A 1987 US Coast Guard Report Concluded That All Drogues and Sea Anchors Tested Successfully -- Provided They Were Properly Engineered

A 1987 US Coast Guard Report concluded that all drogues and sea anchors tested successfully -- provided they were properly engineered. It’s a conclusion ignored in Yachting World’s “Drogues & Sea Anchors” article.

Yachting World in its May 2014 article misquoted a 1987 US Coast Guard (USCG) report, claiming a series drogue tested better than cone-style drogues and sea anchors. The USCG report actually stated how all of the devices prevented vessel capsize successfully and not one specific product as alleged by Yachting World.

Perhaps misunderstanding the terminology contributed to Yachting World’s mistakes. In the USCG report, a drogue is defined as a sea anchor or any other similar device deployed from the bow or stern of a boat. This makes the report difficult to read as terms are used interchangeably to mean the same thing.

The Yachting World article also says the USCG report raises questions about deploying a drogue or sea anchor from the stern rather than the bow, especially from a fin keeled sailboat. The report’s consulting engineer and author, Donald Jordan, arrived at this conclusion primarily through model testing and computer analysis with minimal boat deployment of equipment.

What’s not mentioned in the Yachting World article are the numerous real- life stories published over the past several decades that demonstrate how equipment deployed from either end of a boat perform equally well as long as it is rigged properly.

Boaters might consider that the USCG report is nearly 30 years old. The Jordan series drogue was a new product built by Jordan to be specifically used for testing in the USCG report. While Jordan states in the report he

Page | 1

Copyright © 2016 Fiorentino Para-Anchor. All Rights Reserved. has no proprietary interest in the Jordan series drogue, he did strongly support the sale of the device through his business relationship with Ace Sailmakers (USA) by encouraging buyers to purchase the Jordan Series Drogue.

Both equipment and deployment/retrieval processes have changed significantly since 1987. There are newer products on the market now that effectively address issues of breaking waves. Many of the advantages of the series drogue that Jordan claims have been matched or surpassed by newer equipment and deployment procedures.

The USCG report states, “The U.S. Government does not endorse products or manufacturers.” It also says, “The report does not constitute a standard specification or regulation.” Throughout the report and in his final conclusion, Jordan, while favoring his own Jordan series drogue product, states that any properly engineered and correctly sized drogue can prevent breaking wave capsizing. This sentiment of Jordan’s was somehow overlooked by Yachting World.

Original series, cone-style drogues, and sea anchors tested in the 1987 USCG report. Photo courtesy USCG.

Page | 2

Publication: Yachting World Magazine Article Name: “Drogues and Sea Anchors” Pages: 86, 87, 88, 90, 91 Reporters: Elaine Bunting and Skip Novak Editor’s response: Elaine Bunting made some edit suggestions within our article and we made the changes. Ms. Bunting stated “I acknowledge the publication of your report and if you would like to give me a link to its location online I will add it as a link to our report.”

US Coast Guard responds to the 1987 report

USCG (2008) An e-mail to Fiorentino from the office of Design and Engineering Standard Lifesaving and Fire Safety Division helps clarify Jordan’s role in their test. Jordan formulated and collected the test data and then wrote the report with C.L. Hervey:

“In general, the Coast Guard does not endorse products and findings in test reports are presented as the opinions of the researchers and not necessarily the opinion of the Coast Guard….The R&D Center was in charge of the project with the assistance of Mr. Donald Jordan as a consulting engineer involved with formulation of test parameters, test methods, data acquisition, evaluation of results, and writing the report. The Coast Guard provided a convenient, low-cost test platform…”

USCG (2016) Fiorentino contacted the US Coast Guard in August 2016 to fact check this article. The USCG clarified in an e-mail there’s no recommendation of one drogue over any other. Here’s their recommendation:

“The Coast Guard recommends that individuals decide what drogue/arrangement will best fit their boat and the situations they need to be prepared for while operating.”

We agree boat design and personal preference are the big determining factors on what storm tactics a sailor chooses to use. Of course, a sailor’s level of experience inevitably contributes to the decision making process.

Page | 3

Clarifying misinformation & misquotes

In this article, we will review vital test details and relevant information omitted from the Yachting World article.

We are particularly concerned about claims in the Yachting World article that the USCG report “recommended” or stated the series drogue was the “best option” tested. This is misleading because it implies an endorsement was made from the USCG which can help boost product sales unfairly. This is a red flag to us, because the Coast Guard, as we pointed out, has never endorsed the series drogue or any other drogue for sea going vessels. In fact, as mentioned earlier, its report says all sea anchors and drogues work equally well if engineered properly.

In addition, Yachting World makes very little effort to balance its article. There are only positive statements about the series drogue and generally negative remarks about competing drogues and sea anchors. Without providing reasonable pros and cons about each device, we can’t see how a reader can make an informed decision about how to resolve a potential issue or choose the right safety device for themselves.

In some parts of the article, it is evident that the information is the reporter’s own opinions. However, in other areas, such as the descriptions of parachute anchors or series drogues, it misrepresents the conclusions of the USCG report. The article also ends with two additional pages of testimonials supporting only the series drogue with no attempt to present views of users deploying other types of drogues or sea anchors.

Finally, only one company is promoted in the Yachting World article through a web link. The company only sells the series drogue. Yachting World’s online digital version of “Drogues and Sea Anchors” sends you directly to the seller’s website. All of this seems bias to us considering standard protocol with most publications is to list several competing manufacturers.

Page | 4

Yachting World claims & our response

The following quotes are taken from Yachting World’s “Drogues and Sea Anchors” article that we feel misquote or omit important details related to the USCG research. “Yachting World’s Claim” is followed by “Our Response” which includes additional details we feel have been overlooked. We hope to bring balance by showing both points of view in an attempt to present both the pros and cons of each drag device tested.

Yachting World Claim: “The report also notes that “in the trough of a wave/ swell {when} the para-anchor rode goes slack, the yacht will commence to yaw, wanting to lie ahull, thereby leaving it partially or totally beam to the sea with the possibility of being knocked flat or rolled.”

Our Response: The USCG report describes how all of the drogues, especially the series drogue, suffer from the same issue of rode going slack leading to possible vessel knockdown.

What Yachting World excludes is how Jordan, who authored the USCG report, added 35 pounds of weight to prevent his 90 element series drogue from collapsing and the yacht from yawing during his tests. Jordan concluded “For smaller boats a 25 lb. anchor is adequate. For large boats a 35 to 50 lb. anchor is preferable” to successfully deploy the Jordan series drogue.

Donald Jordan recommended 25 to 50 lbs. be added to his series drogue. C/O USCG

Page | 5

There is no indication Jordan used chain weight with the cone-style drogues or sea anchors during his testing process. Fiorentino tested chain weight with various drag devices in the years after the report was written, which demonstrates that weight placement is an important solution for all storm drogues. Not all drogue manufacturers recommend chain weight.

Interestingly, Fiorentino discovered weight placement is not as important for the para-anchors as with storm drogues since para-anchors hold more water.

The extra force from larger devices helps reduce slack rode, assuming the parachutes are sized and matched properly to the boat. Para-anchor sizing does vary between manufacturers.

Additionally, some of Fiorentino’s Constant Rode Tension Solutions™, we feel enhance para-anchor and storm drogue performance include, but are not limited to: using rode with less stretch, rode adjustment, shorter bridles, the Free-Flying riding sail™, and engine or sail power. These are some of the alternatives for dramatically reducing slack rode to reduce the yawing problem besides chain. All of these have been developed and tested since the USCG report was issued in 1987. (To learn more about these solutions check out Fiorentino’s Constant Rode Tension Program).

Yachting World Claim: “The US Coast Guard report raises some serious issues about these drogues streamed from the bow. It ‘questions the veracity of claims’ they offer bullet proof protection in storm survival conditions.”

Our Response: The report does address possible issues with drogues streamed from the bow of a boat, especially a fin keeled sailboat, but mostly related to slack rode. This slack rode problem occurred astern “with any drogue” according to Jordon in his USCG report, “particularly if a series type drogue is used.” It’s unclear why Yachting World omitted how the series drogue suffered from the same problem as the drogue “streamed from the bow.”

Page | 6

Yachting World Claim: “The report concludes that a series type drogue provides significant advantage over a cone or parachute type drogue/sea anchor…”

Our Response: Throughout the report, Jordan makes it clear how every drag device (the cone-drogue, sea anchor, and the series drogue) displayed the same results when they were properly sized. Although Jordan favors his product in the conclusion of the report, Jordan still mentions how all the drogue designs function if they are “properly engineered.”

More quotes from Donald Jordan to consider Here are just a few quotes from Jordan in the USCG report to further support the “properly engineered” statement written throughout Jordon’s report which we believe is another way of saying “properly built and sized”:

“The overall conclusion of this early testing was that a properly designed drogue could prevent capsize.”

“It was found that for a small sailing yacht with a displacement of 7500 lbs. a cone or parachute drogue with a diameter of 4 feet or an equivalent series drogue would generally prevent capsize even when the model was struck by a very large breaking wave.”

“The two conventional drogue configurations are the cone drogue and the parachute drogue. Both types have been used successfully in a variety of applications.”

“A sea anchor deployed from the bow would have to be much larger, 2 or 3 times the diameter of a stern drogue, in order to hold the bow into the wind and sea.”

Page | 7

Clarifying Terminology It’s important to note that Jordan used the terms drogue and sea anchor interchangeably to mean the same thing (cone or series) and the report included both the bow and stern deployment of these devices. Additionally, Jordon performed both “model tests” and “full scale tests.” The cone-style drogue, cone sea anchor and series drogue were sporadically tested for comparison; meaning that sometimes only the series drogue was tested and not the cone-style devices. Jordan does make the inconsistencies in the testing process known and acknowledges that some of his interpretations had to be based upon “assumptions.” This makes comparison purposes from computer simulations complex and can raise questions of inaccuracies. Pages 10 and 11 in this article show what the different drag devices actually look like today and in 1987.

Yachting World Claim: “The US Coast Guard has made an exhaustive study of the merits of two popular systems, the parachute anchor and the series drogue.”

Our Response: The parachute anchor was not tested in the USCG report. Only the cone- style drogue and the cone-style sea anchor were tested against Jordan’s product. Pages 10 and 11 in this article show what the different drag devices actually look like today and in 1987.

Yachting World Claim: “This sought to address the pros and cons, and concluded that the best possible option may be the series drogue…”

Our Response: In his final segment in the USCG report, Jordan does write that his Jordan series drogue has some possible advantages, but still admitted that all of the devices in the report performed equally when the equipment was engineered or sized properly. So why does Yachting World publish only the pros regarding the series drogue and then omit the documented cons? This is peculiar, especially considering the series drogue had the worst performance in the USCG report, until chain weight was added to the Jordan drogue. Chain weight happens to be a primary solution for resolving most of the drogue deployment problems, as demonstrated in Fiorentino’s 2013 storm drogue comparison video published on YouTube.

Page | 8

It is also troubling to understand why Yachting World emphasizes the negatives of the cone drogue and sea anchor and then omit their positive traits. After all, the pros and cons, as Yachting World admits to, are stated in the USCG report.

Additional information overlooked in Yachting World’s article is the collection of new drogue designs that may equal or surpass the attributes Jordan claims about his series drogue. Since the 1987 report, hundreds of published testimonials demonstrate how many para-anchors and storm drogues perform well if they are properly engineered and sized. We also believe new types of deployment and rigging setups pioneered by Fiorentino to remove slack rode may contribute to improved performance of these devices. (To learn more check out Fiorentino’s Constant Rode Tension Program).

Yachting World Claim: The following caption was placed upon a photograph of a deployed parachute anchor, “Parachute anchors help a yacht hold station, but produce hazards of their own.”

Our Response: Singling out the parachute anchor, which was not tested in the 1987 USCG report, and presenting it in a negative way, when it is a proven method of survival, once again brings to question the intent of Yachting World’s article. Pages 10 and 11 in this article show what the different drag devices look like today and in 1987.

Page | 9

Equipment Tested in the 1987 USCG Report Jordan Series Drogue vs. the Cone Drogue

Advocates of the Jordan series drogue have implied that parachute sea anchors were tested against the series drogue. Photographs demonstrate how only cone-style anchors were tested and not the para-anchor, which is designed entirely different.

Series Drogue Cone Drogue

The series drogue is a series of miniature cone-like drogues The cone-style drogue and sea anchor were both shaped like woven into a long length of anchor rode. Donald Jordan who a funnel and interchangeably deployed from the bow and authored the 1987 USCG report, tested his series drogue in the stern of a boat during Jordan’s tests. report and later helped sell it through Ace Sail Makers in the United States. The singular cone design has been in use for centuries. Photo by Zack Smith Modern drogue designs come in a variety of different shapes that do not take on the look of a cone or funnel. Photo by Zack Smith

Original series, cone-style drogues, and cone sea anchors that were tested in the 1987 USCG report. Jordan used many terms to describe the cone drogues including parachute anchor and parachute drogue. Photo courtesy USCG

Page | 10

Equipment Not Tested in the 1987 USCG Report Para-Anchors and Modern Storm Drogues

It’s unclear why Donald Jordan chose not to test parachute anchors and other storm drogues supplied during the 1980s as several brands were readily available including: Dan Shewmon Inc., Galerider, Para-Tech Eng., Seabrake, and Gerrard Fiorentino.

Parachute Anchor

The modern para-anchor became available following WWII and was initially made from converted airman chutes. The parachute-style sea anchor (dome-like in shape) was not tested in the 1987 USCG report. Photo by Zack Smith

Many new storm drogue designs have become available since the 1987 USCG report was written nearly 30 years ago. Only the cone-style drogue was tested in the USCG report and not the storm drogues shown in these photos. A mushroom anchor is recommended with a Shark and chain is sometimes used with the Galerider, Seaclaw, Seabrake, and the Para-drogue. Weight sinks storm drogues and helps limit rode slack. Photos by Zack Smith/Bob Ritner

Page | 11

Conclusion

This article is to better inform sailors about the many misconceptions associated with the 1987 US Coast Guard report. Sailors deserve to know the actual differences between drogues and sea anchors and having information misrepresented surely does not help the cause.

The Yachting World article ignored key information presented in the USCG report. Whereas the 1987 report stated that all of the sea anchors and drogues (series and cone-style) performed equally well in preventing capsizing of vessels, the Yachting World article stated otherwise.

There is a clear discrepancy between the USCG report and the claims made by Yachting World, especially considering that the Yachting World article referenced the USCG report. Publications should be unbiased and state the facts as originally published in its entirety.

We would like to reiterate that every single drag device, when engineered properly, displayed similar results. Series drogues, cone-style drogues, and sea anchors all performed equally well when they were properly sized. There is no evidence to suggest that one is superior to the other, especially considering para-anchors and storm drogues are deployed differently and have slightly different functions.

The only significant differences we have discovered are how some devices pack easier than others, some are easier to deploy and retrieve than others, and some devices are built flimsily while others are more robust. Rigging setups and sizing also plays a role. In the end, it is a matter of personal preference if you opt for a parachute sea anchor or storm drogue.

Page | 12

Addendum: Terminology Confusion What’s the difference between a sea anchor & storm drogue?

Although the differences between a sea anchor and storm drogue have been defined within many articles, books and videos, it is still common for sailors to ask what the differences are between these devices. The 1987 USCG report unintentionally may have added to the confusion when author Donald Jordan made the decision to define the terms drogue and sea anchor to mean the same thing. Jordon wrote, “For this report the term drogue is used to describe a drag device of any type or size deployed from either the bow or stern, and may be used interchangeably with the term sea anchor.”

Cone drogues tested in the 1987 report have different purposes than modern sea anchors. Illustration and chart courtesy USCG

Reading the USCG report can be somewhat challenging because it can be easy to confuse which drag device Jordan is making reference to: the cone drogue, cone sea anchor, or series drogue, as sometimes Jordan is referring to a specific device or all of the above at the same time. Combine that with a lengthy technical report and we can see how it might be possible for anyone to overlook or misinterpret the information. In an effort to clarify terminology, Fiorentino divides drag devices into two groups, the sea anchor and storm drogue. Each one has different purposes.

Page | 13

Sea Anchor An underwater device that produces drag in an effort to nearly stop a boat’s drift. Sea anchors are deployed underwater and are attached to the bow of a boat to slow the vessel’s drift and point the bow of the boat into the wind and the waves. The device is commonly used for storm survival or drift fishing. There are a variety of names used to describe a specific type of sea anchor, which include drift anchor, drift bag, drift sock, and para-anchor.

Sea anchor is the generic term to describe all of the different styles of anchors used for storm survival or drift fishing: drift anchor, drift bag, and drift sock are all generic terms for describing sea anchors built specifically for drift fishing. They are normally shaped like a cone.

The term para-anchor was coined by its pioneer Gerrard Fiorentino. Fiorentino’s business associate, Eddie Cohen from Transcontinental Inc., helped popularize the term para-anchor through national advertisements in the late 1950s and early 60s.

Para-anchor is an abbreviation for parachute sea anchor. This type of sea anchor is shaped like an aerial parachute and forms a hemispherical dome-like shape underwater. Parachute designs have a larger surface area permitting the device to capture more water than their conical cousin. This explains why para-anchors A parachute sea anchor deployed from a boat dramatically slows the drift of a boat and are more effective sea anchors. points the bow into the sea. Photo courtesy Fiorentino Para-Anchor

Page | 14

Speed-limiting drogues come in many shapes and sizes and are the most popular type of storm drogue used for running away from a storm. Photo courtesy Fiorentino Para-Anchor

Storm Drogue Anything towed behind a vessel to slow the boat down for running downwind. A storm drogue is designed to help slow the boat so it doesn't fall sideways to the waves, but not slow it so much that waves can break on the cockpit.

Steering is vastly improved as the boat can pivot easier when it is traveling closer to hull speed. Fiorentino in recent years has opted to use “storm drogue” as the preferred definition since the term “drogue” is associated with drugs in many countries outside the USA. Either storm drogue or drogue is technically accurate and can be used interchangeably for instruction purposes. A storm drogue may also be used as a tool for emergency steering.

There are two types of storm drogues: speed-limiting and stopping drogue. A speed-limiting drogue is typically a single, canopy storm drogue made from various patterns of open or solid fabric. It is designed to slow, not stop, a boat. Numerous brands are available online. Fiorentino also considers towing anchor rodes, referred to as warps, as speed-limiting drogues.

A stopping drogue (also referred to as a series or medium pull drogue) is a long length of anchor rode with multiple cones woven into the rope. A stopping drogue is designed to point the stern into approaching waves by

Page | 15

The series drogue is a storm drogue by the mere fact that it is deployed from the stern. It is designed to be a passive tactic where sailors go below and wait out the storm similar to a bow deployed para-anchor. The USCG report does indicate special reinforcement requirements in the cockpit area to prepare for breaking wave strikes when using the stopping drogue. Boats designed with canoe sterns will likely fare better with the stopping drogue than flat transom boats as canoe sterns can slice through waves similarly to the bow of a boat.

Modern storm drogues come in a variety of shapes and sizes. Illustration from Sail Magazine’s “What a drag” comparison article May 2008. Storm drogues not to scale. Reprinted with permission from illustrator Steve Sanford

Page | 16

References & Technical Reports

Testing procedures have significantly improved in recent years, with greater emphasis being placed on side-by-side comparisons of storm drogues instead of relying on model testing, which tends to be less accurate when comparing products. Below is the 1987 US Coast Guard report referenced by Yachting World along with other recent reports and comparison research.

Sources A special thank you to the US Coast Guard for taking the time to review our article and Mark Hanlon P.E. PMP for his guidance and review of our work to ensure technical accuracy which gave us confidence to move forward on this project. Hanlon’s analysis of the 1987 USCG report provided essential data we felt the public should know about.

Investigation of The Use of Drogues To Improve The Safety of Sailing Yachts Report No. CG-D-20-87 1987

7 Drogues at Sea - testing with and without chain YouTube video comparison test with load cell January 21, 2013

4 Parachute Sea Anchors - comparing for storm use YouTube video comparison January 24, 2013