Minimum Tech

[qsiv]

But theres nothing here .... yet!

<hr width=100% size=1>

[jimi]

Who said that ... Celia?

<hr width=100% size=1>I Have The Body Of A God... Buddha

[tome]

A blank canvass!

Picking up the thread, propose (subject to discussion/agreement):

- Departure from Needles or Bembridge ledge
- Destination Cherbourg
- Goal: Minimum logged miles v rhumb line distance
- No use of PC or modern aids for passage planning
- No use of GPS or electronic navaids for crossing
- Echo sounder and log permitted
- Radar permitted for CA only
- No engine (unless becalmed?)

Count Amaya in! Dates to be decided. Should we make it neaps or tatties?

<hr width=100% size=1><P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1>Edited by tome on 19/03/2004 09:21 (server time).</FONT></P>

[qsiv]

I'd beg to differ on one of the objectives ..

I dont think distance v log is relevant - all one really needs is arrival closest to planned arival time.

The shortest duration crossing may very well NOT be the shortest distance.

The only complication here of course is boats quoting a later arrival target, and jilling around to kill time - but then that's what rally crews have to do, so maybe it is valid.

<hr width=100% size=1>

[tome]

Ok Iain, no problem with this.

When do we announce our arrival time? I suspect (like last time) that boats will leave at different times depending on crew commitments etc so not feasible to say be in Cherbourg at 6pm Saturday or whatever.

I'd prefer to call SWMBO or a nominated contact at Bembridge and for them to post my ETA.

<hr width=100% size=1>

[bedouin]

Trouble is I can pretty well guarantee arrival time by allowing plenty of spare time then wasting it all within sight of the entrance.

Also arrival time will be very heavily dependent on wind / weather which can be difficult to predict in advance

<hr width=100% size=1>

[tome]

How about predicted v actual distance?

<hr width=100% size=1>

[bedouin]

I'm going to be difficult here

How would you measure actual distance? The problem is that the expected accuracy of the log (or mine at least) is much less than the sort of differences in distance. So for example a 10 degree error in course only represents a 2% increase in distance - and my log is not that accurate

<hr width=100% size=1>

[Jeremy_W]

- Goal: Minimum logged miles v rhumb line distance

I have to disagree with your "goal". The goal is to complete the passsage! Along the way you will either
a) have had to switch on your electronic gizmos and computers for safety (and now realise beyond doubt how dependent upon them you have become)
b) not have needed them (which gives you a perfect defence against the next slick electronics salesman trying to sell you "essential" kit)

I'll add one proviso. Each yacht shall carry a traditional (non-digital) radio tuned deliberately between stations so that it produces nothing but endless interference and static. Each skippers shall proudly refer to this as "The RDF"!

This sounds like fun. Is BIGNICK doing entertainments? Is Twister Ken doing awards? Whose yacht shall we try to capsize?

<hr width=100% size=1>

[roly_voya]

If you are going to run this on traditional values they it should be judged by traditional values so
1 Leave port
2 IF you make a landfall say hallo to the nearest local - if they reply in french you win!
3 If you ever bump into any of the other boats in the 'competition' again just lie about how you did because unless they cheated (by using hight tech comm's) how they going to know any different!
And of course don't forget the most traditional practice of all which is to drink yourself sensless and wake up in a house of ill repute or co-oped into the navy

<hr width=100% size=1>