# My boat was boarded (and messed with) at anchor!



## MedSailor (Mar 30, 2008)

I went to a local, familiar and popular island (Echo bay Sucia is.) this weekend for another shakedown trip on my new boat. I had a great trip up under motor, tested a bunch of systems, and then, to test the dinghy, davits and new outboard, went ashore with my friend for a walk. 

Conditions were sunny, low 70s, 0-5knots of wind. The holding at this anchorage is a mix of sand and mud, stable depth and is famously good holding. We arrived at 1:30pm and I chose to anchor pretty far away from everyone since I was on rope and I knew I'd swing around a bit. In fact, I actually anchored twice because I wasn't far enough away from the crowd the first time.

My windlass and roller aren't set up for the Mantus yet so I used my Fortress FX-37 with 6ft of 3/8HT chain and 200ft of 12plait 3/4" rope. I power set the anchor at 1/2 throttle using my 90HP engine and 22" diameter prop. It was a good set. The depth at the time of the set (according to my depth sounder) was 30ft. 

Since my depth sounder is mounted 3ft down and is not calibrated to negate this, and my bow roller is 7ft above the water, that adds 10ft to my depth. 40ft of depth (to the roller) and 200ft of scope = 5:1.

Upon returning from my dinghy I noticed a boat anchored right on top of me. No worries as he was pulling up his anchor and moving. (it was a Hunter BTW :grin) There was also an Islander 30 that was pretty close. As soon as I tied up the Islander 30 skipper rowed over to me.

"Excuse me!" She says. "I wanted to tell you that I was just aboard your boat." 

Ummm.... OK..... 

She then begins to tell me a harrowing tale of what apparently happened in the past couple hours when the wind in the anchorage must have gusted to at least 3 knots.

"You appeared to be adrift. I saw your boat drifting all the way over there, and then it came back and drifted towards me. When you got to within 20ft of my boat I went aboard. Your anchor rope appeared to be under no tension and your boat was moving forward with the anchor rope going back under the hull!

I assumed you were adrift so I started hauling in your anchor. It then became apparent that you were actually anchored." 

(me thinking "NO $HIT Sherlock!" That thing was so well set that you COULDN'T HAVE PULLED IT OUT BY HAND IF YOU WANTED TO) Trust me, I've tried and the next morning it took the engine to break it out.)

"Once it was apparent that you were actually anchored I pulled in a bunch of scope so you wouldn't hit me but you were really still too close to the other guy (hunter) so I recommended he move."

This is the part where I'm standing there wondering W-T-F. Do I completely loose my cool and go ape ship here? I feel pretty justified in doing so? Hauling in scope puts the boat at risk. Period. No, I think I'll try and remain calm.... try.... to... remain.....

I asked her when she arrived. She said 5pm. I told her I arrived here at 1:30. She claims to have thought she was here first. 

Curious. How could she have arrived first and yet I wasn't aboard..... 


I decided to tell her this, "First, thank you for your concern for my boat. We do all have to look out for each other here, but I have complete confidence in my anchoring setup and as you, yourself determined, I was in fact well set. As for pulling in scope, there are very well defined and generally understood rules about anchoring and swinging. The upshot of it is, it's first come first serve and the captain gets to choose how much rode to put out and how much to swing. I put out 200ft for a ratio of 5:1 in 40ft of water. I intentionally anchored way out here to avoid the more popular areas in order to be more polite. It's also up to each skipper in the anchorage to have the awareness of who was there first so that you know who has "right of way." Again though, it sounds like you were doing your best to help and I appreciate that part.

She then tells me "Well 5:1 is pretty excessive. Around here you'll find that most people us 3:1 on rope."

I'll just let that one sit for a minute. I recommend reading that second sentence again......

She then says" Also, when I came in, it was high tide and it was only 30 ft. You should consider using chain, or if you don't have a windlass and have to use rope, like I'm doing, use a 15lb weight dropped off the bow to keep the boat from swinging." 

Hmmm..... lets parse out this "advice":. 

1-- 3:1 on rope is okay? Might be common, Doesn't make it okay.
2-- 30ft? I bet her depth sounder is 2ft down and her roller is 4 ft up. That means that her 90ft of rope is now divided by 36ft for a scope of 2.5:1 ON ROPE. Math. It's not as hard as people say it is.
3-- A kellet doesn't stop you swinging, but it might make your swing more unpredictable. 

I decided that trying to school her on the basics of anchoring, when she was clearly feeling like she was the savior and sheepdog of the anchorage wouldn't likely go well. She appeared to have some confidence in these fixed beliefs which not only do I feel are false, I doubt you'd ever find them agreed with in a published source. If I tried to teach her, I don't think I'd get very far, and she's got a long way to go.

She did then ask if she should move, so I think she did figure out she was at fault. I told her that if we bump it'll only be at slack current with no wind as we swing differently and I didn't think she was likely to damage my boat, so I left it up to her. I also decided to keep the 150ft of scope that was left rather than put it back out. In retrospect I shouldn't have done that, but frankly this all happened quickly and I was still in WTF mode. I again thanked her for her concern and she left.

So great inter-webs.... WTF do you think?

MedSailor


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

She used your sauna. Duh.


----------



## smurphny (Feb 20, 2009)

Great story! You can't make this stuff up


----------



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

I really do not believe it takes a great deal of intelligence to notice that the boat one is considering anchoring near is on rope and not chain. 3;1 for chain is acceptable, 5;1 for rope is acceptable; telling someone they should use chain and not rope IS NOT ACCEPTABLE!
I'm only amazed that you held your temper in check after repeatedly being dissed (as the kids say).
May Neptune, in all his wisdom, keep this woman and her ignorance far, far from me.
I tip my hat to you for your patience and tolerance.


----------



## Faster (Sep 13, 2005)

I nominate Med for Sainthood....

Don't know anyone else who's gone through so many serial trials and tribulations in the past couple of years... Sheesh!

Unbelievable patience and tolerance!.. you're in for some very good karma, I hope....

Cheers to you.


----------



## travlin-easy (Dec 24, 2010)

Wow! When I was using rope I always used 7:1 - just to be on the safe side, and now that I'm on all chain, I still use 5:1. I wouldn't even consider 3:1 in Chesapeake Bay's muddy bottom.

Gary


----------



## MedSailor (Mar 30, 2008)

travlineasy said:


> Wow! When I was using rope I always used 7:1 - just to be on the safe side, and now that I'm on all chain, I still use 5:1. I wouldn't even consider 3:1 in Chesapeake Bay's muddy bottom.
> 
> Gary


I MUCH prefer 7:1 on rope and 5:1 on chain. I'll only go under these ratios in special circumstances. In this case, and with the forecast and known local conditions (and it was high tide at the time of the set) etc I was happy with my 5:1 on rope. But I completely agree with you.

I once tried to argue with a friend that 3:1 was perfectly acceptable and standard practice. I was then surprised to find out that Chapman's doesn't recommend 3:1. I'll do it, but again, only considering if it's a deep 3:1 vs a shallow 3:1, anchor type, conditions etc etc etc....

MedSailor


----------



## aloof (Dec 21, 2014)

Wait until she goes ashore. Take half the liquor, beer and snacks. When she comes back row over to explain.....


----------



## eherlihy (Jan 2, 2007)

I would have thanked her for telling me that she came aboard...

And then I would have lost it on the self righteous ignoramus.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

aloof said:


> Wait until she goes ashore. Take half the liquor, beer and snacks. When she comes back row over to explain.....


"I was concerned that you'd get fat and drunk."


----------



## rnixon (May 7, 2013)

MedSailor said:


> "Once it was apparent that you were actually anchored I pulled in a bunch of scope so you wouldn't hit me but you were really still too close to the other guy (hunter) so I recommended he move."
> 
> This is the part where I'm standing there wondering W-T-F. Do I completely loose my cool and go ape ship here?


Yes, that's where I would have politely, but firmly, explained how wrong they were to adjust your scope.

They may get away with low scope with a kellet, but obviously shouldn't assume that another boat, with rope rode, is using low scope.


----------



## MedSailor (Mar 30, 2008)

Faster said:


> I nominate Med for Sainthood....
> 
> Don't know anyone else who's gone through so many serial trials and tribulations in the past couple of years... Sheesh!
> 
> ...


HAHAHAHAH!! Hey, if you've got any pull with the Big Guy who keeps track of the Karma points, then by all means give me a mention! :grin

I actually regret keeping my cool as much as I did. My wife was pretty pissed at me too for not bawling her out over this one. The reason I regret it is that I may have (though I hope I didn't) given her the impression that what she did was okay. I should have made it ABUNDANTLY clear how wrong it was to pull in the scope. There was lots else that was wrong, but this issue should have been made MUCH more clear by me.

MedSailor


----------



## IStream (Dec 15, 2013)

Med,

I've never been boarded by a busybody like that but if they infest the San Juans, you might want to put a note in the cockpit with your cell number and/or the VHF channel you're monitoring while disembarked. It may head off unwarranted bouts of "just trying to help".


----------



## Seaduction (Oct 24, 2011)

Was she on a Sea-Ray??


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

I too nominate Med for the Mr. Nice-Guy award. I would not have been so understanding. I agree with your assessment that it was nice she attempted to save your boat when she thought it was dragging. But once she realized it was well anchored there is no way in hell that she should have arbitrarily changed your scope, no matter what she thought was right or acceptable. That is WAY over the line.

BTW, in my brief exposure to cruising in the PNW I ran into this short-scope situation as well. It was part of a class (Advanced CYA), and I was sailing with a well-experienced PNW crew. When I protested over the short scope they were laying out (certainly less than 5:1) I was also "informed" that this was the way they did it on the west coast. The only sense I could/can make of it is that you folks don't get as many weather surprises as we do here on the Great Lakes. 

Regardless ... I never go less than 5:1, no matter where I anchor.


----------



## tdw (Oct 2, 2006)

Much admiration for Meds coolness in the face of extreme provocation. I'd have probably lost it completely and that rarely does any good at all. 

On the issue of scope .... we almost invariably go for 3:1 but that is all chain and 3:1 on the bottom at high tide plus a bit of an allowance, so we probably are closer to 4:1 at the end of the day. That has held us in good stead though if for some reason we are going to be faced with plus 30 knots or are leaving the boat for any time then I'll let out a bit more to a generous 5:1. Does depend to some extent on water depth. I've found that too many people think 3:1 is from the anchor locker and to compound the misery they will fail to properly set their anchor in the first place. I always set a snubber though I've never used a kellett.


----------



## IStream (Dec 15, 2013)

MikeOReilly said:


> I too nominate Med for the Mr. Nice-Guy award. I would not have been so understanding. I agree with your assessment that it was nice she attempted to save your boat when she thought it was dragging. But once she realized it was well anchored there is no way in hell that she should have arbitrarily changed your scope, no matter what she thought was right or acceptable. That is WAY over the line.
> 
> BTW, in my brief exposure to cruising in the PNW I ran into this short-scope situation as well. It was part of a class (Advanced CYA), and I was sailing with a well-experienced PNW crew. When I protested over the short scope they were laying out (certainly less than 5:1) I was also "informed" that this was the way they did it on the west coast. The only sense I could/can make of it is that you folks don't get as many weather surprises as we do here on the Great Lakes.
> 
> Regardless ... I never go less than 5:1, no matter where I anchor.


I think you're right, Mike. PNW weather tends to be pretty predictable relative to the Lakes and the San Juans tend to have dense mud bottoms that make for good holding, once you get through the eel grass in some places. Add a crowded anchorage to the equation and people become complacent with 3:1 scope. Until it's tested, as it was for me one blustery night at Sucia when I nearly dragged onto the beach.


----------



## newhaul (Feb 19, 2010)

I would have politely given her swimming lessons and a crash course in what not to do to my darn junk boat. Here i have gone as far as a 10:1 at low tide to get around a 7:1 at high tide but I draw under 4 ft so I tend to anchor shallower than others can to stop idiots from doing stupid stuff to me


----------



## Faster (Sep 13, 2005)

We ARE very fortunate, esp in BC waters inside Vancouver Island, that overnight sudden blows are rare indeed. In fact, seemingly rarer today than we recall from 25-30 years ago.. but maybe we're simply making better choices.

Our anchorages are often either deepish, or smallish, or popular, or all three. "Textbook" scope would be problematic in that a single boat could 'tie up' many a bay on its own. This would be viewed as rather unsporting. Short scope, often combined with lines ashore can allow a dozen or more to anchor in an area that a single boat would swing on its own. This in itself requires technique, courtesy, and a certain amount of forbearance.


----------



## Solar54 (May 9, 2015)

I am a chicken. If I am going to try to sleep or leave the boat to go ashore I run closer to a 10 to 1 scope. But I sleep well, and never worry.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

I'm sure I would have been very clear that boarding my boat was very uncool. Once I started getting the chain v. rope lecture, I would have lost it. You know you were right. This was a busy body. 

Sounds like there was no wind to speak of. Was there current? That can cause odd swing characteristics when mismatched to the wind, which are also different by hull type. Perhaps that's what actually happened. 

For what's it's worth, I only use 3:1 when stopping for lunch and not leaving the boat, nor even turning anything off. I have dragged, but not enough worry about while eating lunch.


----------



## MedSailor (Mar 30, 2008)

Minnewaska;2821585
Sounds like there was no wind to speak of. [U said:


> Was there current? That can cause odd swing characteristics when mismatched to the wind, which are also different by hull type. Perhaps that's what actually happened. [/U]


That's exactly what happened. Very common around here. It's easier to pack everybody in, even on heterogeneous rodes when there is a significant wind. When, on the other hand there is just a little wind and a little current, different boats swing VERY differently. It's part of the fun of PNW anchoring. Rope does one thing, chain does another. A kellet does something else entirely...

I anchored away from everyone and even at that used a "short scope" to be polite. She anchored in my swinging area and swung differently.

MedSailor


----------



## kentobin (Mar 31, 2007)

The lady reminds me of a co-worker described as a latent schizophrenic. The doctor who verified the behavior also commented "if they're not on meds they should be and if they are they need to be adjusted." True story.

As to the amount of scope and the use of chain I can't remember reading one article stating that to much scope was bad thing, only to little, or that rope was preferred over chain except for use as a chain snubber.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

She was totally wrong.


----------



## smurphny (Feb 20, 2009)

Faster said:


> We ARE very fortunate, esp in BC waters inside Vancouver Island, that overnight sudden blows are rare indeed. In fact, seemingly rarer today than we recall from 25-30 years ago.. but maybe we're simply making better choices.
> 
> Our anchorages are often either deepish, or smallish, or popular, or all three. "Textbook" scope would be problematic in that a single boat could 'tie up' many a bay on its own. This would be viewed as rather unsporting. Short scope, often combined with lines ashore can allow a dozen or more to anchor in an area that a single boat would swing on its own. This in itself requires technique, courtesy, and a certain amount of forbearance.


That's why I like the large anchor theory. There are often times when you are forced to use less than 5:1 in crowded and especially in deeper/crowded spots. Having a heavier than normal anchor and chain definitely helps if that unexpected blow comes through.


----------



## brokesailor (Jan 12, 2008)

Was she hot?


----------



## eherlihy (Jan 2, 2007)

Yeah? was she??


----------



## RTB (Mar 5, 2009)

Med-

You were too cool dealing with an un-cool person. I would have been totally pissed. 

Ralph


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

If she was hot, the story would have involved the sauna. Actually, it wouldn't have been told at all, since I believe Med is married.

So, channeling Sherlock Holmes, I say, not hot.


----------



## Markwesti (Jan 1, 2013)

Med , you are way to cool . Situations like you describe are the reason I don't own a gun or carry my rigging knife . I would shortly be up on murder charges.


----------



## PitApe (Feb 28, 2015)

Miss "Good Samaritan" obviously has no idea about the sort of liability can-o-worms she could have opened up. Sooner or later this know-it-all gal is going to mess with someones boat and break something, or manage to set the boat adrift, or whatever. THEN she'll learn her lesson.


----------



## newhaul (Feb 19, 2010)

If the crabs don't eat first


----------



## MedSailor (Mar 30, 2008)

Minnewaska said:


> If she was hot, the story would have involved the sauna. Actually, it wouldn't have been told at all, since I believe Med is married.
> 
> So, channeling Sherlock Holmes, I say, not hot.


Ding! Ding! Ding! Ding! Bingo!

It's elementary my dear Minnewatson. 

I'm sure that in an alternative universe an uber hot chick who owns and sinlehands her own boat shows up, anchors next to me and boards the boat without permission because she's heard there is a hot sauna and 3 fridges of cold beer aboard. She then tells me that she's my wife's college buddy and that my wife has found a baby sitter and will be arriving soon to join in the fun.

Or not.... 

(BTW the most unrealistic part of this fantasy is the finding of the babysitter part)

Medsailor


----------



## tdw (Oct 2, 2006)

Faster said:


> We ARE very fortunate, esp in BC waters inside Vancouver Island, that overnight sudden blows are rare indeed. In fact, seemingly rarer today than we recall from 25-30 years ago.. but maybe we're simply making better choices.
> 
> Our anchorages are often either deepish, or smallish, or popular, or all three. "Textbook" scope would be problematic in that a single boat could 'tie up' many a bay on its own. This would be viewed as rather unsporting. Short scope, often combined with lines ashore can allow a dozen or more to anchor in an area that a single boat would swing on its own. This in itself requires technique, courtesy, and a certain amount of forbearance.


Good point Fast. Couple of anchorages we use are in the 20m (circa 65ft) range. Trying to put out 5:1 in that depth can be somewhat problematic.

I still thank that if you make sure the damn thing is dug in properly to begin with you don't need anything like 7:1 although yes that might depend on depth. Invariably scope is greater in shallower water.


----------



## Scotty C-M (Aug 14, 2013)

Med, I'm glad you were patient and polite. Even if she didn't deserve it, you did. It was OK to make it very clear that she was in the wrong, and it seems from your story that your did. Whether she understands that or not, is not your problem.


----------



## MedSailor (Mar 30, 2008)

Scotty C-M said:


> Med, I'm glad you were patient and polite. Even if she didn't deserve it, you did. It was OK to make it very clear that she was in the wrong, and it seems from your story that your did. Whether she understands that or not, is not your problem.


Indeed, deciding just how far to take this fight was largely for my own self benefit. I really NEEDED this weekend on the boat to relax.

I've also done the "road rage" thing at anchor before and it ended with me flipping the guy off after we were both screaming at each other. He didn't learn anything and my blood pressure took a long time to normalize.

In that incident I was on the same anchor and rope (hmmmm a pattern?) And he came to about 80ft from my boat, in his aluminum fishing boat and dropped hook. I told him how much rope I had out and that he was too close and should move.

(300ft of rope in 40ft of water with my roller 10ft above the water)

He then started lecturing me (from his small fishing boat to the deck of my 50ft ketch) about how I needed to have all chain like him. He carried "80 feet of ALL CHAIN" he boasted and some portion of that was used to anchor next to me in 40ft of water.

I tried some arguments mixed with logic and most of it yelled. In the end he was calling me names from across the anchorage and I was flipping him off.

Nothing was gained in that exchange except that he moved before drifting in to me. I vowed next time to allow the close anchorer to drift into me next time and infor them of their error only when it was obvious enough that I could hand them a beer.

I should have put my well meaning neighbor in her place more than I did but my prior exchange guided my actions.

Medsailor

PS I'm wondering if this particular anchor is cursed. So far I've used it for 4 nights and had 2 people tell me I was dragging, one road rage incident and one guy drag into me. Not a good batting average....


----------



## VallelyJ (Nov 21, 2008)

I think you may be missing the larger problem.
She's clearly infatuated with you and desperate to engineer any opportunity to interact. Probably a raging borderline personality disorder. You'll probably eventually find an article of your clothing missing. Or that she's boiled your pet rabbit.
I'd leave, quietly and after dark. Maybe even paint my boat a different color.
Just a thought.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

In crowded anchorages, I like to run an anchor alarm that keeps a persistence line, showing everywhere I've been swinging. This way, I can take a screen shot to prove I wasn't dragging, if necessary. I do this because, if you're not aboard and someone claims you are dragging, your boat is automatically a salvage. We have some that will record the broadcast to prove they had rights and you'll never be able to prove your anchor was actually set.

However, I have to admit I've done similar to Med and not confronted the offender. Just last summer. I broke my prohibition of anchoring at Block Island in July, because my son wanted to meet us there. Couldn't say no. If anyone is familiar, it gets so crowded that you're likely going to be anchoring in 50ft of water, which we did. At the time, I only had 200ft of 1/2 chain and put it all out. I dropped the hook at the edge of the anchorage (last spot available), with everyone else behind me and the boat that was directly behind me was anchored with rode. His bow was about 100 ft off our transom, which is exactly how tight it gets in there.

Sure enough, we swing 180 degs the next day, so my bow is now facing the field and the dude that was behind me is now suppose to be in front. But he isn't, he is about 20 ft off my port side. He says he hasn't dragged, which may have been possible, since the wind wasn't strong enough for me to even fully pull all that chain out straight in the opposite direction. So I start the engine and back against it, which helps some, but he's still in striking distance. He's clearly dragged, but was there first and insists he didn't. I could prove on my anchor alarm that I didn't drag, as I was equidistant from where I dropped the anchor. I had to be, since the wind didn't even full pull the chain across, let along drag the anchor.

My son had left that afternoon and we were planning to move on early the following morning. I was so annoyed and it's such a mad house to begin with, that I just pulled anchor at around 6 or 7 pm and motored directly across to the Point Judith refuge, dropped the hook with nothing with 500 ft of me and slept like a baby.


----------



## djodenda (Mar 4, 2006)

Med:

Really glad you are starting to enjoy your boat. And, I agree, you are in the right in the situation you described.

Certainly since if you were in 30 feet of water, you were well out of the way in Echo bay.

That being said, people do tend to run short scope here, as many anchorages are pretty deep and a boat would take up a lot of room in a 60 foot deep anchorage with a 10 foot tide. Also, conditions here are pretty benign during the cruising season. (I would comment that at least 30% of the time I've anchored/moored in the area around Sucia, I've been hit by a very localized Southeasterly of 15-25 knots during the morning hours.

I think you will find your life (and those around you) a lot easier once you get some chain in play. I have 60' and it really helps out (even though it's a pain to haul up, since I am windlass-challenged)

Hope this doesn't offend, as I suspect you know this already.


----------



## fallard (Nov 30, 2009)

Minnewaska said:


> Just last summer. I broke my prohibition of anchoring at Block Island in July, because my son wanted to meet us there. Couldn't say no. If anyone is familiar, it gets so crowded that you're likely going to be anchoring in 50ft of water, which we did. At the time, I only had 200ft of 1/2 chain and put it all out. I dropped the hook at the edge of the anchorage (last spot available), with everyone else behind me and the boat that was directly behind me was anchored with rode. His bow was about 100 ft off our transom, which is exactly how tight it gets in there.
> 
> Sure enough, we swing 180 degs the next day, so my bow is now facing the field and the dude that was behind me is now suppose to be in front. But he isn't, he is about 20 ft off my port side. He says he hasn't dragged, which may have been possible, since the wind wasn't strong enough for me to even fully pull all that chain out straight in the opposite direction. So I start the engine and back against it, which helps some, but he's still in striking distance. He's clearly dragged, but was there first and insists he didn't. I could prove on my anchor alarm that I didn't drag, as I was equidistant from where I dropped the anchor. I had to be, since the wind didn't even full pull the chain across, let along drag the anchor.


Minne: I'm quite familiar with the chaos in BI Salt Pond when there is a 180 wind shift (or not!) If I were the other boat in your incident, I would probably have at least 5:1 scope on a nylon rode if there was room at the time I anchored. In the wind shift you described, I would likely find the two of us closer than either of us would like--and that is without my anchor dragging.

I share your frustration with the BI scene and don't go there as often as I used to--and never again on July 4th! I have also been using the Pt. Judith Harbor of Refuge more frequently as a low-stress overnight stop. Just be careful not to anchor too close to the shallow spot in the SW corner unless you want to study constructive interference of reflected waves from wakes.


----------



## MarkSF (Feb 21, 2011)

Whenever something like this happens, I always recall something Bill Bryson wrote : "It's part of God's plan for me to spend a little bit of time with all the most stupid people on the planet". Quite effective as a coping strategy!


----------



## IStream (Dec 15, 2013)

MedSailor said:


> PS I'm wondering if this particular anchor is cursed. So far I've used it for 4 nights and had 2 people tell me I was dragging, one road rage incident and one guy drag into me. Not a good batting average....


Face it, Med. Your whole boat is cursed. If it makes you feel any better, so is mine and everyone else's.


----------



## zeehag (Nov 16, 2008)

damn! her bludi head woulda been on a stick in my pond... wow.. 
bubba woulda shredded her and i woulda hung her out on a piling.
i usually anchor in my area first and i use a LOT of chain in a bad holding locale, such as is barra lagoon, even with its shallowness there is lousey holding and i use 150 ft CHAIN in 10-14 ft water, bottomed by silt over hardpan and rocks. 
no one anchors near me-- yaaayyyy... and bubba doesnt have to shred anyone in reality.
the only folks anchor too close to me in sw coastal m ex were trawler folks out for 3 months a year in zihuatenejo-- right on toppa me... fun few days being anchored on top of by a self righteous credit card cpt. gotta give that one credit for allowing me 2 boat lengths.... 
med--you are a true saint.....


----------



## MedSailor (Mar 30, 2008)

djodenda said:


> Med:
> 
> Really glad you are starting to enjoy your boat. And, I agree, you are in the right in the situation you described.
> 
> ...


Not offended at all. I've got an 85lb Mantus in my yard waiting for prime time. Currently I have a 66lb bruce and 150ft of 3/8 chain on the boat but the roller setup doesn't allow for easy deployment or retrieval and the windlass is acting a little screwy.

It may still be usable but I'm slowly function testing things in order of safety and importance. Since I DO have a functional anchor, I haven't yet gotten to fixing the issues with the primary.

Soon though....

MedSailor


----------



## brianc (Feb 19, 2013)

I ran in to the chain/rope issue a couple weeks ago near Seattle. I was there first at 4:1 for high tide on 35 feet of chain and the rest nylon rope. I swing like crazy. I also had a kellet deployed to prevent the rode from wrapping the keel (you're right, it does nothing to prevent us from swinging.)

A larger boat with all chain came an hour or later on all chain. A couple hours after that the current had shifted and we were probably about 20 or 30 feet from them and I'm 99% sure we would have bumped if we continued swinging in their direction. We got in to an argument about them sitting in the same spot and me swinging. They told me I was dragging and should have all chain and it wouldn't be a problem (not really practical on my boat.) It ended in yelling, and then they moved and weren't very happy about it.

So I guess this kind of thing isn't that uncommon around here!


----------



## Buchido (May 8, 2012)

I sail in the PNW and use a 5:1 scope (I have 30' of chain and 200' of rope rode) but I have cut it down to 4:1 in crowded anchorages and light weather forecasts and hope my 30' of chain is enough cantilever to keep good holding. I tell myself it's out of courtesy for the other boats but this seems backwards logic to me because if I drag in the middle of the night and hit someone... I've also had on many occasions been told that 3:1 is typical but I just tell them I have all rope and they go away. Usually it's the people that spin off a bunch of chain straight into a big pile on the bottom and don't bother setting their anchor.

In her defense, in light conditions it's very difficult to known where other boats are on their swinging circle. If you assume everyone's swing radius is 200ft, that means you have to drop anchor 600ft (or 3x the rode length) from every other boat! to have no chance of collision, which in my opinion is impossible to do and is a bit excessive. If you assume everyone will swing roughly same way (which is not always the case in very light wind/current) it comes down to 400ft (or 2x the rode length). However, in heavier conditions where everyone swings predictably with wind/current shifts you could get away with <200ft (<1 x the rode length). These are the rules of thumb that I use anyway.

So given the light conditions, it's no wonder she anchored within your swinging circle. But she shouldn't have assumed that you were dragging (especially given the conditions) and definitely shouldn't have boarded and adjusted your scope as you were there first. And once she realized you were firmly anchored she should have put your rode back out and kindly moved along. 

However, if it was me and if she were there first or if my boat was in actual danger (and not just from hitting a later boat) then I believe her actions are justifiable. So just a case of misplaced help and/or not understanding the decorum. And nothing she did put you or your boat in immediate danger at the time, but telling you she changed something is the key and definitely the only correct course of action and must be applauded. 

So I don't think anything she did is a rageable offence and calmly and politely discussing the situation as you did was the best thing.


----------



## MedSailor (Mar 30, 2008)

Minnewaska said:


> In crowded anchorages, I like to run an anchor alarm that keeps a persistence line, showing everywhere I've been swinging. This way, I can take a screen shot to prove I wasn't dragging, if necessary. I do this because, *if you're not aboard and someone claims you are dragging, your boat is automatically a salvage.* We have some that will record the broadcast to prove they had rights and you'll never be able to prove your anchor was actually set.


Just when I was starting to sleep soundly, you bring this up. Scary.

What's the program you use? This may be something I will do if I continue to use rope in deep places. The folks around here just aren't used to it.

MedSailor


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

Pulled into anagada. Was buddy boating with a mid fifties Hylas. Blowing high twenties with significant chop coming in from southeast. Both of us on all chain with rochnas on the end Let out 150' in 10-12' of water. Sand bottom. Set double snubbers to take shock loads. Boats side by side 170' apart.
Charter cat comes initially looking to anchor between us. Sees us both heading to our dinghies so anchors downwind of us on 5:1 or so. Middle of night wake up to screams and curses. He had dragged onto the reef in front of the hotel. By the morning in the absence of him setting a sledge anchor or making any meaningful attempt to lessen the damage he had worked all the way onto the reef. Heart breaking to watch them put flotation bags under the boat and pull it off. Was told later boat was a total lost. Keels driven into canoe bodies.
Same guy did a U turn in the channel as he lost his dinghy and talked over us on the vhf when we were ordering lobster. Same guy waved off fellow cruisers who came over to help when he first dragged. 
You can't fix stupid. Rudeness does not permit learning.


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

I use "anchor" and "anchor watch". Find leaving the raymarine on to have watch on uses more juice. Also both run on the IPhone and IPad.


----------



## JimMcGee (Jun 23, 2005)

PitApe said:


> Miss "Good Samaritan" obviously has no idea about the sort of liability can-o-worms she could have opened up. Sooner or later this know-it-all gal is going to mess with someones boat and break something, or manage to set the boat adrift, or whatever. THEN she'll learn her lesson.


It's not just liability. Another sailor may not have Med's self control.

Med kudos on keeping your cool, after all you've been through I'd buy some lottery tickets. When your luck turns you're due for a BIG upswing. 
:grin


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

Med-
You know that old quote about all that is necessary for evil to win, is for people to ignore it? (Yeah, I know, I'm mangling that.)
Well, you are now responsible for every starving crab and bottom-feeder in that anchorage, as well as any other harm that [sexist expletive deleted] does to anyone else, for life.

Onceuponatime...we were anchored, by permission of and with PAYMENT to the bottom owners, inside the bulkhead line in private waters off lower Manhattan, for the July 4th fireworks show. Anything inside the bulkhead line is PRIVATE bottomland, mariners can transit but not anchor without permission.

So needless to say, shortly before sunset some yahoos in a beer boat drop anchor literally right in top of ours. (And it isn't an easy anchorage, the bottom is a steep slope with plenty of foul bottom further in.) We told 'em nicely, this is a sailboat, it swings, this is a private anchorage, you're not allowed to be here, and you're creating a danger to both our boats by fouling our anchor. We're going to swing with the current, stand clear.
A waste of polite words on beer boaters.

So maybe 1/2 hour later, four Coasties in an outboard come by, checking out obvious problems, and guess where we sent them? Yup. Beerboat gone, all bye-bye.

The fireworks were wonderful btw.

I have absolutely no problem with asking nicely, ONCE, and then finding the biggest stick I can. Being kind to *oles only makes more of them, it really needs to be discouraged.

Of course, mounting Claymores below the rub rail tends to upset the uniforms these days...damfino why.


----------



## aeventyr60 (Jun 29, 2011)

Maybe you should have been flying a pirate flag?


----------



## tdw (Oct 2, 2006)

MedSailor said:


> Not offended at all. I've got an 85lb Mantus in my yard waiting for prime time. Currently I have a 66lb bruce and 150ft of 3/8 chain on the boat but the roller setup doesn't allow for easy deployment or retrieval and the windlass is acting a little screwy.
> 
> It may still be usable but I'm slowly function testing things in order of safety and importance. Since I DO have a functional anchor, I haven't yet gotten to fixing the issues with the primary.
> 
> ...


Oh well at least it wasn't a Rocna. :laugh

Ours btw is a Bruce. I was going to change it for a Rocna but am pretty happy with the thing so havn't done so.


----------



## djodenda (Mar 4, 2006)

Cool.. Andrew started talking about anchors!!!

I would say that the 15kg Bruce that I have has worked pretty well in the PNW.. 

Always set the first time, except in the East cove on Matia.. A lot of kelp down there.

Of course, I am a very patient anchorer... Probably because I don't have a windlass..


----------



## djodenda (Mar 4, 2006)

Oh.. and Andrew, thanks for sending the summer back.. Appreciate it.


----------



## MedSailor (Mar 30, 2008)

aeventyr60 said:


> Maybe you should have been flying a pirate flag?


Or electrified lifelines. :devil


----------



## tdw (Oct 2, 2006)

JimMcGee said:


> It's not just liability. Another sailor may not have Med's self control.
> 
> Med kudos on keeping your cool, after all you've been through I'd buy some lottery tickets. When your luck turns you're due for a BIG upswing.
> :grin


Maybe we need some of Meds meds.


----------



## fallard (Nov 30, 2009)

hellosailor said:


> Onceuponatime...we were anchored, by permission of and with PAYMENT to the bottom owners, inside the bulkhead line in private waters off lower Manhattan, for the July 4th fireworks show. Anything inside the bulkhead line is PRIVATE bottomland, mariners can transit but not anchor without permission.


As I understand it, all of the waters of the continental US where the water ebbs and flows is PUBLIC under federal rules and is held in trust by the states, who may make rules--or delegate rule making to public entities, like cities or towns-- for its use. So you may have paid for the use of someone's mooring, but there are no PRIVATE bottom owners because there is no PRIVATE bottomland. Here in CT anchoring rules are established by local authority consistent with state guidelines, with supervision of anchoring the responsibility of a publicly appointed harbormaster--not a private "bottom owner" and not the USCG, unless there is a navigational or safety issue (e.g., drugs/alcohol, reckless operation) within their police powers.


----------



## tdw (Oct 2, 2006)

djodenda said:


> Oh.. and Andrew, thanks for sending the summer back.. Appreciate it.


Didn't send it back, you lot came and stole it. Like thieves in the night.


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

fallard-
That's not open for debate or discussion. In NYS there is a long standing and accepted body of law concerning BOTTOM owners of submerged land. Ships engaged in navigation can PASS OVER that bottom. They can navigate IN THE WATER, but the bottom itself is often privately owned and anchoring on it is trespassing, plain and simple and (when so owned)accepted by every court in the state.
The only question is whether a particular party holds title to a particular piece of land. And on the shores of Manhattan? The land in between the piers is normally all privately owned. You will see a "bulkhead line" demarked on all harbor charts. Everything landward of the bulkhead line, is _privately _owned.
I don't recall if the Coast Pilot indicates this, but the bulkhead line is VERY clearly marked, and any boater in NYS should be very much aware that bottomlands will often be private property, no anchoring allowed. Some of those land titles date back to Crown Patents (i.e. from the 1600's) while others were actually SOLD by the federal government during WW2 as part of the effort to raise money for liberty bonds, etc.
You don't get much better at having a legal title, than having bought it directly from the federal government. Or having a royal patent, which carries slightly more weight.

Point is, the beer guys dropped an anchor ON OUR ANCHOR and UNACCEPTABLY CLOSE endangering us all. Even on public property and stone cold sober, that would be reason to have the Coasties visit them and write up every violation that could be found. Belligerent stupidity doesn't belong on the water.


----------



## fallard (Nov 30, 2009)

hellosailor:
I would concede "private ownership" of bottomlands, but only when conveyed by the state. It appears that NY has a very different situation from CT regarding private ownership of public trust lands. 

That said, according to the NYC Waterfront Plan, the bulkhead line refers to the limit of permissible fill and does not otherwise restrict public access, particularly if planned improvements (e.g. fill) are not implemented. Historical grants notwithstanding, the Public Trust doctrine applies and case law supports that (paraphrase of discussion on p. 8 of the Waterfront Plan (1992)).

I'm not in a position to argue whether or not the "private owner" had rights to restrict or control anchoring within his bulkhead line, but unless that right has been specifically conveyed by the State, I would not assume so. 

In any case I am not defending the "beer boat" crew's behavior.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

fallard said:


> Minne: I'm quite familiar with the chaos in BI Salt Pond when there is a 180 wind shift (or not!) If I were the other boat in your incident, I would probably have at least 5:1 scope on a nylon rode if there was room at the time I anchored. In the wind shift you described, I would likely find the two of us closer than either of us would like--and that is without my anchor dragging.
> 
> I share your frustration with the BI scene and don't go there as often as I used to--and never again on July 4th! I have also been using the Pt. Judith Harbor of Refuge more frequently as a low-stress overnight stop. Just be careful not to anchor too close to the shallow spot in the SW corner unless you want to study constructive interference of reflected waves from wakes.


As we were both in 50ish feet of water, I only had 4:1 out (emptied the 200ft in my locker). While it's possible the other boat had 5:1, that would have only caused him to swing another 50 feet or so closer. Our relative positions changed by 150 ft or more. Did he have the recommended 7:1 out for all rode, which would account for it? I suppose it's possible, but I find it unlikely that his 35ft boat had 350+ ft of rode aboard.

I can't imagine Jul 4th out there. Harbormaster told me there were 2,500 boats in the pond. Holy s.......


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

MedSailor said:


> Just when I was starting to sleep soundly, you bring this up. Scary.
> 
> What's the program you use? This may be something I will do if I continue to use rope in deep places. The folks around here just aren't used to it.
> 
> MedSailor


The one I like the best is Boat Monitor, but for some reason you now get a warning that it isn't available in the US iTunes store any longer. I still use it and it still works. I like it because it will send an email and/or text message to my phone, if I drag outside a perimeter I define. Better yet, that perimeter does not have to be a full circle, but any shape of a pie around the anchor. That means I can be notified if I simply swing 180 degs, even if I don't drag. Or be awakened at night for the same.

Anchor Watch is another I use, but the persistence line seems to only show the most recent swing and writes over the oldest lines. Still, you can see where you are relative to the anchor.

There are several more out there and I've been meaning to give another a try.


----------



## wallster (Sep 19, 2011)

capta said:


> I really do not believe it takes a great deal of intelligence to notice that the boat one is considering anchoring near is on rope and not chain. 3;1 for chain is acceptable, 5;1 for rope is acceptable; telling someone they should use chain and not rope IS NOT ACCEPTABLE!
> I'm only amazed that you held your temper in check after repeatedly being dissed (as the kids say).
> May Neptune, in all his wisdom, keep this woman and her ignorance far, far from me.
> I tip my hat to you for your patience and tolerance.


I am still newish to sailing but I just had a question on this. I have seen that you use 7:1 for anchoring and account for if you are at high or low tide. So 5:1 still seems fine, but why is it that with chain you can use 3:1? I am just curious how chain weight makes up for length or what is the science I guess behind that.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

Without getting into what the correct scopes may be, chain is heavier and will not pull straight as easily as rope rode. Therefore, the angle of pull against the anchor is more shallow, providing for better holding. In theory.

For sure, chain is better at chafe protection and in light winds, you are essentially just dropping your own mooring pile, as you don't even pull it when you swing. We now carry nearly 800 lbs of chain. It's almost humorous.


----------



## JimsCAL (May 23, 2007)

I've anchored in the Great Salt Pond at Block many times in the summer. Even on July 4th weekend (I think you could almost walk to shore from boat to boat). If you've been there in July or August a few time, you can't avoid stories. I have a few. The latest was a few years ago when a large shiny new Island Packet came in, dropped the hook and immediately went ashore in the dinghy. And this with the eastern sky black with an oncoming squall. Needless to say he dragged at the first gust with no one aboard, and we spent the next few hours fending him off. When the crew returned, they asked "Did we drag?" and spent the next few hours trying to shoehorn themselves into the crowded anchorage. 

Weekends are crazy there but it's not too bad during the week. I only draw 4'8" so can usually find a spot in shallower water. That plus setting two anchors allows me to set them with decent scope and still not swing to much.


----------



## fallard (Nov 30, 2009)

JimsCAL:

Unfortunately, a lot of the shallow water to the east in the Salt Pond has been occupied by power boats, including rafts of more than 12. It isn't unusual to see these guys put out 150' of scope in 5' of water, making it difficult to maneuver around them. You wouldn't want to be near the party scenes there, especially when they turn their portable generators on. The weekends, of course, are the worst time.

The scene gets more interesting when there is a wind shift in the 20 kt range. That's when you discover your neighbors' swing range, with various ground tackle and scope. Boats with multiple anchors--when most are on one--add further drama. Of course, the wind shifts usually occur after midnight.

BTW, I also anchor in very shallow water, and can float in 2'. with keel and rudder up. Since this can put me close to shore, I make sure I have a good set by backing down hard on the anchor. The anchor watch programs will give you false alarms if you set the swing radius too short, so I use a laser range finder to verify that I am staying put when I am really close to shore and conditions deteriorate. You can also use the laser range finder to determine if one of your neighbors is dragging in your direction. The laser range finders come in various price ranges and are used by golfers for pin spotting. The better (more $) ones have greater range.


----------



## wsmurdoch (Jan 23, 2007)

fallard said:


> I use a laser range finder to verify that I am staying put when I am really close to shore and conditions deteriorate. You can also use the laser range finder to determine if one of your neighbors is dragging in your direction. The laser range finders come in various price ranges and are used by golfers for pin spotting. The better (more $) ones have greater range.


My wife bought me a golfer's laser range finder for Christmas three years ago. It has been a great 'crowded anchorage confidence builder'. We have actual data for the distances to boats near us, and have learned how poorly we guess distances to other boats. Several times in crowded spots I have actually plotted on graph paper the positions of the nearby anchored boats using the laser for range and the hand bearing compass for bearing. I have labeled the boats with their arrival order after us and written their names so that I could call them on the VHF when the 3am storms come through.

All that said, I have been in the wrong. We anchored in the cut at Normans Cay in the Bahamas two years ago for the expected arrival of a cold front. Shortly afterwards a nearby already anchored boat called concerned that we were too close. He said he had 100' of chain out and would be swinging. I replied that we too had 100' of chain out, and since we were 90 yds apart, we could not touch. He did not protest further, and we did not move. During the night in the wind-over-current time, our two boats started to dance. We both stayed up all night watching. We could see them in the cockpit of their boat, and knew they were worried stiff. The closest we got was about 20 yds stern to stern although it was terrifying to watch the two boats charge at each other only to be tugged away at the last minute. At first light we moved.

Although I was right - we did not touch, and could not so long as the anchors held; I was wrong because I kept the couple on the other boat up all night worrying when it would have been just as easy for me to have moved in the evening before the storm as in the morning after, and my neighbor would not have missed a night's sleep.


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

When I come into a crowded anchorage, and after scouting out the possibilities, I try and speak with the crews of nearby boats. I always ask them how much rode they have out, and whether they're on rope or chain or both. If we're really tight I will even ask them about where I plan to drop. It's not always possible, but this information helps me in deciding where to drop. It also opens a conversation early, letting the other boat know I care about anchoring properly and safely.

I understand the need to be neighbourly, and in locations where weather is more predictable it's OK to adjust rode accordingly. But I've also been in anchorages where all those short-roded boats start sliding everywhere when the wind pipes up unexpectedly. 

... Which is why I do my best to avoid busy places :wink.


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

Let those that have never had an anchoring mishap continue to make thread posts. For the rest it is time edit your post.


----------



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

wallster said:


> I am still newish to sailing but I just had a question on this. I have seen that you use 7:1 for anchoring and account for if you are at high or low tide. So 5:1 still seems fine, but why is it that with chain you can use 3:1? I am just curious how chain weight makes up for length or what is the science I guess behind that.


It comes down to the angle of pull on the anchor. Anchors are designed to have a low angle pull for them to function best. With a little chain and the rest line, the line has no weight and the small amount of chain won't keep the angle low, so without the extra scope you could unset your anchor easily.
With chain, the weight of the chain keeps the pull of the rode on a better angle and often you don't even put tension on the anchor itself, but just raise the chain off the bottom.


----------



## IStream (Dec 15, 2013)

Minnewaska said:


> The one I like the best is Boat Monitor, but for some reason you now get a warning that it isn't available in the US iTunes store any longer. I still use it and it still works. I like it because it will send an email and/or text message to my phone, if I drag outside a perimeter I define. Better yet, that perimeter does not have to be a full circle, but any shape of a pie around the anchor. That means I can be notified if I simply swing 180 degs, even if I don't drag. Or be awakened at night for the same.
> 
> Anchor Watch is another I use, but the persistence line seems to only show the most recent swing and writes over the oldest lines. Still, you can see where you are relative to the anchor.
> 
> There are several more out there and I've been meaning to give another a try.


I use the breadcrumb function on my chart plotter. To keep power consumption down I turn the display brightness as low as it'll go when I'm at anchor.


----------



## MastUndSchotbruch (Nov 26, 2010)

wsmurdoch said:


> My wife bought me a golfer's laser range finder for Christmas three years ago. It has been a great 'crowded anchorage confidence builder'. ...


Do you really need a laser range finder, for much dinero? Or would a simple thing like this one work to get the lay of the anchorage, for less than 15 bucks delivered?

Amazon.com : PrideSports Range Finder : Golf Range Finders : Sports & [email protected]@[email protected]@http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/[email protected]@[email protected]@41MwB8oPpoL


----------



## miatapaul (Dec 15, 2006)

MedSailor said:


> Ding! Ding! Ding! Ding! Bingo!
> 
> It's elementary my dear Minnewatson.
> 
> ...


What happens on a Nauticat, stays on a Nauticat! :devil


----------



## smurphny (Feb 20, 2009)

My Garmin 376C plotter has a very reliable and accurate anchor watch function and will easily run all night on its battery, needing recharge next day. Its small size allows me to bring it right down in the cabin and set it next to my bunk where it will surely wake me up should it trigger a drag alarm. The alarm circle can be set to any distance which is essential as every anchorage is different as far as what trigger distance is best. There must be other small GPS/Plotters which perform this function. Trusting an iPhone or Android, which were really not engineered as marine plotters, using some beta version app, seems a bit risky.


----------



## vega1860 (Dec 18, 2006)

We spent three and a half years in the PNW. I took Williwa down the inside passage last summer and cruised the Gulf Islands, the San Juans and Admiralty inlet.

I love Alaska!


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

JimsCAL said:


> ....Needless to say he dragged at the first gust with no one aboard, and we spent the next few hours fending him off. When the crew returned, they asked "Did we drag?" and spent the next few hours trying to shoehorn themselves into the crowded anchorage. ......


They are pretty lucky you didn't call the Harbormaster and declare they were dragging into you. Rumor has it that the local TowBoat monitors and records the channel and that's all the evidence they need to salvage the boat. I would not be surprised that some falsely accuse their neighbor, just to have them towed away. It gets that kind of crowd in mid-summer too.


----------



## wsmurdoch (Jan 23, 2007)

MastUndSchotbruch said:


> Do you really need a laser range finder, for much dinero? Or would a simple thing like this one work to get the lay of the anchorage, for less than 15 bucks delivered?
> 
> Amazon.com : PrideSports Range Finder : Golf Range Finders : Sports & Outdoors


I don't know. I've never played with one of those. My Nikon ProStaff 550 laser rangefinder reads to the yard or meter on a digital scale. It was about $150. My wife got a deal on it because it does not work too well when ranging a small target like a golf pin. But, it works fine on boats or shoreline.

My only two complaints are that after three years the rubber eye cup has dried up and cracked and that the reticle is not lighted and is thus quite difficult to use at night.


----------



## fallard (Nov 30, 2009)

MastUndSchotbruch said:


> Do you really need a laser range finder, for much dinero? Or would a simple thing like this one work to get the lay of the anchorage, for less than 15 bucks delivered?
> 
> Amazon.com : PrideSports Range Finder : Golf Range Finders : Sports & Outdoors


Can't speak to the reliability and accuracy of your PrideSports unit, but I can speak to the peace of mind you get when you can range to 1-2' accuracy at several hundred yards and about 3' at a thousand yards. You will pay for the extra range, but note that the effective range decreases as visibility goes down. On an exceptionally clear day I can range to 1500 yds with most targets, including rocks on shore. I can also range on small targets like mooring buoys. You have to pay more for that kind of performance. My Leica unit did not come cheap, but was worth the price IMO.

As indicated in my earlier post, I use it for early warning and for that you need accuracy and repeatability. In some harbors you need the extra range. Example: On a BVI charter, I used it to verify that I wasn't dragging with a reputed broken elkhorn coral bottom that did not inspire confidence when I set the anchor. I was ranging to a prominent rock about 600 ft away on a lee shore in a stiff breeze and was able to verify all was good after several hours and was able to sleep that night. (I was also able to determine that the boats close upwind weren't coming down on me either!)


----------



## MastUndSchotbruch (Nov 26, 2010)

fallard said:


> Can't speak to the reliability and accuracy of your PrideSports unit, but I can speak to the peace of mind you get when you can range to 1-2' accuracy at several hundred yards and about 3' at a thousand yards. You will pay for the extra range, but note that the effective range decreases as visibility goes down. On an exceptionally clear day I can range to 1500 yds with most targets, including rocks on shore. I can also range on small targets like mooring buoys. You have to pay more for that kind of performance. My Leica unit did not come cheap, but was worth the price IMO.
> 
> As indicated in my earlier post, I use it for early warning and for that you need accuracy and repeatability. In some harbors you need the extra range. Example: On a BVI charter, I used it to verify that I wasn't dragging with a reputed broken elkhorn coral bottom that did not inspire confidence when I set the anchor. I was ranging to a prominent rock about 600 ft away on a lee shore in a stiff breeze and was able to verify all was good after several hours and was able to sleep that night. (I was also able to determine that the boats close upwind weren't coming down on me either!)


I have no doubt that the multi-hundred dollar model is better than the one I can get for pocket change. Question is whether 1' accuracy is necessary for the task, given that the boat can swing through hundreds of feet under normal conditions (with corresponding scope).

But I have used neither one so my opinion is not really informed. I might buy a fifteen dollar toy, just to play with it and perhaps check on my distance estimates provided by Eyeball Mark I, but I won't pay several hundreds for that.

Thanks for the first-hand information.


----------



## Noelex (Jan 23, 2008)

MastUndSchotbruch said:


> Do you really need a laser range finder, for much dinero? Or would a simple thing like this one work to get the lay of the anchorage, for less than 15 bucks delivered?
> 
> Amazon.com : PrideSports Range Finder : Golf Range Finders : Sports & Outdoors


I think that is an optical rather than a laser rangefinder.

The advantage of the laser models is they will give a distance readout without any knowledge of the size of the object.

Not essential, but they are a handy tool on a boat, especially anchoring as has been noted by other users. If it is an optical rangefinder (that is not clear from the ad) it would be of very limited use. I would check before ordering.


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

"I think that is an optical rather than a laser rangefinder."

Perhaps, because it does not have, need, or use any batteries, and self-powered lasers haven't been mass-marketed yet?(G)


----------



## fallard (Nov 30, 2009)

noelex77 said:


> I think that is an optical rather than a laser rangefinder.
> 
> The advantage of the laser models is they will give a distance readout without any knowledge of the size of the object.


Semantics: both types of rangefinders in this discussion are "optical".

The difference is that the $15 version appears to use a passive technique that requires an estimate of the height of the target and then works on a simple calculation based on the angle subtended by the target to determine the base of a triangle with known (estimated?) height. The laser rangefinders transmit a pencil beam of light that is reflected by the target. The distance is determined by the time it takes for the laser light to make the round trip.

The cheaper type could be reasonably accurate when ranging to a tall object of known height, like a lighthouse, but that would depend on several factors, like the image quality and the scheme for determining the angle subtended by the target. My guess is that the rest is just a built-in look-up table where the distance equals the height divided by the tangent of the angle.


----------



## MastUndSchotbruch (Nov 26, 2010)

fallard said:


> Semantics: both types of rangefinders in this discussion are "optical".
> 
> The difference is that the $15 version appears to use a passive technique that requires an estimate of the height of the target and then works on a simple calculation based on the angle subtended by the target to determine the base of a triangle with known (estimated?) height. The laser rangefinders transmit a pencil beam of light that is reflected by the target. The distance is determined by the time it takes for the laser light to make the round trip.
> 
> The cheaper type could be reasonably accurate when ranging to a tall object of known height, like a lighthouse, but that would depend on several factors, like the image quality and the scheme for determining the angle subtended by the target. My guess is that the rest is just a built-in look-up table where the distance equals the height divided by the tangent of the angle.


That makes sense. I wondered whether the el-cheapo version uses the superposition of two images which I remember using on my old camera (the type with film inside, not a chip!). This requires no knowledge about the height of things or anything but I suppose it only works for short distances, not the ones typically in an anchorage.

So I guess you saved me $15.-, for trying out this thing. I can do a distance estimation based on height for free using the reticles in the binoculars.


----------



## MedSailor (Mar 30, 2008)

MastUndSchotbruch said:


> That makes sense. I wondered whether the el-cheapo version uses the superposition of two images which I remember using on my old camera (the type with film inside, not a chip!). This requires no knowledge about the height of things or anything but I suppose it only works for short distances, not the ones typically in an anchorage.
> 
> So I guess you saved me $15.-, for trying out this thing. I can do a distance estimation based on height for free using the reticles in the binoculars.


The paralax ones (that focus 2 images) also have a limited useful distance. Make sure you don't buy one designed for archery, for example, as it'll only work from 10-50 yards likely.

I have a laser one for bowhunting. I had thought about bringing it aboard for distance measurements but hadn't thought it would be useful enough to do so. On the other hand, it doesn't take up much space.

I've also seen it suggested that you can use your radar to get accurate range estimates.

MedSailor


----------



## MastUndSchotbruch (Nov 26, 2010)

MedSailor said:


> The paralax ones (that focus 2 images) also have a limited useful distance. Make sure you don't buy one designed for archery, for example, as it'll only work from 10-50 yards likely.
> 
> I have a laser one for bowhunting. I had thought about bringing it aboard for distance measurements but hadn't thought it would be useful enough to do so. On the other hand, it doesn't take up much space.
> 
> ...


Yes, that's what I meant, distance based on binocular disparity (which you null to get the distance). For the distances involved, one would likely need more distance between the lenses than what is tolerable.

Radar is a good idea if you have one...


----------



## MedSailor (Mar 30, 2008)

MastUndSchotbruch said:


> Radar is a good idea if you have one...


It could be, or it could be confusing in the middle of the night when things are suddenly stressful. "lets see, with the inside ring being 0.125NM and the boat being 2/3 of that distance, it makes the boat.... ummm....." math is hard after drinking rum. :wink

My radar probably has a feature where I can use the cursor and select a target and find the exact range. I'm not fluent enough to use it though.

MedSailor


----------



## Capt Len (Oct 9, 2011)

If you rely on radar range rings only you can end up like the Andrea Doria or more recently the BC ferry overlapping the dock at Duke Point. I kinda like the feature on the GPS plotter where you're the centre and cursor goes to object de ? .Then you look over ther for conformation. My old Furuno had an adjustable range ring with digital distance readout and was good for distant RACONs but not accurate enough for fine work.


----------



## fallard (Nov 30, 2009)

MastUndSchotbruch said:


> That makes sense. I wondered whether the el-cheapo version uses the superposition of two images which I remember using on my old camera (the type with film inside, not a chip!). This requires no knowledge about the height of things or anything but I suppose it only works for short distances, not the ones typically in an anchorage.
> 
> So I guess you saved me $15.-, for trying out this thing. I can do a distance estimation based on height for free using the reticles in the binoculars.


The el cheapo unit appears to have only one aperture, so it wouldn't work like the old rangefinder cameras. It does appear to be a variant of the technique you use "for free" with the reticles in your binoculars.

Radar doesn't provide the accuracy of a laser rangefinder, nor does your GPS. That said, I would not disparage the use of the anchor watch function once you have determined that you are not dragging. At least the anchor watch function remains active while you are sleeping. The laser rangefinder only works when you are attending it.


----------



## Sublime (Sep 11, 2010)

All this speak about electronics is boring.

OP, the proper response is to let your eyes go all shifty as you slip on some dark sunglasses. Position your hand inside a pocket as if you have a gun. Then ask in an eerily quiet voice, "Did you...notice anything down below? Anything that....might have...scared you? Anything you think you should...call the cops for?" As she shakes her head no, tell her, "That's right. You didn't see nothing." Continue to cast threatening stares from afar even after she boards her own vessel again.


----------

