# Vectran sleeve for anchor rode?



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

Hi, I just had a thought, being relatively satisfied with rope in my neighbourhood, only being nervous about having the rope cut by something.

Now, I figure I _could_ use chain for the first bit, but I'd rather not.

I can say beforehand, that the boat I'm getting this for, is 43 feet, really slim (225cm/7'4") and weighs in at just over four tonnes. It's low, so not much windage.

I will handle my anchor with a winch, but no anchor roller, so the anchor itself will be lifted out of the water by hand, hence me thinking I might be able to get around the use of chain. The anchor itself will weigh around 15kg/33lbs. (and a slightly bigger for stronger winds).

What about a leaded anchor rode (as in "rope"), but having the lower half covered in Vectran, so as to protect against cuts? I mean, obviously, Dyneema won't work as it's not springy at all and is surprisingly easily cut, but Vectran or Kevlar (as used in stab proof vests) seems to be a completely different thing.

I'm not worried about the price of the sleeve (obviously), but I don't want to waste time ordering and installing the stuff (plus the splicing needed afterwards) only to find it was a waste of time and effort

P.S. I just know that someone will come along and rhetorically ask "Why don't you give it a try, and then report back to us", lol.


----------



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

I'm not sure if this is a put-on or not, but I do not believe I have ever known anyone who uses only line to anchor a 40 odd foot boat, in over 50 years as a mariner.
You seem to have no understanding of the principles of anchoring and I would suggest you read some of the threads on anchoring and readjust your thinking, before you lose your boat.
If it is a put-on, then you got me; good on you.


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

capta said:


> I'm not sure if this is a put-on or not, but I do not believe I have ever known anyone who uses only line to anchor a 40 odd foot boat, in over 50 years as a mariner.


Oh, a "mariner" 

Capta, don't think length, think weight. It's not a big boat. And we obviously sail in different waters.



> You seem to have no understanding of the principles of anchoring and I would suggest you read some of the threads on anchoring and readjust your thinking, before you lose your boat.


I am well aware of the principles of anchoring. However, I'm not circumnavigating, and I will be doing this by hand. Since you think I'm bluffing, and since you think that the "50 years as a mariner" somehow mmakes your right per definition, perhaps you should reread my post again. Particularly about the cutting resistance which is the whole point, and the weight of the boat I mention.

I also mentioned the width and height of the boat, because it is really narrow so it will cut through the waves at anchor, and the height of the thing, because windage, or lack of same, matters.

Unless I'm mistaken, Vectran, Spectra, Dyneema and so on, wasn't around for most of those 50 years as mariner. If you think about it, I'm asking for something easier for the hands than chain, weighted like chain, and with a cut resistance, if not equal to, then closer to chain than polyester or nylon.

Way to think out of the box. I'm done with wire in boats as well. I prefer more modern solutions (Dyneema, Spectra etc.).



> If it is a put-on, then you got me; good on you.


No, it's bloody well not a put on! It's an effort to think out of the box to gain most of the benefits of chain but without the drawbacks of chain, by keeping some of the good things about rope. Getting a weighted rode (as in inlaid lead), with a cut resistant outer is something that in theory ought to possible with something more modern than nylon or polyester. Or hemp, like in the "good old days" of 1963.

Edit: If you're wondering about the anchor, it's a Manson Supreme, and the backup is a Fortress type thing, so the weights should be plenty for my use.


----------



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

To the best of my knowledge, none of the rope you have mentioned has any elasticity. 5 tons versus a 33 pound anchor (bigger in more wind) with no elasticity is a recipe for disaster. Do you use dacron double braid, Vectran, Spectra or Dyneema for dock lines?
Good luck thinking outside the box on anchoring. You don't have to be a circumnavigator to have a 50 knot squall (or more) come through an anchorage kicking up some pretty ugly seas.


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

capta said:


> To the best of my knowledge, none of the rope you have mentioned has any elasticity. 5 tons versus a 33 pound anchor (bigger in more wind) with no elasticity is a recipe for disaster. Do you use dacron double braid, Vectran, Spectra or Dyneema for dock lines?


Sigh, once again, go read the opening post. I was talking about a sleeve on the outside of the actual rope. A sleeve I would myself put over, making it lose, so the anchor rope within would continue to be able to give as it should. Hell, the thread title even uses the word "sleeve".



> Good luck thinking outside the box on anchoring. You don't have to be a circumnavigator to have a 50 knot squall (or more) come through an anchorage kicking up some pretty ugly seas.


Sigh, still so set in your ways you're not able to read what is actually being proposed.


----------



## pdqaltair (Nov 14, 2008)

a. I think you will have some problems with the sleeve moving separately from the rode. Normally the sleeve and line have similar elasticity.

b. I think you will need some chain--at least 10 feet--to hold the shank down during setting. I have tried going without chain for small boats and it is a problem. Even more so with high-mod lines, which generally less dense than nylon (float).

Consider using some chain backed by high-mod and using a VERY long snubber (50 feet). Multihull sailors understand your point. With that sort of a performance boat, non-conventional solutions must be investigated. My last boat was an all-Kevlar cat and carrying much chain was out of the question.


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

Thanks a bunch for your answer!


pdqaltair said:


> a. I think you will have some problems with the sleeve moving separately from the rode. Normally the sleeve and line have similar elasticity.


I was thinking of checking the give in the core line, and then make the sheeve a given length (depending on how long the protective sheeve will need to be - could be 60 feet, for example), and then attach the end of which, 25 percent lower down on the core - in essense "pushing" it down a bit so it doesn't influence the core rope.



> b. I think you will need some chain--at least 10 feet--to hold the shank down during setting. I have tried going without chain for small boats and it is a problem. Even more so with high-mod lines, which generally less dense than nylon (float).


I was thinking leaded line from Liros to hold down the shank, but now when I think about it, I could test the cut and abrassion resistance by attaching a bigger sleeve around a piece of chain just to test it.



> Consider using some chain backed by high-mod and using a VERY long snubber (50 feet). Multihull sailors understand your point. With that sort of a performance boat, non-conventional solutions must be investigated. My last boat was an all-Kevlar cat and carrying much chain was out of the question.


The boat will have a (carbon) bowsprit, but in an oldstyle, with bobstay, whisker stays and so on, so I will have to use a bridle or a snubber even with chain. I don't think I want the actual anchor rope to be high mod, although it would save some weight. There's a hole in the stem where the bobstay is fastened (it's actually fastened with dyneema), which ought to be big enough to be able to attach the snubber to. And it's a real low boat (it has no cabin or anything), so I will be able to reach that from lying on the foredeck.

Now that you have put it into my mind, perhaps I should go look at some multihull forums to see what they do. Do you happen to know some (I'm really not well versed in multihulls, having never been on one, except a hobie cat decades ago)?


----------



## Stumble (Feb 2, 2012)

One,

I have been kicking around the idea of an all dyneema anchor line for a while. Sure you loose stretch, but so do all chain rodes as well and I don't see anyone screaming about all chain as a problem, though a snubber would be in order. 

The biggest issue as you bring up is abrasion, but frankly the best thing for that would be a larger sleave of 12 strand dyneema added to the solid dyneema core. There are also some abrasion specific covers you could look at made from tightly woven Dacron you could look at as well.


As for a dyneema core over something else. I wouldn't. The same reason plastic tubing makes such a terrible abrasion sleave would apply. Ie the two lines stretch independently of each other creating a huge amount of internal friction.


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

Thanks, but I'm not talking Dyneema for the sleeve, I'm talking Vectran, which has a much higher cut resistence and a somewhat higher abrasion resistance. And it only needs to be "loose" around it, not super tight, and being pushed "down" towards the anchor, it will be at the slimmest (but still big enough) when the line is completely taught (as in no stretch left whatsoever).

I will look into the Dacron sleeves. I don't think I'm ready for a through-and-through Dyneema rope. Hell, just making something grip it at the snubber end will be problematic. 

As for plastic making poor abrasion sleeves, I can only say that leather or, indeed, kevlar makes for great abrasion sleeves in general. You need to look no further than motorcycle clothing to see the evidence for that. 

I will definately look into every sleeve I can think of, but I think Pdq had it right when he suggested I should look to the multihull crowd for experiences in this regard. I mean, if those guys can make something work, with all that windage, surely a very small 43' (yes, it truly is a fin keeled dinghy, lol) would be able to make use of their experiences.


----------



## katsailor (Jan 6, 2013)

It's all about the ability to dissipate heat that makes certain chafe gear perform better than others. There was a Practical $ailor article I recently read that evaluated chafe guards including several home built methods. I don't think Kevlar may be a good choice, while it has certain benefits in motorcycle clothing it isn't designed to go sliding down the road for hours after hours, day after day. I use Kevlar slings in my industry and they are very susceptible to failure if pinched or exposed to a hard edge. 

I think I would at least have some chain to help keep my anchor set. 
Another point about chafe gear is that it can hide degraded conditions that may result in premature failure of your ground tackle. 

I sure would like to hear your opinion of raisng an anchor by hand without a bow roller after you have done it, anyway it's your boat and your back. 

PS I understand you are thinking outside the box but I am trying real hard to be civil in this forum, after all it's not advrider. You come across as a person thats a little rude and already knows it all. If you already have the answers why are you asking questions in this forum? 


Fair winds and following seas.


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

One said:


> What about a leaded anchor rode (as in "rope"), but having the lower half covered in Vectran, so as to protect against cuts? I mean, obviously, Dyneema won't work as it's not springy at all and is surprisingly easily cut, but Vectran or Kevlar (as used in stab proof vests) seems to be a completely different thing.


Vectran is "springy"? Uhhh, I don't think so... Dyneema is "easily cut"? Really? Have you ever tried to cut Amsteel? One of the reasons for its popularity for a wide variety of industrial applications is its high resistance to abrasion...

I think a length of Cordura chafe sleeve would be ideal for your purpose... Not sure why you'd need to attempt to 'match' the stretch of the rode itself, simply whip it at the end near the shackle, an appropriately sized sleeve isn't gonna go anywhere...

Cordura is very tough, this is what Yale uses as chafe protection on their polydyne mooring pennants... Great stuff...

CHAFE SLEEVE CORDURA FOR UP TO 3/4" ROPE NHS-114 137259

Samson makes chafing gear out of Cordura, as well...


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

Stumble said:


> One,
> 
> I have been kicking around the idea of an all dyneema anchor line for a while. Sure you loose stretch, but so do all chain rodes as well and I don't see anyone screaming about all chain as a problem, though a snubber would be in order.


Hmmm, not sure that would be the greatest idea... The one thing that gives an all-chain rode its "stretch" is the catenary effect of the weight of the chain, and it generally requires pretty extreme conditions to snatch up a chain rode bar-tight... With an anchor rode of Amsteel or similar, even with a snubber, you could be seeing some high snatching loads quite easily...


----------



## NCC320 (Dec 23, 2008)

Since your concern is abrasion of the rope rode which will contact the bottom, how about this possibility.....a three part rode. Anchor, then short chain...20 ft. or so to help set the anchor, then high modulus, low (no) stretch abrasion resistant line (maybe a size larger than the main rode) for 50 ft. or so, and finallly, spliced into the high modulus line, a normal nylon rode for elasticity and shock absorption. Lengths of the various sections could be selected based on depth of anchorage water and where/how you use the boat.

Using a sleeve could get messy as dirt and dirty water could work in between the sleeve and the underlying rode. But, if it were sealed at both ends, a sleeve over the chain might make handling on deck by hand easier.


----------



## pdqaltair (Nov 14, 2008)

NCC320 said:


> Since your concern is abrasion of the rope rode which will contact the bottom, how about this possibility.....a three part rode. Anchor, then short chain...20 ft. or so to help set the anchor, then high modulus, low (no) stretch abrasion resistant line (maybe a size larger than the main rode) for 50 ft. or so, and finally, spliced into the high modulus line, a normal nylon rode for elasticity and shock absorption. Lengths of the various sections could be selected based on depth of anchorage water and where/how you use the boat.


I almost suggested that but though a long snubber to be more practical and more conventional for that reason. It is simple to replace a snubber when its elasticity fades.

PLEASE don't cheat on anchor size. With this rode you will need a good modern anchor of honest size. Another option to cheat on weight is to use Fortress anchors and be prepared to set 2 some nights, but that is a ling complex discussion; generally it is a poor option.


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

katsailor said:


> It's all about the ability to dissipate heat that makes certain chafe gear perform better than others. There was a Practical $ailor article I recently read that evaluated chafe guards including several home built methods. I don't think Kevlar may be a good choice, while it has certain benefits in motorcycle clothing it isn't designed to go sliding down the road for hours after hours, day after day. I use Kevlar slings in my industry and they are very susceptible to failure if pinched or exposed to a hard edge.


Yup, hence I was looking at vectran and any other ideas such as the dacron suggestion.



> I think I would at least have some chain to help keep my anchor set.
> Another point about chafe gear is that it can hide degraded conditions that may result in premature failure of your ground tackle.


It will be a loose sleeve, only stitched a little at both ends to stop it sliding off.



> I sure would like to hear your opinion of raising an anchor by hand without a bow roller after you have done it, anyway it's your boat and your back.


I've raised bigger anchors than the ones I'm talking about by hand before. Not chained anchors, though.



> PS I understand you are thinking outside the box but I am trying real hard to be civil in this forum, after all it's not advrider. You come across as a person thats a little rude and already knows it all. If you already have the answers why are you asking questions in this forum?


I'm not being rude. I'm being impatient with people who insist on misconstruing what I say.

Case in point:



JonEisberg said:


> Vectran is "springy"? Uhhh, I don't think so...


I never said it was springy, I was saying the actual anchor rope being springy. Think of a elasticated tether. The outer sleeve is longer than the relaxed state of the inner springy bit. In my use, however, the inner "elastic" will be the actual anchor rope, and the outer sleeve will be longer, relatively speaking, to the inner, so it will not at any point be taking any weight.



> Dyneema is "easily cut"? Really? Have you ever tried to cut Amsteel?


Yes, with a serrated blade on a taught line. It went through with only a few strokes.



> One of the reasons for its popularity for a wide variety of industrial applications is its high resistance to abrasion...


Abrasion resistance and cut resistance are not the same thing.



> I think a length of Cordura chafe sleeve would be ideal for your purpose... Not sure why you'd need to attempt to 'match' the stretch of the rode itself, simply whip it at the end near the shackle, an appropriately sized sleeve isn't gonna go anywhere...


I want to match the stretch because I want to go a bit oversize, so that I can 1) minimise heat between sleeve and the rope, and 2), because I don't want the sleeve to influence the stretch of the actual rope.



> Cordura is very tough, this is what Yale uses as chafe protection on their polydyne mooring pennants... Great stuff...


Yes, but that would be one long stitch going along the rode. Cordura is nylon, btw.



> Samson makes chafing gear out of Cordura, as well...


Still, I would have a long stitch going down the length of the chafe gear. and it will be stiff. A sleeve made from something already tubular would be the easiest

P.S. NC322 and PDQ, I have seen your posts, but I have to go, I will respond to them later today


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

NCC320 said:


> Since your concern is abrasion of the rope rode which will contact the bottom, how about this possibility.....a three part rode. Anchor, then short chain...20 ft. or so to help set the anchor, then high modulus, low (no) stretch abrasion resistant line (maybe a size larger than the main rode) for 50 ft. or so, and finallly, spliced into the high modulus line, a normal nylon rode for elasticity and shock absorption. Lengths of the various sections could be selected based on depth of anchorage water and where/how you use the boat.


I will probably end up having a bit of chain, at least as a back up rode. I'm still not too confident about having any part of the stuff being high modulus, though. But having "stuff" in three separate parts just might be the way to go. Couple this with PDQs suggestion of long nylon snubbers and I think we might be on to somethin.



> Using a sleeve could get messy as dirt and dirty water could work in between the sleeve and the underlying rode. But, if it were sealed at both ends, a sleeve over the chain might make handling on deck by hand easier.


Yes, I was thinking of stitching the sleeve with only a few stitches at both ends, so it could be pulled up and down easily with a few snips and just as easily stitched back - mostly because it would be an easy way to inspect the underlying rope for chafe. Perhaps it would be even easier to tape it, he he.

I'm still contemplating that sleeve over the chain idea. It would certainly make it easier to handle on deck by hand.



pdqaltair said:


> I almost suggested that but though a long snubber to be more practical and more conventional for that reason. It is simple to replace a snubber when its elasticity fades.


Yes, I concur. I think I have to come up with some sort of combination that works for my particular boat and needs/wants. Regardless of anything else, I will be using snubber(s), simply because the boat has a bowsprit and bobstay, so I figure it's needed.



> PLEASE don't cheat on anchor size. With this rode you will need a good modern anchor of honest size.


Oh, I won't cheat in this regard. The anchor in question is the Manson Supreme, and as far as I can tell from Manson's and Rocna's respective websites, it is the correct size for the boat (33lbs. or so).



> Another option to cheat on weight is to use Fortress anchors and be prepared to set 2 some nights, but that is a ling complex discussion; generally it is a poor option.


Yes, the "fortress type" I mentioned a bit earlier was Mansons "Racer" anchor. The reason for the "racer" over an actual Fortress anchor is the plastic "bubbles" on the ends of the perpendicular rod, so as to not punch a hole in, or scar the boat when getting it out. I was thinking the Manson R9, which weighs in at 32.4lbs, or perhaps the R10 which weighs in at 35.7lbs. They are meant for (racing) boats 46-52ft and 49-55ft respectively. So, although meant for lightweight racing boats, I'm choosing a rather large size, if I go for either of those.


----------



## DonScribner (Jan 9, 2011)

It is very beneficial to respond in a less combative way. These guys, many have deep pockets and deeper opinions, also have a degree of experience that those of us with a lesser degree of both should at least consider. "I don't agree, but I'll think about it" can go a long way. That said:

My Lancer 25 displaces about 4000 lbs and is a little wider than your baby. Even though she is lighter and shorter than your rocket (she must FLY!) I wouldn't go without a chain for the first 10 feet or so. I can see what you're trying to do and in its simplicity, it seems plausible but I don't believe you'll find a leaded line with enough weight to make the rode hug the sea bed like it should. But, I do like the idea of covering some of the rode with Vectran. My line is getting a little beat up at the thimble and the Vectran would take care of that . . . once I resplice it. And as far as "out of the box" goes, I'm an architectural skylight designer that keeps getting threatened to get back in the box. I didn't know there was one. So . . .keep on thinking but keep an eye on the old "fahts" that have learned a thing or two, and paid the repairs.

Don

Maine


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

DonScribner said:


> It is very beneficial to respond in a less combative way. These guys, many have deep pockets and deeper opinions, also have a degree of experience that those of us with a lesser degree of both should at least consider. "I don't agree, but I'll think about it" can go a long way.


I did that when the people in question actually read what I wrote. Not so much when people continue to misconstrue what I say, seemingly on purpose.



> That said:
> 
> My Lancer 25 displaces about 4000 lbs and is a little wider than your baby. Even though she is lighter and shorter than your rocket (she must FLY!) I wouldn't go without a chain for the first 10 feet or so. I can see what you're trying to do and in its simplicity, it seems plausible but I don't believe you'll find a leaded line with enough weight to make the rode hug the sea bed like it should. But, I do like the idea of covering some of the rode with Vectran. My line is getting a little beat up at the thimble and the Vectran would take care of that . . . once I resplice it. And as far as "out of the box" goes, I'm an architectural skylight designer that keeps getting threatened to get back in the box. I didn't know there was one. So . . .keep on thinking but keep an eye on the old "fahts" that have learned a thing or two, and paid the repairs.
> 
> ...


Thanks, I do think I might end up having a covered piece of chain at the bottom, although I will do my utmost to find another solution, even if that means more inspection. I also think, that regardless what gear I end up with, I think a piece of chain to be attached will be the prudent thing to do, especially if leaving the boat for a couple of days. I would just prefer to not use it on a daily basis. Especially not a rough, uncovered chain.


----------



## pdqaltair (Nov 14, 2008)

I like the Fortress with no ball on the ends because of the way I store them; I place them on edge in a locker with the arm through a hole in the floor. This has worked on 2 boats, but each is different.

I have a 35-pound Manson Supreme (32-foot, 8000-pound cat) and it seems about right. Since it will drag in soft mud on short scope, it is certainly not too big. Solid as hell in any good bottom.


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

One said:


> I'm not being rude. I'm being impatient with people who insist on misconstruing what I say.
> 
> Case in point:
> 
> ...


Ooops, my bad... No doubt I'm the sole reader of this thread who could have possibly construed what you wrote here...



One said:


> ... I mean, obviously, Dyneema won't work as it's not springy at all and is surprisingly easily cut, but Vectran or Kevlar (as used in stab proof vests) seems to be a completely different thing.


...to imply that you may think Vectran - being a _"completely different thing"_ from Dyneema, and all - might possess some degree of elasticity that Dyneema lacks, and thus more suitable for what you have in mind...

As to your other points...

You're right, abrasion resistance is not the same as cut resistance... If you genuinely fear your rode being "cut" as opposed to being abraded in places where you routinely anchor (whether by sharp rock, or debris fouling the bottom, etc.) then you really should go with at least some amount of chain in your rode...

Yes, I'm aware that Cordura is a nylon... Thus, it would seem a good candidate for your desire to have your sleeve come close to matching the elasticity of your rode...

Not sure what the issue with the stitching of Cordura chafe sleeves would be... It most certainly does not add a perceptible degree of "stiffness" to the sleeves, they remain extremely pliable... More so than your leaded rode, no doubt...

Anyway, good luck with finding a supplier of Tubular Vectran... You'll save some time by skipping over the first few hundred hits for the term in a Google search, unless you happen to be in the market for some high-tech bicycle tires, as well...


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

pdqaltair said:


> I like the Fortress with no ball on the ends because of the way I store them; I place them on edge in a locker with the arm through a hole in the floor. This has worked on 2 boats, but each is different.


Lol, that is freaking clever!



> I have a 35-pound Manson Supreme (32-foot, 8000-pound cat) and it seems about right. Since it will drag in soft mud on short scope, it is certainly not too big. Solid as hell in any good bottom.


Excellent. It means it's probably a-okay for my boat (although it weighs around the same, my boat has much lower windage than a catamaran).


----------



## pdqaltair (Nov 14, 2008)

One said:


> Excellent. It means it's probably a-okay for my boat (although it weighs around the same, my boat has much lower windage than a catamaran).


Yes, sounds right. 16-foot beam with a 7-foot tall bridge deck (including hard top enclosure).


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

JonEisberg said:


> Ooops, my bad... No doubt I'm the sole reader of this thread who could have possibly construed what you wrote here...


Well, it ought to have been clear from post one.



> ...to imply that you may think Vectran - being a _"completely different thing"_ from Dyneema, and all - might possess some degree of elasticity that Dyneema lacks, and thus more suitable for what you have in mind...


No, I was talking about the setups: Having a Vectran sleeve around polyester or nylon rope versus having all dyneema. Those two setups are very different. Sorry if it wasn't clear in that particular sentence, but having had explained it about ten times before that sentence, it should have been obvious to most anyone able to read.



> As to your other points...
> 
> You're right, abrasion resistance is not the same as cut resistance... If you genuinely fear your rode being "cut" as opposed to being abraded in places where you routinely anchor (whether by sharp rock, or debris fouling the bottom, etc.) then you really should go with at least some amount of chain in your rode...


Sigh, I don't fear it. I think it's only prudent to consider a cut to a line reasonable.



> Yes, I'm aware that Cordura is a nylon... Thus, it would seem a good candidate for your desire to have your sleeve come close to matching the elasticity of your rode...


Except it would have to be sewn and as such be really, really stiff, and not really cut resistant.



> Not sure what the issue with the stitching of Cordura chafe sleeves would be... It most certainly does not add a perceptible degree of "stiffness" to the sleeves, they remain extremely pliable... More so than your leaded rode, no doubt...


yes, over short lengths and with a really, really loose fit. Now imagine having all that velcro or a seam with a reasonable fit, and you might see the problem I'm describing .



> Anyway, good luck with finding a supplier of Tubular Vectran... You'll save some time by skipping over the first few hundred hits for the term in a Google search, unless you happen to be in the market for some high-tech bicycle tires, as well...


First hit:

https://www.google.dk/search?q=vect...&rls=org.mozilla:da:official&client=firefox-a

*Donaghys Industries, Marine - Aquaculture Products - Manufacturers and Distributors*

Second hit is this thread, then comes a pdf, and the fourth hit is this:

http://www.electriduct.com/Vectran-Braided-Sleeving.html

Now, that wasn't so hard, was it?


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

One said:


> Well, it ought to have been clear from post one.
> 
> Sorry if it wasn't clear in that particular sentence, but having had explained it about ten times before that sentence, it should have been obvious to most anyone able to read.


Well, I'll tell you what... How about you try to work on your ability to express yourself clearly, and I'll try to work on my reading comprehension, OK?



One said:


> Sigh, I don't fear it. I think it's only prudent to consider a cut to a line reasonable.


Still sounds like a decent argument in favor of some chain, to me...



One said:


> First hit:
> 
> https://www.google.dk/search?q=vect...&rls=org.mozilla:da:official&client=firefox-a
> 
> ...


No, not when you have all the answers beforehand, I suppose... I'm still trying to figure out why you started this thread in the first place...

Unless, it was to drop the hint that your next boat is gonna be one of those Carbon-Spritted Cost-is-No-Object Faberge' Egg-Style Daysailers Whose Elegance is Not Marred by Unsightly Lifelines and Anchors, perhaps?


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

JonEisberg said:


> Well, I'll tell you what... How about you try to work on your ability to express yourself clearly, and I'll try to work on my reading comprehension, OK?


Deal, but after having explained the same thing again and again, I think it's the comprehension skills that is lacking the most.



> Still sounds like a decent argument in favor of some chain, to me...


Sigh. Could it be that everything is a compromise, and I'm trying to find the best compromise possible for my needs?



> No, not when you have all the answers beforehand, I suppose... I'm still trying to figure out why you started this thread in the first place...


Read the first post and the subsequent posts, and you might get why. Hint: I was looking for experience and perhaps some good advice. Something I have received from some of you.

Edit: You mentioned how almost impossible it would be to find tubular vectran, and when I showed you how easy it was with the right search terms, it's now a question of me "showing off" and "having the answers beforehand". Nobody has the answers just because they can do a proper search in google and find some products. That doesn't mean everything then is set in stone. Hence me asking about experiences and thoughts on the matter. [End of edit]

Instead, you go on to this:



> Unless, it was to drop the hint that your next boat is gonna be one of those Carbon-Spritted Cost-is-No-Object Faberge' Egg-Style Daysailers Whose Elegance is Not Marred by Unsightly Lifelines and Anchors, perhaps?


What are you on about? I was mentioning the weight of the boat because it's somewhat important to the issue of anchoring, I was mentioning the carbon sprit, but pointing out it was "old-style" bowsprit with whisker stays, and bobstays, so it was clear that it wasn't one of those modern bowsprits which can be pulled inboard, that I wasn't going to drill into the bowsprit, and that I wasn't willing to place an anchor up there, after saving weight by going with CF rather than wood.

I also mentioned it was an old-style boat, but build modern, so you could understand why it was light, and why it was low, and, not least, why it was so narrow. I even mentioned it was a somewhat glorified dinghy, since it has no cabin whatsoever (nor a head or anything of the kind). How is that "faberge egg-style day sailor"? It's a boat I can take places, I can "camp" in, and play in big weather in. In other words, it's a boat that is fun to me. If I wanted to brag about it, perhaps I would have posted photos of it and told you more about it, wouldn't I? uke


----------



## Maine Sail (Jan 6, 2003)

You can buy Cordura "sleeve" easily. There is no seam to sew as it is already in tubular form. Just slide it over the rode. While we have a windlass we rarely use it. We also use a mixed rode as a primary. The chain is no harder on the hands than the rope rode...


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

Maine Sail said:


> You can buy Cordura "sleeve" easily. There is no seam to sew as it is already in tubular form. Just slide it over the rode. While we have a windlass we rarely use it. We also use a mixed rode as a primary. The chain is no harder on the hands than the rope rode...


Okay, I stand corrected. I have only seen velcro'd or sewn chafe protection. However, it doesn't solve the problem of cut resistance: It's still just nylon.

I find chain much harder on the hands than rope. I haven't tried stainless chain, though, because that would weigh even more for the same strength of galvanized (not that I want to get into a debate about that too).


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

One said:


> > Originally Posted by JonEisberg
> > Well, I'll tell you what... How about you try to work on your ability to express yourself clearly, and I'll try to work on my reading comprehension, OK?
> 
> 
> Deal, but after having explained the same thing again and again, I think it's the comprehension skills that is lacking the most.


We're well past the point of ridiculousness here, but I'll bite once more... Here's your chance to help me out with my comprehension skills...



> ...to imply that you may think Vectran - being a "completely different thing" from Dyneema, and all - might possess some degree of elasticity that Dyneema lacks, and thus more suitable for what you have in mind...





One said:


> No, I was talking about the setups: Having a Vectran sleeve around polyester or nylon rope versus having all dyneema. Those two setups are very different.* Sorry if it wasn't clear in that particular sentence, but having had explained it about ten times before that sentence, it should have been obvious to most anyone able to read.*


So, then, could you point to your explanation(s) where you speciified that your reference to Dyneema was regarding its use as a rode, whereas the reference to Vectran & Kevlar was regarding its use as a sleeve?

Any one of the numerous times that clarification was cited prior to the sentence/post I was responding to should suffice...

My apologies for eliciting so many "Sighs" from you... Dealing with slow learners like me must be the reason you're "always tired", eh?


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

JonEisberg said:


> So, then, could you point to your explanation(s) where you speciified that your reference to Dyneema was regarding its use as a rode, whereas the reference to Vectran & Kevlar was regarding its use as a sleeve?
> 
> Any one of the numerous times that clarification was cited prior to the sentence/post I was responding to should suffice...


I'm sorry I can't quote whole posts here, because apparently you want me to quote the entire thread, and then explain things to you once again.

But here goes a few (*bold=my emphasis*):

*Thread title*


> Vectran *sleeve *for anchor rode


For the follow parts, click on them to see where in the thread they are:



One said:


> Hi, I just had a thought, being relatively satisfied with rope in my neighbourhood, only being nervous about having the rope cut by something.
> [...]
> What about a leaded anchor rode (as in "rope"), but having the lower half *covered in Vectran, *so as to protect against cuts? I mean, obviously, Dyneema won't work as it's not springy at all and is surprisingly easily cut, but Vectran or Kevlar (as used in stab proof vests) seems to be a completely different thing.
> 
> *I'm not worried about the price of the sleeve* (obviously), but I don't want to waste time ordering and installing the stuff (plus the splicing needed afterwards) only to find it was a waste of time and effort





One said:


> Particularly about the *cutting resistance* which is the whole point, and the weight of the boat I mention.
> [...]
> If you think about it, *I'm asking for something easier for the hands than chain, weighted like chain, and with a cut resistance*, if not equal to, then closer to chain than polyester or nylon.
> 
> ...





One said:


> Sigh, once again, go read the opening post. I was talking about* a sleeve on the outside* of the actual rope. *A sleeve* I would myself put over, *making it lose, so the anchor rope within* would continue to be able to give as it should. Hell, t*he thread title even uses the word "sleeve".*





One said:


> I was thinking o*f checking the give in the core line*, and then make the *sheeve a given length* (depending on how long the protective sheeve will need to be - could be 60 feet, for example), and then attach the end of which, 25 percent lower down *on the core - in essense "pushing" it down a bit so it doesn't influence the core rope. *
> 
> I was thinking *leaded line from Liros to hold down the shank,* but now when I think about it, I could test the cut and abrassion resistance by *attaching a bigger sleeve* around a piece of chain just to test it.
> 
> The boat will have a (carbon) bowsprit, but in an oldstyle, with bobstay, whisker stays and so on, *so I will have to use a bridle or a snubber even with chain*. I *don't think I want the actual anchor rope to be high mod, although it would save some weight.* There's a hole in the stem where the bobstay is fastened (it's actually fastened with dyneema), which ought to be big enough to be able to attach the snubber to. And it's a real low boat (it has no cabin or anything), *so I will be able to reach that from lying on the foredeck. *


If you notice here, I'm actually mentioning being able to lie down on the foredeck for a reason. But, oh no, that must be to "show off" according to you.

You want more posts to show how little you have understood in this thread? Okay, then:



One said:


> Thanks, b*ut I'm not talking Dyneema for the sleeve, I'm talking Vectran,* which has a much higher cut resistence and a somewhat higher abrasion resistance. And *it only needs to be "loose" around it, not super tight, and being pushed "down" towards the anchor, it will be at the slimmest (but still big enough) when the line is completely taught (as in no stretch left whatsoever).*
> 
> I* will look into the Dacron sleeves.** I don't think I'm ready for a through-and-through Dyneema rope. Hell, just making something grip it at the snubber end will be problematic. *
> 
> ...





One said:


> Yup, *hence I was looking at vectran and any other ideas such as the dacron suggestion.*
> 
> *It will be a loose sleeve, only stitched a little at both ends to stop it sliding off.
> 
> ...


Please continue to click on the small blue buttons to see where exactly those quotes are from? Do you want the final ones?

Okay, then:



One said:


> I will probably end up having a bit of chain, at least as a back up rode. I'm still *not too confident about having any part of the stuff being high modulus*, though. But having "stuff" in three separate parts just might be the way to go. Couple this with PDQs suggestion of long nylon snubbers and I think we might be on to somethin.
> 
> Yes, I was thinking of *stitching the sleeve with only a few stitches at both ends*, so it could be pulled up and down easily with a few snips and just as easily stitched back - *mostly because it would be an easy way to inspect the underlying rope for chafe.* Perhaps it would be even easier to tape it, he he.
> 
> ...


Notice how the bowsprit and bobstay is a relevant part of this? But to you I'm merely "showing off", right. 



One said:


> Thanks, I do think I might end up having a covered piece of chain at the bottom, although I will do my utmost to find another solution, even if that means more inspection. I also think, that regardless what gear I end up with, I think a piece of chain to be attached will be the prudent thing to do, especially if leaving the boat for a couple of days. I would just prefer to not use it on a daily basis. Especially not a rough, uncovered chain.


See, it would have been much easier if you had been able to comprehend the thread title from the get-go, instead of trying to accuse me of "showing off" when I mention things that are relevant to the topic at hand, and when I showed you how to do a google search and find a type of product.

Also, it would have been much easier if you had actually reread the thread, instead of having me basically repost the entire thread so it could be spoonfed to you in bite sizes suitable to you.



> My apologies for eliciting so many "Sighs" from you... Dealing with slow learners like me must be the reason you're "always tired", eh?


Yes, I guess that must be the reason, not impatience with people insisting on misconstruing what is said.


----------



## pdqaltair (Nov 14, 2008)

One said:


> I find chain much harder on the hands than rope. I haven't tried stainless chain, though, because that would weigh even more for the same strength of galvanized (not that I want to get into a debate about that too).


Actually, with gloves there is little difference, even less if you get insulated freezer gloves (the padding they give is nice).










These and similar gloves have many uses around the boat.


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

He, he, good point!


----------



## MedSailor (Mar 30, 2008)

I'm not going to make any particular suggestion about the product I am about to suggest for fear of incurring your wrath for not having understood Your Clearness.

I would like to offer up vinyl coated chain, as another material that might be able to be used in some capacity for your project.

Vinyl coated chain

Personally, I LOVE out of the box ideas, even if they don't turn out to be for everyone.

MedSailor


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

One said:


> See, it would have been much easier if you had been able to comprehend the thread title from the get-go...


Had you bothered to have another look at my initial post to this thread, and my recommendation contained therein, you might have spared yourself from making such a stupid assertion...



JonEisberg said:


> I think a length of Cordura chafe _*sleeve*_ would be ideal for your purpose...





One said:


> Also, it would have been much easier if you had actually reread the thread, instead of having me basically repost the entire thread so it could be spoonfed to you in bite sizes suitable to you.


Yeah, sorry you had to go to all that trouble...

But, you know, I was kinda hoping you'd produce a relevant example that was written* PRIOR* to my initial response in Post #12, and the comments under discussion... Or, should we be expected to be in possession of some sort of clairvoyance in our replies to you, that would anticipate any further clarifications you might offer during the course of the thread?

Sorry, but you've repeatedly disparaged my ability to understand what I read, and have asserted that I have deliberately "misconstrued" what you have written... You are contending that my 'confusion' regarding your comparison of the suitability of Dyneema vs Vectran is due more to my inability to read, as opposed to the lack of clarity in your presentation - despite your admission that you weren't "clear... in that particular sentence". So, let me try this one more time, in the interest of attempting to elevate my reading skills beyond those of a first-grader:

Post #24


One said:


> No, I was talking about the setups: Having a Vectran sleeve around polyester or nylon rope versus having all dyneema. Those two setups are very different. *Sorry if it wasn't clear in that particular sentence, but having had explained it about ten times before that sentence, it should have been obvious to most anyone able to read.*


So, then, could you point to any one of your explanation(s) where you speciified that your reference to Dyneema was regarding its use as a rode, whereas the reference to Vectran & Kevlar was regarding its use as a sleeve, _prior to the post of mine you selected as a "case in point" example of "people insisting on misconstruing what you say"?_

You've asserted that you've done so - in a manner that could be understood "by most anyone able to read" - roughly "ten times" before my first reply to this thread... Should be easy to find at least one example, no?

Sorry, but I'm not seeing any such explanation prior to my initial post, nor in fact until you finally offered it up in your Post #24...

Damn, I haven't gone this deep down the Rabbit Hole of Post Parsing Absurdity since mixing it up with some gun-nutter over on Political Anarchy after the massacre at Newtown... LOL!


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

One said:


> > Originally Posted by Maine Sail
> > You can buy Cordura "sleeve" easily. There is no seam to sew as it is already in tubular form. Just slide it over the rode...
> 
> 
> Okay, I stand corrected. I have only seen velcro'd or sewn chafe protection. However, it doesn't solve the problem of cut resistance: *It's still just nylon.*


Here's a list of services who employ a proprietary weave similar to Cordura made from "just nylon" for chafe protection:

US Navy
US Coast Guard
US Army
Military Sealift Command
NOAA
MARAD
Canadian Coast Guard
Chevron Shipping Co., LLC
Crowley Maritime Corp.
Foss Maritime Co.
Moran Towing
OSG America, Inc.
Pasha Hawaii Transport Lines, LLC

Again, you're right to distinguish between resistance to _abrasion_, and resistance to _cutting_... However, unless you're often anchoring in bottoms littered with industrial debris or similar, in close proximity to coral, abrasion would seem to me to be a far greater likelihood than an actual severing of the rode... And, only a fool would choose anything other than chain, or perhaps wire, if anchoring where coral might be present...

One possible downside I see to the Vectran sleeve you've found, compared to the much tighter weave of Cordura... I have some bits of Vectrus rope on my boat, nice stuff, but with a very annoying tendency to "snag" on anything sharp - cotter rings, for example - that it comes into contact with... Even after contact with an aggressive nonskid surface, the rope tends to become somewhat 'fuzzy' rather quickly, and soon exhibits strands that have been pulled out of the rope... Hard to tell how 'tight' the weave is of the product you've found, but I'd certainly want to handle it a bit before buying, to ensure it would not have a similar tendency...


----------



## RichH (Jul 10, 2000)

Cordura is typically made with very fine denier yarns ... and therefore isnt going to have much abrasion nor cut resistance as would a heavier diameter/denier fiber. With cordura on a rode were not talking slight abrasion and small cuts as would happen to a 'backpack' made of cordura. 
If youre intent on doing this, a probable better application would be to use tubular nylon webbing as your sacrificial covering ... mountain climbing stuff. 

More simplistically, consider to simply use a larger diameter rode that would have inbuilt 'abrasion, etc.' resistance due to the extra thickness of the rope .... analogous to the 'corrosion allowance' in extra thick walled marine engines, heat exchangers and high pressure vessels. 

For very long term 'wetted' usage, nylon STINKS for anchor rode usage simply because nylon 'uptakes' water into its long chain polymer structure and then quickly hydrolyzes (analogous to rusting of iron). Six months soak in water and nylon (Nylon66 is best) and the nylon will start to generate lots of 'hydrolyzed particles' ... the equivalent of severe RUST. 

Dacron polyester rode would be a much better application choice ... and simply use a stretchy nylon 'bridle' from the bow for the expected 'shock loads' .... using large dimension tubular nylon webbing, etc. and attached to the polyester rode with multi-wrapped 'prussik' knot(s). 
You could also add a short length 'soft lay' flexible steel cable between the anchor and the rode ... but chain is still the obvious best choice.

Fundamentally, even with 'sleeved' rope, any rope that is pulled across sharp 'transitions', edges, etc. while under high loads etc. is going to wind up with a lot of internal structural damage due to differential loads on the individual fibers across the rope lay; hence, 'weakened'. 

Keep it KISS simple, too many 'outside the boxes' adds unnecessary 'complexity'; and, with complexity comes a lot of 'unforeseen future problems'.


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

JonEisberg said:


> H
> 
> But, you know, I was kinda hoping you'd produce a relevant example that was written* PRIOR* to my initial response in Post #12!


In short, read the headline, and then read the first post, and then every successive one on page one. I make it very clear I'm talking sleeves.

With that said, I don't think I'll bother explaining it many more times: I'm talking a sleeve. I'm not really willing to use an all-dyneema rode. If it makes you happy, I will admit that I could have been even clearer than I was, and that some posts might, in a vacuum, make it difficult to tell if I'm talking about the entire rode, or the sleeve. But that's only in a vacuum.


----------



## sailordave (Jun 26, 2001)

Jon, I think you should go sit on the boat and meditate...
Just reading this thread has worn me out.

Ding, next.


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

JonEisberg said:


> Here's a list of services who employ a proprietary weave similar to Cordura made from "just nylon" for chafe protection:
> 
> US Navy
> US Coast Guard
> ...


All very good points. However, Vectran sleeving is also used to anchor drilling platforms and other such things. And owning quite a few really, really thick cordura bags (from RedOxx), I can say that they're tough, but still doesn't like sharp objects.

Some of those you're mentioning I bet they don't use nylon under water for anchor rode/rode sleeve. In fact, big ships often use dyneema for mooring, simply because that if they break, the remainder won't recoil and possibly kill people.

You mention handling it (Vectran) before buying. Yes, I will do that. I only posted this thread to give me some good ideas, and make it possible for others to read it at a later date. Many of the things mentioned in this thread has given me much food for thought, and I'm happy I posted it, regardless of my run-in with you and others.

As for "only a fool would choose anything other than XXX", I'm sorry, but that kind of thinking may be a great choice for people not willing to push the boundaries and stay stuck in the past. It may very well work just fine, but we have newer products with promising properties, and I see no problem in investigating these things. I don't use wire for rigging either, and I don't think a longkeeler is necessary for crossing oceans, nor do I think that it needs to look and work like the boats of the Pardeys. There are many ways to skin a cat, and if we can't discuss it, we won't move forward. We would still be using hemp rope (i.e. "Only a fool would use wire for rigging" - and later: "Only a fool would use modern high-modulus rope for rigging").


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

Let me start from the bottom of your post:



RichH said:


> Keep it KISS simple, too many 'outside the boxes' adds unnecessary 'complexity'; and, with complexity comes a lot of 'unforeseen future problems'.


I do _try _to keep it simple. However, you (a general you), need to see what's out there, and what solutions may or may not work, before paring it down to its essential. At least that's how I think about it.



RichH said:


> More simplistically, consider to simply use a larger diameter rode that would have inbuilt 'abrasion, etc.' resistance due to the extra thickness of the rope .... analogous to the 'corrosion allowance' in extra thick walled marine engines, heat exchangers and high pressure vessels.
> 
> For very long term 'wetted' usage, nylon STINKS for anchor rode usage simply because nylon 'uptakes' water into its long chain polymer structure and then quickly hydrolyzes (analogous to rusting of iron). Six months soak in water and nylon (Nylon66 is best) and the nylon will start to generate lots of 'hydrolyzed particles' ... the equivalent of severe RUST.
> 
> ...


Most anchor rope here in Scandinavia, and dare I say, in Europe, are made from polyester. I like polyester, and as such I would not go full nylon in any case. However, with this new boat of mine, which has a bowsprit with bobstay and whisker stays, I figure I will need a bridle and/or snubber anyway. I don't mind that, and I can lie down on the foredeck to reach the bobstay hole, so it doesn't even have to be on deck or a two-part bridle/snubber going on both sides of the sprit.

I am, however, considering nylon for the snubber. It can be rather thick, but obviously not so thick it will defeat its purpose as a glorified elastic to suck up the bumbs.

I guess I could go up in diameter to do the same sort of thing (to protect against chafe and to a degree protect against cut-through), but I don't see it as a problem to pull on a sleeve before putting it on the boat the first time. This, of course, if covering it with vectran will actually work in the real world.



RichH said:


> Cordura is typically made with very fine denier yarns ... and therefore isnt going to have much abrasion nor cut resistance as would a heavier diameter/denier fiber. With cordura on a rode were not talking slight abrasion and small cuts as would happen to a 'backpack' made of cordura.
> If youre intent on doing this, a probable better application would be to use tubular nylon webbing as your sacrificial covering ... mountain climbing stuff.


Yeah, but we're back to nylon then. I prefer a given protective sleeve to have a bit more resistance than nylon, regardless of it being in a sleeve. I mean, if I am going to put on a protective sleeve, I might as well go with something which will protect the most in a given set of circumstances.

In any case, I have taken your advice on board, and I will take it into consideration


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

sailordave said:


> Jon, I think you should go sit on the boat and meditate...
> Just reading this thread has worn me out.
> 
> Ding, next.


Yeah, good advice, of course... My apologies for my role in this pissing match, I realize how often they hold little interest or amusement from those on the outside, looking in...

However, having spent most of the last 5 weeks or so sitting on a couple of boats, primarily reading and 'meditating' over the course of 2,000 miles - _while freezing my butt off pretty much the entire freakin' time_ - well...

Now that I'm finally home for a spell, sitting in a nice warm room, I figure I'm due a bit of amusement at the keyboard... (grin)


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

One said:


> As for *"only a fool would choose anything other than XXX"*, I'm sorry, but that kind of thinking may be a great choice for people not willing to push the boundaries and stay stuck in the past. It may very well work just fine, but we have newer products with promising properties, and I see no problem in investigating these things. I don't use wire for rigging either, and I don't think a longkeeler is necessary for crossing oceans, nor do I think that it needs to look and work like the boats of the Pardeys. There are many ways to skin a cat, and if we can't discuss it, we won't move forward. We would still be using hemp rope (i.e. "Only a fool would use wire for rigging" - and later: "Only a fool would use modern high-modulus rope for rigging").


Ooops, looks like it's my turn to _Sigh..._

So, is that your inability to comprehend what you read come shining through, or are you simply "deliberately misconstruing what I said"?



JonEisberg said:


> And, only a fool would choose anything other than chain, or perhaps wire, *if anchoring where coral might be present...*


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

JonEisberg said:


> Ooops, looks like it's my turn to _Sigh..._
> 
> So, is that your inability to comprehend what you read come shining through, or are you simply "deliberately misconstruing what I said"?


Oh, I read your point about corals, but my point still stands. There are drawbacks of chain as well, wrapping itself around coral heads etc. Besides, I'm not exactly in coral land.

It seems you have reached a stage where you do nothing but troll me. It's funny, because I have learned some things in this thread, from people who were actually willing to at least think of possible solutions. I'm not asking people to do as I want to do, nor am I attempting to make it seem like chain is a bad choice in all cases and for all people. It seems hard for you to grasp that this is for my own use, and I'm not out to prove anyone wrong. I'm attempting to find another solution than chain _for my use._

And with that, I'm done with you and your trolling.


----------



## RichH (Jul 10, 2000)

One said:


> Let me start from the bottom of your post:
> 
> I do _try _to keep it simple. However, you (a general you), need to see what's out there, and what solutions may or may not work, before paring it down to its essential. At least that's how I think about it.
> 
> ...


You could also as an alternative to a sleeve, consider an old fashioned 'marlinspike' method of 'worm and parcel' or a coachwhipped covering using vectran or other high tech stuff in 'strings'. The tightness of the worming + parcelling or *coachwhipping* left 'loose' and 'open' so as to not add a lot of added 'stiffness' to the rode.

Coachwhipping


----------



## MedSailor (Mar 30, 2008)

One said:


> P.S. I just know that someone will come along and rhetorically ask "Why don't you give it a try, and then report back to us", lol.


I'll be that guy. Seriously, give it a go. It's novel, so it won't be well received until you prove the concept. Waste of time? Perhaps, but I bet you'll learn a lot and if it doesn't work first time, you'll know how to approach the problem better next time.

I think the leaded line is not likely to be heavy enough (I'm assuming you want some weight in your rode) and fitting a vectran sleeve sounds like unnecessary complexity. How about just a vectran rope, and then figure out how to add weight to it?

I've given some thought myself on how to weight a rope anchor rode. I like having a rode I can pull up by hand, and thus I have a big Fortress on a long nylon line. The easy way to weight it it to put some chain at the end, but that puts even more weight at the end, which is harder to haul up by hand because you'll be lifting chain and anchor at the same time.

I've seen it suggested to have a multi-part rode with anchor--> 50ft of line--> length of chain--> rest of rope rode. While this system adds many splices, shackles and potentially adds more points of failure (though they could all be made strong) it allows the weight of the chain to be pulled up separately from the weight of the anchor. Since you're not using a roller and worried about your topsides, you could use the vinyl coated chain. I don't like this solution myself. It just doesn't seem elegant enough, and has too many connections.

What I've been thinking of is something akin to lead fishing weights clamped on, sewn on, or otherwise attached at intervals along the chain. They could be small weights every foot, medium ones every few feet, or mini-killets every few fathoms. This would add weight all along the rope rode and if you're worried about the lead marring the topsides, you could cover it with shrink-tubing, nylon chafe guard, or just about anything you wanted to.

Since lead is so wonderfully malleable and workable, you could use hobby lead in sheets, or lead wire of any diameter up to 1/2". 
Something here might appeal: Fishing weights
Or here: Lead Wire

















MedSailor


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

RichH said:


> You could also as an alternative to a sleeve, consider an old fashioned 'marlinspike' method of 'worm and parcel' or a coachwhipped covering using vectran or other high tech stuff in 'strings'. The tightness of the worming + parcelling or *coachwhipping* left 'loose' and 'open' so as to not add a lot of added 'stiffness' to the rode.
> 
> Coachwhipping


Lots of work for what could be obtained by buying an already made sleeve. I mean, fifty feet of coachwhipping? No thanks, I don't have the patience for that.



MedSailor said:


> I'll be that guy. Seriously, give it a go. It's novel, so it won't be well received until you prove the concept. Waste of time? Perhaps, but I bet you'll learn a lot and if it doesn't work first time, you'll know how to approach the problem better next time.


Well, coming from you, I'm perfectly fine with that suggestion. I was expecting that sort of response beforehand, but you are willing to at least consider it, even if you may think I'm a tosser. 



> I think the leaded line is not likely to be heavy enough (I'm assuming you want some weight in your rode) and fitting a vectran sleeve sounds like unnecessary complexity. How about just a vectran rope, and then figure out how to add weight to it?


Well, because I am worried that with a rope completely made from Vectran (or Dyneema or the sort) it matters very little how much weight I can get into it, because then it's only, and solely, the weight acting as a shock absorber. I have considered a lead or bronze weight attached a couple of metres (6-12 feet) from the anchor to help it dig in. Or perhaps have the weight on one of those old-school rope sliders on a line (yeah, that would another line down there for that alone). I don't think the first couple of metres of chain is actually helping much with a new-gen anchor. It's more about the angle than anything else from what I can tell.



> I've given some thought myself on how to weight a rope anchor rode. I like having a rode I can pull up by hand, and thus I have a big Fortress on a long nylon line. The easy way to weight it it to put some chain at the end, but that puts even more weight at the end, which is harder to haul up by hand because you'll be lifting chain and anchor at the same time.
> 
> I've seen it suggested to have a multi-part rode with anchor--> 50ft of line--> length of chain--> rest of rope rode. While this system adds many splices, shackles and potentially adds more points of failure (though they could all be made strong) it allows the weight of the chain to be pulled up separately from the weight of the anchor. Since you're not using a roller and worried about your topsides, you could use the vinyl coated chain. I don't like this solution myself. It just doesn't seem elegant enough, and has too many connections.


You're absolutely right, I don't consider it a simple solution either. it's even more complex than the sliding weight thingamajig.



> What I've been thinking of is something akin to lead fishing weights clamped on, sewn on, or otherwise attached at intervals along the chain. They could be small weights every foot, medium ones every few feet, or mini-killets every few fathoms. This would add weight all along the rope rode and if you're worried about the lead marring the topsides, you could cover it with shrink-tubing, nylon chafe guard, or just about anything you wanted to.
> 
> Since lead is so wonderfully malleable and workable, you could use hobby lead in sheets, or lead wire of any diameter up to 1/2".
> Something here might appeal: Fishing weights
> ...


[/quote]

This is a great idea, and from the picture of those things, I could cover it in the same as the rope, or any old polyester sleeve for that matter!

Thank you so much for your help to think various solutions. It's great having people to bounce ideas off of, even if the ideas might turn out to be ridiculous when one is implementing them (damn, I should have chosen a different user name, lol)


----------



## MedSailor (Mar 30, 2008)

Don't forget that if you use a completely vectran rope, you can still use a long shock absorbing bridle. Brion Toss's book "The Rigger's Apprentice" had a GREAT idea for making a shock absorbing bridle. Basically you use 3-strand nylon, unlay it a bit, and insert a long length of shock cord so that the three strands surround the shock cord. Whip the ends of the shock cord to the rope. The rope retains full strength, and as it takes strain, it tries to compress the shock cord, acting as a shock absorber. I'm planning on making one for my chain-snubbing bridle that attaches at the fitting at the bottom or my bowsprit. 

You could also put a buoy, or fender at the end of your stretchy bridle, and the force required to sink the buoy would act as shock absorption. Could be a dual use for a ball fender. 

MedSailor


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

One said:


> It seems you have reached a stage where you do nothing but troll me. It's funny, because I have learned some things in this thread, from people who were actually willing to at least think of possible solutions.


Well, just for the record, I _did_ offer a possible solution in my initial post to this thread... You were dismissive of it, that's fine... I remain comfortable with my suggestion, however, and the fact that it was seconded by Maine Sail - who probably knows as much about anchoring and ground tackle systems as anyone who has ever posted here - suggests at least that it was not entirely hare-brained...



One said:


> And with that, I'm done with you and your trolling.


Fine, I'm sure everyone else reading this thread appreciates your decision...

Oh, well... it was fun while it lasted... (grin)


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

JonEisberg said:


> Oh, well... it was fun while it lasted... (grin)


Yes, nothing like a troll with hurt feelings to waste people's time and energy. You must feel so great about your contribution now 

In any case:



MedSailor said:


> Don't forget that if you use a completely vectran rope, you can still use a long shock absorbing bridle. Brion Toss's book "The Rigger's Apprentice" had a GREAT idea for making a shock absorbing bridle. Basically you use 3-strand nylon, unlay it a bit, and insert a long length of shock cord so that the three strands surround the shock cord. Whip the ends of the shock cord to the rope. The rope retains full strength, and as it takes strain, it tries to compress the shock cord, acting as a shock absorber. I'm planning on making one for my chain-snubbing bridle that attaches at the fitting at the bottom or my bowsprit.


That's pretty clever - it seems like that setup will not only make use of the inherent elasticity of the rope, but will actually be dampened by the inlaid rubber thing. So it's not only springy, but a bit more subdued, so to speak.



> You could also put a buoy, or fender at the end of your stretchy bridle, and the force required to sink the buoy would act as shock absorption. Could be a dual use for a ball fender.


I actually prefer ball fenders, simply because most* of my boats has been without stanchions and lifelines and have had a low freeboard. Ball fenders seem to lie great over the edge, without touching water.

Sometimes I have used a ball fender to mark my anchor, but if more uses, such as this, can be found, I'm all for it. I think it's a great idea.

I think the idea of using a solid rode, so to speak is growing on me. I have since found a stainless version of a kellet, weighing around 30lbs. I'm considering something like that, or perhaps even two, in case of inclement weather. I would use a snatch block with a dyneema closure to attach it to the rode, and use a piece of thinnish line to lower it and pull it up again. That way, I can get weight down there, a reasonable catenary, and can do it all by hand, even if it is slower than using all-chain. 
Well, that's the hypothesis at present, ha, ha! :laugher

* It sounds like I have owned hundreds of boats, but I haven't - it's just that one of them _did _have a high freeboard with lifelines and associated stanchions.


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

One said:


> Yes, nothing like a troll with hurt feelings to waste people's time and energy. You must feel so great about your contribution now


LOL! Well, here's a news flash for you... The amount of time I spend on internet sailing forums would _REALLY_ be wasted, if I didn't derive some amusement from it from time to time... (grin)

However, if someone is gonna falsely claim that I've intentionally misconstrued what they've written, or questions my ability to read based solely upon my interpretation of a single sentence that is eventually conceded to have been unclear to begin with, well.... chances are, I'm gonna push back a bit...

Given the fact that more than one poster to this thread noted your superior, "rude", and "combative" tone before I even arrived upon the scene, it would appear that the matter of who is really doing the trolling here might be open to debate... Nor do I think that a poll among the handful of observers who might have actually followed our tiresome back and forth as to which of us comes off as the more irritating twit in the end, would necessarily be a slam dunk in your favor...

Still, I'm willing to concede, it would probably be pretty close to a toss-up... (grin)


----------



## tommays (Sep 9, 2008)

One

Give your ability and willingness to invest the time needed to quote and absurd amount of items in one post i am pretty sure this is not your first pissing match 

That and the fact that i know everybody BUT YOU for years ?


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

tommays said:


> One
> 
> Give your ability and willingness to invest the time needed to quote and absurd amount of items in one post i am pretty sure this is not your first pissing match
> 
> That and the fact that i know everybody BUT YOU for years ?


Ah, yes, knowing someone for longer than someone else, obviously means the person with the longer relationship must be right. 

And now showing exactly what was wrong with Jon's trolling assertions by way of quoting is wrong in itself. Yes, you two are gold.

Seriously, if you don't like reading my thread, go somewhere else.


----------



## sww914 (Oct 25, 2008)

We tried a sleeve of fire hose on the first ten feet of our rode. It isn't as durable as what you're proposing but it's still pretty durable. It's really rocky around here. The first time we pulled it up like that the sleeve had a bit of a cut in it and we went and bought an all chain rode. I'm really glad that we did, here's what happened a few days later right next to where we were anchored, my wife wrote up the whole thing on our blog-
Duct Tape On The Rocks » Landfall Voyages


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

Isn't (old style) firehose basically made of cotton or linen or something?

Thanks for posting the link, I will read it tonight


----------



## sww914 (Oct 25, 2008)

The stuff we used is some tough cotton on the outside vulcanized (maybe) to the rubber on the inside. It isn't kevlar or anything, that's clear, but it isn't wimpy.


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

I couldn't help myself, so I read the post you linked to just now. That "surfing" kedge anchor makes a great argument for using dynema/spectra/vectran when kedging off. It's because of that twaang that big ships needing to tow, lift or drag heavy things use those modern ropes so they won't recoil and kill someone.

Without reading your post, I wouldn't have foreseen a freaking _surfing _anchor. Man, that would have scared the crap out of the best of us.


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

sww914 said:


> We tried a sleeve of fire hose on the first ten feet of our rode. It isn't as durable as what you're proposing but it's still pretty durable. It's really rocky around here. The first time we pulled it up like that the sleeve had a bit of a cut in it and we went and bought an all chain rode. I'm really glad that we did, here's what happened a few days later right next to where we were anchored, my wife wrote up the whole thing on our blog-
> Duct Tape On The Rocks » Landfall Voyages


Great write-up, thanks... This was the same blow that was featured in CRUISING WORLD awhile back, I presume? Yours was a far more enjoyable read than that one (which, in fairness, was much more of a post mortem analysis of how a variety of crews handled the event), you guys should really consider writing some stuff for publication...

One thing your story confirms... Among any gathering of cruisers, there will _ALWAYS_ be some Radio Nazi who whines about 'improper' use of a hailing channel, even in the midst of an emergency situation like yours... (grin)

Sounds like you all did an awesome job, at no small risk to yourselves... My hat's off to you, folks like yourself are a big part what makes getting out there the rewarding experience it can be...


----------



## sww914 (Oct 25, 2008)

I doubt that it was in Cruising World, at least in print, because it just happened a couple weeks ago. My wife is pitching a series of articles on rescue and then she has a list of cruising topics that she'd like to do as well.
Thanks for the high compliments!
Steve


----------



## MedSailor (Mar 30, 2008)

sww914 said:


> We tried a sleeve of fire hose on the first ten feet of our rode. It isn't as durable as what you're proposing but it's still pretty durable. It's really rocky around here. The first time we pulled it up like that the sleeve had a bit of a cut in it and we went and bought an all chain rode. I'm really glad that we did, here's what happened a few days later right next to where we were anchored, my wife wrote up the whole thing on our blog-
> Duct Tape On The Rocks » Landfall Voyages


What a great read! If you haven't yet, or aren't currently, writing a book, you should!

MedSailor


----------



## sww914 (Oct 25, 2008)

She's working on that!
Thanks again,
Steve


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

sww914 said:


> I doubt that it was in Cruising World, at least in print, because it just happened a couple weeks ago. My wife is pitching a series of articles on rescue and then she has a list of cruising topics that she'd like to do as well.
> Thanks for the high compliments!
> Steve


Here's a link to the CW article I mentioned:

Safety at Sea: Storm in the Harbor | Cruising World

Sounds like a common occurrence in that neighborhood...

One of the definitive, classic accounts of a similar event was the survey back in the early 80's done by Lin & Larry Pardey, after the disaster in Cabo San Lucas, during which Bernard Moitessier and about 20 other cruisers lost their boats on the beach... All-chain rodes were probably a bit less common back then, and several boats severed rodes when bowsprits began splintering, etc., and quickly sawing thru rope rodes. Other boats, attempted to escape the mayhem under power, only to foul their own rodes, or those of other boats... That's gotta be one thing in favor of all-chain, pretty unlikely you're ever gonna wrap a chain rode around your prop.. (grin)

Another excellent account is from a cruiser from Seattle named Jerry King, who spent a lot of time in Mexico aboard his Caliber 40 MIRADOR. I had the pleasure of meeting Jerry years ago up in the PNW, a very capable and analytical guy... He had a rode cut by a bow roller failure during Hurricane Marty10 years ago, his is a pretty dramatic story, as well... His archives are worth browsing, lots of valuable stuff in there from a knowledgeable, experienced guy...

SEPTEMBER_27_2003

I've always thought this pic speaks volumes, about the risks of riding out a blow aboard a boat with a lot of 'accessorized windage'... (grin)


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

That particular fitting looks like it was an accident waiting to happen. Notice the lack of bracing, and notice how little surface/edge was welded:


----------



## sww914 (Oct 25, 2008)

That is sub-standard.


----------



## zz4gta (Aug 15, 2007)

Is this guy serious? I didn't read the entire thread so please forgive me if I'm repeating some points.

I don't care how big your boat is. It still weighs 8,000+ lbs. The reason all chain rode works is b/c when the boat pulls on it it lifts the heavy chain off the bottom providing some shock absorbtion usually provided by the nylon rode. You can ease handling of the anchor system by using all rode, then attaching a weight ~20' up from the anchor and then adding Dyneema chafe sleeve over the nylon rode.

Dyneema has better cut resistance and UV resistance than Vectran, technora and kevlar. It also has a lower friction coefficient. Which is why it is used as anti CHAFE SLEEVE. 
New England Ropes - Product Details
Give up on the vectran/kevlar idea.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

One said:


> That particular fitting looks like it was an accident waiting to happen. Notice the lack of bracing, and notice how little surface/edge was welded:


This is a good example how an apparently very strong bow fitting, done with thick stainless steel can be by (bad) design weaker than another made with much lesser strong steel.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## jrd22 (Nov 14, 2000)

Sigh - had I seen this thread earlier I could have made popcorn for everyone.

Thinking outside the box is great, but if there's one subject that has been argued, debated, kicked around, in the box, out of the box, upside down and backwards, it's anchoring and the general consensus has always come back to: a length of chain on the end of the rode.


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

jrd22 said:


> .
> 
> Thinking outside the box is great, but if there's one subject that has been argued, debated, kicked around, in the box, out of the box, upside down and backwards, it's anchoring and the general consensus has always come back to: a length of chain on the end of the rode.





zz4gta said:


> Is this guy serious? I didn't read the entire thread so please forgive me if I'm repeating some points.
> 
> I don't care how big your boat is. It still weighs 8,000+ lbs. The reason all chain rode works is b/c when the boat pulls on it it lifts the heavy chain off the bottom providing some shock absorbtion usually provided by the nylon rode. You can ease handling of the anchor system by using all rode, then attaching a weight ~20' up from the anchor and then adding Dyneema chafe sleeve over the nylon rode.


And yet dyneema rope with vectran sleeves and all-through vectran are used for anchoring of oil rigs.

As for the general concensus, I couldn't care less, when we have people arguing that a weight attached (i.e. a kellet heavy enough) will not work when the chain/rope/rode is taught. That's kind of the point, isn't it? That the weight (be it the chain or the kellet) will constantly work to pull the boat and anchor together by way of gravity.



> Dyneema has better cut resistance and UV resistance than Vectran, technora and kevlar. It also has a lower friction coefficient. Which is why it is used as anti CHAFE SLEEVE.
> New England Ropes - Product Details


You're wrong. Vectran is more cut resistant than both kevlar and dyneema. And although a tad less UV resistant than Kevlar and Dyneema, it's still plenty resistant for my use. And if in doubt, I could have a sacrifical sleeve at the top, you now, just like at the bottom, only catering to the "problem" of being on deck. Talk about making it a problem. Nylon is probably the worst of all when it comes to UV degradation.



> Give up on the vectran/kevlar idea.


Ah, yes, let's follow superstition and tradition, simply because it is how it used to be done.

Medsailor had a great idea about a buoy and also mentioned combining it with a kellet. The buoy has merit in my book, and so does the kellet.

What would be absolutely perfect? A sinking rope that could not be cut (i.e. _exactly _as cut resistant as steel) and a kellet heavy enough placed smack in the middle between the bottom/anchor and the bow of the boat. That way, the weight would be placed were it could do the most work and thus be most efficient.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

One, regarding your problem, as zz4gta points out, it is not one but two and the bigger one seems to me the one that is pointed by zz4.

When I had an old wooden boat I had no chain in my anchor, just a thick nylon rode. To solve the problem that ZZ4 mentions I had a system that worked with 25L Jerrycans full of sand. I had three of them and I tied one in each 8m of rope. In 6 meters of water I would have the 3 on the water doing the job a chain does but when I pull them up I would only take the weight of one at a time.

Take in consideration that I was a young guy then that had no money nor space in the boat for a chain and I cruised a lot. You can improve the system with Iron or even lead weights at a convenient distance.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

PCP said:


> One, regarding your problem, as zz4gta points out, it is not one but two and the bigger one seems to me the one that is pointed by zz4.
> 
> When I had an old wooden boat I had no chain in my anchor, just a thick nylon rode. To solve the problem that ZZ4 mentions I had a system that worked with 25L Jerrycans full of sand. I had three of them and I tied one in each 8m of rope. In 6 meters of water I would have the 3 on the water doing the job a chain does but when I pull them up I would only take the weight of one at a time.
> 
> ...


Yes, I'm considering cut resistance and catenary.

You're not bad at pointing these things out in a good way, but it seems that the most vocal against my "idea" or reasoning, either don't read what I say or have no or little experience with or knowledge about modern fibers.

At one point I said I thought that some of the modern fibers had "_promising _properties". That to me, means that they may not equal and most likely not surpass the strengths of steel, but that there may be upsides or solutions that can either make up for its possible shortcomings. 
Polyester or nylon sure wouldn't be something I'd consider on their own. But we're 50-70 years past that, and maybe, just maybe, it would be possible to make up an anchoring "system" which could work at least just as well on a day to day basis (for my use, that is).

Chain has shortcomings too, not least: Weight at the bow, or weight to drag on deck, rust, and usually a need for a bowroller, right at the very place in in a narrow boat where weight matters the most.

If I were to follow old wisdom, I would have two oversized, super heavy anchors constantly placed in their dedicated bowroller, always at the ready, with 500ft of heavy duty chain for each anchor and a couple of storm anchors with associated chain in the bilge.

Now, I don't have that, and I'm not going to.

What I do find at least a bit telling about the conservatism (not in the political sense) on this subject, is that most will have no problems thinking "nylon", a few more will begin to doubt polyester and so forth. I mean, if chain was the end-all, why even consider using rope even for part of the rode? So an 80 year old "high tech" rope is fine, but the more modern, the less it can be considered.

In reality, a kellet and a _cut proof_ rope would be ideal - add buoy to allow the nose of the boat to ride the waves better and you'd have a perfect system, easy to handle as the weight is divided. Now, there is no actual cut proof rope available, but again, some of the more modern fibres do have _promising_ properties.


----------



## sww914 (Oct 25, 2008)

I should point out that we anchored all the way down 1500 miles of coast on a chain & rope rode. We thought that it was fine. After our experiences here, we spent 1/3 of our money on chain.


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

sww914 said:


> I should point out that we anchored all the way down 1500 miles of coast on a chain & rope rode. We thought that it was fine. After our experiences here, we spent 1/3 of our money on chain.


Yes, I'm not saying going the direction I'm attempting ought to be the end-all solution for everyone everywhere, and in every type of boat.

Edit: For my use, it won't even be for long term cruising like most do "cruising". There is no cabin, so it will be camping out in the cockpit. A sort of glorified sailing canoe for want of a better term. I will mostly go alone when I go (as I have done in the past), so should the worst happen and I lose my boat, I'm not going to lose my lifestyle, nor all my belongings. Not that I would want to lose it (I really would hate it), but it won't mean a radical change in my life.


----------



## MedSailor (Mar 30, 2008)

One said:


> Edit: For my use, it won't even be for long term cruising like most do "cruising". There is no cabin, so it will be camping out in the cockpit. A sort of glorified sailing canoe for want of a better term. I will mostly go alone when I go (as I have done in the past), so should the worst happen and I lose my boat, I'm not going to lose my lifestyle, nor all my belongings. Not that I would want to lose it (I really would hate it), but it won't mean a radical change in my life.


This is a really good point, IMHO. The type of out of the box thinking that you're doing is a high risk game for those of us who absolutely can't afford to loose our boat, or end up on the rocks. That's why we're so conservative.

If you can afford the loss, you can take more risks. With calculated risk, you can sometimes push the envelope and learn, or create something new.

As for your ideal "cut proof rope" I have seen commercial fishing boats using stainless steel wire as an anchor rode.

MedSailor


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

Hehe, yeah, I thought about wire, but it must really be bad, bad, bad to pull up by hand.


----------



## sww914 (Oct 25, 2008)

If it's a sailing canoe type thing, that's a whole different picture altogether. Parachute cord would be strong enough in most conditions.


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

sww914 said:


> If it's a sailing canoe type thing, that's a whole different picture altogether. Parachute cord would be strong enough in most conditions.


It was a figure of speech, trying to hint at how many creature comforts there was in the boat. It's 43ft +sprit and with a bulbed fin keel with a draft of 8'6". It weighs just over 8000lbs.


----------



## sww914 (Oct 25, 2008)

OK, two pieces of parachute cord.


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

sww914 said:


> OK, two pieces of parachute cord.


LOL, my thoughts exactly. The boat is even really slim, less than 8 feet, so the hull itself does have a canoe sort of shape to it.


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

One said:


> Hehe, yeah, I thought about wire, but it must really be bad, bad, bad to pull up by hand.


Yeah, and stowage could be a bit problematic, as well...

A short length of wire - 6' or so - seems to have become recently popular among the trawler crowd, for use with a storm anchor in a soft bottom.... The theory seems to be, it permits the anchor to bury itself far deeper than the far greater surface area of chain would allow...

You do raise another possible downside to the use of a rope like Amsteel as a rode, however... An appropriately-sized rode of such a material might be as small a diameter as 5/16" for a boat like yours. Since your plan is to be raising your anchor by hand, it can be pretty tough on the hands to go with anything much thinner than 1/2", a consideration which could compel one to go (simply from an ease of handling standpoint) with a diameter far greater than you need from in terms of breaking strength, and that could become very expensive, very quickly... (1/2" Amsteel being $4.50/foot from Defender, here in the States)

And, I think it was already mentioned somewhere earlier as well, but the difficulty of attaching a snubber to a high-tech, 'slippery' fiber such as Dyneema is not to be underestimated - one needs to be able to tie a REALLY good rolling or icicle hitch to avoid it from slipping on that sort of rope...


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

I'm thinking 8-10mm, including the sleeve. 8mm seems to be the bare minimum that is nice to handle with bare hands (my hands, that is)

In any case, some sort of sleeve is necessary anyway, regardless of diameter. I mean, the foremost reason for me to think of this, besides weight, is ease of handling. And, as mentioned before, I'm still not sure about going full vectran, go for vectran over dyneema, or simply go for vectran over polyester - polyester being the most used around here for anchor rope. 

As for the icicle hitch, regardless, I will need to practice that a lot anyway, as I've never had a boat before with a non-retractable bow sprit. I thought that while practicing, I could double up on the snubbers and use some climbing gear or really strong cam cleats as a back up, until I feel I have it down.


----------



## zz4gta (Aug 15, 2007)

One said:


> And yet dyneema rope with vectran sleeves and all-through vectran are used for anchoring of oil rigs.


And you're comparing your use to an oil rigs? You do see the numerous problems with that right?



> You're wrong. Vectran is more cut resistant than both kevlar and dyneema.


Please provide a cite for this 'fact'. 
Judging from discriptions of products, I beg to differ:
Fibre Explanations : Sydney Rigging Specialists
Ultra-high-molecular-weight polyethylene - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Vectran - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
New England Ropes - Product Details
New England Ropes - Product Details

APS in annapolis has the same opinion, I also rig sailboats. I cut Vectran and dyneema on a DAILY basis. How many times have you cut the two fibers? I'll see what else I can dig up from NER, I know samson has done some case studies.



> As for the general concensus, I couldn't care less.


You've made that very clear. My question: If you've already made your mind up and no one else here has the intellegence to dispute your methods, then why start a thread asking for help? Clearly our suggestions have dissapointed you greatly. Please let me be the first to appologize for wasting your time.


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

zz4gta said:


> And you're comparing your use to an oil rigs? You do see the numerous problems with that right?


No, I'm comparing another use of Vectran as cut and chafe resistant sleeve.

How is it not on point to consider something where money is no object, but weight matters, to my possible use?



> Please provide a cite for this 'fact'.
> Judging from discriptions of products, I beg to differ:
> Fibre Explanations : Sydney Rigging Specialists
> Ultra-high-molecular-weight polyethylene - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> ...


You can get cut resistant gloves made from Kevlar, from Vectran, and spectra, as well as a combination of them all. Obviously, the combination are the best of them all. However, when it comes to the use of kevlar for chafe protection in high load areas (i.e. in a bow roller or cleat), it has one property that makes it better than the others: It is very resistant to _heat_. Under water, that's not really a problem for a sleeve.



> APS in annapolis has the same opinion, I also rig sailboats. I cut Vectran and dyneema on a DAILY basis. How many times have you cut the two fibers?


I have cut Dyneema quite a lot, and under tension it is cut very easily. Kevlar not so easily, but I have only cut kevlar fabric, not a line.

You also seem to confuse chafe resistance with cut resistance. Perhaps that's on purpose, but we have already been over that.



> I'll see what else I can dig up from NER, I know samson has done some case studies.


You do that, and keep in mind that we're talking sleeves. Ultimate strength is rather theoretical (i.e. it will be thicker than needed for handling purposes).

Also, you should consider that Vectran is used more and more for stab proof vests, making lighter and thinner vest than would be possible with kevlar. Why is that? It couldn't possibly be that Vectran is the better choice?

Vectran is also used for more and more tires (yes, really) because it is better than kevlar to protect against, say, a shard of glass cutting through.

Performance | Schwalbe Tires

On a weight to strength basis, both are around 5 times as strong as steel, Dyneema around 15 times as strong as steel:

http://rs.nationalsafetyinc.com/company_79//Understanding Cut resistance.pdf



> You've made that very clear. My question: If you've already made your mind up and no one else here has the intellegence to dispute your methods, then why start a thread asking for help? Clearly our suggestions have dissapointed you greatly. Please let me be the first to appologize for wasting your time.


No, some of you have actually given me a lot of food for thought. Others have simply shunned the notion of doing something differently.

I mentioned earlier how it's funny that nylon is fine for parts of the rode, polyester less so, and how it seems like it's a matter of conservatism and fear of modern materials. I also mentioned that I thought these newer materials had _promising properties,_ but I don't want to once again repeat myself to someone who has obviously not read the thread.

B2B Fiber Manufacturer | Olympic Fiber Press Release - Vectran and Wool: a unique future blend

http://www.biotechlearn.org.nz/focus_stories/wool_innovations/new_stab_and_flame_resistant_fabric

Stab resistant fabric on show at Fashion Week | Scoop News


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

Specs for kevlar and vectran sleeve in the attached pictures.

From here:

Techflex - Vectran® Braided Sleeving <-- Vectran

Techflex - Kevlar® Braided Sleeving <--- Kevlar


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

One said:


> Yes, I'm not saying going the direction I'm attempting ought to be the end-all solution for everyone everywhere, and in every type of boat.
> 
> .


I am very curious about your boat. Can you post some pictures or links to them?

Regards

Paulo


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

PCP said:


> I am very curious about your boat. Can you post some pictures or links to them?
> 
> Regards
> 
> Paulo


I haven't had it built yet - still figuring out details with the designer (and with myself) but it's an "extreme" version of the attached pictures (less weight aloft (i.e. wood veneered carbon spars, less steel) and to be set up with furlers and a top-down gennaker etc.).

(Edit: Fecked up the attachments)


----------



## zz4gta (Aug 15, 2007)

One said:


> Specs for kevlar and vectran sleeve in the attached pictures.
> 
> From here:
> 
> ...


That proves that Vectran has better abrasion resistance than Kevlar. I'm not arguing that. Try to keep up. Show a similar chart comparing dyneema/spectra. 
I'm also not saying that vectran is a crappy fiber, you seem to have trouble comprehending that. You're links show it being used in a number of ways. Congratulations.

Now back to the part where you stated that Vecran has better cut resistance (abrasion) than Dyneema. I provided a links that compare the 2 saying that abrasion resistance is "improved with a coating in Vectran" and "highly resistant to abrasion" in Dyneema.

The quote is below:
"It is highly resistant to corrosive chemicals except oxidizing acids; has extremely low moisture absorption and a very low coefficient of friction; is self-lubricating; *and is highly resistant to abrasion, in some forms being 15 times more resistant to abrasion than carbon steel. *Its coefficient of friction is significantly lower than that of nylon and acetal, and is comparable to that of polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE, Teflon), but UHMWPE has better abrasion resistance than PTFE.[3][4]

I'm still waiting for that cite...


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

zz4gta said:


> That proves that Vectran has better abrasion resistance than Kevlar. I'm not arguing that. Try to keep up.


Did you or did you not respond to a comment I made about kevlar as well as Dyneema?
I thought so.

But I have to say, I can't remember where I got it from. But even if it were true (I can't be arsed to once again do research to satisfy trolls), Spectra floats, and furthermore, it's not easily available as sleeving. But thank you for the suggestion of it. I would try it out if I could get hold of a piece (sleeving, that is). What's weird, though, is that it should be possible to get it as cut resistant sleeving if it were up there with Vectran. Yet I can't even find it other industries as sleeving. Slings and whatnot are no problem to get hold of, but sleeving seems to be a problem.



> I'm also not saying that vectran is a crappy fiber, you seem to have trouble comprehending that.


No, I know Vectran is not a crappy fibre, and I realise you're just trolling in attempt to show that if I'm wrong in one instance, I must be wrong overall. Of course, that same bad logic doesn't apply to you.



> You're links show it being used in a number of ways. Congratulations.


Your point? I didn't write the stuff in my links. So now, because vectran has various uses, that renders my argument invalid? Right on. Yet another trolling attempt.



> Now back to the part where you stated that Vecran has better cut resistance (abrasion) than Dyneema. I provided a links that compare the 2 saying that abrasion resistance is "improved with a coating in Vectran" and "highly resistant to abrasion" in Dyneema.


Sigh. What's your point? You attempt to prove me "wrong", when in reality, I have been open even to dacron as a sleeve. For the hell of it, I could try both, if I was so inclined. I just find it telling that in industrial applications and in stab vests and so on, Vectran is the go to material, not Dyneema. So some research have been done by people already. I'm just trying to adopt that same material for the same reasons, albeit in another setting.



> The quote is below:
> "It is highly resistant to corrosive chemicals except oxidizing acids; has extremely low moisture absorption and a very low coefficient of friction; is self-lubricating; *and is highly resistant to abrasion, in some forms being 15 times more resistant to abrasion than carbon steel. *Its coefficient of friction is significantly lower than that of nylon and acetal, and is comparable to that of polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE, Teflon), but UHMWPE has better abrasion resistance than PTFE.[3][4]
> 
> I'm still waiting for that cite...


You can wait as long as you want when you, yourself, won't acknowledge where _you _were wrong or decided to not read my sentences to the end. It's a two-way street, but like the other troll back there, I really don't care about your opinion at this point.

If you have more details you'd like to counter, be my guest. I made this thread to get ideas, and I really don't care much if I have some detail wrong here or there. Suffice to say, that Vectran, Kevlar, Dyneema, _and _Spectra is much more resistant to abrasion and cuts than nylon or polyester.

I have decided to try out polyester with a vectran sleeve, straight dyneema, dyneema with a vectran sleeve (or two, at the lower end), but not a dyneema sleeve. The reason for the latter is that it seems most dyneema sleeves have polyester in them, to aid with grip, and that polyester defeats the purpose for me, and a pure dyneema sleeve might become too slippery.

I will also try out various combinations of kellet weights and a buoy to see if it works for me.


----------



## VK540 (May 6, 2011)

Maine Sail said:


> You can buy Cordura "sleeve" easily. There is no seam to sew as it is already in tubular form. Just slide it over the rode. While we have a windlass we rarely use it. We also use a mixed rode as a primary. The chain is no harder on the hands than the rope rode...


Or, you can just wear gloves to protect your hands instead of a sleeve
! LOL! I haven't posted in awhile and now I know why. This thread is ridiculous! If you want to prove your anchoring points, do it, then post the results. I have been hauling anchors for other people for quite some time as well as anchoring my own boat and the last thing I would do is sleeve any of my rode, chain or nylon or whatever so that I couldn't see it to inspect it. Chain rode acts like a kettle weight. Is strong and chafe resistant. Nylon acts as the shock absorber and can be part of the rode or a bridle from the boat to rode. Either or is proven, accepted and for years given confidence to anchoring boats in scary times. If you are going to argue that something new is better. Do it, try it. Document the results (hopefully in hurricane situations) and share the results. Lead core fishing line was a common thing for deep fishing in my area until they came out with better products. Sounds like you are going back to a lead core shelved installation for anchoring that is wrong for several reasons. You cant inspect the inner core easialy. Like nylon coated scuba tanks. This would be a disastrous situation over time. Every time you pull your anchor should be an inspection. We use the Cordura sleeves at work for safety harness' but only to protect the important stuff from UV's not for comfort or strength. Listen to the 50 years of mariners experience or test it, come back with your results and then we will comment.


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

VK540 said:


> Or, you can just wear gloves to protect your hands instead of a sleeve


I'm sorry, but I made the thread, and that piece of advice is a good one, even if I don't think I'll use cordura. I don't want to wear gloves constantly.



> ! LOL! I haven't posted in awhile and now I know why. This thread is ridiculous!


Noone forced you to read it. You could have not clicked on it.



> If you want to prove your anchoring points, do it, then post the results.


I take it your comment is directed at me, and not Maine Sail. The fact of the matter, I'm not out to prove anything, as I have said repeatedly in this thread. Besides the moaners, whiners, trolls, there is some good advice in this thread, great suggestions and lots of food for thought for me, as the OP.



> I have been hauling anchors for other people for quite some time as well as anchoring my own boat and the last thing I would do is sleeve any of my rode, chain or nylon or whatever so that I couldn't see it to inspect it.


Read the freaking thread. I'm talking about a sleeve I can slide up and down if need be.



> Chain rode acts like a kettle weight.


Yes, go read the thread, and the posts about kellets and buoys. And then consider that most of the weight of the chain is not placed ideally.



> Is strong and chafe resistant.


Yes, and heavy, rusting, mud-grapping and not as easy to handle as rope. Please read the thread, so I don't have to continue to repeat myself, or even worse; recap what _others _have said as well.



> Nylon acts as the shock absorber and can be part of the rode or a bridle from the boat to rode.


Yes, and besides it soaking water so it swells, it breaks down from the inside, is not well protected from UV, and it has a lot of "twang" when it breaks - so much so, that we were just presented to a story about a freaking _surfing _anchor a couple of pages back.

I personally prefer polyester, but yeah, snubbers is good, and a necessity, if you take a look at the pics I posted.



> Either or is proven, accepted and for years given confidence to anchoring boats in scary times.


Ah, yes, and for years CQR anchors was the go-to anchor that made people sleep well. People also used to not clip in, people used to use nylon instead of hemp, and it killed people because of its elasticity when it broke.



> If you are going to argue that something new is better. Do it, try it. Document the results (hopefully in hurricane situations) and share the results.


For the umpteenth time: I'm not saying it is better. I'm saying that for my use, my area, and (soon) my boat, I'm attempting to come up with a solution that might work, because the newer fibres has _*promising *properties_. You're really good at not being able to read. It's as if I offended you personally by making this thread. You didn't even bother to read even half of it, nor look at the pictures.



> Lead core fishing line was a common thing for deep fishing in my area until they came out with better products.


So, what is your argument? They now use dyneema and other modern fibres. Make up your mind, will you.



> Sounds like you are going back to a lead core shelved installation for anchoring that is wrong for several reasons. You cant inspect the inner core easialy. Like nylon coated scuba tanks. This would be a disastrous situation over time. Every time you pull your anchor should be an inspection. We use the Cordura sleeves at work for safety harness' but only to protect the important stuff from UV's not for comfort or strength. Listen to the 50 years of mariners experience or test it, come back with your results and then we will comment.


Ah, for the love of everything you hold sacred: Go read the fracking thread instead of only the first page before posting more of that misplaced anger!

Cordura sleeves would be fine to me, now that he educated me to the fact that they actually come as tubular - the only reason I'm not going to go that way is because that too is nylon.

A loose sleeve on the bottom half would make it possible to inspect the entirety. Do you separate the threads of the snubbers when it comes back on board, to check for heat damage and general fatigue of your nylon snubbers? No, I thought not.

Europeans have been using sleeved anchor rope for decades, and you don't see that many boats lost. If that was the case, it would be impossible to insure such a thing around here. Oh, and they're almost all polyester.


----------



## VK540 (May 6, 2011)

Like I said, this thread must be a joke. Thanks for confirming it.


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

VK540 said:


> Like I said, this thread must be a joke. Thanks for confirming it.


Ah, yes, when shown to not having read anything, or understood half of what you read, it must somehow be confirming your bald-faced assertions.

Seriously, what's next from you?


----------



## VK540 (May 6, 2011)

Time to visit another forum. Maybe one that has substance?


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

VK540 said:


> Time to visit another forum. Maybe one that has substance?


Why? Because you can't help yourself and are forced to click on threads you don't want to read?


----------



## VK540 (May 6, 2011)

Nope! Just that I have learned a hell of a lot from this forum and dont want some blow hard to spoil my good memories of this one.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

One said:


> I haven't had it built yet - still figuring out details with the designer (and with myself) but it's an "extreme" version of the attached pictures (less weight aloft (i.e. wood veneered carbon spars, less steel) and to be set up with furlers and a top-down gennaker etc.).
> 
> (Edit: Fecked up the attachments)


Interesting boat. You are more than welcome to post and discuss it on the interesting sailboat thread. I don't believe you will hear any criticism.

After looking to your boat it makes sense not to use chain. As I have said and by my own experience you will have to carry the weight of a chain in weights that you will have to suspend from the rode but, giving the type of boat it will make a difference to have that weight (and the one from the anchor) at the bow or at the middle of the boat when you sail.

If you had chain you could not keep it on the bow and would have to drag it through the boat, scraping that beauty.

The solution I used on my wooden boat was not bad since it consisted in some plastic containers full of sand that could be easily stored where it was more convenient and because they were soft plastic ones they were friendly to the boat. You can improve that. You only have to find some very strong plastic 2.5 L jerrycans and fill then with little lead spheres. Each will occupy very little space and will weight over 20 kg You will not need more than four probably. They will be easily carried around and the rode can have already the right attachments to attach them quickly at the same time you let go the rode. I know it is not difficult because I use to do that, just some practice is needed.

I guess you are over complicating in what regards the rode and the materials. I don't see anything wrong with what you propose, with the exception of being needed weights on the rode to the same job the weight of the chain provide.

You did not explained what type of boat you were talking about and I guess most criticism come from there. Just try it and post the results

Regards

Paulo


----------



## flyingwelshman (Aug 5, 2007)

One said:


> I will mostly go alone when I go (as I have done in the past)


Quelle surprise!

It's really unfortunate that this thread - which has a lot of merit: interesting comparisons of different materials; discussion of anchoring techniques and philosophies - has been grossly undermined by the pomposity, arrogance and im_*pert*_inence of the OP.

I suppose I'll be next on the list of those being banished from the thread. Ah well.

Bon voyage!


----------



## VK540 (May 6, 2011)

I apologize. As Paulo is a respected person in my readings. Your reply to the very first post was "Oh! A mariner with 50 years experience!" seemed to put everyone's back to the wall when they were offering sound advice base on their experience might have set the tone. I haven't seen your boat, or soon to be boat. Which makes me ignorant or what your anchoring goals are. Most of us, I believe, are referring to standard boats in normal situations and only want to ensure the anchoring is adequate to ensure the safety of the vessel more than protecting the beauty of the vessel. I am not being sarcastic. Just wanted to let you know that you set the tone with your first reply and visiting your profile didn't show you boat or I would have understood the purpose of the thread being in protecting beauty before the basics of practical anchoring technics. Good luck with your quest. I will not interfere with my practical experience anymore.


----------



## VK540 (May 6, 2011)

Damn! I say one nice thing and I get no response!!!!


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

VK540 said:


> Nope! Just that I have learned a hell of a lot from this forum and dont want some blow hard to spoil my good memories of this one.


I am limiting the discussion to this thread, so I don't see a problem, to be honest. You could just not have read it. Or at least not gone off like you did without reading a bit more.



flyingwelshman said:


> Quelle surprise!


Way to go, attempting to psycho analyse me from this thread says a lot more about you than it does about me.



> It's really unfortunate that this thread - which has a lot of merit: interesting comparisons of different materials; discussion of anchoring techniques and philosophies - has been grossly undermined by the pomposity, arrogance and im_*pert*_inence of the OP.


What are you on about? Had I not insisted on finding some other solution than "chain is the only thing that'll work", it would have stopped on page one.



> I suppose I'll be next on the list of those being banished from the thread. Ah well.
> 
> Bon voyage!


Ah, yes, if we can't say whatever we want without being countered or challenged, we can pull out the persecution card.



VK540 said:


> I apologize. As Paulo is a respected person in my readings.


Thank you (if I can say that on his behalf). It makes me happy that you acknowledge it was for my benefit he posted that.



> Your reply to the very first post was "Oh! A mariner with 50 years experience!" seemed to put everyone's back to the wall when they were offering sound advice base on their experience might have set the tone.


1) He was attempting to make an argument from authority with that comment, without even reading the first post thoroughly and the premise of it all. Instead he relied on "50 years as a mariner", as if that means a lot when we're talking about modern fibres. In other words, he figured that nothing has happened in the world of boating during those years, and to him, there was only one way to skin a cat.



> I haven't seen your boat, or soon to be boat. Which makes me ignorant or what your anchoring goals are.


When I gave the details needed (weight, lack of width, deep fin keel (and the depth of it) lack of windage, length, and bowsprit) I was accused of only making this thread to "boast" about the boat. But I did mention the crucial measurements, but even that was apparently "too much". I also mentioned that it doesn't even have a cabin, that it will be used for play, and for "camping" out in the cockpit.

I also mentioned I wasn't going circumnavigating in a boat like that, and that it wasn't intended for that. Later on, I mentioned it was like a glorified sailing canoe, only 43 feet long with a fin keel.

It's not like those things weren't mentioned. In fact, quite a few of them were mentioned several times.

Back a page, there's some pictures in an attachment to a post of mine, if you want to see it.



> Most of us, I believe, are referring to standard boats in normal situations and only want to ensure the anchoring is adequate to ensure the safety of the vessel more than protecting the beauty of the vessel.


Oh, great, now it's about the "beauty" of the vessel. Seriously, I don't live in hurricane ally, and the "beauty" of that boat is that it fits into a 45ft pallet container. Yes, the keel comes off, and it fits. It seems like you're trying to build a strawman. I never said it was about "protecting beauty".



> I am not being sarcastic. Just wanted to let you know that you set the tone with your first reply and visiting your profile didn't show you boat


And everyone one of you moaners from reply number one to my opening post has failed to read what I have written, even when it has been repeated to you ad nausem.



> or I would have understood the purpose of the thread being in protecting beauty before the basics of practical anchoring technics.


And there it was: The strawman. Need I repeat once again, that I'm getting that boat to have fun in "bad" weather, and to use as a platform to "camp" with? That I'm not going to circumnavigate with the thing, as _there is no freaking cabin_!? Do I need to repeat that I am well aware of the catenary effect and chafe? That the boat is really slim, and the ends narrow? That it's really lightweight for a boat of that length? I guess it's useless to repeat it, because you, like every other moaner and whiner in this thread are completely unable to read what is written because it doesn't fit well with your preconceived notions.



> Good luck with your quest. I will not interfere with my practical experience anymore.


Yeah, nothing like that "practical experience" (as if I haven't boated my entire life).

You know, I have a rock in my trousers which repels tigers. It's true. I always carry it when I'm Europe and I have never encountered a tiger in the wild. Freaking great, isn't it?

In any case, I will now respond to someone who actually reads what I have written, instead of being personally offended that I'm trying to figure out an alternative solution to an old problem.


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

PCP, I have read your post, but I'm really tired after the last couple of hours (have been doing some work on the side) so I think I'll call it a day. Thanks for the advice and support, even if I am a bit of a tosser.


----------



## VK540 (May 6, 2011)

Thanks for being so honest. Now I know your a jerk. *******. They can kick me off this forum for being honest and if they do I will miss it but I wont miss the members like you.


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

One said:


> You can wait as long as you want when you, yourself, won't acknowledge where _you _were wrong or decided to not read my sentences to the end. It's a two-way street, but like the other troll back there, I really don't care about your opinion at this point.


Hi, there - remember me? You know, _"the other troll"_ you seem to be unable to resist making somewhat pointed references to? (grin)



One said:


> I made this thread to get ideas, and I really don't care much if I have some detail wrong here or there...


Hmmm, that sure didn't seem to be the case back when you responded to my initial reply, and reacted rather strenuously to my questioning your assertion that *"Dyneema... is surprisingly easily cut"*, and went on to clarify that you were more concerned with "cut resistance", over "abrasion resistance"...



One said:


> You also seem to confuse chafe resistance with cut resistance. Perhaps that's on purpose, but we have already been over that.
> 
> Also, you should consider that Vectran is used more and more for stab proof vests, making lighter and thinner vest than would be possible with kevlar. Why is that? It couldn't possibly be that Vectran is the better choice?
> 
> ...


How ironic that you should select that particular link, I was close to citing it about 3 days ago when we were debating the relative cut resistance of Dyneema vs. Vectran... But, I ultimately passed figuring, _'why bother'?_

But, since you've brought it up, now is as good a time as any, I suppose... If there IS one thing I might be capable of reading, it's a simple list... Doesn't look like Dyneema is _"surprisingly easily cut"_, to me...

From your own cite:

*CHART OF CUT RESISTANCE LEVELS*

Metal Mesh, Hexarmor

Fiber Metal Blends (Kevlar Steel, Dyneema Fiberglass)

*Dyneema*

ATA

Spectra

Kevlar, *Vectran*, Twaron

Synthetic Fabrics (Polyester, Nylon)

Cotton

Leather

Latex

Beautiful, very interesting boat, btw... Good luck with her...


----------



## flyingwelshman (Aug 5, 2007)

One said:


> Way to go, attempting to psycho analyse me from this thread says a lot more about you than it does about me.


Thanks for the props on my psychoanalytical expertise, but I wasn't providing analysis, I was merely pointing out that I was not at all surprised to find out that nobody wants to go sailing with you.



One said:


> What are you on about? Had I not insisted on finding some other solution than "chain is the only thing that'll work", it would have stopped on page one.


It should have stopped at page one. I think that people that have given you some excellent responses to your request for opinions have demonstrated incredible humanity in over-looking your obvious douchiness.



One said:


> Ah, yes, if we can't say whatever we want without being countered or challenged, we can pull out the persecution card.


On at least two occasions you have suggested that those who did not agree with you, or your demeanor should leave the thread, or not have participated in the first place. I anticipated the same response. Past behaviour is a strong indicator of future action and all that.


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

VK540 said:


> Thanks for being so honest. Now I know your a jerk. *******. They can kick me off this forum for being honest and if they do I will miss it but I wont miss the members like you.


Nice one in the inbox of my email. I'm truly sorry that I don't find it fun sailing in an undercanvassed keg with my entire life in it. I'm also sorry that you fail to realise that other people have other priorities, that there are other solutions out there than bronze, canvas, and big engines to power that floating bomb shelter through the water, and that you think that it's only boats that are build and outfitted to withstand a hurricane that has merit.

As for you being booted off of this forum, I'm not going to report anything, and I think it's fine you put it out there for all to see.

PCP ( I figured I might as well, since I was back to respond to VK540),

I don't mind carrying the weight in the boat at all. I'm fine with that. Just not up front. But by dividing it up in "bits", I might actually be able to handle a lot of weight as a whole, and be able to anchor safely. I like the idea of sand canisters, because I was thinking stainless or bronze, but those things are expensive in large weights, and they _will _mar the deck, or even worse, if dropped, they could damage the hull from the inside. If for nothing else, then going with sand canister will make it cheap and easy to try different weights while I make up my mind.


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

flyingwelshman said:


> Thanks for the props on my psychoanalytical expertise, but I wasn't providing analysis, I was merely pointing out that I was not at all surprised to find out that nobody wants to go sailing with you.


You still don't get it, do you? People do want to go with me, but I tend to go out in weather where other people prefer to stay at home or in harbour.

Seriously, if you don't get it now, you're a lost cause. 



> It should have stopped at page one. I think that people that have given you some excellent responses to your request for opinions have demonstrated incredible humanity in over-looking your obvious douchiness.


Anything else you wish to whine about, when you could just as easily have ignored the thread?



> On at least two occasions you have suggested that those who did not agree with you, or your demeanor should leave the thread, or not have participated in the first place. I anticipated the same response. Past behaviour is a strong indicator of future action and all that.


Yes, it is. Trolls and whiners will always be trolls and whiners, FlyingWelsh. When people ***** and moan about how this thread is the worst thing they have ever encountered, that the questions and the suggested solutions (solutions from all fronts) are bad, idiotic and whatnot, and go off because they feel personally offended, while not having read or understood even the freaking subject line, of course I tell them to simply stop reading the freaking thread. I do the same, when some tosser come into this thread and claim I'm ruining the entire site for not just taking people's "experience" at face value and call it a day.

Most of the noise in this thread has been from people who ***** and moan (and my response to them) about why I don't just listen, while they ignore most of what I actually say - except of course, what can make them grow full of rightous indignation. - while not being able to read, while attempting to psycho analyse me (ring a bell?), and while acting all offended because I have other priorities than them.

Or, the best one; when I said I needed snubbers anyway because the boat had a cf sprit with bobstays and whiskers, that was suddenly because I was "bragging". Seriously, the inferiority complex shone on that one.

Are we done now, or do you want to take the helm as the moaner de jour?


----------



## flyingwelshman (Aug 5, 2007)

One said:


> You still don't get it, do you? People do want to go with me, but I tend to go out in weather where other people prefer to stay at home or in harbour.


The only statement you made vis-à-vis sailing companionship was here:


One said:


> I will mostly go alone when I go (as I have done in the past)





One said:


> Seriously, if you don't get it now, you're a lost cause.


 Well colour me:'lost' 'cause I'm still convinced that there isn't enough room for a passenger, or crew, on your sailing canoe once you, your monstrous bonce and your ego (there you go, my first psycho-analytical observation) are aboard. :laugher



One said:


> Anything else you wish to whine about,


haven't 'whined'. Simply took you to task for your boorishness.



One said:


> when you could just as easily have ignored the thread?


And here we have it: the invitation to not participate. Knew it would happen!



One said:


> tosser


 You seem to use that expression a lot. At risk of being accused of passing judgement, I might suggest that you might benefit from a quick one off the wrist.



One said:


> while not being able to read, while attempting to psycho analyse me (ring a bell?)


Again with the psychoanalysis mantra. Did you go off your meds?



One said:


> Are we done now, or do you want to take the helm as the moaner de jour?


I suppose if I'm the best you can do.... although, again, excuse my presumption, but I'm convinced that a 'moaner' of a more conjugal nature would work wonders to improve your dearth of personality.


----------



## zz4gta (Aug 15, 2007)

One said:


> I would try it out if I could get hold of a piece (sleeving, that is). What's weird, though, is that it should be possible to get it as cut resistant sleeving if it were up there with Vectran. Yet I can't even find it other industries as sleeving.


Hey jacka$$, it is available. I linked to it earlier in this thread. It's called 
DYNEEMA CHAFE SLEEVE you dunce. My God this is what the ignore button is for. Congrats, you're the first person I ever put on it in the entire time I've been here.

You can't fix stupid.


----------



## Lateen Luffer (Mar 10, 2013)

I wonder if you could make up for a lack of chain in your rode with 10lbs of fishing weight maybe 20 feet away from the anchor? it would help keep the pull angle low and it would (only a little) help distribute the sudden jerk on the anchor when the boat gets a gust of wind. I'm just supposing here. I'm certainly not a pro. In fact I was happily surprised when I didn't sink my little boat all last weekend! Good luck ~LL


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

Lateen Luffer said:


> I wonder if you could make up for a lack of chain in your rode with 10lbs of fishing weight maybe 20 feet away from the anchor? it would help keep the pull angle low and it would (only a little) help distribute the sudden jerk on the anchor when the boat gets a gust of wind. I'm just supposing here. I'm certainly not a pro. In fact I was happily surprised when I didn't sink my little boat all last weekend! Good luck ~LL


That is the idea but he needs much more than that. If anchoring on 7m of water he would need a weight of 40lbs on the 10m mark, another one at 18m, another one at the 26m mark. that would make up for the function weight plays in a chain. With this set up he can even have a light good aluminium anchor since his boat is light and extensive cruising is not what he seems to be planning.

10lbs is really nothing compared with the needed weight to substitute the weight of a chain.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

I'm guessing, but I need to do the calculations, but I think I can do with a little less than the weight of the chain, simple because I can place the weight more efficiently than the weight of a chain. I mean, a pull right between point A and point B will exert more force to pull those two points towards each other than the same weight distributed along the entire length between those points.

But you're absolutely right: 10lbs is far less than what I had in mind. 30-40lbs kellets (plural) is the weights I was thinking would be easiest to handle.

_
Edit/add:_ Anchor wise, I want a Manson supreme, or a Mantus which I have just discovered and read about (Medsailor's reviews in particular), and a biggish Manson "Racer" (their Fortress look-alike) in either size R9 or R10 as a back up. The reason for the "Racer as opposed to the equivalent Fortress is that it comes with plastic "bulbs" at the end of the perpendicular rod which makes it easier to handle. I'm open to buy a Fortress, though, if I feel the "Racer" is not big enough (size R10 is their biggest).


----------



## MedSailor (Mar 30, 2008)

One said:


> I'm guessing, but I need to do the calculations...


Behold, my FAVORITE website of anchor geekery.  Enough math to give a nerd a migraine and under the heading "synthesis" there are some awesome excel spredsheets that allow you do calculate EVERYTHING. Want to know the differences in the angle of your anchor stock and the forces on your bow cleat in a 20kt gust with you kellet either 10 or 20 ft from the anchor? Done!

Anchor Forces and calculators

MedSailor


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

MedSailor said:


> Behold, my FAVORITE website of anchor geekery.  Enough math to give a nerd a migraine and under the heading "synthesis" there are some awesome excel spredsheets that allow you do calculate EVERYTHING. Want to know the differences in the angle of your anchor stock and the forces on your bow cleat in a 20kt gust with you kellet either 10 or 20 ft from the anchor? Done!
> 
> Anchor Forces and calculators
> 
> MedSailor


Holy crap! Sweet, Medsailor! Thank you, just what I needed!


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

One said:


> ..Anchor wise, I want a Manson supreme, or a Mantus which I have just discovered and read about (Medsailor's reviews in particular), and a biggish Manson "Racer" (their Fortress look-alike) in either size R9 or R10 as a back up. The reason for the "Racer as opposed to the equivalent Fortress is that it comes with plastic "bulbs" at the end of the perpendicular rod which makes it easier to handle. I'm open to buy a Fortress, though, if I feel the "Racer" is not big enough (size R10 is their biggest).


You can also consider an aluminium Spade. Also great results in tests. I guess a Fortress will be superior regarding a direct pull but when the wind veers 180º the Fortress will come out and will (hopefully) set again while the Spade will just turn around without coming out.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

Okay, I didn't know it came in aluminium. It's a bit difficult to store comparatively. I found it and bookmarked it, as I don't have to make up my mind just yet.


----------



## MedSailor (Mar 30, 2008)

One said:


> Okay, I didn't know it came in aluminium. It's a bit difficult to store comparatively. I found it and bookmarked it, as I don't have to make up my mind just yet.


It also disassembles (as does the Fortress) so that might help with stowage.

MedSailor


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

MedSailor said:


> It also disassembles (as does the Fortress) so that might help with stowage.
> 
> MedSailor


Super! Then it's definately on the shortlist


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

As much as I love the Manson Supreme or Rocna, once I finally saw the pics of your boat and it became apparent how small is the foredeck 'footprint' you'll be working with, my first thought was "Good luck getting a 35 lb Manson Supreme back aboard, raising by hand, without quickly dinging up those beautiful topsides..." Those anchors can be pretty ungainly, and tricky enough to bring back on deck with windlass and proper bow roller - they could be a serious challenge dealing with on a boat like yours...

The Spade was the first 'New Generation' I used for several years before making the switch to a Manson, and I still keep an over-sized aluminum version aboard as a back up... However, in my experience - and I've heard similar complaints from others - the aluminum version can be much trickier and require more patience to set, than the heavier equivalent version in steel... Like the other well-known lightweight Fortress, their relatively light weight can make the initial setting difficult, and they're not the best choice in an emergency situation where one might need to get a hook to set quickly, or on comparatively short scope...

And hence, the downside/compromise for your application... _For the best way to 'help' these aluminum anchors to obtain their initial set, is the use of a length of chain at the anchor end of the rode..._ As always with a boat - and particularly when thinking outside of the box - the name of the game is 'tradeoff"...

Having said that, however - I'd agree that for your purposes, an aluminum Spade or Fortress is probably your best choice, overall...


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

How did you make the attachment show up in the post, and not like a tiny thumbnail at the bottom?

Anyway, you mention the footprint of the foredeck. To be fair, that picture of the stem is taken with a wide angle lens, making it seem like it's even narrower than it actually is - sort of the same effect as looking through one of those door peep holes.

I'm thinking I can walk the anchor hanging from its rode to the shrouds and pull it up the final bit from there - if for nothing else, than it will give me something to hold on to.

As for anchors needing a bit of chain, that is not true. They need a low angle to set properly, and there's no reason that should come from a chain. It's not the material that matters, it's the angle of pull that matters.

In any case, I'm not going super light with the anchor - not the spade either. The idea of the "collapsible" alu spade and the fortress is to get them relatively oversized to be able to use when needed, simply because they're oversized. In weight terms, they will be around the same weight as the steel Manson (or steel Mantus, as it were). I briefly considered the XYZ anchor, but even I thought that would be tempting fate a bit much, what with it being a freaking sawblade!


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

One said:


> ...
> 
> ... The idea of the "collapsible" alu spade and the fortress is to get them relatively oversized to be able to use when needed, simply because they're oversized. In weight terms, they will be around the same weight as the steel Manson (or steel Mantus, as it were). ...


No, it does not work that way. It is not the weight that matters but the surface area and design. You don't need a bigger anchor just because it is aluminum, you need an anchor with the same size of the steel one and therefore a much lighter one.

As Jon explained the problem with an aluminum Spade is that it is more difficult to set on account of weight needed for penetration. When set you don't have a performance much different from a steel one. In that aspect the fortress it is much more easy to set, as easy as a steel anchor.

Regards

paulo


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

PCP said:


> No, it does not work that way. It is not the weight that matters but the surface area and design. You don't need a bigger anchor just because it is aluminum, you need an anchor with the same size of the steel one and therefore a much lighter one.


What I meant was that I'll have a 35lbs Mantus/Manson anchor as my primary every day anchor, and an extra one (fortress or perhaps the alu spade), with more surface area in case I get nervous. I'm sure I can handle the weight of that (assuming I get some balls on the end of the rod of the fortress). The weight is just at the upper limit of practicality (for holding it off the topsides), so I might as well go for the biggest one.



> As Jon explained the problem with an aluminum Spade is that it is more difficult to set on account of weight needed for penetration. When set you don't have a performance much different from a steel one. In that aspect the fortress it is much more easy to set, as easy as a steel anchor.


Okay, got you. So the Spade is not as easy as the Fortress to make set. 
I think that settles it in that regard. I might as well get the one that is set the easiest of the two, even if it's prone to digging itself out of the ground when veering.

Just to clarify, one the one hand, I'm looking for an anchor setup I can handle sans windlass (I'm reasonably fit and row a lot), but on the other hand, I want something as big and heavy as I can handle.


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

One said:


> How did you make the attachment show up in the post, and not like a tiny thumbnail at the bottom?


Not every day someone asks me how I did something with a computer - in fact, I believe this is the first time, ever (grin) If I were to wander into the Active Captain/Sailing Forums thread, my first response would have to be "What is OpenCPN?"

I'm using a Mac, so what I did after enlarging the thumbnail, was to hit Control + View Image, then copied the url...



One said:


> As for anchors needing a bit of chain, that is not true.


_"Sigh..."_

I didn't say that anchors necessarily "need" a bit of chain... I said that a length of chain is _'helpful'_ in obtaining an initial set when using a lightweight anchor such as an aluminum Spade, or Fortress...



One said:


> They need a low angle to set properly, and there's no reason that should come from a chain.


Really? If you actually believe that, then why did you make clear right from your initial post, that it was your intention to go with a leaded/weighted rode? Of course, the weight doesn't absolutely _need_ to come from chain, it's simply that nothing else offers the convenience and effectiveness of offering the greatest amount of weight per foot of length employed...



One said:


> It's not the material that matters, it's the angle of pull that matters.


That is true, in a strictly physical sense... However, the advantage of chain or a heavily weighted rode is that the catenary afforded by the weight allows one to achieve the required angle to obtain a decent set _sooner_ and more easily, after letting out less scope, than can be done with a lighter rode comprised of rope alone...

This is not only a matter of convenience, but in a situation where anchoring must be done in response to an emergency as opposed to at a time and place of one's own choosing, it can be a real safety issue... For example, many might view my use of 6' of 1/4" stainless chain on my 100' of rode carried in my inflatable tender as a bit of overkill. However, perhaps the greatest risk to puttering about in a dinghy - particularly in a remote area where you're on your own - is the danger of being unable to anchor quickly if you need to due to an engine failure, or whatever, before you might get blown or drift into deeper water... A bit of chain will definitely give me the best chance of getting my little Bruce to set in 50' of water, before a strong ebb running off a bank in the Bahamas sweeps me out into the ocean...

At any rate, someone should probably set an old dog like Don Street straight on his old-fashioned take on the utility of chain when using a lightweight anchor... Coincidentally, I happen to be reading his wonderful new STREET'S GUIDE TO THE CAPE VERDE ISLANDS, and just came across this bit last night:



> The aluminum Fortress anchor has amazing holding power once it is dug in. It will hold incredibly well as long as it has about 15 feet of 3/8 chain between it and the rope rode. That gives the anchor some weight and helps get it down to the bottom. When setting this anchor, great care must be taken, sort of like setting the hook in a fish. Once in, the Fortress is great, but if not set carefully, it will skid across the bottom and not dig in.


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

JonEisberg said:


> Not every day someone asks me how I did something with a computer - in fact, I believe this is the first time, ever (grin) If I were to wander into the Active Captain/Sailing Forums thread, my first response would have to be "What is OpenCPN?"
> 
> I'm using a Mac, so what I did after enlarging the thumbnail, was to hit Control + View Image, then copied the url...


Oh, I thought you had reuploaded the image and managed to get it to show up in the post, he, he.



> _"Sigh..."_
> 
> I didn't say that anchors necessarily "need" a bit of chain... I said that a length of chain is _'helpful'_ in obtaining an initial set when using a lightweight anchor such as an aluminum Spade, or Fortress...


True, you did say that.



> Really? If you actually believe that, then why did you make clear right from your initial post, that it was your intention to go with a leaded/weighted rode?


Because, at first I thought that was the easiest. But after you and others chimed in, I realised that more weight was needed, and that the best way to get so much weight down there, yet be able to handle the rode would be with kellets. I do listen and amend my ideas as I learn new things or realise flaws in them.



> Of course, the weight doesn't absolutely _need_ to come from chain, it's simply that nothing else offers the convenience and effectiveness of offering the greatest amount of weight per foot of length employed...


It's convenient, that's for sure.



> That is true, in a strictly physical sense... However, the advantage of chain or a heavily weighted rode is that the catenary afforded by the weight allows one to achieve the required angle to obtain a decent set _sooner_ and more easily, after letting out less scope, than can be done with a lighter rode comprised of rope alone...


True, but a "heavily weighted rode", also includes a rode weighted with kellets. Although, I realise it's not as convenient as chain, at least that solution would allow me handle more weight as it is divided between parts.



> This is not only a matter of convenience, but in a situation where anchoring must be done in response to an emergency as opposed to at a time and place of one's own choosing, it can be a real safety issue... For example, many might view my use of 6' of 1/4" stainless chain on my 100' of rode carried in my inflatable tender as a bit of overkill.


I can carry kellets in an inflatable too, if necessary. Not that I need to, since I will attach them with a snatch block or similar.
However, (and you're welcome to laught at my choice), I have ordered one of these to use as a "dinghy" - it's not a pool toy, even though you could be forgiven to think so:

https://www.alpackaraft.com/index.cfm/store.catalog?CategoryID=53&ProductID=87

It's the Fjord Explorer with a removable rowing frame (so as to be used with a kayak paddle). 
The oar frame weighs 1.5lbs (yes, it's light), and the boat itself weighs in at at a "hefty" 5lbs 10oz, and the oars, which can be put together as a kayak paddle weighs 1.5lbs too.



> However, perhaps the greatest risk to puttering about in a dinghy - particularly in a remote area where you're on your own - is the danger of being unable to anchor quickly if you need to due to an engine failure, or whatever, before you might get blown or drift into deeper water... A bit of chain will definitely give me the best chance of getting my little Bruce to set in 50' of water, before a strong ebb running off a bank in the Bahamas sweeps me out into the ocean...


True, and a very valid concern. I doubt I will go to the Bahamas with this boat, though. The draft is somewhat prohibiting in areas like that.



> At any rate, someone should probably set an old dog like Don Street straight on his old-fashioned take on the utility of chain when using a lightweight anchor... Coincidentally, I happen to be reading his wonderful new STREET'S GUIDE TO THE CAPE VERDE ISLANDS, and just came across this bit last night:


Why would I "set him straight"? He's clearly talking about having weight down there. I can't see why a kellet wouldn't do the exact same. I could even use a prussik or icicle knot to tie the kellet somewhere close to the anchor itself, before letting go of it from the dinghy. I fail to see how my solution differs from his, except I'm using something else to weigh it down.

Now, I hope you realise that we all agree weight is important, and that I'm not trying to advocate a "weightless" rode for anchoring, or that I have the intention to go out and try anchoring without weight to help with the catenary.


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

Ok everyone, I am very late to this post. I only read it this morning.

I was about to lock it, but now see that it has gotten back on track. If it derails again, I will have to start deleting posts or locking it. THere is some good information here, so that would be a shame. 

I am not pointing my fingers at anyone (yet), just sayin...

Brian


----------



## MedSailor (Mar 30, 2008)

Cruisingdad said:


> Ok everyone, I am very late to this post. I only read it this morning.
> 
> I was about to lock it, but now see that it has gotten back on track. If it derails again, I will have to start deleting posts or locking it. THere is some good information here, so that would be a shame.
> 
> ...


Yes but would you lock it up with chain, or some modern fiber with a chafe resistant sleeve? :laugher:laugher:laugher

(Medsailor dives behind pile of sandbags) 

MedSailor


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

Yup, we're back on track 



MedSailor said:


> Yes but would you lock it up with chain, or some modern fiber with a chafe resistant sleeve? :laugher:laugher:laugher
> 
> (Medsailor dives behind pile of sandbags)
> 
> MedSailor


He, he!


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

One said:


> However, (and you're welcome to laught at my choice), I have ordered one of these to use as a "dinghy" - it's not a pool toy, even though you could be forgiven to think so:
> 
> https://www.alpackaraft.com/index.cfm/store.catalog?CategoryID=53&ProductID=87
> 
> ...


Actually, for your intended purpose, that looks like pretty suitable boat... I'd sure like to find a tender that weighs less than 6 lbs, but I doubt it would last very long in a place like the Bahamas, or some of the other places I like to sail... (grin)


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

JonEisberg said:


> Actually, for your intended purpose, that looks like pretty suitable boat... I'd sure like to find a tender that weighs less than 6 lbs, but I doubt it would last very long in a place like the Bahamas, or some of the other places I like to sail... (grin)


Yes, the Bahamas are such a tough place to sail it takes experts and only the heaviest gear will suffice, lol.

Packrafts are tough boats:






Packrafting Snowy River in winter. Music by Gotye: Somebody that I used to know - YouTube

And if you worry about UV, they are so quickly deflated and inflated you will have no trouble packing it away in a small pouch within minutes.


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

One said:


> > Originally Posted by JonEisberg
> > Actually, for your intended purpose, that looks like pretty suitable boat... I'd sure like to find a tender that weighs less than 6 lbs, but I doubt it would last very long in a place like the Bahamas, or some of the other places I like to sail... (grin)
> 
> 
> Yes, the Bahamas are such a tough place to sail it takes experts and only the heaviest gear will suffice, lol.


Wait, wasn't I supposed to be the troll in this thread? (grin)

Nah, one doesn't need to be an "expert" to cruise the Bahamas, but one can routinely encounter conditions there that can be pretty tough on an inflatable... Perhaps you've never seen a Bahamian 'Ironshore', or taken an inflatable to dive or fish around a coral reef? Even the most inviting pink sand beaches, being often composed of ground coral, can be surprisingly abrasive and harsh on a boat's fabric over time...










Sure, those Packrafts look like a tough little boat, all right... But, I'll accept the tradeoff of a heavier tender that meets my requirements of having a hard bottom, heavier Hypalon fabric, molded-in oarlocks, and a rigid transom that will accept my little 2 HP Honda...

Don't let the pretty colors, or their proximity to the US mainland, deceive - the Bahamas can be a surprisingly unforgiving cruising ground...


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

JonEisberg said:


> Wait, wasn't I supposed to be the troll in this thread? (grin)


Yes, and you still are to a degree, hence my response.



> Nah, one doesn't need to be an "expert" to cruise the Bahamas, but one can routinely encounter conditions there that can be pretty tough on an inflatable... Perhaps you've never seen a Bahamian 'Ironshore', or taken an inflatable to dive or fish around a coral reef? Even the most inviting pink sand beaches, being often composed of ground coral, can be surprisingly abrasive and harsh on a boat's fabric over time...


I don't dive, and certainly I wouldn't dive from a packraft as it would blow away.

The beauty of this thing is that you don't need to let the fabric touch the shore. You can lift it with a single finger.



> Sure, those Packrafts look like a tough little boat, all right... But, I'll accept the tradeoff of a heavier tender that meets my requirements of having a hard bottom, heavier Hypalon fabric, molded-in oarlocks, and a rigid transom that will accept my little 2 HP Honda...


Okay, a packraft won't take an engine, I'll grant you that. I don't need a hard bottom or heavy hypalon fabric when I can lift the boat easily, can deflate and inflate easily and quickly. I don't need a lock either, as it fits in a small pouch, inflation bag included (yes, it doesn't need a pump, you use a bag for inflation).



> Don't let the pretty colors, or their proximity to the US mainland, deceive - the Bahamas can be a surprisingly unforgiving cruising ground...


And there it was again, lol.


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

One said:


> I don't dive, and certainly I wouldn't dive from a packraft as it would blow away.


So, finally, something we can agree upon:



JonEisberg said:


> I'd sure like to find a tender that weighs less than 6 lbs, but I doubt it would last very long in a place like the Bahamas, or some of the other places I like to sail...


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

JonEisberg said:


> [photo of windy bay][/quote]
> 
> And you point about that photo of windy weather is what exactly? That you need a motorised dinghy? And that your motorised dinghy wouldn't blow away if you dived from it in weather like that?
> 
> ...


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

One said:


> And you point about that photo of windy weather is what exactly? That you need a motorised dinghy?
> 
> To me it's a question of adapting. If it stays windy, that sucks, but I can cope. I'd rather have something lightweight and easy to use and pack away on a daily basis, rather than a big, heavy tender which is ***** to drag onto the deck, resorting to towing the thing mostly.
> 
> I can't carry an open water rowboat (i.e. 18-20ft long) for that sort of thing anyway, and I'm not carrying anything fuelled by petrol/gasoline regardless of size of dinghy. When the weather is bad, I simply adapt.


This thread, as as many threads, has a lot of misconceptions based on the assumption that all sailboats, or all dinghies for that matter, should serve exactly the same purposes or have the same basic characteristics.

Well, that is not true. It all depends were you use the boat, where you want to sail, if you sail solo or not, the number of your average crew and your tastes and compromises you prefer to take regarding the use of the dinghy and the inconvenients it will raise to store it aboard, regarding size and weight.

Regarding the dinghy it is obvious that taking into account a more broader use Jon is right. One's dinghy can be more adapted to him but just to a very small set of circumstances. But those conditions can be just the conditions One is going to experience while sailing on his particular cruising ground (that is much more limited than Jon's one) and that can make it the best choice for him, taking also into account his very particular sailing boat. I find it a bit conflicting One's saying that he likes to sail in testing weather and then think he can use that dinghy in testing weather to go ashore. Well he can but he is going to be very wet and if is going to shop for provisions, better having all things in water proof bags. The space is not much and the weight can unbalance the boat if any considerable weight is carried but that's his choice.

Personally I like to have a small relatively narrow, light dinghy with a hard bottom, a boat easy to row and I have one like that. On the last year on 3 months of navigation I used the engine 2 or 3 times. Of course for light I am not talking about that light I am talking about 16 or 17 kg and even so the boat is less stable than any other dinghy I had been on, specially with only one inside or boarding. Not a problem if you remember that. Sometimes I don't and I have been thrown out of the dinghy a couple of times while moving carelessly. Not a problem in 25º water since I am practically all times in a swimsuit but that can be a problem with cold water.

Regarding the use of engine, I started to cruise last year without one, because I rarely use it and I thought it would not be a problem but after one day where I took one hour paddling furiously to reach my boat against a 30k wind, I decided to buy one as soon as I could. Sure I could have asked for help to reach my boat but I don't ask to do that. Of course, I could have stayed on the sailboat since it was becoming windy, but I wanted to go shopping and to visit that old town near by and didn't want to pay the 80 euros on the local marina

Bottom point, a very light inflatable boat used as a dingy, like the one you purpose, have obviously advantages regarding storage but also many disadvantages regarding its use as a dinghy. It is an extreme compromise, like your sailing boat as a cruising boat. For most uses and needs as a dinghy the disadvantages will be more than the advantages but in a very limited set of circumstances that can be the right boat to have. Only you can decide that and you will be only really sure after having tried it for a year or so. For now you are just convinced that it will work just right. Let us now after you having used it for a considerable period of time. It would be an interesting information

Regards

Paulo


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

I am well aware that the dinghy I'm talking about has disadvantages. My point was the way Jon seem to suggest I only sailed in good weather, that only his cruising grounds were challenging and windy and so on. The whole trolling attitude bugged me. Especially since he won't even concede a point when he has been proven wrong. He merely ignores it and move on to the next where he once again tries to assert how his choices are the only right choices, and that everything else is heresy.

The dinghy I'm talking about can carry two in _calm _waters. _Obviously_, that doesn't make it a good dinghy for anything other than for _solo _trips. I also have a 1-person life raft, because I usually go alone, and if other people are with me, they only want to sail in "good" weather, and we never do any long crossings together. The liferaft tube is made from a fabric that feels very close to the fabric of the packraft, albeit slightly thicker.

The boat I have chosen can be rowed and "kayaked" or even paddled like a canoe if need be. I chose one with a rowing frame because that will allow me to use it in windier weather. It is, of course, not a motorised dinghy, nor is it meant to be a people carrier.

I have an old packraft (also from Alpackaraft) which doesn't have a rowing frame, but I figure I can use that to carry big loads, towed by the other one if need be. In any case, obviously I'm not saying that it's better all around, but under certain circumstances it definately is. Diving from it? No. Using an outboard on it? No. Taking it with you so it can't be stolen? Yes. Carrying one person safely? Yes. Lightweight? Yes. Much quicker and easier to inflate and deflate than a Zodiac? Yes. easy to store? Yes. Needing to tow it? Hell no. And to boot: Although I figure it's not as UV resistant as a hypalon tube, it doesn't need to, as it won't be towed, nor stored on deck.

As you guys might have figured out, I'm not unwilling to try new things or won't adapt things from other fields. Sailing for a lot of cruisers, is conservatism, in the sense that cruisers in general is rather late to adopt new things. Not all things, obviously, but quite a lot of things. So much so, the old days are glorified, regardless of how many perished because of a lack of equipment, or a lack of good equipment (yes, that includes the boat).


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

I'm sorry, I'm tired, which makes me a bit "pissy", so to speak. I'll leave this thread for the day.


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

Okay, with this I'm done for the day. Notice the *bolded *part:



PCP said:


> I find it a bit conflicting One's saying that he likes to sail in testing weather and then think he can use that dinghy in testing weather to go ashore.


I don't sail in the dinghy, I sail in my boat. The current boat is at a jetty, and when I go away for periods, I usually don't hesitate much to move on even if the weather is inclement. I rarely go to and from my boat in a dinghy in crappy weather.



> Well he can but he is going to be very wet and if is going to shop for provisions, better having all things in water proof bags.


I already have some nice drybags, including a waterproof backpack. Most of them is made by Watershed (yes, they're rugged as hell).



> The space is not much and the weight can unbalance the boat if any considerable weight is carried but that's his choice.


I already have another packraft. But as I rarely will be carrying 120-160lbs of food and drink, that problem is a non-issue.



> Personally I like to have a small relatively narrow, light dinghy with a hard bottom, a boat easy to row and I have one like that. On the last year on 3 months of navigation I used the engine 2 or 3 times. Of course for light I am not talking about that light I am talking about 16 or 17 kg and even so the boat is less stable than any other dinghy I had been on, specially with only one inside or boarding. Not a problem if you remember that. Sometimes I don't and I have been thrown out of the dinghy a couple of times while moving carelessly. Not a problem in 25º water since I am practically all times in a swimsuit but that can be a problem with cold water.


The water around here is usually cold, and I'm used to dress for it.

In any case, if you have the space, go take a look at the 12ft Vermont Packboat (it's a rigid thing). I have it's bigger brother, the 15ft Adirondack Guide Boat in kevlar. The 15ft'er is a great rowing boat, but I suspect that the 12ft is actually better in windier situations.



> Only you can decide that and you will be only really sure after having tried it for a year or so. For now you are just convinced that it will work just right.


No,* I already have a packraft. I only mentioned it back there, because even my packraft would be able to carry rope and a kedge anchor - especially since I'm going to use kellets and not chain. *

If I want something more rugged, I will buy a Vermont Packboat, cut it in half, and fabricate a way to easily and quickly bolt the two parts together. Much better rowing, and it will still fit into a big hatch.


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

One said:


> And you point about that photo of windy weather is what exactly? That you need a motorised dinghy? And that your motorised dinghy wouldn't blow away if you dived from it in weather like that?


My point was only this, perhaps the 3rd repetition of it will be the charm:



JonEisberg said:


> I'd sure like to find a tender that weighs less than 6 lbs, but I doubt it would last very long in a place like the Bahamas, or some of the other places I like to sail...





One said:


> Btw, thanks for ignoring the other points I made about this being a matter of doing things differently (I.e. being able to pick it up, rather than slamming it on the shorefront).


I have not ignored that, in fact _my very first sentence_ in response addressed the differences in our respective requirements in a tender:



JonEisberg said:


> Actually, for your intended purpose, that looks like pretty suitable boat...





One said:


> Also, I wonder if you think that Northern Europe and the North Sea is somehow not windy? I gather as much, after your first sarcastic comment about the packraft being a good fit "for the type of sailing [I was] doing" before being shown just how tough boats they are.


Actually, I've spent a fair amount of time in Norway, and all the other countries that outline the North Sea. I'm under no illusion that your sailing grounds are anything less than a very challenging place to explore in a small boat...

You appear to have a vivid imagination, and have read "sarcasm" into a comment where it was not intended... It's obvious you and I have entirely different requirements in a tender. You will be sailing a high-performance boat of less than half the displacement of my little tub, and your desire to eliminate even a short length of chain from your anchor rode reflects the primacy of light weight in your selection of gear...

My considerations are quite different, I'll accept the tradeoff of heavier construction in much of my gear, and especially in a tender... You're sailing a boat without a cabin, whereas I often live aboard my boat for months at a time when I take off cruising. I could be wrong, perhaps your Packboat is made of some bulletproof miracle fabric, but I tend to doubt a tender weighing in at less than 6 pounds would stand up to some of the hazards of a place like the Bahamas over time... If I were to suffer a tear in the fabric of my tender in a location as remote as the Jumentos Cays, or the Bight of Acklins, it could really spoil my cruise... Not to mention, most every time I jump in my inflatable, it is loaded with an engine, a gallon gas can, a jug of water, oars, anchor/chain rode, life jacket(s), and a large underseat dry bag with a full compliment of safety gear - VHF/GPS, tools, flares, nav lights, horn, compass, portable depthfinder, and a whole bunch of other crap... As such, the advantage of "being able to lift my tender with a single finger... before I even touch the shore..." would largely be lost on me...



One said:


> In any case, this is a thread about anchor rode, so let's not continue on this tangent.


Fine with me, but let the record show that it was you who brought the discussion of your tender into this thread, baiting the hook with a comment that reads like a veritable _invitation_ to respond:



One said:


> However, (and you're welcome to laught at my choice), I have ordered one of these to use as a "dinghy" - it's not a pool toy, even though you could be forgiven to think so:
> 
> https://www.alpackaraft.com/index.cf...3&ProductID=87


Have a nice day...


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

JonEisberg;1012943 You're sailing a boat without a cabin said:


> I do too, but not likely as many months as you. And I don't feel the need to carry my whole life on my back when I'm out.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

One said:


> ... In other words; you're being as intellectually dishonest as usual.


One, it is nice to have aboard someone that likes sailing and cruising and does that in a much lighter way them me. That makes me average in what regards choice of boats and cruising style, instead of a radical as I am seen by many. I guess I like to see the balance tending for the "right" side, the one that enjoys sailing as cruising

But you have an aggressive attitude even when nobody is being aggressive to you. Calling Jon dishonest and even more saying that he is usually dishonest is very disagreeable and makes no sense. Jon is a well respected member of this forum and we all know that he is not usually dishonest. Expressing an opinion even when that does not coincide with ours do not make others dishonest. Dishonest implies an intention of purposely deceiving and quite frankly I don't see any justification for you to say that.

Besides I don't understand your point. Some guys may have treated you unfairly, as it happens many times with rookies, but Jon seems to me to be among the ones that have treated you fairly.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

One said:


> ... He merely ignores it and move on to the next where he once again tries to assert how his choices are the only right choices, and that everything else is heresy...
> 
> ...Again, it's like it's hard for you to get over the notion that you can actually do things differently...


_"Sigh..."_ Damn, and it's supposed to be _ME_ that has a reading comprehension problem? LOL!

Please show me where I have argued that you - or anyone else, for that matter - should be using the sort of tender I choose to use when I head off on an extended cruise... Not what you are _imagining_ I'm saying, but rather _the actual words I've posted..._ As far as I can tell, the _ONLY_ point I've made here, is that your Packboat would not be very suitable for _MY_ particular style of cruising, especially in place like the Bahamas...

I've cited some reasons why, and I'm quite confident that most others who have experience in the Bahamas would likely agree, that a boat like yours might not be the optimum choice for an extended exploration of those waters... How you transform that into my arguing that those reasons should also apply to you, the sort of sailing you do, in the regions you do it in, is completely beyond me...



One said:


> ...Once again, you seem to believe there's only one way to skin a cat...


Well, perhaps you've missed some other posts of mine in another current thread, re the variety of choices of lightweight tenders:

http://www.sailnet.com/forums/698460-post7.html

http://www.sailnet.com/forums/1012468-post27.html



One said:


> JonEisberg said:
> 
> 
> > Not to mention, most every time I jump in my inflatable, it is loaded with an engine, a gallon gas can, a jug of water, oars, anchor/chain rode, life jacket(s), and a large underseat dry bag with a full compliment of safety gear - VHF/GPS, tools, flares, nav lights, horn, compass, portable depthfinder, and a whole bunch of other crap..
> ...


Yes, for real - though a very modest assortment, to be sure... Honda 2 HP outboards can be a bit finicky, I always like to have a spare spark plug, and the tools to effect a change, or deal with any other little thing that might come up, which might require an assist from a device more robust than my fingers alone... Blame it on the Boy Scouts, but I like to be prepared, and one thing I forgot to mention I usually carry in my dink's gear bag, is a sealed box of matches... Again, I invite you to point out where I have argued where you should be doing as I do, as well...



One said:


> I don't need to carry that engine, that gallon of gas, *nor will I be carrying an anchor for it. *


Different strokes for different folks, nothing wrong there... I very much enjoy rowing, hence my current choice of an RIB inflatable that rows surprisingly well, and my use of 7' oars well beyond the capability of the 'toy' oars most inflatables are equipped with, today...

As to my reasons for carrying an anchor, I would simply suggest that that you may be underestimating the significant risk of taking off in a tender in many places in the Bahamas without one... The strength with which the current can flow off the banks, and through the narrow cuts into open, deep waters like Exuma Sound, for example, well... not carrying the means to keep oneself from being 'swept away' in the event of a problem, seems a needlessly foolish risk, to me... Others may disagree, of course - though I would guess than anyone who has ever tried to fight their way against an ebb current at a spot like Galliot Cut in an under-powered tender, perhaps with darkness falling, might not be tempted to ever try it again without an anchor aboard...



One said:


> More generally, I don't use my boats as a campervan, where I park it some place and use the motorcycles (dinghy) on the back to get around. I use the boat, hence I like something that actually sails well. If I want to stay in one place for weeks on end, I fly or drive there and rent a room.


Nor do I... I think most everyone familiar with the sort of cruising I do, would agree that I, too, like boats that sail well, that I generally keep on the move, and certainly am not prone to sitting in one place for weeks on end...



One said:


> Yes, if your parameter is that any such thing should work exactly like it does for you right now, of course, the point is moot.


I've arrived at my current selection of the most suitable dinghy choice for me, after about 15 years of experimenting with all manner of tenders, both on my own boat, and those of others... I've used pretty much everything from a softail Avon Red Rover, to a rigid nesting dinghy, my kayak, up to my current Avon Lite RIB with a folding transom...

For sailing/overnights/short cruises in my home waters, depending on my mood, and whether I have company or not, I've used every single one of the boats pictured below as a tender... Pardon the mess, my house had gone underwater during Hurricane Sandy the previous week... (there are THREE different inflatables in that pile, btw...) But, yeah, you keep trying to convince yourself, that I am steadfastly arguing a 'One Size Fits All/My Way Or the Highway' approach when it comes to a discussion of suitable tenders for people other than myself:












One said:


> I _did _bring it up ("baiting", really?), but *only because you talked about how you needed a motorised dinghy to get your kedge out and how heavy it was...*


Looks like your imagination has gotten the better of you... yet again... Care to point out where I've said any such thing?

I'm in a charitable mood this evening, and inclined to believe you're simply confused...

Others, however, might put it differently:



One said:


> In other words; you're being as intellectually dishonest as usual.


Have a nice weekend...


----------



## bljones (Oct 13, 2008)

Take it to OT.


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

PCP said:


> But you have an aggressive attitude even when nobody is being aggressive to you. Calling Jon dishonest and even more saying that he is usually dishonest is very disagreeable and makes no sense.
> Jon is a well respected member of this forum and we all know that he is not usually dishonest. Expressing an opinion even when that does not coincide with ours do not make others dishonest. Dishonest implies an intention of purposely deceiving and quite frankly I don't see any justification for you to say that.


I am well aware of what "dishonest" means. However, I used the qualifier "intellectual" in front of, so it read "intellectually dishonest". That doesn't mean I think he's a liar. It simply means I think he's a) saying things in a thinly veiled manner, so when confronted with it, he can pretend he never said it, and b) constantly makes assumptions about me that has no bearing on reality. Just take a look at his post after this, and keep this post in mind:

http://www.sailnet.com/forums/gener...ectran-sleeve-anchor-rode-12.html#post1012544

Yes, that's the post where I respond to his point about carrying 100' of chain in his dinghy. And as for his post following yours (right above this, that is), he's once again at it, pretending he never implied such a thing, and pretending he never made the assumption that in order to work, it had to be done his way - even right down to be able to carrying a chain rode (length somewhat irrelevant).



> Besides I don't understand your point. Some guys may have treated you unfairly, as it happens many times with rookies, but Jon seems to me to be among the ones that have treated you fairly.


Well, at this point I may very well have a short fuse and it may very well be a little harsh to lump him in with the rest of the tossers, but be that as it may, I'm not asking for cruising advice in this thread, nor am I unexperienced. I have made some choices (all around), and I cruise my own way. This thread was simply made to solicit suggestions and ideas on using something other than chain (and nylon, polyester etc.) for the main rode. I got great advice in between the mess, great suggestions, and you even linked me to that site that made it somewhat easier to calculate what I want to calculate in this regard.

As it is, this thread is a drain on me, having to deal with people whose tactic is to merely imply things, only so that they can later on say they didn't say anything of the sort. That, to me, is what a troll is, and in that regard, I consider him to be back trolling.


----------



## bljones (Oct 13, 2008)

One, enough.

I have rarely seen a poster so determined to hijack his own thread, but you seem determined to a) alienate everyone around you and b) completely bury any value this thread might have had in a steaming pile of hostility.

Yeah, I know, "it's everyone else's fault." for misunderstanding you.
But, it's not. if you feel that, as it appears, damn near EVERYONE is misunderstanding you, then the problem isn't everyone else.


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

bljones said:


> One, enough.


Yes, responding to people posts and explaining things, only to once again be misrepresented is now a bad thing.



> I have rarely seen a poster so determined to hijack his own thread, but you seem determined to a) alienate everyone around you and b) completely bury any value this thread might have had in a steaming pile of hostility.


I don't care about aleniation. I have always been on the fringe in this regard, but if you read my above post, you will notice that I don't respond to Jon's latest, and that I do say that it has become a drain, that I have gotten some great replies in between the mess and so on. In other words, I'm saying this thread is almost over for me, and that I have received great answers I can actually use. Perhaps that wasn't clear enough.



> Yeah, I know, "it's everyone else's fault." for misunderstanding you.
> But, it's not. if you feel that, as it appears, damn near EVERYONE is misunderstanding you, then the problem isn't everyone else.


I am not. _Some _people are so blind, deaf, and dumb they won't consider other ways of doing things or read what is actually said. Even PCP, who I actually like, disregarded the "intellectual" part of the term "intellectually dishonest". How can that be put any clearer - especially when the term came after a point where I showed what I meant by it?


----------



## bljones (Oct 13, 2008)

Yeah, that's exactly the reply i figured was coming.


----------



## One (Mar 20, 2013)

bljones said:


> Yeah, that's exactly the reply i figured was coming.


Likewise.

[Unsubscribed]


----------



## MedSailor (Mar 30, 2008)

One said:


> Likewise.
> 
> [Unsubscribed]


I don't know about you guys, but even though I have a penchant for anchor-gear threads, AND a disorder that requires I read every post from every one of them, I'm glad this is over.

Some interesting stuff was discussed. The boundaries of current technology were pushed, and intellects (and egos) did battle. At times it looked like chess, and at other times it looked like toddlers shouting to mom "He started it!!".

MedSailor


----------



## tdw (Oct 2, 2006)

oh well .... i guess we all saw this coming and crazy old CruisingDad did put a shot across the collective bow(s).






Andrew B


----------

