At which end of the Boat

[davidk65]

When cruising on rivers, tidal or none tidal, I have heared experinced river men arguing over the use of conventional anchors and the use of mud weights.

 

Some say the conventional anchor should be deployed at the bow and the mud weight used at the stern. Other seem to maintain one should deploy the mud weight at the bow and the achor at the stern.

 

Does all depend upon what you are doing e.g. if your are intending to drop anchor in normal conditions and just anchoring without any emergency you would use the anchor at the bow, but what do you do with the mud weight?

On the other hand if the boat is in difficulties and being carried forward by the current, say bow first, say towards a bridge or wear (time and nerve permitting) would the anchor be better dropped off the stern (providing it's made fast first) and hopefully stopping the forward movement in time?

Or does it depend on wether you are travelling up or down stream.

 

DavidK65

[John Orentas]

Well it all depends on the circumstances doesn't it. But if I was anchored in mid stream on a fast flowing river with all kinds of flotsam and broken free craft coming down, I would rather have my bows pointing into the flow.

[Carrie]

If you're solo, I guess you should have your anchor with you at the back, shouldn't you?

[Keeping Up]

Well it all depends on the circumstances doesn't it. But if I was anchored in mid stream on a fast flowing river with all kinds of flotsam and broken free craft coming down, I would rather have my bows pointing into the flow.

I've often wondered about this problem. Even when not solo, I know that my wife wouldn't be strong enough to lift the anchor so I must assume that I would be deploying the anchor myself. In particular I wonder what to do when the river is relatively narrow.

 

If I was travelling upstream, throwing an anchor over the stern would mean that the bows would be swung round by the current, with the possible result that the boat would end up broadside across the river acting as a dam and in danger of being rolled over. Therefore the anchor should be at the bows - but who know what may have happened in the time taken for me to leave the tiller, walk to the bow, and throw the anchor overboard.

 

Similarly, if I was travelling downtream it would seem to be sensible to throw the anchor off the stern to avoid being swung round by the current to become a broadside dam; although this would leave the stern gear vulnerable to attack by the flotsam and loose boats that you mention. So should I have the anchor ready on the stern deck - where I am likely to trip over it and fall overboard myself?

 

Perhaps it would be best to have the anchor at the bow when heading upstream and at the stern when heading downstream? Suppose I am heading upriver to a winding point, then heading back down again. When I have winded, should I then transfer the anchor from one end to the other? How am I to do this without leaving the tiller, for it is too heavy for my wife to lift and I know she wouldn't want to take the tiller on a fast-flowing river. In fact the anchor (15kg) and its chain (25kg) together are so heavy that it would take me many minutes to carry them from one end of the boat to the other, this is NOT something on my preferred list of things to do.

 

Another answer would be to have two anchors, one at each end of the boat - but that's not a good option as it costs too much and takes up too much space, and still doesn't solve the problem of how to deply a bow anchor without leaving the stern.

 

So what do I do? In practice, I keep the anchor ready at the bows, I work on the assumption that if I need the anchor then things have probably gone too far for me to be any immediate use at the stern anyway, and I feel nervous when travelling downstream on a narrow, fast-flowing river.

 

Allan

[Amicus]

This all depends on the boat, but, if steaming upstream against a fastish flow I think I’d think about having the anchor on the cabin roof aft, near the helm, with the chain flaked out along one side of the cabin roof and the bitter end attached at the bow.

In an emergency the helmsman could chuck the anchor over the side, the chain would run off under it’s own weight. The helmsman need only shout a warning to those on board and prepare ‘isself for the bang when the anchor took hold, perhaps using the engine to reduce the snatch.

In way of the forward cockpit the chain can be tied out of the way using string, which would break away if the anchor were deployed.

[NB Willawaw]

On the river and in the context of inland waterways, anchors are mainly used in case of engine failure when caught in a strong current or tidal flow (i.e. to stop the boat being swept into danger when unable to manoeuvre under own power).

 

The argument about anchors and mud weights is to do with holding power.

Anchors don't always hold well in mud and silt, although this also depends on the type of anchor carried (another subject in its own right). The thing to bear in mind is that a mud weight uses purely weight to "hold" - an anchor digs in with flukes and that is where the holding power comes from.

 

I prefer the anchor at the bow because there is generally no room for it with its cable at the stern and I like the bow into the flow as the flare of the bow can deal with that - its quite frightening having a 6 knot tide coming around your stern and pinning the rudder in a hard over position. Also when you get the engine started, you dont have to worry about fouling the prop. When the anchor is at the bow, you can use the engine to push you forward until you are nearly over the anchor before heaving it up.

 

If the engine fails, depending on whether the flow is with or against you, the boat will either carry on without steerage or stop and start to go backwards. If I am on a river, the anchor is normally ready for rapid deployment (i.e in the cratch and attached to its cable).

I can be at the bow within 30 seconds, the anchor goes over the side near the bow with all its chain following it.

As the boat does what its going to do with the flow, I can "snub" the cable paying out with the rope line which is attached to the chain and acts as a kind of shock absorber. By running the line through an eye welded for the purpose and around a cleat in the cratch area, I can apply a friction hitch to gradually arrest the line running out.

Bearing in mind that its usual to run out 6 times the depth in chain/line before expecting the anchor to hold, there is normally time to do this. The sudden shock of bringing the line taut otherwise can shear fittings or knock people overboard, etc.

Edited January 21, 2006 by NB Willawaw

[Clarissa]

If you're solo, I guess you should have your anchor with you at the back, shouldn't you?

 

Yup. The rope can be attached to the bow and led to the anchor, be it bow or stern. Likewise the anchor could be stowed in the bow and a rope, or chain, led to the other end, then someone in the bow could just release it from a hook without having to lift it and the rope, or chain would be attached at the best place at the time.

 

Anchoring a narrowboat in a river in spate with debris and drifting boats coming down is a bit worrisome, but could be done. A bargee friend used to take sand barges down the Avon to Bristol. When they reached the turn for the lock into the "Floating Harbour", just above a large weir, they would run the barge onto a sandbank and wait for things to improve, which they always will.

 

Watching the 100 ton Thames sailing barges come up on the tide to Maldon quay, on the River Blackwater (I read a great narrowboat cruise to there from the Thames, an intrepid group called the Tuesday Night Club) is a lesson in anchoring. They let down the anchor in the fairway and steer to the quay while someone lets the cable, rope or chain, run out until a point where they need to stop. An anchor will plough through a mud or sand bottom and this is used to slow down or turn around too.

I write too much ... it's being a single hander, did I tell you about the time I was entering a harbour, ... blah, blah

[DHutch]

Also, another point is that you can (basicaly) always get a mudweight back, unlike an anchor, which can become stuck/snaged on somthing.

 

On EA we have the anchor upfront, with a vetus winch, and a pulley to feed it over the side.

 

I tryed for find a decent photo of the winch/pulley, but this is all i could find.

 

 

Daniel

[Clarissa]

On EA we have the anchor upfront, with a vetus winch, and a pulley to feed it over the side.

Daniel

 

It seems narrowboaters are refusing to be persuaded to captain glorified skips and I'm glad. Blimey! It looks right shippy.

[enigma]

Mud weights are no good for a narrowboat, there is no holding power, they will not hold an 18 ton boat.

 

If travelling up river have it at the bow. If travelling down river have it at the stern if you do not want the boat to swing around when the anchor bites, especially if the river is not wide enough for the boat to swing around.

 

The problem of an anchor becoming stuck under a root or rock can be prevented by using a tripping line.

 

Have an anchor that you can lift!!

 

Enigma

[John Orentas]

I have had an anchor for more that twenty years, it has yet to get wet I would love to try it out. I've been tempted to throw it over the side a few times but always worried about not getting it back.

Edited January 24, 2006 by John Orentas