# series drogue or para anchor?



## ralphmacey (Nov 13, 2006)

I plan on a first time crossing the Atlantic from East to West, northern Florida to Bermuda to Azores to Europe starting in late May, early June. I have a Hallberg Rassy 352 and would like advice on good sails to have for the trip as well as recommendations on a series drogue or a para anchor. Any other "must haves" would be welcome too.


----------



## killarney_sailor (May 4, 2006)

I have a parachute sea anchor but wish I had series drogues since you are much more likely to be in the conditions where you might use them (say 40 to 50 knots). The parachute system seems more helpful in conditions above 50 knots sustained which you are highly unlikely to get on your trip.

Do you have an inner stay on your boat that you can use for a small staysail or storm jib? Also backup for your self-steering makes a great deal of sense. Hand steering for days with a small crew really sucks. Don't ask how I know.


----------



## gershel (Feb 4, 2001)

I think you're actually planning on going west to east, unless my chart is upside-down. LOL
Marc


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

Series drogue.


----------



## jackdale (Dec 1, 2008)

The drogues and sea anchors are used differently. The drogue goes off the stern to slow you down, the sea anchor goes off the bow to keep your bow into the seas / winds. The HR could use either.

I would not use a drogue on a boat that was easily pooped.


----------



## smurphny (Feb 20, 2009)

I have a sea anchor which I hope remains right where it is underneath a lot of stuff in a locker. I guess the best option is to have both. There was a study, I believe by the USN (could be wrong) that weighed in on the side of drogues but to me putting the stern of a boat to the sea is WAY counter intuitive. A good book is The Pardy's _Storm Tactics_ has lots of good information on using a sea anchor.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

smurphny said:


> I have a sea anchor which I hope remains right where it is underneath a lot of stuff in a locker. I guess the best option is to have both. There was a study, I believe by the USN (could be wrong) that weighed in on the side of drogues but to me putting the stern of a boat to the sea is WAY counter intuitive. A good book is The Pardy's _Storm Tactics_ has lots of good information on using a sea anchor.


It took me a LONG time to become a believer in the JSD for that very reason (stern-to waves seems wrong). I'd read the Pardy book as well and saw the "common sense" in the bow-to approach.

However, after lots of research, and especially after reading Hal Roth's "Handling Storms at Sea", a more recent heavy weather book than the Pardy's, with its very meticulous comparison of the various tactics...I became a believer.

I also agree with Jack above on the issue of how your boat is set up to handle a boarding wave. Ours is pretty well set up to deal with such an occurrence (relatively small and shallow cockpit, top-down companionway entry - not vertical with large hatchboards, pretty good drains, etc.) - to a degree of course.

Anyway, all this is certainly hypothetical for me. And I hope it stays that way. But I definitely trust Hal Roth's take. So the JSD for me.


----------



## Brent Swain (Jan 16, 2012)

Any parachute or drogue works better from the stern. It eliminates rudder damage, by the boat backing down on the rudder. Be careful when you buy a parachute. Mine looked shiny, like nylon ,so I assumed it was. Turned out to be cotton, and lasted an hour and a half before it shredded. 
Now I use a galerider type , which I made out of car seat belts, using a big mooring ball as a mold. Friends had good results in the Queens Birthday storm off New Zealand with one. They found it worked best 80 feet behind their boat, which eliminates the need for a huge amount of rode. 
You can eliminate chafe by using chain for the first few feet of rode , til it clears your transom. Running it off one quarter eliminates the roll when the wind lightens , but the swell remains. It is a lot easier to set and recover that way as well.


----------



## jackdale (Dec 1, 2008)

Brent - would you run a stern mounted drogue on Derek Hatfield's boat?










I will admit the potential rudder damage is a huge downside to sea anchors.


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

jackdale said:


> I would not use a drogue on a boat that was easily pooped.


Might be a prudent approach, to avoid venturing too far offshore in a boat that was "easily pooped", to begin with


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

smackdaddy said:


> It took me a LONG time to become a believer in the JSD for that very reason (stern-to waves seems wrong). I'd read the Pardy book as well and saw the "common sense" in the bow-to approach.
> 
> However, after lots of research, and especially after reading Hal Roth's "Handling Storms at Sea", a more recent heavy weather book than the Pardy's, with its very meticulous comparison of the various tactics...I became a believer.
> 
> ...


Let me be clear, I have the utmost respect for the Pardeys, what they've accomplished, and what they've learned and passed onto other sailors... However, I feel their recommendation regarding sea anchor tactics are very specific to the sort of full-keeler they sail, and have become outmoded when applied to the more moderate or split underbody designs most of us sail today...

If anyone has managed to get their bridle system using snatch blocks to work during a storm at sea, I'd love to hear about it... Hell, I've never managed to get their setup using a pennant riding on the anchor line with a snatch block to work _at anchor_, much less in large, confused seas offshore 

I've laid numerous times to a bridle in open roadstead anchorages, or harbors with a surge, in an effort to reduce rolling... Baracoa, Cuba, is a classic example of a place where the ocean swell wraps around into the anchorage at a deep angle to the prevailing wind, without a bridle the rolling would be very uncomfortable...










But in my experience, the only thing that works is to have the pennant _FIXED_ to the main rode, and adjusted at your primary winches. Trying to use a snatch block as the Pardeys claim they do, it's just a matter of time before it moves up or down the rode, and I'd invite anyone who has had success using their setup in heavy weather to explain how they managed it... I suspect many who endorse this techinque have perhaps read Lin & Larry's book, or watched their video, but have never actually tried this approach in heavy weather offshore 

Evans Starzinger does a pretty thorough job of de-constucting the 'myth' of the viability of the use of a parachute in this fashion, although the bolded emphasis is mine 



> 9a. How about the bridled para-anchor technique?
> 
> As mentioned above, we generally think the para-anchor tactic the least useful because it prevents you from sailing away from the worst weather and is difficult to change/adapt as conditions change. *The bridled para-anchor deployment approach is the most complex possible way to deploy the para-anchor, with the most points of potential failure and human error. Those are bad traits when fatigued in severe storm conditions. Virtually every crew we know who has tried the approach in real storm conditions has considered it a failure. So, we like this 'bridled' approach even less than the 'over-the bow' approach.*
> 
> ...


John Harries doesn't like parachutes, either:

Large Sea Anchors Not Recommended For Offshore Sailboats

While I do carry a Para-Anchor on my own boat, it would require a very specialized set of circumstances of the sort Evans describes, for it to be my first choice as a storm tactic... If I'm gonna put anything over the side, it will be a Series Drogue first... And, I sail a boat that's "easily pooped", compared to most 

And, for the OP, I'd suggest a good light-air sail inventory will be far more important, and see far more use for the trip you have in mind, than either sea anchors or drogues...


----------



## benesailor (Dec 27, 2012)

I was under the impression that the Pardey method places the boat into a heave to position; not straight off the bow.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

+1 Jon.

Ralph - you ought to read through this thread:

http://www.sailnet.com/forums/seamanship-navigation/48237-heavy-weather-sailing.html

It's one of the best I've ever seen and covers this whole debate very well I think. Oh, and this one:

http://www.sailnet.com/forums/gener...ed/53639-don-jordan-jordan-series-drogue.html


----------



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

Having used both in weather that actually requires it, over 60 knots in most cases, I would never use a sea anchor again. I was constantly worried about damaging my rudder as mentioned above.
Towing a drogue also has it's own problems. Though I have not had this happen to me, I have met people who have had their drogues end up in their rigging, which must be a real pain in the a**.
Alternately, I have had a drogue slow me to the point that I was constantly being pooped, filling the cockpit frequently. In the end, the only solution was to cut the thing free and allow the boat to sail unrestricted under bare poles. It is a tremendous amount of work to steer in those conditions, at times surfing across the face of the waves at ridiculous speeds, then pointing the bow directly down wind to allow the white water to pass underneath as it overtakes you.
But if I can keep the boat under control, I feel I am much safer than hampering her with a drogue, so I no longer keep either aboard. Should I ever (Neptune forbid) get into a situation where I feel I should drag something to slow me down, I can see no reason why one or two of my 6 anchors with 30 or so feet of chain, on a long anchor rode, would not do the trick.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

Thanks capta. I love hearing directly from those who've used these things in anger.

What kind of boat were you in with the drogue/pooping? I assume it wasn't your center-cockpit shown in your avvy?


----------



## Omatako (Sep 14, 2003)

capta said:


> In the end, the only solution was to cut the thing free and allow the boat to sail unrestricted under bare poles. It is a tremendous amount of work to steer in those conditions, at times surfing across the face of the waves at ridiculous speeds, then pointing the bow directly down wind to allow the white water to pass underneath as it overtakes you.
> 
> But if I can keep the boat under control, I feel I am much safer than hampering her with a drogue, so I no longer keep either aboard. Should I ever (Neptune forbid) get into a situation where I feel I should drag something to slow me down, I can see no reason why one or two of my 6 anchors with 30 or so feet of chain, on a long anchor rode, would not do the trick.


The problem with controlling the situation you describe is that you have to be able to see what you're doing. Mostly when the weather is such that you need a drogue, it is heavily clouded too and then the inevitable happens - the sun sets and it gets real dark.

We had this and in the dead of night we saw huge areas of white water overtaking us on both sides - we were sailing downwind under bare poles and doing 7 to 9 knots. When the boat surfed for the first time in pitch black conditions down what felt like a huge wave with a 10 ft wall of white water chasing us from behind, I knew that whatever else I do in my life, I never want to do that again. When it got light the next morning it was confirmed that the waves around us were 35 to 40 feet and randomly breaking. Nobody chooses to surf that in a 40ft cruising boat - unless you're stark raving mad.

And I don't get the fear of being pooped. So a flood of white water washes over the boat. As long as the boat doesn't accelerate down the rest of the wave and your wash boards are in place and strong, I don't have a huge problem with that. Having said that, I don't really ever want those big patio doors commonly found on ocean going cats these days.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

Omatako said:


> The problem with controlling the situation you describe is that you have to be able to see what you're doing. Mostly when the weather is such that you need a drogue, it is heavily clouded too and then the inevitable happens - the sun sets and it gets real dark.
> 
> We had this and in the dead of night we saw huge areas of white water overtaking us on both sides - we were sailing downwind under bare poles and doing 7 to 9 knots. When the boat surfed for the first time in pitch black conditions down what felt like a huge wave with a 10 ft wall of white water chasing us from behind, I knew that whatever else I do in my life, I never want to do that again. When it got light the next morning it was confirmed that the waves around us were 35 to 40 feet and randomly breaking. Nobody chooses to surf that in a 40ft cruising boat - unless you're stark raving mad.
> 
> And I don't get the fear of being pooped. So a flood of white water washes over the boat. As long as the boat doesn't accelerate down the rest of the wave and your wash boards are in place and strong, I don't have a huge problem with that. Having said that, I don't really ever want those big patio doors commonly found on ocean going cats these days.


And another. Good lord, Oma, I love "big sailing", but that's sounds like hell.

"Those that go down to the sea..."


----------



## scotthenry (Apr 4, 2010)

FYI, when Herreshoff (I think it was L. Francis) designed his personal short-handed around-the-world sailboat (the Marco Polo design), he included a spade rudder that could turn 360 degrees, to protect it while lying a hull or to a sea anchor.


----------



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

smackdaddy; I've sailed several boats through some pretty extreme storms;
a 46' British built timber yawl, a 65' Wm. Hand gaff ketch (1909), both aft cockpit boats. The gaffer had a much larger stern than the British boat which had a very fine stern and bow, but neither handled well with the drogue out. After releasing the drogue both rose much more quickly to the seas and shipped less water, though the steering of both vessels was still very hard work and extremely tiring. A third boat in an Atlantic storm was a Brown, 37' Searunner tri, and on that, the drogue specifically recommended by Brown, would not allow the boat to go fast enough to safely keep her on the face of the waves when needed. That was a wild ride for 22 hours, but we had no problems after we cast off the drogue.
Omatako,
"The problem with controlling the situation you describe is that you have to be able to see what you're doing. Mostly when the weather is such that you need a drogue, it is heavily clouded too and then the inevitable happens - the sun sets and it gets real dark."
I found that even in the dark, the white water was quite visible, though, quite honestly, 90% of the steering was done by feel, after the first few hours. The stern would lift as the waves approached and I would set her to race across the face, much as a surfer would, then as the whitewater caught up with us it was necessary to put her stern directly into the approaching water (which I could certainly hear, if not see) and slow the boat and let the wave pass under us. Though the noise was terrible, I welcomed the dark, because seeing those waves was a truly terrifying site at times.
I don't know if you've ever had a huge wave mount a boat in heavy weather, but for me the boat became completely unmanageable with several (hundred?) tons of water washing over the stern and filling the cockpit. It doesn't matter how big your cockpit drains are, they are never large enough to rid the boat of the extra weight quickly enough to allow her to rise for the next wave. But if the stern did rise, with all that water rushing forward, I was sincerely worried that she would pitch pole, one experience I dread. Read "Once is Enough" by Miles Smeeton, a book that saved our lives when we were capsized three times in a hurricane (cyclone, if you insist) in the SoPac.
I guess it's different with every boat. I shudder when I see these boats with no transoms or the ones with the huge scoops and stairs on the stern, which in my estimation are an invite for the waves to mount the boat.
I hope never to go through that sort of experience again, because it was very frightening and exhausting. But at least I know that the boats I chose to sail in the past and the boat we are sailing now can take whatever Neptune chooses throw at us and we did and will survive, without asking others to risk their lives to save us. Perhaps that sounds a bit cocky, but at a certain point I have to have that confidence or I'd better stop voyaging.


----------



## smurphny (Feb 20, 2009)

The biggest issue with a sea anchor would seem to be the many variables in getting it set and working as it should. Getting it positioned in the right wave set, getting a snatch block to sit in the right place to keep the boat quartered, just getting it over the side without fouling in heavy weather would be a challenge. The deployment of a sea anchor presents many more potential problems than a drogue. Also, being that this is not a routine procedure means that you will not practice using a sea anchor to the extent whereby you really feel confident in the procedure. I have a laminated sheet of deployment procedure right in the bag with it :
Deploy Sea Anchor

Check weather, ready all below decks *before* storm.
Link lines, sea anchor.
Buoy on trip line.
Put snatch block on pennant line.
Chafe gear ready.
All up to cockpit.
Up on deck clipped in. 
Heave-to.
Wrap pennant on winch to length, cleat.
To bow on windward side, bring : 
Bitter end- cleat on 2 cleats (outside lifelines).
Tie off at approx. half the line (150') 
Back to Cockpit
Ready main rig to go over.
Rode ready to uncoil freely.
Trip line/float unclipped and free to pull chute.
Launch over rail to windward. Wait for chute.
To bow with snatch block and pennant chafe gear.
Snatch block on anchor line
Set chute in 2nd wave crest. 
Chafe gear on rode.
Adjust pennant, sails, and rudder to stay in slick.
Check hourly, adjust periodically to avoid chafe.

Probably the most important part of this is in doing it well before conditions get too bad.

I have also sewn up a seat belt drogue which I have yet to try.


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

capta said:


> Towing a drogue also has it's own problems. Though I have not had this happen to me, I have met people who have had their drogues end up in their rigging, which must be a real pain in the a**.
> Alternately, I have had a drogue slow me to the point that I was constantly being pooped, filling the cockpit frequently. In the end, the only solution was to cut the thing free and allow the boat to sail unrestricted under bare poles. It is a tremendous amount of work to steer in those conditions, at times surfing across the face of the waves at ridiculous speeds, then pointing the bow directly down wind to allow the white water to pass underneath as it overtakes you.
> But if I can keep the boat under control, I feel I am much safer than hampering her with a drogue, so I no longer keep either aboard. Should I ever (Neptune forbid) get into a situation where I feel I should drag something to slow me down, I can see no reason why one or two of my 6 anchors with 30 or so feet of chain, on a long anchor rode, would not do the trick.


Of the drogues you've used, have any been a series drogue? They're an entirely different animal, and I think really have to be experienced to be appreciated. There's good reason why they are the equipment of choice of most who cruise in the Southern Ocean, for example...

Experiences and discussions of heavy weather are so variable, so dependent upon both boat and crew, it's always a losing game to attempt to apply a broader consensus or "one size fits all" approach to storm tactics... No two heavy weather experiences of mine have ever been the same, and very often one's approach to dealing with a system needs to be modified as a storm progresses...

But, sailing shorthanded, no way would I want to be at sea without a drogue, I simply don't possess the physical ability to deal with actively steering a yacht in big conditions for what might turn out to be days on end...

The CG paper on drogue use is well worth a read:

http://www.jordanseriesdrogue.com/pdf/droguecoastguardreport.pdf

And, as always, Evans Starzinger brings a great perspective, and his very thoughtful analysis, to this subject:



> 9. Do you use drogues or sea anchors in heavy weather?
> 
> We separate heavy weather into three distinct categories. First, is an approaching rotating storm. It's important to get as far away as possible from the center and the 'dangerous semicircle' of the storm. Moving even 100 miles in the right direction can lower your winds from 65kts to 30kts. There are quite clear rules as to which direction to go, depending on which semicircle of the storm you are in. In three of the storm quadrants ('navigable') its best to run and in one ('dangerous') its best to forereach. In none does it make sense to sit hove-to or on a para-anchor.
> 
> ...


----------



## Brent Swain (Jan 16, 2012)

jackdale said:


> Brent - would you run a stern mounted drogue on Derek Hatfield's boat?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 There is no way you could get a boat like that to stay head to the wind. But I wouldn't be cruising in a boat with that kind of transom anyway.


----------



## Brent Swain (Jan 16, 2012)

capta said:


> Having used both in weather that actually requires it, over 60 knots in most cases, I would never use a sea anchor again. I was constantly worried about damaging my rudder as mentioned above.
> Towing a drogue also has it's own problems. Though I have not had this happen to me, I have met people who have had their drogues end up in their rigging, which must be a real pain in the a**.
> Alternately, I have had a drogue slow me to the point that I was constantly being pooped, filling the cockpit frequently. In the end, the only solution was to cut the thing free and allow the boat to sail unrestricted under bare poles. It is a tremendous amount of work to steer in those conditions, at times surfing across the face of the waves at ridiculous speeds, then pointing the bow directly down wind to allow the white water to pass underneath as it overtakes you.
> But if I can keep the boat under control, I feel I am much safer than hampering her with a drogue, so I no longer keep either aboard. Should I ever (Neptune forbid) get into a situation where I feel I should drag something to slow me down, I can see no reason why one or two of my 6 anchors with 30 or so feet of chain, on a long anchor rode, would not do the trick.


Nothing invites being constantly pooped, like a reverse transom, which launches breaking waves directly into the cockpit, many of which would go under the stern ,had the transom not been reversed,.


----------



## Brent Swain (Jan 16, 2012)

Singlehanders don't have the option of steering thru a gale. A drogue is our only option.
With my airtight aluminium door , steel shell, stern drogue and small cockpit, I have no worries about being pooped, however many times it takes to get thru a gale. With my foam earplugs in ( a very handy tool for getting thru the stress of a gale) I will sleep comfortably thru it. My bunk has a canvas safety blanket, which makes it impossible for me to get thrown from it , even in a rollover.


----------



## Omatako (Sep 14, 2003)

capta said:


> I found that even in the dark, the white water was quite visible, though, quite honestly, 90% of the steering was done by feel, after the first few hours. The stern would lift as the waves approached and I would set her to race across the face, much as a surfer would, then as the whitewater caught up with us it was necessary to put her stern directly into the approaching water (which I could certainly hear, if not see) and slow the boat and let the wave pass under us. Though the noise was terrible, I welcomed the dark, because seeing those waves was a truly terrifying site at times.


With respect, you're either very brave, have really low survival instinct or have a real slow boat. At between 7 and 9 knots downwind with a 30ft following sea, I don't need white water to get my boat surfing - the boat takes off. And when there is no white water, you don't have any idea when that is going to happen. Until you're doing 15 knots into the trough. No thanks, not for me.



capta said:


> I don't know if you've ever had a huge wave mount a boat in heavy weather, but for me the boat became completely unmanageable with several (hundred?) tons of water washing over the stern and filling the cockpit. It doesn't matter how big your cockpit drains are, they are never large enough to rid the boat of the extra weight quickly enough to allow her to rise for the next wave.


Score 1 for centre cockpit. Oh and a cockpit is generally not more than about 4 cubic metres in volume which is less than 4 tons. And if my cockpit drains can't cope with that then in New Zealand I would not get a Cat 1 cruising clearance - they wouldn't let me leave.

I agree with some others - going to sea without some form of slowing the boat is very risky - storms can last for days and unless you have another very clever/good helmsman aboard, you can't take that sort of punishment for days on your own. If I asked my wife to "surf the boat along the wave and then turn it down just before the white water hits", I'd get a huge middle finger - nothing more.


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

Brent Swain said:


> Nothing invites being constantly pooped, like a reverse transom, which launches breaking waves directly into the cockpit, many of which would go under the stern ,had the transom not been reversed,.


Not sure such a comparison is always quite so simple, I'd suggest as so often is the case, _it depends_...

When compared to many boats with a more traditional design with some stern overhang or counter transom, many modern boats with more beamy sterns and reverse transom possess a far greater degree of reserve buoyancy back there, thus 'encouraging' them to rise to a following sea to a greater extent... With a cresting wave that happens to break directly upon the transom, however, you're right, and all bets are off...


----------



## smurphny (Feb 20, 2009)

The issue with a large number of square feet being exposed on a stern is not so much that it may have more buoyancy than a double-ender or a traditional overhung boat. It's that when a BREAKING wave crest smashes into all that surface area, it will displace it somewhere. Either the boat will move sideways and broach or move forward down the face of the wave and possibly cause a pitchpole as the bow, with less buoyancy, digs in and buries. There's a good reason double-enders have long been the choice of offshore sailors.


----------



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

Omatako said:


> With respect, you're either very brave, have really low survival instinct or have a real slow boat. At between 7 and 9 knots downwind with a 30ft following sea, I don't need white water to get my boat surfing - the boat takes off. And when there is no white water, you don't have any idea when that is going to happen. Until you're doing 15 knots into the trough. No thanks, not for me.
> With respect, I don't think it's either a matter of being "very brave, have really low survival instinct or have a real slow boat"; when you are out there, you are out there, and there's not much one can do but survive.
> As for white water, every monohull I've been on was way too heavy to "surf" the white water, they would virtually sink to the gunnels or more, slowing the boat enough for the wave to pass under. The surfing was done before the white water arrived and going across the wave face and it, I believe, kept me from driving her bow into the bottom of the wave and pitch poling, though I never tried it to find out. You are never going to have a cruising monohull that will outrun the waves, so it becomes necessary to work out a safe way to allow them to pass by.
> I would wholeheartedly agree, "No thanks, not for me"; I hope never to have to experience that again. I was in my 30's; very much younger than I am now, with a lot more endurance. I've surfed many a boat for short periods and that is not quite the same thing as I am talking about. To be quite frank, in those conditions, I was not checking my knot meter and noting the speed, I had other, much more important things occupying me. The longest I had to actually steer was 22 hours, not that bad for a 30 something guy in pretty good shape.
> ...


----------



## Omatako (Sep 14, 2003)

capta said:


> Try a drogue and if it doesn't help, then cut it loose and try w/o. I'm not saying not to use them, only recounting my experiences with them and my preferences.


I haven't used a series drogue in the true sense of the word although I guess what I do use is the same concept. It is a 140 metre jib sheet from a superyacht (50mm Ø) that I have tied a knot in every 5 metres.

To be fair I haven't had the "opportunity" to use it in severe weather - I spend a lot more of my time trying to avoid bad weather than learning how to deal with it  but I have let it out while motoring at full throttle on a calm day and the slowing effect on the boat is impressive. With the length after knotting at 125 metres it easily covers the wave period of the average storm and what's more is I can let out as much as I need and recovery is easy.

And I got it for free so if I have to cut it loose that's not going to hurt as much  The biggest issue I have is where to put it - it is really bulky and also pretty heavy. Still have to figure that out.


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

Omatako said:


> I haven't used a series drogue in the true sense of the word although I guess what I do use is the same concept. It is a 140 metre jib sheet from a superyacht (50mm Ø) that I have tied a knot in every 5 metres.
> 
> To be fair I haven't had the "opportunity" to use it in severe weather - I spend a lot more of my time trying to avoid bad weather than learning how to deal with it  but I have let it out while motoring at full throttle on a calm day and the slowing effect on the boat is impressive. With the length after knotting at 125 metres it easily covers the wave period of the average storm and what's more is I can let out as much as I need and recovery is easy.
> 
> And I got it for free so if I have to cut it loose that's not going to hurt as much  The biggest issue I have is where to put it - it is really bulky and also pretty heavy. Still have to figure that out.


Damn, that sounds like something that would probably sink my boat 

Definitely one of the issues with gear like a series drogue, finding the room to stow what can be a bulky item that one might so rarely - if ever - wind up using...

I made mine using 3/8" and 5/16" sections of Amsteel, makes for a very lightweight and compact bundle... Rather pricey, however


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

smurphny said:


> The issue with a large number of square feet being exposed on a stern is not so much that it may have more buoyancy than a double-ender or a traditional overhung boat. It's that when a BREAKING wave crest smashes into all that surface area, it will displace it somewhere. Either the boat will move sideways and broach or move forward down the face of the wave and possibly cause a pitchpole as the bow, with less buoyancy, digs in and buries. *There's a good reason double-enders have long been the choice of offshore sailors.*


There's good reason double-enders _*USED TO BE*_ the choice of _*SOME*_ offshore sailors...

Amended, to reflect contemporary reality 

Evans Starzinger, Webb Chiles, Jimmy Cornell, and John Neal have about a dozen circumnavigations, and probably close to a million bluewater miles, between them.... And, as best as I can tell, not so much as a single one of them in double-ended boats...


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

JonEisberg said:


> Damn, that sounds like something that would probably sink my boat
> 
> Definitely one of the issues with gear like a series drogue, finding the room to stow what can be a bulky item that one might so rarely - if ever - wind up using...
> 
> I made mine using 3/8" and 5/16" sections of Amsteel, makes for a very lightweight and compact bundle... Rather pricey, however


Jon, can you get a pic of that some time? I'm going to be getting a JSD and would like to see a better option than the traditional line. I love the idea of something that has similar strength but is much more compact.


----------



## smurphny (Feb 20, 2009)

True canoe stern hulls are an older idea but there are still plenty of them around. They used to be and still are the choice of many long distance sailors regardless of what a few "name brand" sailors may use. They have advantages and disadvantages. Actually, the boats in your pictures are very close to being double-ended as are boats with overhangs. The main advantage is to allow a following sea to slip by in the same manner the bow lets water slip by with minimum alteration in direction. The stern buoyancy theory is probably true to a point but once breaking waves get high enough to hit all that glass, the stern will get pushed around more than in a boat with less exposed surface area. That doesn't seem like rocket science.


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

smurphny said:


> Actually, the boats in your pictures are very close to being double-ended as are boats with overhangs.


Not trying to be argumentative, but I'm not sure many people would consider Cornell's Ovni, or Beth & Evans' Samoa, as "close to being double-ended"... 





















smurphny said:


> True canoe stern hulls are an older idea but there are still plenty of them around. They used to be and still are the choice of many long distance sailors regardless of what a few "name brand" sailors may use. They have advantages and disadvantages. Actually, the boats in your pictures are very close to being double-ended as are boats with overhangs. The main advantage is to allow a following sea to slip by in the same manner the bow lets water slip by with minimum alteration in direction. The stern buoyancy theory is probably true to a point but once breaking waves get high enough to hit all that glass, the stern will get pushed around more than in a boat with less exposed surface area. That doesn't seem like rocket science.


You're right, of course, there are still some voyagers out there sailing double-ended boats (Eric Forsyth is among the most prominent that comes to my mind), but I think their numbers continue to diminish... With the demise of Valiant, I can't think of a production builder that continues to produce double-enders. (Pacific Seacraft technically might qualify, if they were actually still building boats in any numbers)...

I have a bit of experience with double-ended/canoe stern boats, one of my all-time favorites was the Alden 38 SEAFLOWER which I ran between Maine and Florida numerous times:










But much of my time offshore has been with the Valiant 42, an absolutely wonderful all-around boat...However, when confronted with a breaking sea of a height sufficient to break against a transom, those boats are just as vulnerable to being pooped as any comparably sized yacht with a reverse transom... And, one of the primary purposes of a drogue, in addition to limiting speed, is to inhibit the stern from being "pushed around" by a potential wave strike...


----------



## smurphny (Feb 20, 2009)

I guess what I'm trying to get at is that if a hull is viewed from the bottom, it seems like most of the boats that have proven records of long distance voyaging have a pointed entry both bow and stern even though not identified as double-enders. Even the narrow CCA era overhung boats like my old A35 "split" the water dissipating the wave energy on both ends. It's definitely true that there are fewer and fewer true double-enders around but it's usually apparent that they actually voyage somewhere rather than sitting tied to docks with a canvas tent over the cockpit.


----------



## jackdale (Dec 1, 2008)

One reason that we may not be seeing many double-enders and vessels of a similar ilk is that very few sailors actually go off-shore. I read an interview with a Hunter rep who put the number at 3%. "The demands of the market" would definitely favour lighter, roomier boats with large easily accessible cockpits.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

jackdale said:


> One reason that we may not be seeing many double-enders and vessels of a similar ilk is that very few sailors actually go off-shore. I read an interview with a Hunter rep who put the number at 3%. "The demands of the market" would definitely favour lighter, roomier boats with large easily accessible cockpits.


Bingo. What continually confounds me though are the guys that think this demand is "misguided". In other words, that the market should want "offshore" boats (i.e. - "safer") despite the fact that that's not the intended use.


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

jackdale said:


> One reason that we may not be seeing many double-enders and vessels of a similar ilk is that very few sailors actually go off-shore. I read an interview with a Hunter rep who put the number at 3%. "The demands of the market" would definitely favour lighter, roomier boats with large easily accessible cockpits.


That's true, of course, but what I'm referring to is the ever-dwindling percentage of double-enders being sailed by people who actually ARE crossing oceans today... The ARC, for example, attracts well over 200 boats each year, and might be considered illustrative of the sort of boats many people are choosing to sail across an ocean these days... Now, I'm unfamiliar with some of the names or brands on this list, but of the entries listed so far for the 2013 edition of the ARC, not a SINGLE ONE jumps out at me as being a double-ender:

World Cruising Club - ARC Entries

Perhaps we need to start classifying multihulls as "double-enders", in order to get their numbers back up?


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

smackdaddy said:


> Jon, can you get a pic of that some time? I'm going to be getting a JSD and would like to see a better option than the traditional line. I love the idea of something that has similar strength but is much more compact.


Here you go... As mentioned, it's in 2 sections, the heavier 3/8 section in the bag on the right will just about fit in another bag of similar size to the one on the left... For a bridle, I'll use a pair of 12' Yale Polydyne 5/8" mooring pennants, shackled to chainplates on the stern quarter, as per Don Jordan's recommendation...

One caveat to using Amsteel, or similar... Because the rope is a rather loose and 'slippery' braid, I think you need to do more to keep the knotted cone tapes from the possibility of getting pulled through the rope. I used small fender washers before the knot to (hopefully) prevent that from happening...

It's a fairly painstaking process to assemble one of these, you definitely want to plan it for a time when you've got a couple of good football games to watch, or something...  I probably got it down to about 4-5 minutes of time to attach each cone to the rode, and I think I have something right around 120 cones, total...


----------



## smurphny (Feb 20, 2009)

JonEisberg said:


> Here you go... As mentioned, it's in 2 sections, the heavier 3/8 section in the bag on the right will just about fit in another bag of similar size to the one on the left... For a bridle, I'll use a pair of 12' Yale Polydyne 5/8" mooring pennants, shackled to chainplates on the stern quarter, as per Don Jordan's recommendation...
> 
> One caveat to using Amsteel, or similar... Because the rope is a rather loose and 'slippery' braid, I think you need to do more to keep the knotted cone tapes from the possibility of getting pulled through the rope. I used small fender washers before the knot to (hopefully) prevent that from happening...
> 
> *It's a fairly painstaking process to assemble one of these*, you definitely want to plan it for a time when you've got a couple of good football games to watch, or something...  I probably got it down to about 4-5 minutes of time to attach each cone to the rode, and I think I have something right around 120 cones, total...


Yes, especially in making the cones from scratch. I have the plans and template to make one but the mere thought of the tedium of cutting and sewing up all those cones has so far headed off the project The Amsteel idea is great. By the way, I did make up those cleat-filler blocks you suggested a while back. Managed to have one wash overboard when I forgot it on deck but they are easy to replace and work well to stop line from getting caught on the midship cleats.


----------



## johnnyandjebus (Sep 15, 2009)

Hello all

A question about using Amstel. It is my understanding that 3 strand or braid is used for the JSD because it stretches, adding to the dampening effect. Amstel doesn't stretch, is this a negative? I have zero experience with the JSD and like the idea of using amstel, just curious about it's effect on the JSD functionality.

John


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

johnnyandjebus said:


> Hello all
> 
> A question about using Amstel. It is my understanding that 3 strand or braid is used for the JSD because it stretches, adding to the dampening effect. Amstel doesn't stretch, is this a negative? I have zero experience with the JSD and like the idea of using amstel, just curious about it's effect on the JSD functionality.
> 
> John


That's the beauty of the series drogue, not being a single-point drogue, it doesn't rely on stretch in the rode to achieve its 'bungee effect'...

The extreme cyclic loads on the rode of a drogue could present problems for nylon, as well. As Evans Starzinger explains:



> The primary reason such a high percentage of para-anchor rodes break in actual use (perhaps 80% of para-anchors deployed in extreme conditions have broken their rodes) is nylon's extreme vulnerability to chafe and internal heat damage. The US Coast Guard and New England Ropes both have extensive experience with nylon failure due to internal heat generated by cyclic loading and recommend Dacron as a better alternative for a para-anchor application. Dacron, while not as stretchy as nylon, is an excellent shock absorber in these 100-600' lengths. However, from a practical standpoint, most people do not have a dedicated rode for their para-anchor and use a spare anchor rode, which is typically nylon. But we must all be aware that nylon has proven to be very vulnerable to failure in this application.
> 
> Seamanship FAQ.


Many voyagers are using Spectra for their series drogues. Steve Dashew uses Amsteel for his on WINDHORSE:

http://www.para-anchor.com/reports/dashew.smith.pdf










In addition to Amsteel being so much lighter and more easily stowed, and being FAR easier to splice than a double braid, is the utility of such a drogue being pressed into service as a shore line. As such, the fact that Amsteel floats is highly beneficial for such a purpose...


----------



## johnnyandjebus (Sep 15, 2009)

Good stuff Jon thanks for the reply

John


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

Have a JSD. surprised how much it weighs.keep it in the lazerette.Its a bear to get out. Probably will bring it out well before possibility of needing it for that reason.


----------



## mattt (Aug 26, 2013)

I read that in the '79 Fastnet race, several boats simply hove to, and the ones that did suffered no real damage. Does the JSD offer significant advantages over a simple heave to?


----------



## jackdale (Dec 1, 2008)

mattt said:


> I read that in the '79 Fastnet race, several boats simply hove to, and the ones that did suffered no real damage. Does the JSD offer significant advantages over a simple heave to?


On many modern boats with a fin keel and spade rudder, heaving-to will tend to result in being beam on to waves. That is a invitation to a slam. Full keel boats tend to heave-to with the bow up at an angle into the waves.


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

Been thinking if I lose steering can deploy part of drogue ( comes in pieces). By adjusting bridle should have some steering.


----------



## smurphny (Feb 20, 2009)

mattt said:


> I read that in the '79 Fastnet race, several boats simply hove to, and the ones that did suffered no real damage. Does the JSD offer significant advantages over a simple heave to?


That was a story told by Alberg about his A35 The story goes that the crew just took the sails down and went below and played cards. They were probably just lucky because once breaking waves reach a height of around half a boat length, ANY boat will capsize if hit broadside by a breaking wave. That would have been around 17' for an A35. Waves were reported to be MUCH higher than that. Boats in the race and commercial ships in the area reported 65 mph winds and waves from 20 to 40 feet in height.

It's interesting to read this report:http://www.blur.se/images/fastnet-race-inquiry.pdf


----------



## Melrna (Apr 6, 2004)

This is a great video about storm tactics, how to deploy a sea anchor in real situation and why you should use one. 




You all want evidence, well here it is and the references. I have read, seen and own most of the references.


----------

