kingfishbig
-
Posts
550 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Fishing Tips, Advice and Articles
Blogs
Store
Posts posted by kingfishbig
-
-
I thought there was a ban on trawling (netting) from Port Hacking to Wollongong - with an exemption for longliners catching bait.
-
15 hours ago, campr said:
Thanks for your comment Baz.
If people want to go off topic like this they should just start their own topic. Anyone reading this will have forgotten what the original topic was and less likely to raise comment. Ron
Well you got plenty of comments liking your innovation, ie it didn't seem to stop anyone. Zoran's set up was actually on the same topic - anchoring.
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, wrxhoon1 said:
The way you are raving on about, anyone would think we are anchoring a 200,000 t ship. The way I look it at is anything that I use will not fail before the anchor drags on the sand or the rock pick on the reef, the prongs will straighten long before anything else gives way.
That's the only paragraph that is on topic. The whole point is that the strength rating goes out the window once corrosion sets in. Look at this example. It has a SWL of 1350 kg (same as Zoran's swivel) and is made of 316 stainless which you are going on about:
https://www.fsc.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Anchor20Swivel20Report.pdf
-
4 minutes ago, Rey05 said:
if me bringing up other uses is a diversion, isn't you not posting or answering the question about the fixings on your boat also a diversion?
that's some serious inception stuff there...
enjoy your mild steel boat fixings, ill enjoy my stainless steel ones.
I know mine will look 10 times better, and last 10 times longer.
but hey, you do you mate.
How can not posting on a topic be a diversion? You have to actually post something at least for it to be called that. PS: I am not too worried about what my anchor gear looks like.
-
6 minutes ago, Rey05 said:
out of curiosity,
can you post. pic of your boat with mild steel fixings. id love to see how that hold up after a few uses.
316ss is the go for salt water environments...... yes you have listed failures of it, but im sure there would be far more failures of people using MS.
I mean if you search hard enough you can find "evidence" of the earth being flat......
I didn't have to search very hard actually. You are welcome to provide counter evidence of more failures in anchoring gear with gal mild steel (good luck with that). As I keep having to point out bringing up other uses is a diversion/ the whataboutism rhetorical fallacy.
Anyway here's another informative article:
https://www.practical-sailor.com/blog/is-stainless-steel-really-the-best-metal-for-use-in-an-anchor
-
34 minutes ago, wrxhoon1 said:
Very simple if you think mild steel is more suitable on your application, go ahead and use it. In my application I find marine grade S/S more suitable than anything else for all my fasteners on boat and trailer. I think you will agree ( maybe not) that the fact that all reputable boat manufactures use S/S, at much greater expense to mild/gal steel, know it is much more suitable .
So are you saying you object boat manufacturers using S/S cleats or anything else that you may tie the anchor rode on? What about the bow hook that you hook the winch hook on? Should that not be S/S, you put a lot more load on that when pulling a 3 t boat. In all my boating life I NEVER had to change one due to failure by either corrosion or breakage by the way the backing plate and nuts are S/S as well . All the cleats on my boat are S/S and I do sometimes tie the anchor on them. My Lewmar windlass is S/S and guess what the fasteners are S/S as well, I'm confidant they won't fail.
Don't you think Grady White would use Gal or mild steel if they thought it would be more suitable and save $$$?
The way you are raving on about, anyone would think we are anchoring a 200,000 t ship. The way I look it at is anything that I use will not fail before the anchor drags on the sand or the rock pick on the reef, the prongs will straighten long before anything else gives way.
You're the only one raving, you have just repeated your same mistake, ie the logical fallacy of whataboutism.
-
1
-
-
54 minutes ago, GoingFishing said:
Are you suggesting that there is no record, or documented failure of a gal snap or swivel in anchoring tackle?
Are you saying SS anchoring tackle is more likely to corrode than gal anchoring tackle?
This is just argumentative (more whataboutism). You know perfectly well what i am saying. Ie that S/S is more likely to fail and that corrosion in S/S is more likely to lead to failure. Firstly because the signs of corrosion are more subtle in S/S and secondly it does more damage to the strength and integrity than in the case of gal steel. This is only made worse by the much lower working strength to start with when you compare the ratings.
-
1
-
-
I'm not still on about about 'NOT using marine grade 316 S/S fittings and fasteners on boats used in saltwater?' , etc. I have never said anything about S/S not being suitable for any of the applications you mentioned. My only objection is for anchoring tackle and this is supported by links which include documented failures. . Saying it (your attribution), over and over again does not make it any more credible and is just a diversion from the actual argument. Ie there is a lot of whataboutism going on here: https://www.dictionary.com/e/whataboutisms/
-
The Suggested Work Load is 290 kg (and this is the only figure you need to pay attention to). Here is what he said:
"I have supplied manufacturer data showing that the snaps I use EACH have a suggested work load (SWL) of 290kg and a breaking strain (BS) of 1160kg. Two snaps combined in the way I use them have an SWL approaching 580kg and BS approaching 2320kg (my whole rig with 2 crew weighs 1972kg)".
The 1350 kg figure (a 'rating') is for the swivel not the snap so you didn't even get that right.
-
1
-
-
5 minutes ago, kingie chaser said:
If that was aimed at me we dont need SS for 4x4 recoveries, what we do need is rated gear & recovery points.
End of story.
Yes rated and not S/S. Doesn't that tell you something?
-
You haven't actually added anything new Zoran. And you haven't really explained away the documented failures in my links as well as the plausible explanations. The whole point is that S/S is more likely to be weakened by corrosion and without warning. And good luck seeing what is going on on the shaft and pins of your swivel seeing that they are hidden from view. Also they are also likely to absorb and retain water so in fact they can be exposed to water for a long time. Plus your anchor gear might be sitting in a wet anchor well for lengthy periods. And you are not really 'oversizing' when your snaps are only given a working load of 300 or so kg's whereas a gal D shackle rates in the tonnes (1-2 typically).
Engine and bollard bolts are not comparable. For a start the transom or bow takes much of the strain, you have 4 of them, they are a different component with different rating, they are not immersed as long, etc.
PS: S/S shackles are not recommended for recovery situations(4wd).
-
1
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, noelm said:
I guess because stainless is commonly used around boats, where other metals not so, no use worrying about (say) silver or titanium, hardly likely to find any on a boat, but stainless is commonly used, and often in applications where perhaps it shouldn't be
4 hours ago, GoingFishing said:All metals behave differently to each other. Its really common sense.
My point is, why single out SS for concerns over structural failure when thats a risk that exists with all metals.
Hmmm🤓🤓
Or that there was a post here showing an anchoring set up which included a stainless steel swivel and clips.
-
10 hours ago, GoingFishing said:
Seems like the issue you raise would be a universal problem for all metals....why single out SS lol??. Plenty of gal fittings that can catastrophically fail due to hidden structural failures? And in fact one could argue that gal has a higher risk as the structural failure could be hidden under the gal coating undetected...a problem which does not exist in SS
You can't have read my well researched links then Their whole point is that stainless steel behaves differently to gal steel.
-
Here's an article about the use of swivels and how they are a weak link. Also they recommend against the use of any stainless steel components:
https://www.practical-sailor.com/sails-rigging-deckgear/anchor-swivels-caution-required
"One of our concerns is material. Stainless steel, in our view, is to be avoided for any load-bearing components in the anchor rode. (For more details regarding our aversion to stainless steel, see our special report, Marine Metal Warning PS February 2007 online)".
-
You can't have read my links then.
-
2 hours ago, zmk1962 said:
Oh dear. Here we go again. All the best @kingfishbig, with your concerns regarding s/s I seriously recommend you x-ray check your s/s outboard mounting bolts for internal corrosion very frequently, for your peace of mind.
You can’t have one view on s/s shackles and another on all your other boat/motor s/s fittings.
cheers Zoranps - My last outboard s/s mounting bolts were in place for 21 years and spent far more time in water than my s/s anchor fittings - no corrosion issues. I am comfortable with my set up based on decades of personal experience. I’ll stick with what has worked for me.
Yes, well at least you have dropped comparisons to tilt rams and propellers. I'm not sure why you want to drag up different and unrelated applications when I have shown documented failures in S/S anchoring components, due to corrosion. Ie absolutely you can have different views for different applications.
-
Make sure you lock S/S shackles as they are more prone to coming undone (see my link on shackles).
PS: Oversizing won't compensate for failure due to corrosion in S/S parts, that's what my links were about. It can result in almost zero strength and unexpected failures due to the lack of visual signs. And your anchor is as safety item in the event of engine failure.
-
1 hour ago, zmk1962 said:
Thanks @kingfishbig. Another interesting read by the same author. He seems to be going against the rest of the industry on this topic. Both Stressfree Marine and Lonestar Marine - two of the major anchoring system suppliers in Oz recommended the swivel.
BTW I wonder how often that author changes all his gal steel anchor terminal gear compared to the s/steel alternative to keep it serviceable- I think you’d agree it would be much more frequent than the s/s alternative (yes stainless has a service life and would have to be changed eventually as well).
Anyway, as I said previously my s/s outboard mounting bolts, propeller, tilt trim shafts etc all spend far more time in saltwater than my anchor does - would that author recommend I change all these to gal steel !In my original post above I have shared what I have used for the past 4years so that I do not need any tools to change the anchor. There was a concern raised about snap hook holding strength - which I have address. There was a concern about using s/s - largely raised on the basis of one author who has a different view to the rest of the industry.
From what I can see, my anchoring requirements as a recreational powerboat user / fisherman are different from that of a cruising sail boater.
We all have to evaluate pros and cons and then use what suits our needs best. I have shared what works for me.cheers Zoran
Well independent advice is valuable, ie manufacturers are not likely to malign their own product. There is another discussion here so he is not exactly a lone voice:
https://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/f118/force-anchor-swivel-critical-failure-71238.html
Yes you will have to replace gal chain and shackles every now and then but they are so cheap and easly to change over you can treat them as a disposable item. Obviously things like propellers, trim and tilt etc are not as easliy replaced and the forces are different (eg aluminium and even plastic are used for propellers and you wouldn't even think about using them for anchoring tackle).
The principles are the same whether you are anchoring a yacht or fishing boat as far as i can see. The former might spend more time anchored so the problems might show up more often - but that gives us something to learn from.
-
Well the article seems to come down against S/S chain and also swivels. There is more on the latter when you look at the link:
http://www.coastalboating.net/Features/Editorials/swivels/index.html
It says the swivel is an uneccessary weak point. It also points out that with most designs the shaft is hidden so you can't check for corrosion and also it is likely to collect and retain moisture.
-
I think the explanation that some of it (the eastern section staring near the tunnel) is now a toll road/ no cash back.
-
1 hour ago, kingie chaser said:
So sounds like the cost will be the class B charge minus the class A charge if I read it correct?
I dont really need it right now but hey you never know when it will come in handy so Im going to apply to.
Still I wonder how this will work with the M5 cash scheme??
If you mean the cash back scheme it's gone isn't it? It's now a Toll road. You still get a notice on MyEtoll and you can then claim it back (the difference). I didn't see anything about it not coming into effect by Nov. Unless that means you have to wait until the quarterly notice is out by then and then you can claim back for the quarter.
-
New Signing has a point. Stainless steel is more brittle than mild steel. Also it can corrode in a low oxygen environment or if constantly wet and can lead to catastrophic failure even though it appears to be in acceptable condition. There is a good summary here:
http://cruising.coastalboating.net/Seamanship/Anchoring/MetalsUsedinAnchoringTackle/index.html
-
There are aftermarket, non standard one available.
-
10 minutes ago, flatheadluke said:
I think I can explain things a bit better.
RIGHT NOW
about 3 million people aged 65+ (Retirement age)
About 12 million people aged 15 to 64 (working age)so a ratio of working age to retireamber age of 1/4
projected 20 years time
about 10 million people retirement age
About 20 million working age
so a working age to retirement age of 1/2
what do you think would happen right now if we halved the number of people working and paying taxes? Could we still afford pensions and free healthcare?
You have ignored my point - it will be easier just to deal with it. I can provide some references if you like. Also where did you get those figures from? PS ironically much of the ageing bulge is the result of past waves of immigration.
-
1
-
1
-
Cronulla Trawler
in Fishing Chat
Posted
They use nets though - usually with dingies to position them.