# Don Jordan and the Jordan Series Drogue



## sailingdog

In my opinion, the greatest storm safety device ever created is the Jordan Series Drogue.

The JSD was the brainchild of Don Jordan, a retired aeronautical engineer, in response to the fatalities that were the result of the 1979 Fastnet disaster. I believe that the Jordan Series Drogue is a piece of gear that every sea-going small sailboat should have.

Don Jordan was an aeronautical engineer, who worked for Pratt and Whitney, eventually retiring from his position as chief engineer. He was also a senior lecturer at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology for many years. He was a pilot and a life-long sailor.

Back when I was getting things setup for my boat, I spoke with Don Jordan a number of times regarding the Jordan Series Drogue. I was fortunate enough to get a personal recommendation for the drogue sizing for my boat from Don directly. Unfortunately, Don passed away last year.

*What is a Jordan Series Drogue?*
 
It is a safety device for small craft that consists of a long line with a series of small drag cones attached along its length. The JSD for the Pretty Gee consists of a 5/8″ line, 270′ long, with 130 small cones attached to it. It has 15′ of 5/16″ chain on the terminal end as a weight. It is connected to the boat by a bridle that is 45′ long. It looks like this:









 Photo courtesy of Sail Magazine's article on series drogues and sea anchors.

*How Does a Jordan Series Drogue Work?*
 
How the Jordan Series Drogue works is best explained by Don Jordan himself, on a website that he helped develop about the Jordan Series Drogue. Please visit the Jordan Series Drogue website to find out more about this ingenious device.
*
Who Makes the Jordan Series Drogue?*
 
There are several ways to get or make a Jordan Series Drogue. First, you can get the materials and make them yourself. Buying a kit is often easier, if a bit more expensive. Both Ace Sailmakers and SailRite make and sell either the cones alone or complete kits, including the cones and double braid line, for making Jordan Series Drogues to cover a series of different size boats. Ace Sailmakers will also make complete drogues as well.

*Why Use a Jordan Series Drogue, instead of a Parachute Sea Anchor?*

Well, there are quite a few reasons to use a Jordan Series Drogue over a parachute sea anchor. Here are a few of the more important ones IMHO.

First, the Jordan Series drogue was developed and tested in conjunction with the US Coast Guard, and was specifically designed for helping small sailcraft survive in storm conditions, like those found during the 1979 Fastnet disaster that was Jordan's primary motivation for developing the series drogue. It has been proven to work very successfully and protect boats using it from damage during its deployment.

Second, due to the change in boat design, most boats are far more stable when using a drogue than when using a sea anchor. Don Jordan has an *interesting post* about this on the Jordan Series Drogue site, and there is no reason to think that the forces that apply to a sailboat at anchor would not also apply to a sailboat lying to a sea anchor.

Third, the overall forces that are generated by a Jordan Series Drogue are lower and the peak shock loading forces that the boat is subjected to is far lower by design. The design of the JSD allows it to gradually increase the resistance applied to the boat as the rode becomes more heavily loaded-and doesn't have the issues with collapsing and suddenly re-deploying a parachute sea anchor does.

Fourth, Don Jordan had no financial interest in selling or making the Jordan Series Drogue, as he put the idea and patents for it into the public domain after developing it. Some of the oft-cited information sources that tout the superiority of the parachute sea anchor type devices are a bit less than honest IMHO.
*
How to Install, Deploy and Retrieve the Jordan Series Drogue*

*Installing the JSD*

Prior to setting off on a blue water passage, your boat should be outfitted with dedicated chainplates for the Jordan Series Drogue. These chainplates should be mounted fairly low and as far outboard and aft on the hull of the boat as possible. They should be tied into the structure of the boat as securely as the chainplates for the rigging.

The bridle should be about three times as long as the distance between the chainplates. If the transom is 12′ wide, the bridle for the Jordan Series Drogue should be about 36′. This should give you sufficient length for the splices and to terminate the bridle lines properly. Ideally, one end of the bridle should be an eyesplice that is connected to the eyesplice at the end of the drogue by running the bridle line through the drogue's eyesplice and then through its own eyesplice so the bridle line forms a larkshead knot around the drogue line.

The other end should be spliced around a thimble and connected to the chainplate via a heavy shackle. Ideally, the bridle legs should be run through tubular polyester webbing to protect them from UV damage and chafe. These lines should be left permanently connected while on any bluewater passage.

The Jordan Series Drogue should be flaked into a bag or container, starting with the bridle end. This should leave the terminal end, with the weight, on top of the drogue line, and allow the drogue to be deployed by simple dropping the drogue's terminal end into the water.
*
Deploying the Jordan Series Drogue*

*Make sure the drogue line is free and clear to run out before doing anything else,* because as soon as you release the weight to deploy the drogue-you are committed to it&#8230; as the small cones will start to fill and increase the load on the drogue line. When conditions deteriorate to the point you feel the Jordan Series Drogue should be deployed, you should drop the weight and terminal end of the drogue into the water and let the drogue run out.

Check to see that the bridle legs lead fair and then head down below and batten down the hatches. If you've setup the chainplates, bridle and drogue properly, chafe should not be an issue. Don Jordan designed the series drogue to be an "ejection seat" for the sailor&#8230; where you deploy it and then wait for the ride to end. It shouldn't require the crew to do much more than keep a watch. No active steering or other crew participation should be required once the series drogue has been deployed, allowing the crew to rest, eat, and restore themselves.
*
Retrieving the Jordan Series Drogue*

This is one of the more difficult things to do. Don Jordan wrote:


> I recommend that you deploy the drogue in fair weather to get a feel for the launching and retrieval. You will need two winches and two helper lines. See website.
> 
> I mention this because one skipper recently cut the drogue loose after a successful ride in a storm because he could not get it back - no excuse for this . Don


Now, I've tried out my series drogue several times and came up with a pretty good solution for retrieving it. What you will need are the following:
Two lines about twice the LOA of your boat, with a stopper knot tied in about two feet from one end, and one about halfway down the line.
Two snatch blocks attached to the base of the bow pulpit
The procedure is to run the lines forward to the snatch blocks and back to the genoa winches. The winches should be free, since you probably won't have any sail up if you've resorted to a Jordan Series Drogue.
Tie the end of the port line with the stopper knot to the series drogue rode with a rolling hitch. _This will allow you to winch about a boat length of series drogue aboard the boat. *Watch out and make sure you don't snag the cones on anything while you're winching it aboard.*_
Then tie the end of the starboard line with the stopper knot to the series drogue rode with a rolling hitch.
Next, go forward and untie the first line rolling hitch and bring it back to the cockpit.
Then winch in the second line, and tie the end of the port line to the series drogue rode again and repeat.
On most boats, the series drogue and bridle will be about a dozen boat lengths long or so. So, you only have to do this six times to retrieve it. It is even simpler if you're sailing with a second person, since they can be moving forward and retrieving the lines, while you're winching in the drogue. This method also minimizes the amount of time spent tying and untying the knots.

*The Jordan Series Drogue and Trip Lines*

I asked Don about using a trip line on the JSD... he did not recommend it. As he explained it, the problem is that if the trip line and the JSD rode twist, it could compromise the JSD by fouling the small cones and preventing them from opening properly.

When the boat is not in motion because of the waves, the JSD will usually extend nearly straight down from the stern of the boat. As the boat starts to move, the cones start load up as the road becomes more heavily loaded. When the JSD is vertical like that, it could easily twist and foul the trip line.


----------



## Valiente

Thanks, SD. I guess you think not enough people stick their heads in "Seamanship", eh?


----------



## sailingdog

I was debating putting this thread there....but clicked on GD first.. 


Valiente said:


> Thanks, SD. I guess you think not enough people stick their heads in "Seamanship", eh?


----------



## KeelHaulin

While I like the idea; and overall it is a good design, I don't like the fact that you must devote a huge amount of rhode to a device that you would only use in the event you are caught up in storm situation. If warps were towed for example; they could be re-used for other purposes when not being used as a drouge. The Neals (mahina.com) don't recommend the JSD for this reason; and suggest other alternatives that are as effective and easier to retrieve.

Don't get me wrong; I like the idea but I just wish there were a simpler way to achieve the same result (a progressive force drouge).


----------



## sailingdog

The converse of this point is that if you're using a rode for other things, like the anchor, the chances of it being damaged when you need it for a storm drogue is much higher. 

If someone came up with something that could do the job of the JSD without requiring it be a dedicated rode....that woudl be great. One recent development is the use of spectra based lines in the JSD, which results in a much lighter and more compact JSD...



KeelHaulin said:


> While I like the idea; and overall it is a good design, I don't like the fact that you must devote a huge amount of rhode to a device that you would only use in the event you are caught up in storm situation. If warps were towed for example; they could be re-used for other purposes when not being used as a drouge. The Neals (mahina.com) don't recommend the JSD for this reason; and suggest other alternatives that are as effective and easier to retrieve.
> 
> Don't get me wrong; I like the idea but I just wish there were a simpler way to achieve the same result (a progressive force drouge).


----------



## smackdaddy

I'm still not convinced of the retrieval issue. It sounds pretty difficult. Even on the website they mention several sailors just cutting it loose after use. And the retrieval method they do list sounds pretty intense as well (winching in 8 feet at a time, 300+ feet, 30+ minutes = very tired arms)

Granted I've used neither a JSD or a Gale Rider - hell I've not even been in conditions that warrant bare poles - but theoretically, though the JSD makes a lot of sense from a loads standpoint - the GaleRider seems to make more sense from an all-round usage standpoint.

Always good to see comparisons though!


----------



## sailingdog

smackdaddy said:


> I'm still not convinced of the retrieval issue. It sounds pretty difficult. Even on the website they mention several sailors just cutting it loose after use. And the retrieval method they do list sounds pretty intense as well (winching in 8 feet at a time, 300+ feet, 30+ minutes = very tired arms)


This is why I recommend winching it in 25-30' at a time instead. It speeds up the process quite a bit, since you end up spending far less time tying and untying knots.



> Granted I've used neither a JSD or a Gale Rider - hell I've not even been in conditions that warrant bare poles - but theoretically, though the JSD makes a lot of sense from a loads standpoint - the GaleRider seems to make more sense from an all-round usage standpoint.
> 
> Always good to see comparisons though!


I haven't used a GaleRider, but several people I know switched to the JSD from the GaleRider.


----------



## bobmcgov

Thanks, SD. I'm still turning over design ides for a trip line to ease retrieval, one that would not compromise safety or performance. Best I've come up with so far is to string the cones on continuous perimeter webbing, while the braided central line runs thru all the cones, through the apex hole, unattached. Something like this:










When deployed, the force is carried entirely by the webbing, which is attached to a bridle. After the storm, you could winch in the center line; a trip ball on the end would collapse & invert the cones as it is winched toward the boat; you should be able to get the entire series mostly to your transom and lift it aboard as an untangled mass.

To be sorted out: Making sure it doesn't twist (perhaps occasional swivels?). Providing adequate shock absorption. Keeping the center line slack, but not too slack, during use.


----------



## sailingdog

Bob—

That's an interesting idea... I don't know if it would work. You need to have a weight at the end of the drogue, to sink it down into the water so it can absorb the loads. The problem I see is that the double strip of webbing and the central trip line are going to be even bulkier than the existing design is. Also, the cones would probably be far more complicated to make, since the terminal end isn't connected to a central rope, and without the terminal end connection to the central rope, they'd have to be re-designed and heavier material.


----------



## scottyt

sd do you have a jsd ? if you do what are the cones made out of, is it just standard sail material ? also if you have one can you please take a pic of one of the cones and how its attached 

tia


----------



## sailingdog

Scottyt—

Yes, I do have a JSD, but it is down on the boat. You can see most of that at the two websites I've linked to in the OP.


----------



## scottyt

sailingdog said:


> Scottyt-
> 
> You can see most of that at the two websites I've linked to in the OP.


thanks for pointing out there was more than one link there, i read the first one last night. i just watched the video.

i wonder if it would work as well if the cones where stitched to webbing instead of woven in to the line. it would be much faster to stitch than go thru threading and knotting 600 tails in to the line ( based on 100 cones ). i just looked 1 inch webbing has a normal strength of 4000 lbs, so the leader would still need to be double braid. new england ropes is 8500 lbs for 1/2 inch

i also had a retrieval idea that may or may not work. if every other cone had a small ring stitched to it and a line that was a few feet longer then the whole rig was run thru the rings and attached to the last cone. when the smaller line was pulled it would collapse the whole thing on to itself. using double braid as the main line would make sure it would not twist much or at all


----------



## bobmcgov

sailingdog said:


> Bob-
> 
> That's an interesting idea... I don't know if it would work. You need to have a weight at the end of the drogue, to sink it down into the water so it can absorb the loads. The problem I see is that the double strip of webbing and the central trip line are going to be even bulkier than the existing design is. Also, the cones would probably be far more complicated to make, since the terminal end isn't connected to a central rope, and without the terminal end connection to the central rope, they'd have to be re-designed and heavier material.


Anchor was left out for clarity; easy to add to the end of the webbing. Sewing the cone apexes (apices?) to a central line contributes little to strength on normal JSDs, since the force is mainly at the perimeter webbing anyhow. Bet 4oz dacron sailcloth would do fine. The whole point of the design is each cone bears only a fraction of the strain.

My design should actually pack flat, as the cones will flatten somewhat and nest inside one another accordion-fashion, with the webbing folded out to the sides. I could imagine a mesh pouch packed like a parachute: hang it over the stern rail, tie off the bridle leads, and rip open a velcro flap. Mushroom anchor falls out, pulling the drogue after it. Three minutes from lazarette to deployed. Most JSDs I've seen have to be packed in daisy chain fashion, which takes up lots of room and invites tangles.

Hey Maine Sail -- we got yer next field test for ya!


----------



## AdamLein

How about a remote-controlled auto-inflating balloon on the outboard end? Could be powered by a little CO2 cartridge. Maybe a wire running to a solenoid valve for the control? I'm thinking the sort of balloon freedivers use to carry them up from deep dives... just needs to be triggered from the boat.


----------



## smackdaddy

Naaa - just train a dolphin to continually swim beside your boat. Then after an F11, chunk it some cod and have it retrieve the JSD for you. MUCH easier! And you have some good entertainment for the kids.

There's got to be a better way. When the product's website admits it's a PITA and is still trying to figure out a good way to get it back on the boat...you have to wonder.


----------



## Omatako

*Am I missing something?*

Maybe because the line I'm suggesting below will interfere with the set of the 'chutes but what if you had a loose lighter line running idle alongside the series drogue and connected to the trailing end?

It needn't be as strong as the main line because when recovery begins, you can simply jettison the boat end of the drogue and haul it in on the spare line with all the 'chutes collapsed.

Yep, OK, it is twice the length now but it's certainly a lot less complicated and a whole lot less drag.


----------



## blt2ski

Along with the, "some folks just cut it, instead of hauling it back in" Come on now, not that it could happen, but you could need this twice or three times on some crossings, depending upon the year you travel. That is an expensive use of funds! 

They need to fix the retrieval part of this thing, otherwise, like a lot of things, it may be the best at what it does, but if you cannot fix it etc, it might as well be the worst! This one appears to fall into the worst catagory due to retrieval, not that any one really asked me!

Marty


----------



## bobmcgov

Agree we need to simplify retrieval. Then the design will become standard. ALL sea anchors or drogues are hard to recover -- they are made to resist pulling! People cut JSDs loose because they are tired, seasick, drenched, and can't muster the energy to winch the bastard back on board. They'll regret it later, but it's the sort of decision you make when you've been pounded senseless for three days.

SD's method of running forward and aft with nippers works fine on multis, in decent conditions, or with multiple crew; but I could see that sort of muscle-work being functionally impossible for me (140 lbs) after a blow, and possibly dangerous when the wind has dropped but the sea is still cutting up, the boat is heaving every which way, and you can't put up sail to steady it because (because why?) you're trying to winch the damn JSD aboard.

I'm going to make a couple prototypes this summer and troll them around, see if we can sort out a trip line scheme for these things. They really are a great development in storm tactics and people will be less hesitant to use a JSD if they know getting it back aboard isn't a nightmare.


----------



## camaraderie

*Introducing Don Jordan's Brothers' Drogue*

Perplexed by the difficult retreival issues presented by his brother's 
drogue, Mike set about designing something to remedy the situation.
Extensively tested and mass produced in China by Nike...introducing the 
Michael Jordan Series Drogue! Just DO IT!!


----------



## bobmcgov

There's the UK version of the "Jordan": twenty Katie Prices tied together by their bra straps and thongs.










Outstanding drag coefficient, unpalatable to sharks, popular in many warm-water cruising grounds. But in field trials we've been unable to overcome the natural buoyancy of her head, even using quite heavy anchors. So we're modifying the design: now every second drogue will incorporate Jordan Knight from New Kids on the Block. They sink very well.


----------



## smackdaddy

Nice Bob and Cam - now see what you guys can dream up for the competing device: The Gale Rider!


----------



## sailingdog

Bob-

*The people who usually cut the JSD free are trying to get back underway before the storm that they were dealing with and had to use the JSD for, has really ended, often before they were rested sufficiently as well. *

The whole point of deploying the JSD is so that the captain and crew can get some decent rest and recharge themselves. Almost every user of the JSD has reported that the boat felt like it was in a harbor and the motion of the boat had gentled significantly-*so the statement about being pounded senseless really doesn't make much sense. Using the JSD is supposed to prevent that from happening.*

If there is no strong winds and waves driving the boat, the JSD is actually relatively easy to retrieve-since it will be hanging almost vertically directly beneath the boat as designed.

On my boat, the JSD design length is 270' or so, with a bridle that is about 35' long. That means that I've got to retrieve 300' of rode effectively. If I can retrieve 40' at a time by running the two lines forward to the bow pulpit, I only have to do the whole running back and forth bit EIGHT times all told, and tie/untie 16 knots.

If you want a guinea pig to test your new designs, I'd love to see them.  Improving upon Don Jordan's design would be a good thing, especially if we can come up with one that works as effectively, but is far easier to retrieve.



bobmcgov said:


> Agree we need to simplify retrieval. Then the design will become standard. ALL sea anchors or drogues are hard to recover -- they are made to resist pulling! People cut JSDs loose because they are tired, seasick, drenched, and can't muster the energy to winch the bastard back on board. They'll regret it later, but it's the sort of decision you make when you've been pounded senseless for three days.
> 
> SD's method of running forward and aft with nippers works fine on multis, in decent conditions, or with multiple crew; but I could see that sort of muscle-work being functionally impossible for me (140 lbs) after a blow, and possibly dangerous when the wind has dropped but the sea is still cutting up, the boat is heaving every which way, and you can't put up sail to steady it because (because why?) you're trying to winch the damn JSD aboard.
> 
> I'm going to make a couple prototypes this summer and troll them around, see if we can sort out a trip line scheme for these things. They really are a great development in storm tactics and people will be less hesitant to use a JSD if they know getting it back aboard isn't a nightmare.


----------



## sailingdog

Not a great idea, since if the balloon inflates by accident during the storm... you're basically screwed.  I wouldn't trust something electrical for the retrieval, and something simpler and mechanical in nature is generally a better way to go-especially with storm gear.



AdamLein said:


> How about a remote-controlled auto-inflating balloon on the outboard end? Could be powered by a little CO2 cartridge. Maybe a wire running to a solenoid valve for the control? I'm thinking the sort of balloon freedivers use to carry them up from deep dives... just needs to be triggered from the boat.


----------



## sailingdog

blt2ski said:


> Along with the, "some folks just cut it, instead of hauling it back in" Come on now, not that it could happen, but you could need this twice or three times on some crossings, depending upon the year you travel. That is an expensive use of funds!


 And something you're likely to regret if you need it a second time around...



> They need to fix the retrieval part of this thing, otherwise, like a lot of things, it may be the best at what it does, but if you cannot fix it etc, it might as well be the worst! This one appears to fall into the worst catagory due to retrieval, not that any one really asked me!
> 
> Marty


If you've waited until the storm that necessitated using the JSD has ended, retrieval isn't all that bad as I understand it. As I said previously, the real problem with retrieving it is if the boat is still in motion from the wind/waves and you're trying to retrieve it while it is still effectively in use.


----------



## smackdaddy

sailingdog said:


> If you've waited until the storm that necessitated using the JSD has ended, retrieval isn't all that bad as I understand it. As I said previously, the real problem with retrieving it is if the boat is still in motion from the wind/waves and you're trying to retrieve it while it is still effectively in use.


This still doesn't make sense though, Dog. What you seem to be saying is that it's "easy" only when the boat is not in motion and the drogue is hanging vertically beneath the boat. As some said earlier - the sea state will keep up quite a while after the blow passes. So are you saying that you just have to wait for a virtual dead calm to easily retrieve it? Seriously? Maybe that's why most sailors cut it and split.

Again, the site itself drives home the difficulty of retrieval. Them's the facts. Until Bob finds a decent celebrity to aid in that...I ain't buyin' it.

Honestly, it seems that if you could video yourself successfully deploying and retrieving in moderate conditions (kind of a Giu video) it would help not only your assertions - but would probably be very useful for the JSD website as well.


----------



## blt2ski

SD,

You're fighting a losing battle here. Again, folks will buy what they pervieve to be the "best" at something. BUT, if it has a negative like this one does, which most items do, and that negative is a really bad one, it will not sell!

I use all kinds of 2 cycle equipment for my landscape biz. How many times have you heard that "Stihl" is the best? Do not get me wrong, good equipment etc, but, when it breaks down, try to get parts out of the Stihl! It takes 2 weeks minimum. If you are like me, then you need a back up for if and when the machine breaks down. I realize things will break, no biggie, but, if and when they do, I want quick turn around. I end up buying Echo, as they will overnight things to the shop, and I'm on my the road again a day or two later vs 2 weeks of down time! So an echo breaks down afer 100 hrs vs 120 for the stihl as an example, I get more use out of the Echo in a given time frame because of the parts issue. So to me, the Echo is better. 

In this drogues case, When the wind dies, I want to pull it in! so they need to figure out a better way to make it easier on a tired person in a funky less wind sea state. Otherwise, dragging ropes or equal, while not as effeicient in use, when the storm pass's, quicker and easier to get moving. 

Marty


----------



## AdamLein

Okay what about a much deeper version of the lifesling? Drop overboard a long sinking line with a float on the outboard end, and secure the bitter end to the boat. Sail around in a big circle so that the sinking line essentially fouls the drogue line, the deeper the better. Pick up the float and haul.

Basically the sinking line needs to "catch" the drogue as deep as possible, which converts it into a trip line. Preattaching an outboard-facing grapnel on the inboard end of the chain at the end of the drogue could help with this. If you can pick up that hook with your sinking line, you wouldn't be pulling agaist the resistance of the cones anymore.

Sort of like this (before you return to pick up the buoy):


From Diagrams


----------



## bobmcgov

Unlike the Great Lakes or coastal bays, at sea the wind doesn't neccessarily die & water calm just because the storm or squall has passed. Wind may drop from fifty to twenty knots, then stay there for five days -- and you ain't winching that drogue aboard in twenty. There's also a limit to how much time you want to spend dragging a sea anchor -- there may be shoals to leeward, or you may wish to stop drifting off course and start making miles to your destination again. Ability to retrieve *easily* and *at will* is critical to a finished design.

The JSD improves motion, but it won't magically cancel all effects of a confused sea, or spare you the fatigue of sitting 4-hour watches in cold, pelting rain. Cause you still have to watch, right? Just the _noise_ of a bad storm can wear down a crew, and so can anxiety. We used to practise really clever and efficient rappelling techniques at our local crag, so if we had to bail off a big mountain in a hurry we could do so safely, with minimal loss of gear. It was invaluable training but conducted at 8000' in the sunshine, on good solid granite. Turns out those techniques work a bit less effectively at 14000 feet, with exhausted climbers & "rock" made of cat litter. When the sleet is horizontal and night is coming fast, you plug in two eighty-dollar cams and kiss them goodbye.


----------



## Sequitur

I have a JSD as an emergency device, as an answer to a big _*what if?*_. Another answer to an even bigger _*what if?*_ is my liferaft. I hope that we never need to use either one. But to head offshore without answers to all of the _*what ifs*_ is not good seamanship.

I have not yet done a test deployment of my JSD, but it is one of the things I have planned planned for our July sail straight out into the Pacific for three days then turn around. I'll experiment with retrieval methods, though one thing I know is that the first third of the haul is a matter of winching-in the bridle and the leader. Then, as the cones start coming in, each length becomes easier. My 147 cones will become about 10% lighter a load with each 15 retrieved.


----------



## sailingdog

smackdaddy said:


> This still doesn't make sense though, Dog. What you seem to be saying is that it's "easy" only when the boat is not in motion and the drogue is hanging vertically beneath the boat. As some said earlier - the sea state will keep up quite a while after the blow passes. So are you saying that you just have to wait for a virtual dead calm to easily retrieve it? Seriously? Maybe that's why most sailors cut it and split.


Dead calm isn't required. In fact, confused seas can make it simpler to retrieve the JSD in many ways, since there is no predominant movement to the waves to cause the drogue to really deploy, and confused seas is often the case after the wind has dropped in intensity after a storm.



> Again, the site itself drives home the difficulty of retrieval. Them's the facts. Until Bob finds a decent celebrity to aid in that...I ain't buyin' it.
> 
> Honestly, it seems that if you could video yourself successfully deploying and retrieving in moderate conditions (kind of a Giu video) it would help not only your assertions - but would probably be very useful for the JSD website as well.


----------



## Tubsmacker

Well, Im a bit of a novice really but I have been looking at making a JSD up for my boat.

As for retrieval, clearly if there is load on the drogues then there is going to be winching involved. without getting into specifics, why not use a block and tackle set up utilising the cockpit winch to reduce the winching loads. I admit it would still be slow but not so tiring perhaps? Just a thought


----------



## sailingdog

A winch gives you 40:1 leverage or more in most cases. If that isn't enough to haul the drogue back aboard, you're probably doing something wrong.


----------



## Tubsmacker

Yeah that's what I thought. I can get my dinghy on board no probs with the block and tackle. Originally I just used the winch and it was a struggle by comparison.

My other thought was that i could run a line from the anchor winch through the bow rollers on the outside of the guard rails etc ( outside of boat) using some slack which i could bring in at the stern and then winch in the bridle a bit and connect the anchor winch line where the bridle connects to the main drogue line. I could then tension the line further and release the bridle from the stern (or cut at the stern cleats or the bridle connection point if in a big hurry with minimal loss of materials)

The drogue would then be attached directly to the anchor winch through the rollers. I anticipate that as the stern would now be free that in would swing as the drag would be on the bow so i would then be facing the drouge and easily winch it in using forward engine power if required just like a normal anchor up situation.

Does this sound at all feasible?


----------



## TSOJOURNER

*Series Drogue Problems*

It would seem SailingDog has a greater desire to push the Jordan Series Drogue than to provide boaters with impartial facts. What's more disturbing is the use of the 1987 Coast Guard report to attack the parachute sea anchor industry. There are always two sides to a coin, so lets consider the side that SailingDog fails to mention.

According to Donald Jordan's 1987 Coast Guard Report, a breaking wave can sweep the stern of your boat while using a Jordan Series Drogue. If a wave strikes a flat transom boat, the report emphasizes to have strong companionway doors and that everything else in your cockpit better be beefed up. There's also potential damage to a dinghy or windvane hanging from the transom. From what I read, sailors who own a canoe stern boat are potentially the only people that can effectively use the series drogue in a breaking wave circumstance.

Something else not mentioned is how Jordon failed to compare apples to apples. According to the Coast Guard Report, the series drogue was never tested against the parachute sea anchor. In truth, Jordon tested his series drogue against a cone-style drift sock that looks similar to an airport windsock. Jordan's second mistake was to add weight placement to his drogue, but not to the competing drift socks. According to the CG Report, Jordan recognized how weight placement was essential. So why didn't Jordon add weight to the drift socks? It's been common practice since 1947 to use chain weight for parachute sea anchors? If it works for the parachute sea anchor and the series drogue, why not the drift socks?

Furthermore, it's not very cool to credit Donald Jordan as the "brainchild" (inventor) for other peoples hard work. In truth, the series drogue concept was originally patented by E.J. Pagan in 1889 and later by Sidelnikov in 1975. Unlike Jordan, their efforts to promote their series drogue failed.

Finally, lets be honest about the USCG involvement with the series drogue test. In truth, the USCG makes it very clear how they only provided "an economical platform" for Jordon to conduct his studies. They never endorsed the series drogue or stated that it was the best solution. Donald Jordon and his business associates make that claim.

SailingDog attacks those involved with the parachute sea anchor as "&#8230;a bit less than honest&#8230;" yet no facts are listed. However, the facts mentioned above might bring into question the honesty of those pushing the series drogue.

I would love other viewpoints on this subject. thanks.


----------



## Mimsy

So um, Hi Lynette and welcome to Sailnet. Any chance you have a husband/brother/partner named Albert?

Sailingdog is a well respected member of this community. He has time and time again offered help and assistance to any and all who have asked for such. AFAIK, he has no ties to any particular manufacturer of any peice of equipment. He is merely a very seasoned sailor who offers HIS opinions on priducts he has used along with a strong rationale as to why he prefers them.

Based on my experience with him and the fact that I know his interest lies solely in sharing his love of sailing of others, his opinion on various devices and equipment always has value to me. Other newcomers who come peddling their wares with under the guise of being a consumer are always met with skepticism by myself.


----------



## Mimsy

Lest you decide to use the handy edit feature to remove the tone of your post, I've quoted it here.

I have no problem with you offering a different opinion, that's what makes a for an interesting and enlightening conversation. I do however, take offense at you attacking Sailing dog personally. That is childish, bratty behavior and it pisses me off when 12 year olds do it and even more so when grown adults resort to the same.



> It would seem SailingDog has a greater desire to push the Jordan Series Drogue than to provide boaters with impartial facts





> SailingDog attacks those involved with the parachute sea anchor as "&#8230;a bit less than honest&#8230;" yet no facts are listed. However, the facts mentioned above might bring into question the honesty of those pushing the series drogue.


----------



## smackdaddy

Lynnette said:


> It would seem SailingDog has a greater desire to push the Jordan Series Drogue than to provide boaters with impartial facts. What's more disturbing is the use of the 1987 Coast Guard report to attack the parachute sea anchor industry. There are always two sides to a coin, so lets consider the side that SailingDog fails to mention.
> 
> According to Donald Jordan's 1987 Coast Guard Report, a breaking wave can sweep the stern of your boat while using a Jordan Series Drogue. If a wave strikes a flat transom boat, the report emphasizes to have strong companionway doors and that everything else in your cockpit better be beefed up. There's also potential damage to a dinghy or windvane hanging from the transom. From what I read, sailors who own a canoe stern boat are potentially the only people that can effectively use the series drogue in a breaking wave circumstance.
> 
> Something else not mentioned is how Jordon failed to compare apples to apples. According to the Coast Guard Report, the series drogue was never tested against the parachute sea anchor. In truth, Jordon tested his series drogue against a cone-style drift sock that looks similar to an airport windsock. Jordan's second mistake was to add weight placement to his drogue, but not to the competing drift socks. According to the CG Report, Jordan recognized how weight placement was essential. So why didn't Jordon add weight to the drift socks? It's been common practice since 1947 to use chain weight for parachute sea anchors? If it works for the parachute sea anchor and the series drogue, why not the drift socks?
> 
> Furthermore, it's not very cool to credit Donald Jordan as the "brainchild" (inventor) for other peoples hard work. In truth, the series drogue concept was originally patented by E.J. Pagan in 1889 and later by Sidelnikov in 1975. Unlike Jordan, their efforts to promote their series drogue failed.
> 
> Finally, lets be honest about the USCG involvement with the series drogue test. In truth, the USCG makes it very clear how they only provided "an economical platform" for Jordon to conduct his studies. They never endorsed the series drogue or stated that it was the best solution. Donald Jordon and his business associates make that claim.
> 
> SailingDog attacks those involved with the parachute sea anchor as "&#8230;a bit less than honest&#8230;" yet no facts are listed. However, the facts mentioned above might bring into question the honesty of those pushing the series drogue.
> 
> I would love other viewpoints on this subject. thanks.


Yeah - well - that's just Dog. He does have some serious love for this thing for whatever reason but it's usually taken with a grain of salt. We all have our obsessions.

One question I've been curious about is whether a device like the Galerider or Seabrake or Shark or whatever could be used off the bow instead of a chute? It seems the chute creates so much load that something a little more porous might achieve the same storm tactic objectives without the loads problem.

It sounds like you know quite a bit about the devices. What do you think?


----------



## smackdaddy

Mimsy said:


> Lest you decide to use the handy edit feature to remove the tone of your post, I've quoted it here.
> 
> I have no problem with you offering a different opinion, that's what makes a for an interesting and enlightening conversation. I do however, take offense at you attacking Sailing dog personally. That is childish, bratty behavior and it pisses me off when 12 year olds do it and even more so when grown adults resort to the same.


Mims - unless you know who this person is and are sure they're doing what you say - your tone at this point is worse than Lynette's. Chill out.


----------



## frankdrebin

Float followed by one and a half times the length of the drogue of "retrieval line". Attach this to the weighted end of the drogue. When under weigh, the float will submerge, and the weight will shallow, but it should work. To retrieve, slacken the line so the float surfaces. I would do this in forward, not reverse. Retrieve the float and recover the drogue "backwards." 

What float vs. weight ratios would work the best?

That's as far as my thinking goes.


----------



## bubb2

Lynnette, You failed to disclose you are a sail rep for Fiorentino para anchors. We have a rule around here that it you have a interest in a product that you disclose it in you posts and not take to personal attacks of members that have differing opinions.

Fiorentino ParaAnchor - manufacturers of sea anchors and parachute anchors and storm drogues


----------



## smackdaddy

Bubb - I'm with you on the disclosure. Should have happened. But, honestly, I don't see a "personal attack" on Dog in Lynette's post. Disagreement? Yeah. Saying he wasn't providing all the facts? Yeah. But nothing _personal_ as far as I can see.

Anyway - if Lynette will now acknowledge the affiliation it seems to me it would be good to get some good solid product comparisons from those in the know. Why not?


----------



## TSOJOURNER

*Series Drogue Problems*

Mimsy, 
I never questioned SailingDog's character or ability to provide good sailing advice. I do question anyone who claims those involved with parachute sea anchors as dishonest. My public profile demonstrates honesty, as does my restraint not to push any product or drag device company.

SmackDaddy,
Most drogues are too small to provide enough resistance to keep your bow into the waves. Believe it or not, load cell research indicates that parachute anchors place a lot less force on your boat than initially thought. Much has to do with keeping continuous tension on the rode to avoid shock loading. Practical Sailor's February 2009 issue about "Sea Anchor Sizing," briefly discusses that topic. To be fair, my knowledge on drag devices comes from a lot of reading and from talking with people that test this equipment.


----------



## bubb2

Lynnette said:


> SailingDog attacks those involved with the parachute sea anchor as "&#8230;a bit less than honest&#8230;" yet no facts are listed. However, the facts mentioned above might bring into question the honesty of those pushing the series drogue.


 Smack, the part that I feel was unnecessary is calling peoples honesty into question. I know Dog has strong opinions but he does "honesty" believe them.


----------



## TSOJOURNER

*Series Drogue Problems*

Bubb2,

I disclosed my affiliation with Fiorentino under my profile--before submitting my first letter. I went out of my way, not to push Fiorentino's products. And why do you ignore the fact that SailingDog is the one who chose to imply that parachute manufacturers are dishonest?


----------



## smackdaddy

Good point Bubb. I guess both sides have flung the "liar, liar pants on fire" salvos. Oh well, it will be fun to see Dog's calm, reasonable response.

Hey Lynette, are there any summaries of that load cell research that you could provide here? That way we get some documentation in the mix.


----------



## TSOJOURNER

*Series Drogue Problems*

SmackDaddy,

The load cell information should be published before the end of the year. I'll let you know when it's available.

Usually I don't start a fire unless I'm topless on a beach somewhere!

All drag devices have pros and cons. Zack Smith said it best at one of his seminars last year--

"There are pros and cons to all drag devices. The only real difference between drag devices are how much they slow or nearly stop your boat. And, how long it takes before they break or tangle. Breakage relates to the quality of the parts built into the product. Tangles relate to drag device design and instruction for use. A sailor needs to decide what they can realistically use in heavy weather--taking into consideration the experience and size of your crew. Never let anyone tell you that a stern deployed drogue is better than a bow deployed para-anchor or visa versa. It's strictly personal preference."

Disclosure: I couldn't send the above quote without checking with Zack first.


----------



## bubb2

Lynnette said:


> Bubb2,
> 
> I disclosed my affiliation with Fiorentino under my profile--before submitting my first letter. I went out of my way, not to push Fiorentino's products. And why do you ignore the fact that SailingDog is the one who chose to imply that parachute manufacturers are dishonest?


Please don't take this wrong, but I been here on the board for a long time. Over the years we had sales people try every way they could think of to push their products on the board.

First posts start out like "has anybody ever use ******* ." 6 posts later you find out that they are representing the product and the posts are nothing more then to avoid paying for advertising fees.

I do not believe that was your motive. You do have a financial interest in the discussion and to leave that information hidden in your profile is less than transparent.

Now when it comes to Dog, he has been here a long time also. Look at his post count. We can read between the strong words that dog uses because we have been doing for so long and for so many.

After you have a few hundred posts here we will know if you are here because of your interest of sailing or sea anchors.

Now that this is all out in the open air, Carry on!


----------



## GeorgeB

Lynnette, you could have been more open if you disclosed your affiliation with Fiorentino when you responded to this thread rather than leaving it someone else doing a little detective work to 'out" you. Some people might call that deceptive if not dishonest. Remember, "Dog" is a Corinthian, you are a Professional.

I took a quick look at your website and I do have a couple of questions. In the diagram, it appears that you deploy the anchor so that the boat lies in an "a hull" position. Wouldn't make the boat vulnerable to breaking and boarding waves? What does your company recommend the mariner to do in beefing up their mooring cleats to withstand the tremendous forces placed on them?

<OGranted, my experience with drogues is somewhat limited, but isn't the point for them to slow the boat down to match the speed of the wave and not to stop it completely like a para anchor? Even though the intent of our drogue was to merely slow us down, our rigger (Biron Toss) installed a pair of pretty massive chain plates to our hull to absorb the forces resulting from the drogue. We were doing this on a race boat so our intention was not to stop the boat completely, but to keep moving and ride the storm out. You could be much more helpful if you would provide us with some honest information other than referring to a twenty year old study. I may be a mere plebian, but who the heck is Jack Smith, and why should I care about what he says?


----------



## Mimsy

bubb2 said:


> Smack, the part that I feel was unnecessary is calling peoples honesty into question. I know Dog has strong opinions but he does "honesty" believe them.


Precisely. Had the thread said something along the lines of " I disagree and here is why..." without mentioning SD or any other name it never would have been an issue for me.

I am just starting to learn about heavy weather sailing and safety devices. I am very interested in hearing differing opinions on equipment and how tohandle it. What I am not interested in is yet another vendor diluting the discussion with personal attacks. Trying to discredit someone in order to promote your own agenda, for financial gain really, really rubs me the wrong way.

Back to your regularly scheduled discussion.


----------



## TSOJOURNER

*Series Drogue Problem*

Bubb2,
Once again, the information was not hidden in my profile. It's clearly written, "sales rep Fiorentino." That's the only reason you know I work for them.

Please explain how it hurts everyone to know both the positive and negative about a series drogue? SailingDog provides details that say it's perfect and I provide details that say its not.

In truth, my interest is in sailing naked and seeing a fair and balanced comparison with all drag devices.


----------



## kwaltersmi

Good stuff Dog. First I've heard of an alternative to the "parachute" style drogue. 

But this thread begs the question, do you take your Telstar on bluewater passages or sails where you expect you might encounter conditions requiring the deployment of a drogue? Or are you recommending every coastal boat (along with bluewater/passage-makers) carry this equipment?


----------



## TSOJOURNER

*Series Drogue Problems*

Georgeb,
The subject in this thread is supposed to be about the series drogue&#8230;not me! Once again, the information is in my profile. It's clearly written, "sales rep Fiorentino." That's how you know who I am. This information was disclosed in my profile before the submission of my original letter. Reply #34 page 4 in this thread.


----------



## Valiente

If I were running in coastal seas that were not breaking, but were, with the wind, pushing my boat too close to hull speed and beyond my ability to steer, I would consider trailing the JSD because distributing the shock loading over a long, narrow drag device makes sense to me. Slowing the boat and presenting a stern corner (quartering) would allow me to steer down the wave faces better, were it prudent to do so.

If I were in conditions where I was considering bare poles, or where the seas were breaking or the waves were of the size to roll me were I to lie a-hull, I would hove to with a sheeted in trysail and an offset helm. I would consider deployed a para-anchor or similar device to keep me hove to and making under (ideally) a knot of leeward drift with the bow 50 degrees or so off the wind.

Then I would go below and try and rest.

Bad weather situations and our responses are going to be condition-dependent, sea-state dependent, barometer/weather info dependent, proximity to land/shallows dependent, and number/strength of crew dependent.

We haven't even _discussed _the boat yet, nor the type of devices that may be aboard, or, like warps, may be able to be fabricated or deployed from materials at hand.

There is no one solution. There is no one boat, nor one storm, nor one distance from big, pointy rocks. There are, however, a range of solutions and tactics with which all who venture offshore would be wise to learn, to practise and to understand, particularly in the many contexts the seas and the skies can produce.


----------



## TSOJOURNER

*Series Drogue Problems*

Mimsy,

Once again, you are ignoring the fact that SailingDog Wrote, "Some of the oft-cited information sources that tout the superiority of the parachute sea anchor type devices are a bit less than honest." Refer to my original letter on page 4, reply #34. I personally believe boaters want to know about the complete details about the series drogue test and not just SailingDog's or my viewpoint, but both.


----------



## kwaltersmi

Well said Valiente. Well said.


----------



## bubb2

Lynnette said:


> Bubb2,
> Once again, the information was not hidden in my profile. It's clearly written, "sales rep Fiorentino." That's the only reason you know I work for them.
> 
> Please explain how it hurts everyone to know both the positive and negative about a series drogue? SailingDog provides details that say it's perfect and I provide details that say its not.
> 
> In truth, my interest is in sailing naked and seeing a fair and balanced comparison with all drag devices.


Lynnette, somehow you seem offended that I made it public (for the less savvy board user's that would not go to a profile) that you are sales rep. for a sea anchor manufacturer. As I pointed out to you in a earlier post, the board rules are that if you represent a product you make it known to the members in you POSTS not your profile. Every Menber has a right to know if someone has more than a casual interest in the product they are discussing. It is simple, it's not personal, but now I wonder why that is an issue for you.

So far I learned from your posts that you like to be topless on the beach and sail naked. Great!

I too want to see a "fair and balance" conversation. Could you give us first hand accounts of how you used your Para-anchor? how to deploy it and retrieve it? Is it best used off a single line or a bridle? Any personal experience you can offer using a para-anchor will be a great asset to the discussion.


----------



## smackdaddy

Yeah - I think the real point here is not disclosure of vested interests - but sailing naked. Lynette at least deserves a point for throwing down what I'd deem FULL disclosure on her sailing habits. Well played.

Now, Mimsy, I'm sorry, but there is no freakin' way I'd sail with Dog...especially if he was naked. Watching that retrieve a JSD would burn your eyes out.


----------



## TSOJOURNER

*Series Drogue Problems*

Bubb2,
Once again, you know that I'm affiliated with Fiorentino. There was no intent of hiding that fact in my profile or any other time. There was no attempt to sell Fiorentino's products. Would it help if I edit my original post #34 on page 4and clearly write that Lynnette is a salesperson for Fiorentino Para Anchor? How and where do you suggest I place that information in the post?

If you are concerned about the less than savvy board members, why not discuss the pros and cons about the series drogue? Why ignore the potential problems associated with the series drogue or any other drag device?

Lynnette Mitchell
Salesperson -- Fiorentino Para Anchor


----------



## TSOJOURNER

SmackDaddy. 
Nudity is how a woman distracts a real man.


----------



## JimHawkins

Lynette,
Here are a couple of the disclosure rules from sailnet:
2) You shall identify yourself and your interest in your signature, 
your title, or both.
5) You SHALL be transparent and forthright.
You violate both of these.
[the full list can be found at http://www.sailnet.com/forums/buying-boat/39218-special-interest-declaration.html]

You do both yourself and your company a disservice by engaging in childish denial and argument while simultaneously flouting the rules. It's also rather self defeating to attack SD's integrity. I myself find plenty of things to attack him on, but this one won't fly. I also might point out that this thread was started to provide information about JSD's, not about para-anchors, but now that you've hijacked it I'm sure people will read any real information you might care to provide.


----------



## Capnblu

So now that You have been thoroughly welcomed and initiated to SailNet, Lynnette, and since you are a rep for Florentino, how about some real video? I would like to see a REAL deployment, and retrieval of your system. Smack will probably want a different video, but he can ask for himself. You may as well stop ripping into Dog, As the first line in his thread says In my opinion, the greatest storm safety device ever created is the Jordan Series Drogue." This is HIS opinion. And if he starts a post with that, he has put considerable thought into it. He was convinced enough to buy one and has actually deployed it. I hope he will post a video showing how to use it, but let Gui will do the voiceover. So what do you say, lets talk about the pro's, and con's, and drop the hurt feeling BS.


----------



## genieskip

Back to discussing the various storm tactics and devices. 

I couldn't decide between a para anchor and a JSD, so over the winter I sewed myself one of each. The para anchor is done and the JSD has all the cones sewn up but not yet spliced in (and a long tedious job that is, I hear). I look forward to trying them out over the summer. I feel fortunate because the PO installed power on one of the primaries, which should make retrieval simpler, though I'll probably have to run the engine to keep the batteries fed. 

I agree with Valiente that each boat, crew and situation is different and therefore a prudent skipper should have more than one option at his disposal. I can see needing to be bow to the waves and also see a time when stern to might be better. Redundancy is good. I used to sail with an old German skipper whose motto was "have a backup for your shpare" Sorry, can't do justice to the accent.


----------



## TSOJOURNER

*New Member*

Capnblu,
How refreshing -- a voice of reason. Fiorentino's editor is currently working on their new website video and SmackDaddy can ask me for anything he wants.

Listen everyone, 
SailingDog has strong opinions about the series drogue and so do I. My original letter posted today (page 4 reply #34) demonstrates how I never promoted the parachute sea anchor or the company I'm affiliated with. I did not place the company's name in the post in an effort to avoid accusations of foul play. That's why I was honest about my identity in my profile. That obviously was misunderstood. So I changed my signature. Ironically, that plugs Fiorentino. Good night.


----------



## sailingdog

Lynette-

The website and book I was referring to is Victor Shane's Drag Device Database book and website. The website clearly links to the Para-tech parachute sea anchor website, and many of the testimonials feature Para-tech parachute type sea anchors by name. The database seems to skimp or ignore a lot of available testimonial about other devices.

For example, from the DDDB website, out of the 15 monohull sea anchor testimonials listed, 12 were using Para-tech sea anchors. I seriously doubt that Para-tech has an 80% market share. Out of the 9 multihull sea anchor testimonials, all 9 were based on Para-tech sea anchors... Out of the 7 drogue testimonials, one used a Para-tech parachute as a drogue, two were Galeriders, two were series drogues, and the rest had no prepared storm drogues.

Out of the 32 cases presented, 22 were Para-tech sea anchor based... and again,_* I seriously doubt that two thirds of the boats at sea are carrying Para-tech sea anchors.*_ It might be sheer coincidence that the brand of sea-anchor the Drag Device Database website is linked to shows up in so many of their testimonials... but I find that very unlikely. So, yes, I consider it somewhat unethical as a marketing ploy.

As for the JSD and breaking waves-while there is the risk of a breaking wave striking the stern of the boat and damaging it... AFAIK, that has not happened to date to anyone using a JSD device. Far more has been written about the shock loading that parachute-type sea anchors result in causing serious damage to the boat's they are attached to, often resulting in severe damage to the bow, where the hardpoints for the parachute were previously attached-yet you don't say anything about those problems. Nor do I see you addressing the issue of the water motion possibly resulting in the collapse of a parachute type sea anchor.

*You obviously have a vested interest in and obvious bias about the parachute-type sea anchor, regardless of who makes them. * I have no such bias or vested interests in the Jordan Series Drogue. As I clearly stated, this is my opinion... without bias or financial interest of any kind.... you can take it or leave it.


----------



## smackdaddy

sailingdog said:


> *You obviously have a vested interest in and obvious bias about the parachute-type sea anchor, regardless of who makes them. * I have no such bias or vested interests in the Jordan Series Drogue. As I clearly stated, this is my opinion... without bias or financial interest of any kind.... you can take it or leave it.


Okay dude, let's keep this a fair fight. You may not have a *vested interest* in the JSD, but I don't think there's anyone on God's blue sea that believes you *don't* have an *"obvious bias"* for this thing.

You've been pushing the JSD like Viagra. So ease up a little on the farbing.


----------



## Capnblu

Smack, she said "ANYTHING", and you you are still thinking about SD? You aren't sick are you? 
Lynnette, I have a Tayana 42. She is a canoe stern, center cockpit version. In your opinion, is a JSD an excellent, good, fair, or poor choice of drogue, compared to the Fiorentino? Stern and Bow? How does your system relate to a vessel of heavy displacement, compared to a relatively light multihull? 
SD, would you prefer I asked these types of questions in a different thread?


----------



## smackdaddy

Oh no, I didn't miss the love toss. It's just I get that a lot. You know. Eat your hearts out fellas.

Of course, being the Rock of Gibraltar that I am, not even naked women yanking my halyards can shake my laser focus on making fun of Dog.

(PS - Lynette, your PM box seems to be full. Heh-heh.)


----------



## TSOJOURNER

*Series Drogue Opinions*

SailingDog,

Thank you for your kind tone this morning (post #64). I think its fair to say you began this thread by sharing your opinion that promotes the series drogue (entry #1). I provided an opinion about facts and mistakes overlooked in your series drogue thread (page 4, post #34). And I made no attempt to sell parachute sea anchors.

If I understand you correctly, you're "a bit less than honest&#8230;" statement is a reference to Victor Shane's, DDDB and not all manufacturers of parachute anchors. Although Victor Shane is a business associate of Para-Tech and demonstrates a bias by omitting Fiorentino from his DDDB book - I think the book still offers useful testimonials.

You 're right about shock loading with parachute sea anchors that are set improperly. Zack Smith, who conducts Fiorentino's research, provides the best solution to this topic in Practical Sailors Feb 2009 issue.

"Smith maintains that rode tension is the big secret in successfully using and sizing a parachute sea anchor. Rode naturally stretches under force until it becomes taut. As force is reduced, rode becomes relaxed&#8230;what we want to avoid is too long a period of rode slack because this leaves a vessel swinging beam to, where waves can heavily roll the boat or in rare circumstances, cause it to fall back on the rudder(s). One way to get and maintain more tension is to deploy a larger anchor; however, this also makes retrieving the anchor more difficult. In order to get more tension out of a smaller anchor, Smith suggest paying out shorter lengths of rode, adding a small length of chain next to the parachute, or flying a riding sail to increase vessel windage."

Shock loading is a problem for all drag devices, including the series drogue. The series drogue tends to generates twice the amount of force compared to other drogues, but less than a parachute anchor. Regardless, water motion rarely affects a properly rigged parachute anchor or drogue.

It might surprise you that Fiorentino spends a lot of time assisting people with their homemade drag devices or products manufactured by other companies. Fiorentino even sends people to Sailrite if they choose to build their own series drogue. Why? If sailors use all drag devices properly their success rate is high. This leads to more sailors carrying a drag device aboard their boat versus no safety net at all. So yes, I'm bias, but only for a company that stands for integrity.

SailingDog, we are all bias and have opinions. It's nice when we can express them.


----------



## TSOJOURNER

CapnBlue,

Salesperson or not, I would only choose Fiorentino. In all fairness, please check out all the manufacturers websites to learn how to use their products. Cheers!


----------



## genieskip

One question I have relates to the swivel that is recommended with parachute anchors. Does that become superfluous if chain is hung on one side of the chute to keep it from windmilling? How much chain per foot of diameter? I don''t like the idea of the swivel because most swivels that size (3/4 inch) just don't work well under pressure.


----------



## Capnblu

Why Lynnette? ("only choose a Florentino") I have a good idea why SD chose the JSD, but why as an individual, and not an employee of the company, would you only choose Florentino? Does it cover the shortcomings of all other drouges? Isn't it ok for you to say here why it's better? The problem with reading every other manufacturers data, is that it is biased towards their own product. (sorry) Much weight is placed on the opinion of SD, because (I think) he researched, and came to the conclusion that the JSD is right for HIM. We have also been reading and getting a feeling for his advice for almost 34 000 entries, just on this site. Perhaps some individuals whom owns a Florentino could pitch in, and discuss what they like and don't like.


----------



## sailingdog

Lynette-

I'd point out that you're not quite correct when you say the Jordan Series Drogue causes greater shock loading than other drogues. By shock loading, I am referring to the sudden transfer of high forces to the hardware that connects the drogue or sea anchor to the boat. While the Jordan Series Drogue does create more drag than most drag devices outside of a larger parachute-type sea anchor, it doesn't shock load, as the JSD is designed to load progressively.

When not under load, the JSD will effectively hang vertically from the transom of the boat.... as a load is applied by the moving boat, the JSD will extend from the transom of the boat aft and as the load increases, more and more of the JSD will be brought into play, progressively loading the rode and deck hardware on the boat. This is unlike other drogues and the parachute-type sea anchors-which, if the boat goes from an untensioned rode to applying a heavy load will generally get shock loading as the single element of the drogue or parachute sea anchor fills and takes effect.

I'd also point out that boat's lying to a JSD are rarely pooped, as the stern of most modern boats offers far more buoyancy than does the bow.  Don Jordan mentions this in his notes, which were published *here*, saying:



> Some sailors have expressed reluctance to use a drogue for rear of being "pooped". Testing has shown that a conventional monohull or multihull will perform in a safe manner when riding stern to the sea. Actually, the stern generally has more local buoyancy than the bow and will rise quickly to a steep sea. However, storm waves will have whitecaps containing some moving water and this may splash aboard.
> 
> In a dangerous breaking wave strike, moving water may sweep the cockpit and strike the companionway doors. This is unavoidable, and is a necessary corollary to saving the vessel.


Don Jordan also goes on to point out that he:



> ...developed this drogue in conjunction with the Coast Guard.* It is the first and only such device to be specifically designed for a 'worst case' breaking wave strike. *Such a strike is described in Miles Smeeton's book 'Once Is Enough'. Modern engineering tools such as scale model testing in flow channels and breaking wave tanks, computer dynamic simulation, and laboratory testing for structural strength and durability were used in the development, as well as full scale testing using a 42-foot Coast Guard powerboat. The final design was tested in large breaking waves at the Coast Guard National Motor Lifeboat School in Ilwaco, Washington. This work is described in U.S. Coast Guard Report C.G.-D-20- 87, Investigation of the Use of Drogues to Improve the Safety of Sailing Yachts., U. S Dept. of Commerce Nat. Info. Service, Springfield, VA 22191 ($22).


I'd also question how why you feel a parachute sea anchor is a safer device, when the issues with form stability of a boat anchored from the bow, as explained by Don Jordan *here*, still exist. Boats lying to a sea anchor will still have a tendency to horse, which does not happen when lying to a stern-deployed JSD. Don Jordan points out that sea anchors, including the large parachute type ones are not that useful because:



> A monohull is directionally unstable when moving backward because the center of pressure of the underwater surface is behind the center of gravity. As any skipper knows, it is possible to run off before a storm - but it is not possible to run off backwards as the boat will yaw. There are two additional sources of instability. The center of pressure of the air forces on the topsides and rigging is ahead of the center of gravity. There is also a third and more complex dynamic instability. The last two instabilities result in the behavior observed when a monohull is anchored from the bow in protected water during a hurricane. "It is particularly unnerving to watch a yacht tacking back and forth on a mooring under bare poles and knocking flat at the end of each tack," reported one who watched a monohull during hurricane Bertha. If the boat had been anchored from the stern, it would ride with little yaw.
> 
> When riding to a parachute sea anchor, a monohull will yaw wildly. As the storm increased in severity, it would develop load sufficient to break the rode. A sea anchor does not provide safety in a survival storm.


What is your response to these points?


----------



## TSOJOURNER

*show me yours first -- and then I'll show you mine*

SailingDog,

Please respond to my viewpoints from yesterday and I'll be more than happy to respond to yours. Here's part of the original post not answered (#34):

According to Donald Jordan's 1987 Coast Guard Report, a breaking wave can sweep the stern of your boat while using a Jordan Series Drogue. If a wave strikes a flat transom boat, the report emphasizes to have strong companionway doors and that everything else in your cockpit better be beefed up. There's also potential damage to a dinghy or windvane hanging from the transom. From what I read, sailors who own a canoe stern boat are potentially the only people that can effectively use the series drogue in a breaking wave circumstance.

Something else not mentioned is how Jordon failed to compare apples to apples. According to the Coast Guard Report, the series drogue was never tested against the parachute sea anchor. In truth, Jordon tested his series drogue against a cone-style drift sock that looks similar to an airport windsock. Jordan's second mistake was to add weight placement to his drogue, but not to the competing drift socks. According to the CG Report, Jordan recognized how weight placement was essential. So why didn't Jordon add weight to the drift socks? It's been common practice since 1947 to use chain weight for parachute sea anchors? If it works for the parachute sea anchor and the series drogue, why not the drift socks?

Furthermore, it's not very cool to credit Donald Jordan as the "brainchild" (inventor) for other peoples hard work. In truth, the series drogue concept was originally patented by E.J. Pagan in 1889 and later by Sidelnikov in 1975. Unlike Jordan, their efforts to promote their series drogue failed.

Finally, lets be honest about the USCG involvement with the series drogue test. In truth, the USCG makes it very clear how they only provided "an economical platform" for Jordon to conduct his studies. They never endorsed the series drogue or stated that it was the best solution. Donald Jordon and his business associates make that claim.


----------



## Capnblu

Hmmm, I was hoping for more than a pissing match Lynnette. If you want to sell some of those things, get over it, and move onto giving some information on your better solution. Tell us why, show us why, and take the high road. Maybe I need to buy one? Use my boat as an example. What info does it take? C'mon, lets play.


----------



## sailingdog

Lynnette said:


> SailingDog,
> 
> Please respond to my viewpoints from yesterday and I'll be more than happy to respond to yours. Here's part of the original post not answered (#34):
> 
> According to Donald Jordan's 1987 Coast Guard Report, a breaking wave can sweep the stern of your boat while using a Jordan Series Drogue. If a wave strikes a flat transom boat, the report emphasizes to have strong companionway doors and that everything else in your cockpit better be beefed up. There's also potential damage to a dinghy or windvane hanging from the transom. From what I read, sailors who own a canoe stern boat are potentially the only people that can effectively use the series drogue in a breaking wave circumstance.


No, actually, the JSD would benefit anyone using it in the case of breaking wave strike... however, as you point out the double-ended canoe stern boats would benefit in ways other designs might now. I'd point out that any boat that is hit by a breaking wave would do well to have a beefed up structure. A boat lying to a parachute-type sea anchor would be even more dangerously exposed, given the very nature of the parachute sea anchor, and would be well advised to have a reinforced cabintop.

I'd also point out that anyone carrying a dinghy on davits in this type of situation on the open ocean pretty much gets what they deserve... having a dinghy on transom davits in any kind of heavy weather is just stupid IMHO.

Most wind vanes wouldn't be too seriously affected, other than losing the vane, and if you had your airvane still mounted while dealing with the conditions that forced you to deploy a JSD, you deserve to have it broken off.  The airvane on most windvanes is easily and quickly removable.



> Something else not mentioned is how Jordon failed to compare apples to apples. According to the Coast Guard Report, the series drogue was never tested against the parachute sea anchor. In truth, Jordon tested his series drogue against a cone-style drift sock that looks similar to an airport windsock. Jordan's second mistake was to add weight placement to his drogue, but not to the competing drift socks. According to the CG Report, Jordan recognized how weight placement was essential. So why didn't Jordon add weight to the drift socks? It's been common practice since 1947 to use chain weight for parachute sea anchors? If it works for the parachute sea anchor and the series drogue, why not the drift socks?


Obviously, you didn't read the report very well... First, I'd point out that the report doesn't state whether weight was used with the other drogues or not... *the only thing the report definitively states is that weight was used with the series drogue. *There is no evidence in the report one way or the other to determine whether weight was or was not used with the other drogues. This is an assumption you are making.

Second, I'd also point out that the bow-deployed parachute sea anchors were dismissed after scale model testing proved that they wouldn't successfully hold the bow to waves/wind if the rode had any slack in it, as would occur whenever the boat entered the trough between waves. This is clearly stated in 3.2.4, and is the reason why only stern-deployed drogues were tested.

AFAIK, none of the parachute sea anchor manufacturers recommend deploying their devices from the stern of the boat. BTW, real world experience with parachute-type sea anchors has proven that they do have problems if any slack forms in the rode.

Section 3.3.2 says:



> A variety of drogue designs were tested, including cone drogues with both rigid and flexible hoops, parachute drogues, and a novel design called a series drogue.


However, the test also notes that the large parachute style drogue and the series drogue do not display the tendency of the smaller parachute drogues or cone-based drogues to collapse when not under load.



> Furthermore, it's not very cool to credit Donald Jordan as the "brainchild" (inventor) for other peoples hard work. In truth, the series drogue concept was originally patented by E.J. Pagan in 1889 and later by Sidelnikov in 1975. Unlike Jordan, their efforts to promote their series drogue failed.


A lot of people are credited with "inventing things" that were actually invented by other people... A good example is Bill Gates and Microsoft Windows... which was clearly a rip-off of the Mac operating system that had come along prior to Windows. The fact that Ctrl-x, c, v, z, and p are used for the cut, copy, paste, undo and print commands truly shows the level of the innovation that Bill had... since those were the Mac OS commands for those functions.

As another historic example, Guglielmo Marconi is credited as the father of modern radio, when it was actually "invented" by others, including Nikola Tesla. From a PBS article on radio, Nikola Tesla and Marconi.



> Tesla filed his own basic radio patent applications in 1897. They were granted in 1900. Marconi's first patent application in America, filed on November 10, 1900, was turned down. Marconi's revised applications over the next three years were repeatedly rejected because of the priority of Tesla and other inventors.





> Finally, lets be honest about the USCG involvement with the series drogue test. In truth, the USCG makes it very clear how they only provided "an economical platform" for Jordon to conduct his studies. They never endorsed the series drogue or stated that it was the best solution. Donald Jordon and his business associates make that claim.


Can you point out where I said the USCG endorsed the Jordan Series Drogue. All I've ever said is that Don Jordan developed in it conjunction or cooperation with the US Coast Guard. To quote my original post, this is what I said:



> First, the *Jordan Series drogue was developed and tested in conjunction with the US Coast Guard, and was specifically designed for helping small sailcraft survive in storm conditions, like those found during the 1979 Fastnet disaster that was Jordan's primary motivation for developing the series drogue. *It has been proven to work very successfully and protect boats using it from damage during its deployment.


If you've read more into my statement than what is actually there, that's pretty much your own damn fault and problem.

The fact that you're attacking my posts and reading facts not in evidence into various things is pretty pathetic. Anytime, someone starts quoting things out of context, generally indicates that their basically on shaky ground. I'd really like to hear your response to the questions I posed in my previous post, since I've addressed your points.


----------



## bubb2

Capnblu said:


> Hmmm, I was hoping for more than a pissing match Lynnette. If you want to sell some of those things, get over it, and move onto giving some information on your better solution. Tell us why, show us why, and take the high road. Maybe I need to buy one? Use my boat as an example. What info does it take? C'mon, lets play.


So far this is what I been able to ascertain from Lynnette as why we should consider her para-anchor:

Her's is the best because she's says so!

Her's is the best because she says Dog does not tell the truth (3 times)

Her's is the best because the manufactures web site says so!

Her's is the best because she says so and if you would like to learn anything about her para-anchor go to the web site and stop asking her!

Her's is the best because she sails naked!

Her's is the best because she can cut and paste from her web site and make it look like a post on Sailnet!

I think I have covered it all and learned all I can about about Para-anchors from Lynnette, Where do I send the check? I bet that is only Question that Lynnette can answer!:laugher


----------



## Mimsy

*bubb2* I <3 you forever. :laugher


----------



## sailingdog

Bubb—

Your next round at the AS pub is on me..  Although, I take exception to me not telling the truth... I've told the whole truth... even if Lynnette decides to makes assumptions and jump to conclusions about what I've said.


----------



## bubb2

sailingdog said:


> Bubb-
> 
> Your next round at the AS pub is on me..  Although, I take exception to me not telling the truth... I've told the whole truth... even if Lynnette decides to makes assumptions and jump to conclusions about what I've said.


Dog, I know you have told the truth! If fact, I was so in hope to learn first hand information. I have been looking at drogue's and para-anchors over the years.

This would have been such a good chance for us to learn from a manufacturer's rep. What is sad is the way this Para-anchor company has been represented. It does make me wonder if it is not all snake oil, as I find no compelling reason that it is not. Based on the statements from their representative.


----------



## sailingdog

The fact that Paratech, one of Lynnette's competitors, fails to clearly mention that they have a relationship with Victor Shane and the Drag Device Database website and book on the DDDB.com website makes me wonder about the impartiality and the truth of the testimonials presented there. As I have stated previously, Don Jordan had no financial or economic motivation as he released the Jordan Series Drogue design to the public domain, and did not manufacture or have any vested interest in the JSD's production or sale. He was very open about answering any questions regarding the JSD and even giving sizing recommendations via e-mail, which is how I became acquainted with him. Over the years I had the good fortune to speak with him at length several times and correspond with him via e-mail regarding the JSD.

Lynnette's spurious attacks on Jordan being the "inventor" of the JSD as well as her attacks about the facts in the USCG study make me wonder about her credibility. Jordan's point about boats and their instability under a bow-deployed sea anchor or anchor for that matter, are pretty well founded and clearly explained on the JordanSeriesDrogue.com website. Lynnette has yet to explain how a Fiorentino Parachute-type sea anchor prevents this from occurring or how they prevent the massive shock loading that is known to occur when a large diameter parachute-type sea anchor is used.


----------



## sailingdog

I'd also point out that a properly sized Jordan Series Drogue will limit the boat's speed to about 1-1.5 knots at best... much like a parachute sea anchor does... producing far more drag than most other "drogues" do.


----------



## chucklesR

As a multihull sailor that reads and makes my own decisions I'll just add my little piece.

The biggest problem on a multi in big winds is the possibility of capsizing, the last thing I want to do is be held in place for a breaking wave which is exactly what a sea anchor would do. Studies prove that, google it if you want proof, I've seen enough to say I 'know' that to be true.

The next problem is too much speed, the last thing I want is to fly off the top of a wave or spear the base of one and pole vault/bury my bow.
Anybody with google and Youtube can see video's of boats doing just that, again, no links needed.

With my windage even bare pole I can make serious speed in 40 knts of wind - and that's proven by Tony Smith (Gemini designer/builder) on his trip across the Atlantic - the boat was making 18 kts under all reefs in 35 kts of wind and 20 ft seas.
www.geminicatamarans.com - Tony's story is posted there.

Dragging a dogue, or warps etc. is the proven answer for my boat, under those conditions, on that trip.
I'll take getting pooped to spearing a breaker any day, boats designed to take it.

Like Valiente said a couple of pages ago, every thing is different every time.

ANYONE that says they have the ONE answer to fit all the variables is always lying.

Having said that, Lynette, no pics, didn't happen. 
Smack, quit drooling and use your head. Add something useful to the conversation or fade out.


----------



## sailingdog

chucklesR said:


> Having said that, Lynette, no pics, didn't happen.
> Smack, quit drooling and use your head. Add something useful to the conversation or fade out.


I don't think that any of this is actually possible.


----------



## smackdaddy

chucklesR said:


> Smack, quit drooling and use your head. Add something useful to the conversation or fade out.


Who are you again?

Fine - the multi dudes want the JSD. Whatever. Just don't be so bitchy about it. For crying out loud can't you hear the eyes rolling?

Look anyone that has done some reading on current heavy weather techniques for monos comes across the para-anchor technique quite often. The people in the ad to your left have pushed it quite a bit as something that's been tested and proven. And their technique has been adopted by some of the most popular HWS books out there. So it's got some cred.

Furthermore, these people don't care so much about the techniques for multis.

So - yeah Val's exactly right...which means you and Dog are only kind of right.

I'm just saying you guys should give the chick a little air and let her hammer it out with Dog instead of spending so much time defending him (from a girl - though she seems to actually pack a punch). And if/when she gets a little uppity - just remember that Dog tends to bring that out in people...kind of like I do with you.


----------



## sailingdog

I'd point out that the parachute sea anchors generally only work well when deployed from the bow on older, full-keel designs, since they have less of a tendency to horse at anchor.... for the reasons described by Don Jordan... They tend to not work very well on more modern designs as a general rule. 

The Pardeys even point out that the sea anchor shouldn't be deployed from the bow alone...but usually recommend using a line to hold the boat at an angle to the drogue, to prevent the boat from swinging wildly.

I'd point out that the JSD works for both multihulls and monohulls... and has been proven quite useful for both. If you actually took the time to read some of the links I've posted in this thread, you might learn something... unfortunately, that would require you learning how to read words of two syllables and greater...


----------



## smackdaddy

Dog - for the love of Poseidon - I've read your stuff, even the rare content with multiple syllables. Re-lax dude. You're getting all Reverend Wright on the JSD. That's all I'm saying.

You can quote stats and reports until your even bluer in the face. Then she'll quote other stats and reports that make the para-anchor shine. Then one of Chichester's friends will come a long with yet another device that is the end-all.

Val is right. So just have the conversation and quit trying to make the JSD the end-all device. More importantly, let her answer some of the other's questions if she's going to. That will be far better than you protecting us from the mean sales lady.

On the other hand, I think if you took a 300' 3/4" line and sewed in all the 34DDs that are trailing behind the "Sailing Braless" thread - you just might have something I'd buy.


----------



## Capnblu

I await Lynnette's replys. Wonder if her boss reads sailnet?


----------



## Paul_L

sailingdog said:


> I'd also point out that a properly sized Jordan Series Drogue will limit the boat's speed to about 1-1.5 knots at best... much like a parachute sea anchor does... producing far more drag than most other "drogues" do.


This might be the biggest problem with a JSD. In many cases you will want to slow the boat down for safety, mono or multi, but want to keep good steerage on. Instead of racing down big waves at 12-14kts, you want to have a good control at 5-6kts. If you use a Galerider type drogue, then that is what you will get. If you use a JSD, then you will pretty much park the boat and have a little steerage. In the complete survival strorm, this might be what you want. For most uses and most heavy weather, the slow the boat to a reasonable and safe steering speed is probably more useful.

Paul L


----------



## sailingdog

Paul-

I asked Don Jordan about that... he said that you weren't supposed to have to steer at all with a JSD deployed..... it was designed to give the captain and crew a chance to hunker down in the cabin and get some serious rest while it dealt with the storm. Provided the chainplates for it were mounted properly, chafe should not be a major issue, since the bridle for the JSD should go from the chainplates and run free and clear to the JSD itself. Don generally recommended having custom chainplates installed for use with the JSD.



Paul_L said:


> This might be the biggest problem with a JSD. In many cases you will want to slow the boat down for safety, mono or multi, but want to keep good steerage on. Instead of racing down big waves at 12-14kts, you want to have a good control at 5-6kts. If you use a Galerider type drogue, then that is what you will get. If you use a JSD, then you will pretty much park the boat and have a little steerage. In the complete survival strorm, this might be what you want. For most uses and most heavy weather, the slow the boat to a reasonable and safe steering speed is probably more useful.
> 
> Paul L


----------



## Paul_L

sailingdog said:


> Paul-
> 
> I asked Don Jordan about that... he said that you weren't supposed to have to steer at all with a JSD deployed..... it was designed to give the captain and crew a chance to hunker down in the cabin and get some serious rest while it dealt with the storm. Provided the chainplates for it were mounted properly, chafe should not be a major issue, since the bridle for the JSD should go from the chainplates and run free and clear to the JSD itself. Don generally recommended having custom chainplates installed for use with the JSD.


In an extreme storm case, it makes sense what Jordan said. In the case that most people are likely to find themselves, a speed controlling drogue will most likely be more useful. If you had the space and the money, then having both on board would be the best. In my case, I'll take the tradeoff and stick with the Galerider type. It is much more likely to get used on my boat than a JSD.

Paul L


----------



## sailingdog

One problem I see with deploying a GaleRider or other speed controlling drogue is what do you do when you realize it isn't enough??? Do you cut it free and deploy the JSD? IMHO, it would be unwise to have both deployed, as one would surely foul the other.


----------



## Paul_L

sailingdog said:


> One problem I see with deploying a GaleRider or other speed controlling drogue is what do you do when you realize it isn't enough??? Do you cut it free and deploy the JSD? IMHO, it would be unwise to have both deployed, as one would surely foul the other.


I don't think in general you'd want them both out there. Although I'm not a sure that can really foul each other a lot. A speed limiting type drogue is easier to retrieve than JSD. But both will be real work and probably best left till the time that things ease up a bit. If you are planning for the extreme conditions, then sure start with JSD. I guess I question what you are going to do in the more likely conditions that you would want some drag control. That's where a Galerider type drogue, or hove-to or fore-reaching might be best.

Paul L


----------



## sailingdog

Paul—

We're in agreement there... it will be interesting to see how Lynette responds.


----------



## knothead

Valiente said:


> There is no one solution. There is no one boat, nor one storm, nor one distance from big, pointy rocks. There are, however, a range of solutions and tactics with which all who venture offshore would be wise to learn, to practise and to understand, particularly in the many contexts the seas and the skies can produce.


Amen. 
And then we pray.


----------



## sailingdog

There are no atheists on a sailboat in a bad storm or in foxholes when bullets are flying... 


knothead said:


> Amen.
> And then we pray.


----------



## Valiente

sailingdog said:


> The Pardeys even point out that the sea anchor shouldn't be deployed from the bow alone...but usually recommend using a line to hold the boat at an angle to the drogue, to prevent the boat from swinging wildly.


Correct. Having a steel full keeler, I can run or hove-to: Conditions (including the crew's) would dictate that choice and I would customarily carry equipment to accomplish both. Hell, if I thought running at hull speed for 12 hours in less-than-fully developed seas (like off the edge of a fast-moving and fresh depression, I would likely run, particularly if it took me in a desired direction, because I like to sail, after all. But hoving-to spares the crew, and spares my boat in a way that a cat or a tri would be less likely to accomplish or to gain much benefit from.

If I had a tri or a cat, I would run, and if in running too fast, I would deploy a drogue, and my drogue would likely be a JSD because I couldn't fit 600 feet of 1 1/2" warps and a couple of tires on my cat without making it sail funny.

As I said, different strokes. The monohull might be slower, but its ability to hold more gear due to volume (unless it's a really big cat or tri) means I have a few options lighter, swifter designs do not.

For instance, there's no reason a cat or a tri couldn't have a separate trysail track, but I've never heard of it. I just hear about them going to bare poles once they start scudding too quickly off the waves and catching uncomfortable amount of air.


----------



## Valiente

Paul_L said:


> For most uses and most heavy weather, the slow the boat to a reasonable and safe steering speed is probably more useful.
> 
> Paul L


Well, this is where you can experiment. If you can cut and sew (or have the appropriate loot), there's no reason you couldn't fabricate a "parking JSD" and a "slow me down" JSD with fewer or more widely spaced cones, right?

Most cruising couples would probably want to go into "park" mode, but even there, if you are trying to get away from the dangerous part of a storm, belting along in a controlled fashion (like on a broad reach with a storm jib and a third-reefed main) might call for the "keep me from surfing JSD". Again, nothing's absolute here. In discussion para-anchors, the Pardeys mention delivery experiments where a 12-foot para-anchor gave far too much drag off the bow and kept it too close to the wind, losing the desirable "slick" and, well, sailing too much to qualify as hoving-to.


----------



## Capnblu

sailingdog said:


> There are no atheists on a sailboat in a bad storm or in foxholes when bullets are flying...


Or "salespeople" in here, when we start asking questions, eh? :laugher


----------



## sailingdog

Apparently, the sales people have all left the building... 



Capnblu said:


> Or "salespeople" in here, when we start asking questions, eh? :laugher


----------



## Paul_L

Valiente said:


> Well, this is where you can experiment. If you can cut and sew (or have the appropriate loot), there's no reason you couldn't fabricate a "parking JSD" and a "slow me down" JSD with fewer or more widely spaced cones, right?
> 
> Most cruising couples would probably want to go into "park" mode, but even there, if you are trying to get away from the dangerous part of a storm, belting along in a controlled fashion (like on a broad reach with a storm jib and a third-reefed main) might call for the "keep me from surfing JSD". Again, nothing's absolute here. In discussion para-anchors, the Pardeys mention delivery experiments where a 12-foot para-anchor gave far too much drag off the bow and kept it too close to the wind, losing the desirable "slick" and, well, sailing too much to qualify as hoving-to.


A JSD takes up a lot of space. It requires having a dedicated rode. Having two of them seems unrealistic. A Galerider takes up little space and the rode can be shared with a backup anchor or shoreline or whatever.
You say " Most cruising couples would probably want to go into "park" mode, but even there,", I think this is very dependent on the type of boat you have. If it is a heavy, slow beast, then you are probably right. As the boat does not have a tendency to surf and when you start thinking about drogues, the conditions will be fairly extreme. On lighter boat or a multi, you have to watch the down wave boat speed. Using a drogue can make this much more controlable.

Paul L


----------



## TSOJOURNER

*The best drouge by far!*

Forget all the complicated designs, parachutes, chain plates, all you need is a long, long line. Simply tie the bitter end around the salesman's or sales lady's foot and let it out, you don't even have to tie it to your boat an anchor will do. It might not slow you down much but at least it'll shut them up.


----------



## TSOJOURNER

*series drogue*

A question on retrieval of the series drogue. Is there any reason you can't put a relatively light floating line out , attached to the end of the chain (or anchor). The floating line being, I don't know, maybe 30'-50' longer than then drogue with a float at 30' from the anchor/chain. This way you can pull it in arse over face. It should be quite easy to pull in backwards seems the parachutes will collapse. The extra 30? foot should allow it to sink sufficiently?
We use the same technique with an anchor, works well, but then it's not being dragged behind the boat, potentially for days. Could there be problems with twist? If so, ways to eliminate potential twist?


----------



## smackdaddy

Me being the ever-skeptic, I'm still not convinced that the JSD won't expose the rudder to damage in serious seas.

Granted, I've not found much evidence yet, but I have seen some recent rudder damage even at our lake on a boat that was stern-to-weather. And this was only 3-4' chop in 50 knot winds. Those bow-to-weather boats were fine.

Then watching the Falcon GT videos (in BFS) with the stern getting stern-smacked by a breaking sea, imagining that happening if the boat was slowed to 1 knot makes me wonder.

I'm gonna keep looking. I'm just not convinced yet.


----------



## johnshasteen

We carry a parachute drouge and have lots of line to tie knots in and throw over the stern, but having run before two Force 10 storms and not using either, I'm not sure that I would deploy either in the next big storm. The more you slow the boat down, the less control you have.


----------



## Ajabu

I don't currently have a series drogue. I've spent the last year reading up on them and following users' stories and it's on the list for next season but since I don't have any first-hand experience using one, take whatever I say with an appropriate grain of salt...



bobmcgov said:


> Thanks, SD. I'm still turning over design ides for a trip line to ease retrieval, one that would not compromise safety or performance. Best I've come up with so far is to string the cones on continuous perimeter webbing, while the braided central line runs thru all the cones, through the apex hole, unattached. Something like this:
> 
> [Image removed because I can't link it as a new member. See page one for poster's diagram.]
> 
> When deployed, the force is carried entirely by the webbing, which is attached to a bridle. After the storm, you could winch in the center line; a trip ball on the end would collapse & invert the cones as it is winched toward the boat; you should be able to get the entire series mostly to your transom and lift it aboard as an untangled mass.
> 
> To be sorted out: Making sure it doesn't twist (perhaps occasional swivels?). Providing adequate shock absorption. Keeping the center line slack, but not too slack, during use.


The best retrieval technique for a series drogue I've heard so far is running a line to a turning block at the bow and back to a genoa winch. This allows you to haul in a boat-length at a time. Deck obstructions may require that you place your block elsewhere (like at the mast in Dog's case.) That said, I respect anyone with the drive to make a good thing better.

I see a few issues with your design. First, by not attaching the trip line to the center of each cone, only the last cone would be inverted when you haul in on it. The line would simply slip through the holes in the center of your cones and they would stay fully inflated. I also agree that you would have issue with the system twisting, collapsing cones, and reduced effectiveness.

-----

On another note, I was a bit surprised to see how heated this discussion got at times.

I guess that makes sense. This debate tends to get heated, not because we're having an engineering discussion about the best way to add drag and slow a boat in nasty weather. It's heated because we're talking about how to protect what is (in many cases) our largest asset, but more importantly, how to protect our families who may be frozen in terror below deck looking to us to carry them safely through this storm of biblical proportions. It's natural that this is an emotionally charged discussion.

It sometimes seems (on this forum and others) as if there's the drogue srowd and the chute crowd and never shall they meet. It's almost as bad sometimes as the mono- versus multi- debates. I'm reading stuff many people are arguing as if carrying both a drogue and a chute aboard is unthinkable.

It is not unheard of for blue water cruisers to carry up to four anchors (main, spare, kedge, storm). If we habitually carry more than one type of anchor to cope with variations in sea floor or anchoring tasks, why not carry more than one drag device to deal with variations in sea state?

As Val so poignantly reminded us, situations differ, boats differ, storms differ, and the priorities of the sailor differ. I sail with my wife and children aboard. I would never dream of taking my children deep into blue water with only one technique and one tool to deal with a storm. I'm also a believer in redundancy when it comes to life-and-death gear.

A chute and a drogue are two seperate things that accomplish a similar task, but comparing the two is a bit like comparing a screwdriver and a hammer. Both a hammer and a screwdriver are tools used to attach two objects together, but they both accomplish their tasks in a very different way. More importantly, a hammer is much better in some situations whereas a screwdriver is more appropriate in others.

A chute is great at stopping drift to as low as 1 knot for an evening of rest or an afternoon of fishing. It has been used very successfully to enhance a hove-to defense to a gale. Drogues are great at increasing drag when running off to reduce surfing. The series drogue induces enough progressive drag that you can't really run off in a traditional sense, rather you can go bare pole while maintaining a stern-to attitude. The key to this is the progressive nature of the drag. You will not get slack in the line that provides an opportunity to broach. The constant drag on the stern keeps you perpendicular to the waves. The progressive loading and unloading on a series drogue also means that the peak loads are significantly lower than on a chute system for the same storm.

I am thoroughly convinced that either a series drogue or a chute are acceptable for weathering most gales. Both would be safe and offer reasonable comfort.

I am equally convinced that, for a truly epic storm, I'd bet my life on the series drogue. In a storm of that magnitude the shock loads on a chute and associated gear would be tremendous. Best case, it would be incredibly uncomfortable, meaning the crew isn't resting and therefore less capable. Worst case, the line snaps, whipping back on deck and seriously injuring someone, deck hardware breaks off, or structural damage occurs depending on where the weak link in the system is. It is also important to get the placement of the chute correct in the relation to the wavelength for proper function. (As if we don't have enough to worry about at that moment.) Given that a chute is difficult (if not impossible) to recover in a full and worsening gale, a solid argument can be made that switching to a JSD is not an option, therefore it is likely best to start with one in the first place when used as a storm survival tool.

I will admit that the vast majority of storms experienced by recreational sailors aren't of that magnitude and consequently. Frankly, most sailors will never experience a storm like that. Either tool would work the vast majority of the time. It's up to each sailor to do their own risk assessment and consider things like the likelihood of that event and the cost in life and property, then pick what makes sense to him/her.

I get it that more gear means more weight and less space for other things. I fight with the storage issue constantly as well. When my wife insisted that we back-up the 4-man hard canister life raft with hydrostatic release that was stored in its cradle on deck with a valise-packed unit in a locker in case the deck was swept clean, I grumbled, rolled my eyes, and tried to reassure her that we'd be fine just like most of you all probably are while you're reading this. However, if my wife isn't satisfied that we're prepared for the worst mother nature can throw at us and the children will be safe, then we're not going sailing. Long story short... after much staring into lockers and scratching my chin, I found a way.

My point is not to preach safety to a level that is ridiculous to the vast majority of sailors. My point is that each of us has a different set of concerns and priorities. If I was racing I'd make very different decisions. Once my kids are off on their own, we'll definitely lighten up on the safety gear. My point is that the assumption that it isn't an attractive or valid option for anyone to carry both a drogue and a chute because carrying both adds one more bag of bulky gear is just plain not true for everyone. In fact, for some people, having a variety of tools and tactics at their disposal to deal with tough situations has a lot of value.

So for me and my family, I guess I'm back to some more chin scratching and staring into lockers to find a place for a series drogue. I'm sold.

Wow... this started off as just a few notes on a someone's modified series drogue design and suddenly I'm writing a novel. I appreciate anyone that actually read all of this! Cheers!


----------



## smackdaddy

Hey aja - welcome to SN dude. I've grown to appreciate the JSD a lot more than I used to.

I do still have some questions about the physics of it (that AL did a good job of laying out) as it relates to the rudder. But it seems like a pretty cool solutions.


----------



## AceSailmakers

Hi ,

We have done a number of Speed Reducing Series Drogues, some for some
very well known large racing mutihulls, one for a carbon 57' multihull.

Jordan Series Drogue is a registered trademark of Ace Sailmakers, LLC .
Donald Jordan always referred to the device as a series drogue, Ace Sailmakers named our product the "Jordan Series drogue" to honor the late, great Donald Jordan. US trademark #3,766,160.

Don Jordan gave years of consulting expertise, and also developed his web site at no charge to my company. He said he did all the work "to help sailors"

Thank you,
Dave Pelissier
Ace Sailmakers
East Lyme, CT USA
860 739 5999


----------



## smackdaddy

Hey ace, what do you think about the concerns of potential rudder damage in the event of a large breaker on the stern?


----------



## AdamLein

smackdaddy said:


> Hey ace, what do you think about the concerns of potential rudder damage in the event of a large breaker on the stern?


Why do I get the feeling that every night you fall asleep worrying about a large breaker on the stern damaging your rudder?


----------



## smackdaddy

AdamLein said:


> Why do I get the feeling that every night you fall asleep worrying about a large breaker on the stern damaging your rudder?


IT'S KILLING ME ADAM! KILLING ME! AAAAARRRRRRGGGGGG!


----------



## sailingdog

Hey Dave—

Welcome aboard... you made the series drogue that Don Jordan spec'd for my boat a few years back.


----------



## shaile

A para anchor deployed from the bow at an angle to the wind is sometimes needed to assist holding a heaving-to boat.

Can a series drogue replace a para-anchor in such a role ?


----------



## sailingdog

It isn't designed to.


shaile said:


> A para anchor deployed from the bow at an angle to the wind is sometimes needed to assist holding a heaving-to boat.
> 
> Can a series drogue replace a para-anchor in such a role ?


----------



## Fascadale

Hi, and greetings from a newbie in Scotland 

I'm thinking of spending (many, many) hours fabricating a JSD over the winter

Here's a couple JSD questions: 

What are the advantages of using braid on braid over single braid, and what about multiplait? 

What is the advantage of using rope of decreasing size towards the chain end of the rode. I can see that rope of a smaller diameter is lighter but what is the recommended method of joining the sizes of rope?

Thanks


----------



## Zanshin

Fascadale - I spent many hours making my drogue and cannot wait not to use it 

The important factors for me were not to use 3-strand as it can unlay, otherwise the choice of line was just down to cost and having one that is stretchy enough. I got double-braid and was happy splicing and working it. As smaller line is significantly cheaper than bigger diameter line one can reduce diameters the further away from the boat one gets and the lower the potential maximum loads are. This saves cost, weight and volume. The latter is a big factor for a series drogue the size of mine. I decided to splice in hard eyes everywhere and connect the disparate pieces of the drogue with shackles. That way there is no way for chafe to set in. I´m installing u-bolts to the stern of the boat so there is no chafe at those attachment points. I did check with the boat designer to make sure that the aft transom could support the maximum computed loads before deciding where to attach those hardpoints.


----------



## sailingdog

I take it the u-bolts will have the mother of all backing plates behind them??



Zanshin said:


> Fascalade - I spent many hours making my drogue and cannot wait not to use it
> 
> The important factors for me were not to use 3-strand as it can unlay, otherwise the choice of line was just down to cost and having one that is stretchy enough. I got double-braid and was happy splicing and working it. As smaller line is significantly cheaper than bigger diameter line one can reduce diameters the further away from the boat one gets and the lower the potential maximum loads are. This saves cost, weight and volume. The latter is a big factor for a series drogue the size of mine. I decided to splice in hard eyes everywhere and connect the disparate pieces of the drogue with shackles. That way there is no way for chafe to set in. I´m installing u-bolts to the stern of the boat so there is no chafe at those attachment points. I did check with the boat designer to make sure that the aft transom could support the maximum computed loads before deciding where to attach those hardpoints.


----------



## Fascadale

Zanshin said:


> I decided to splice in hard eyes everywhere and connect the disparate pieces of the drogue with shackles. .


How did you manage the "leader" "bridle" join?


----------



## funjohnson

Two quick questions:

How much room is the series drogue going to take? I'll need the 107 cones along with the appropriate 5/8" rode... are we talking a sail bag full or a small duffel bag? In a 34' boat, space is very important. This may sway which direction I go.

Also, based on the photos I have seen of the Jordan drogue, it seem that you make different segments of rode with x number of cones. Couldn't you just deploy one segment (say 50 cones) to slow you down in a moderate blow. I'm sure it would be difficult to add the additional segment, but at least I would be more likely to use the thing.


----------



## sailingdog

Fascadale said:


> How did you manage the "leader" "bridle" join?


One way to do it would be this:










Of course, you'd want to mouse the shackle pins with stainless steel wire.


----------



## Zanshin

The U-bolts have relatively large backing plates that also have 90 degree folded edges to prevent bending. I'm not particularly worried about the installation, since I contacted Jeanneau and the boat designer, Philippe Briand, did the math and sent me a drawing of where to place the bolts, put a bit of fiberglass layup and how big the backing plates are to be. According to Jeanneau, the calculated maximum loads on the drogue of 20,000lbs for my boat are "not too significant" for either the aft clamps or transom.


----------



## Fascadale

You may be interested in the discussion on this subject that we are also having on the other side of the pond  here


----------



## Zanshin

scottyt said:


> sd do you have a jsd ? if you do what are the cones made out of, is it just standard sail material ? also if you have one can you please take a pic of one of the cones and how its attached
> 
> tia


Take a look at Jordan Series Drogue for a couple of pictures of the one I made, I have some more pictures to load to that page but it will take a couple of days before they appear


----------



## sailingdog

Good to know Zanshin. I wouldn't want the drogue pulling free and leaving two large holes in the transom of your boat.


----------



## Zanshin

To look on the positive side of the those two holes I wouldn't have to worry about retrieving my drogue after it disposes of itself.


----------



## AdamLein

Zanshin: thanks for the write-up, but a minor point: the difference in drag/deceleration between a parachute in air and a sea-anchor in the water is not due to the incompressibility of water (I'd bet that air under a parachute behaves approximately like an incompressible fluid anyway), but rather due to the much higher viscosity and density of water. The higher viscosity means water's flow can't divert around the sea anchor as easily as air around a parachute, and greater density means more mass to resist the tension on the anchor line than the parachute's lines.


----------



## Zanshin

AdamLein - How right you are! I transposed the compressibility issue from the airplane prop vs. boat prop issue to the underwater parachute but your explanation makes it clear that it is viscosity and mass. I'll have to correct that immediately.


----------



## AdamLein

Zanshin said:


> the compressibility issue from the airplane prop vs. boat prop issue


Can you explain what you mean by this? Propellers, of all kinds, are like black magic to me.


----------



## clindsey

Hey sailingdog, did you sell your Tristar yet?
Thanks


----------



## smackdaddy

WTH? He's _selling_ it?


----------



## sailingdog

Clindsey—

I don't own a Tristar... and I'm not selling my Telstar.  I did post an ad for a friend who was selling theirs down in Florida, but it has since sold.


----------



## clindsey

*what do you think?*

Of the corsair line of boats? Other than space between the 28 telstar and the corsair?


----------



## sailingdog

clindsey said:


> Of the corsair line of boats? Other than space between the 28 telstar and the corsair?


So as not to hijack this thread, I've started a *new thread on this topic*.


----------



## funjohnson

There is a Jordan drogue on Ebay right now for a small boat (100 cones). I'm not sure if this could be extended, but the "Buy it now" of $425 doesn't seem bad.

Click here for link


----------



## Skipper Jer

Yes I know the thread is a year old but I have a question about construction. 
The video at Sailrite shows the webbing fished through the braid then knotted to attach the cones to the line. Would sewing the webbing to the line weaken the line? Would the sewing needle cut the strands in the core thereby weakening the line?


----------



## AdamLein

Captainmeme said:


> Yes I know the thread is a year old but I have a question about construction.
> The video at Sailrite shows the webbing fished through the braid then knotted to attach the cones to the line. Would sewing the webbing to the line weaken the line? Would the sewing needle cut the strands in the core thereby weakening the line?


I dunno. Seems unlikely that you could do this without knowing it... the strands are very strong, and the needle is pointy but edgeless. Lots of rope-maintenance tasks require passing a needle through the line, so I wouldn't worry too much about it. Just be careful and don't use force to put the needle through.


----------



## Skipper Jer

I asked Samson rope company about this. The response was that disturbing the braid does affect strength as does sewing the webbing to the line. How much the line is weakened is hard to say because its dependent on how much things are disturbed. No numbers were given, but words like small and some were used. If I do this I'll use a bigger line closer to the boat which will compensate for the loss of strength. 100 cones, 8000 pounds, 80 pounds per cone makes me think the webbing could be much smaller, 3/8 or 1/4 inch. 3/8 inch nylon webbing breaks around 1400 pounds. OVER KILL for sure.

I agree damage could be kept down by using a blunt needle so as not to cut or tear the inner core.


----------

