Re: “Default” anchor arrangement on an Amel 54

Arno Luijten

Hi Bill,

Not meant to annoy you but if you do not read forum postings with with your "opinion glasses" on there is hardly any forum you can read/participate. On the is specifi topic, getting facts about anchor behavior is close to impossible as there are so many variables at play. Even the "so called"objective anchor tests are quite synthetic and often show results that seem to be strange at least. Only if you see consistent problems with whatever anchor model across tests and peoples experiences you can assume there is some flaw in the design.

This being said I read it was actually John Bruce (Bruce anchor) that first came with the idea of a roll bar, although he never put it in practice. It is also a well known argument that Bruce anchors are among the best but they do not scale very well and although many drilling platforms rely on the design, it's performance is mediocre in the 15-50 kg range.

But my question was not about the holding capabilities of the Buegel. My problem with the anchor is that it sits poorly on the bow of a 54.
My own experience using the anchor is very limited and from what I read seems to concur with other experiences that the anchor does not like weed on the bottom but works fine in sand/mud.




So Buegel may claim this rollbar fame, but it's a shared fame.

Join to automatically receive all group messages.