New Generation Anchor

[ebb]

Fortress spent an amazing amount of money to make this trial happen. Hiring the 81ft R/V
Rachel Carson, four days of lodging, lunches and lattes, don't think the platoon of guys
were volunteers. And Chuck Hawley as an "Independent Reviewer" (formally Vice
President of Information and a board member of WetsMarine) might also have been hired
for his clout. The deck was stacked in FX anchors' favor. There are grounds to presume
that the omission of certain competitors was deliberate - as well as for certain competitors
being included, because Fortress knew they would 'take a fall'... in the mud! Money put
up for this show guarantees that Fortress absolutely comes out on top. Guess, $100,000?
A lot! It's hardware theater for the 35ft to 45ft yacht crowd.

Don't have a special anchor to champion. Own a Fortress, but haven't seen it for decades.
My original hotties, as they appeared, were Supreme, Ultra, Mantus. But sobering up soon
revealed that each has flaws. Some seem to defeat exactly what an anchor is supposed
to do. Some need to evolve into a better tool from the promise of their unique design.
Every anchor (2, 3, more?) on a 26' cruiser must be dependable in multiple beds. A small
sailboat can't fart around with an engine to precision a cranky anchor.

MECHANISTIC AND ARBITRARY FORTRESS TEST REVEALS TEST IS USELESS
If further study of the Fortress test methodology certifies their conclusions, then a poor
showing of cruising anchors in our lighter weights, makes for us almost no choice at all.
Mechanically pulling anchors at 10ft per minute for 100ft before a scope is reached to make
a standard pre-set comparison, imco, pretty much ignores what an anchor may do naturally.
Pulled incessantly thru the mud may create forces and loads that could not exist otherwise.
However, anchoring in a wind as mighty as the winch-drum on the RachelCarson with our
galvanized marvels all dragging on high, we can preview on the chart a 10 minute tale of
our favorite hook letting our favorite boat slip away to virtual doom.
Instead of a 45lb mushroom as control, Fortress should have had a couple 35ft to 45ft
yachts setting anchors. The same anchors at the same time..... THEN, we'd bear witness!

I'll always think the basic design of the Mantus a good one. Angled flat flukes are definitely
the key. Very disappointing that Mantus showed so poorly. There is a notation on the
comparison chart in the P.S. report that says: "Mantus suggests 85lb anchor for a 45'/50'
cruiser and 105lb as a storm anchor." {That suggests if we normally carry 25lb/35lb anchors,
Mantus wants 50lb/70lb weights for primary....IF CORRECT, THIS IS RATHER BIZZARE.}

So they want at least twice the anchor weight of the others to do an equal job...in mud. But
that remains to be verified for a mud seabed. Mantus' suggestion would put it well out of
contention with lighter and more impressive aluminum FX on weight alone. However it has
earned a reputation for versatility and strength. That Magical "instant set". This promising
anchor is destined to remain as a backup. It has prominent hexhead bolts under the fluke
that will gouge the deck.

ATTRIBUTES
Besides being useful for as many seafloors as possible, and having a smooth unobstructed
form, the contenders, when dropped overboard, must land on the fluke and ready to set.
It's OK for an anchor to lay on its side, if the first pull sets it. Anchors must instantly set,
within a few feet, and stay ready until called, by further tension on the rode, to go deeper.
Anchors should get set without use of an engine.

Also, would not have expected Spade anchor to be so completely 'unreliable' in soft mud.
I'm sure Alain Poiraud intended his anchor to dig into any bottom it encountered. However,
it evidently didn't at 10 fpm. Spade with its sharp point, scoop fluke, weighted wedge tip
(half of the anchor's weight is on its tip), and pronounced shoulder fins under the fluke...
has inspired the designers of each of my hotties and a number of others. Sometimes
Poiraud's whimsies are just added on, I'm sure, to a new design, because it looks important...

Tried to find the origin of the 32degree shank to fluke angle. Imco the closer the fluke is to
the shank, the easier the fluke can be pulled out or plow. A more open angle will 'point' a
well designed fluke more downward and away from the horizontal pull of the shank. My 30lb
USNavy pattern Danforth, built like a battleship, has a 33degree angle. Poiraud calls it the
'chisel' angle. Once having been a woodworker, Krenov's bevel was between 20 & 30degrees,
But heavy duty mortise chisels are 35degrees. The Spade shank angle may be OK but it
has the messiest fluke bevel imaginable...as far as anchor sediment-dynamics is concerned.
Dig his enthusiasm for unique invention, but his science is too French for me. Poiraud
influence certainly is everywhere evident on Supreme, Rocna, Ultra, and other pretenders.

Imco the fisherman slot on Supreme and Boss yacht anchors is irrelevent and misleading.
Gets instant recognition. However, Excel, especially f.s. Sarca have new ideas that are
not French impaired. Should be brought into focus. If any anchor should NOT have been
omitted, it is Sarca. Doubtful that these Fortress test results are repeatable by another
comparison series. I'm not surprised, but still disappointed & shocked at some showings...
.................................................. .................................................. ...............................
.................................................. .................................................. ...............................
Fluke area comparisons weren't done.. FX blades are bigger, longer, thinner & sharper.
Had a minor boot-in-the-butt that might be interesting to follow through on....not an idea
but something that popped up without thinking. If we already have a new-gen anchor,
and we're curious to see if changing its surface area for soft mud could make it work,
why not take some sheet aluminum or steel sheet, or even some bendable glass panel, and
shape it larger and/or longer, cut a slot somewhere in the middle of it -- just enough to
sit snug around the base of the shank at the fluke -- and slip it over the shackle end,
down the shank, to the fluke. Is it possible to increase area this way, or extend or even
split the pointy end if that's the secret. Try it out.... Will an accesory version of an added
over the top plate like this be useful as an aide.... for a modern shackle & chain duddy?

What are the pudding dynamics of single fluke new-gens? Their poor showing may be
due to fancy curved shanks trying to fly like wings & boomerangs. Hawley mentioned it....
flying anchors through sticky mud probably sculpted anchor flukes into undefined blobs.

WHILE WE'RE WAITING:
Here's another line of inquiry: In 1822 a Brit named Piper patented an anchor he called
WISHBONE. Articulated Danforth's have a single shank that splits the fluke(s) at the
crossbar/stock into two equal plates. Wishbone splits the SHANK into two pieces that arch
around from the stock at the sides of a single isosceles fluke up to the shackle.
Stock acts as the fluke hinge for both anchors ...Wishbone has no central shank to pull
up into a Windline! Perfect mud/sand anchor. But no easy way to get it back onboard!

HANS-STEALTH. http://www.hansanchor.com/ Very interesting anchor.
..... "Airplanes and anchors have a lot in common! Both have to perform with a
minimum of resistance." Have not seen Stealth first hand. Made with two roughly tri-
angular plates, one acting as the bottom diving fluke, with its twin clamshell attached
across but not attached over the top of the shank, allowing loose seafloor material to enter
.. and in theory, hug the device into the substrate, rather than deep diviing The Stealth is
'symmetrical' in the sense that a Danforth is: it interacts with the bottom on either of its
sides. The shank is hinged. The fluke blades act in a bucket form. Shank to fluke angle is
25degrees. The bend in the fluke also acts to right the device on either side it lands,
ready to be pulled into set. When on site, hit NEXT (upper left ) for a
tour of the mind behind Hans Claesson's anchor ! {don't get me started...but his fluke is
also beveled on the 'wrong' side like a lot of the guys. And while some dimensions are
given, there is no meaningful diagram with transparent specs to be found on the site.)

...........................MINIMUM RESISTANCE.... EXACTLY ! ! ................................

Fortress arbitrary testing strategy of arrogantly dragging anchors through mud, probably
also would have defanged this Stealth anchor by transforming it into a lump.

The decades old 30/32 degree shank-to-fluke ANGLE 'requirement' for all anchors, might be
tested/proved...with the assumption that the angle might be opened up more...say, five
degrees ...to see if some new single fluke anchors can be encouraged to dive in more willingly
when pulled ...rather than round out, pull up, or drag continuously on or under the seafloor.

With apology to LewisCarroll:
...And then they rested on a rock Conveniently low: And all the little Anchors stood And
waited in a row. The time has come, the Walrus said, To talk of many things: Of shoes--
and ships--and sealing wax--Of cabbages--and kings--And why the sea is boiling hot--
And whether pigs have wings..... And why New-Gen anchors are really not!