Have your Anchor ready: Don't be caught out

[magnetman]

29 minutes ago, blackrose said:

 

Ok, I'll take your word for it. It's never happened to me, not because it's a wide beam but because the leading edge of the bows are the rubbing strakes and below that the hull angles back towards the baseplate so there's no way to catch anything unless it's protruding just above the waterline. Isn't narrow boat hull design the same?

 

That's a Stockless anchor and if it doesn't meet with CWDF approval that's probably because some CDWF members don't know as much as they like to think.

 

It isn't an Admiralty Pattern anchor. That's an Admiralty Pattern anchor.

 

 

Yours is a Smiths  Patent anchor. 

[David Mack]

2 hours ago, Theo said:

On narrow rivers like the Avon and the Soar we have the anchor at the stern if going downstream.  Not ideal but better than being unable to turn and wedging right across the river with the current trying the capsize us.

I agree, but on previous anchor threads some folk have insisted you must have the anchor rope attached to the bow whichever way you are going. Personally, I would rather have the stern digging in a bit due to tension in the anchor rope, rather than risking getting stuck broadside across a river.

2 hours ago, Theo said:

If it had happened on the Severn and we hadn't had the anchor ready it would have been life threatening. 

Not always. If you are close above a weir then, yes, you need to be able to anchor quickly. But if you are miles above a weir you have more time to try other options first. The only time I had engine failure on a river I was just below a lock on the Thames, heading upstream. Although the anchor was rigged ready, I decided to drop a mud weight off the bow, as easier to retrieve later. It didn't stop the boat completely, but significantly slowed it, and we drifted close enough to the bank I could reach out and grab some overhanging branches and then use the boathook to get hold of some garden railings that I then put a rope around. Engine problem quickly sorted and we were off again. I doubt the householder ever knew we were there.

[IanD]

14 minutes ago, David Mack said:

I agree, but on previous anchor threads some folk have insisted you must have the anchor rope attached to the bow whichever way you are going. Personally, I would rather have the stern digging in a bit due to tension in the anchor rope, rather than risking getting stuck broadside across a river.

Not always. If you are close above a weir then, yes, you need to be able to anchor quickly. But if you are miles above a weir you have more time to try other options first. The only time I had engine failure on a river I was just below a lock on the Thames, heading upstream. Although the anchor was rigged ready, I decided to drop a mud weight off the bow, as easier to retrieve later. It didn't stop the boat completely, but significantly slowed it, and we drifted close enough to the bank I could reach out and grab some overhanging branches and then use the boathook to get hold of some garden railings that I then put a rope around. Engine problem quickly sorted and we were off again. I doubt the householder ever knew we were there.

 

I agree with your first comment -- if you're going downstream and the anchor is attached at the bow and you deploy it (from either end) nothing will happen until it digs in, at which point the bow will (hopefully) stop moving and the boat will swing round until first it's broadside on to the current and eventually -- if there's room to swing round -- facing back the other way with bows upstream. But half-way through you're broadside on to any current and any floating branches etc. coming down the river, which is not a nice place to be even if there's enough space. The "stern digging in" sounds like more of a theoretical worry than a real one with a narrowboat, if you look at the forces in and the angle of the anchor rope the worst that will happen is that the stern gets pulled down a couple of inches.

 

Going downstream I'd say the best place for the anchor is at the stern attached to a dolly so you can lower it overboard and not have to turn the boat round in the stream. Going upstream have the rope ready attached to the bow stud, and either have the anchor ready at the bow if you have an easily accessible well deck, or at the stern to deploy from there if -- like me -- you don't, with the rope running back along the roof from the bow stud.

 

Most canal boaters will never have to deploy an anchor in an emergency even in a lifetime of boating, and even if the worst happens the odds of then being near a weir are even smaller -- but if you're unfortunate enough to have an emergency when out on a river, it makes sense to have an anchor that is ready to deploy and likely to work properly... 😉

[David Mack]

4 minutes ago, IanD said:

 

I agree with your first comment -- if you're going downstream and the anchor is attached at the bow and you deploy it (from either end) nothing will happen until it digs in, at which point the bow will (hopefully) stop moving and the boat will swing round until first it's broadside on to the current and eventually -- if there's room to swing round -- facing back the other way with bows upstream. But half-way through you're broadside on to any current and any floating branches etc. coming down the river, which is not a nice place to be even if there's enough space. The "stern digging in" sounds like more of a theoretical worry than a real one with a narrowboat, if you look at the forces in and the angle of the anchor rope the worst that will happen is that the stern gets pulled down a couple of inches.

 

Going downstream I'd say the best place for the anchor is at the stern attached to a dolly so you can lower it overboard and not have to turn the boat round in the stream. Going upstream have the rope ready attached to the bow stud, and either have the anchor ready at the bow if you have an easily accessible well deck, or at the stern to deploy from there if -- like me -- you don't, with the rope running back along the roof from the bow stud.

 

Most canal boaters will never have to deploy an anchor in an emergency even in a lifetime of boating, and even if the worst happens the odds of then being near a weir are even smaller -- but if you're unfortunate enough to have an emergency when out on a river, it makes sense to have an anchor that is ready to deploy and likely to work properly... 😉

You've missed the key point of mine and Theo's posts. On a narrow river a longer narrowboat heading downstream with the anchor warp attached to the bows would have to spin round when the anchor is deployed. My concern is not being broadside to the current while that happens, it is the risk of grounding at both ends of the boat in a narrow channel and then being permanently broadside on to the current. That could sink a boat whereas merely drifting downstream broadside is unlikely to do so.

[LadyG]

2 hours ago, Theo said:

I'm going to bite and be prepared to be shot down.

 

We have 50ft chain and 40ft rope.  I do wonder if that it really enough on the Severn but I hope that as we approach the weir the water get shallow enought for the anchor to bite.

Goodness me, chain is measured in fathoms.

A chain is 22 yards,

There is Wikipedia of course 

Rope is purchased in metres.

[Sea Dog]

14 minutes ago, LadyG said:

Rope is purchased in metres.

I got mine in a carrier bag... 

[IanD]

26 minutes ago, David Mack said:

You've missed the key point of mine and Theo's posts. On a narrow river a longer narrowboat heading downstream with the anchor warp attached to the bows would have to spin round when the anchor is deployed. My concern is not being broadside to the current while that happens, it is the risk of grounding at both ends of the boat in a narrow channel and then being permanently broadside on to the current. That could sink a boat whereas merely drifting downstream broadside is unlikely to do so.

I didn't miss that point, and I'm agreeing with you 🙂

[system 4-50]

3 hours ago, mrsmelly said:

You are of course correct, only a numpty would disagree  Believe it or not some eejuts even think you are safer riding a peddle cycle without a helmet on as its much safer you know 

My cycle helmet is secured with 15M of rope, is this enough?

[mrsmelly]

4 minutes ago, system 4-50 said:

My cycle helmet is secured with 15M of rope, is this enough?

You need gaffer tape.

[Alan de Enfield]

2 hours ago, blackrose said:

It isn't an Admiralty Pattern anchor

 

I used the common name - it appears to be the "Admiralty Navy Pattern Stockless" but there are a number of similar 'stockless' variants. I'm sure you will know what you have, as you bought it.

[magnetman]

Its more complicated than I thought. 

 

 

The one I have which I thought was a Smiths is actually a Byers according to this list. 

 

 

 

 

[Midnight]

I once deployed an anchor from the stern of a friend's boat on the ebbing, tidal Yorkshire Ouse. It didn't pull the stern down and it didn't stop the boat either until we were into the willows. 

[Alan de Enfield]

7 hours ago, Midnight said:

I once deployed an anchor from the stern of a friend's boat on the ebbing, tidal Yorkshire Ouse. It didn't pull the stern down and it didn't stop the boat either until we were into the willows. 

 

Presumably you/he then sourced a suitable anchor for the size / type of boat ?

[magnetman]

When I used to throw big magnets in the Thames on ropes I occasionally found anchors with nothing attached. 

 

I can imagine a scene where the skipper issues instructions to a crew member to 'chuck the anchor in' but the crew member fails to check if the anchor is fixed to anything. 

 

I had about half a dozen out including some quite good anchors. 

 

[IanD]

33 minutes ago, magnetman said:

When I used to throw big magnets in the Thames on ropes I occasionally found anchors with nothing attached. 

 

I can imagine a scene where the skipper issues instructions to a crew member to 'chuck the anchor in' but the crew member fails to check if the anchor is fixed to anything. 

 

I had about half a dozen out including some quite good anchors. 

 

 

I've seen the same mistake made with a stern line... 😉

[rusty69]

17 hours ago, Theo said:

I'm going to bite and be prepared to be shot dow

It would be more appropriate to bight.

 

Hopefully the anchor will bite before the bitter end. 

[magnetman]

It was explained to me how long the anchor rode needs to be but I could never fathom it out. 

[LadyG]

As I don't have a 56lb weight, if was going downstream I assume I could use the chain without the anchor, its at least 56lb. 

I'd still have the anchor itself in the bow with a warp.

Edited August 16, 2023 by LadyG

[Hudds Lad]

Our boat came with a 16kg Talamex French Anchor, but no chain or rope with it. It currently resides in the cellar as we've no river cruising in our immediate future. It seems adequate for a 4bed Victorian house as it's not moved an inch since we brought the anchor home  

[robtheplod]

You can also plough fields with the 'Bruce' ......

[magnetman]

I only realised fairly recently that a CQR anchor was so named because it is supposed to be SECURE. 

 

Clever play on words. I originally thought it was initials like Corin Quentin Richardson. 

[rusty69]

4 minutes ago, magnetman said:

I only realised fairly recently that a CQR anchor was so named because it is supposed to be SECURE. 

 

Clever play on words. I originally thought it was initials like Corin Quentin Richardson. 

Ours are secure. One in the anchor locker, the other in the cockpit locker,along with a small grapnel and one of those funny smiths anchor. 

 

I thought fluke made multimeters. 

[magnetman]

Fluke do make multimeters. It was just by chance that this happened. 

[IanD]

8 minutes ago, magnetman said:

Fluke do make multimeters. It was just by chance that this happened. 

And Wayne Kerr still make component analysers... 😉

[Alan de Enfield]

22 minutes ago, magnetman said:

I only realised fairly recently that a CQR anchor was so named because it is supposed to be SECURE. 

 

Clever play on words. I originally thought it was initials like Corin Quentin Richardson. 

 

 

The comparisons between the 'Stockless Admiralty Pattern' and the CQR are quite interesting.

 

Published in The Yachting Monthly and Motor Boating Magazine April 1934

 

Anchor A = 23 lb CQR

Anchor B = 25lb Traditional (with stock) anchor

Anchor C = 20lb Traditional (with stock) anchor

Anchor D = 20lb Stockless anchor

 

As may be seen from the table of results the traditional type is always more efficient than the stockless, and it seems that the new type (CQR) is, in all kinds of ground, more efficient than the traditional type. Indeed, the superiority of the new type is very marked, for it gives a rule about two-and-a-half times as big a drag as the best anchor of the same weight

 

 

Edited August 16, 2023 by Alan de Enfield