Jessica Watson's Round-the-World Voyage

[sec906]

Originally Posted by slomotion

...But the actual speed record is something like 57 days. For multi-million dollar, purpose built, space age, speed record type trimarans...

A new record was set two months ago by Franck Cammas, it took just over 48 days.

[slomotion]

Originally Posted by sec906

A new record was set two months ago by Franck Cammas, it took just over 48 days.

The solo record is held by Francis Joyon (2008) in about 57 and a half days. Cammas' absolute record was done with a 10 man crew. But I take your point: Jessica and other traditional circumnavigators are not in the same ballpark with the serious speed guys.

They would never presume to be. And I would add that, because of that, it is silly and stupid to try to hold these two disparate groups to the same standards. Jessica is doing it, more or less, the way sailors in ordinary boats have been doing it for over 40 years. It is presumptupous and insulting for WSSRC to retroactively "sanction" Robin Knox-Johnson for something he did years before WSSRC existed and even more years before WSSRC invented their RTW definition. Knox-Johnson and those who follow in his wake disserve better than that.

[smyjpmu]

Hey, great job, but she didn't sail around the world. She sailed around Antarctica.

Great job, Antarctica is really big (about twice as big as Australia), but it isn't the world. Take a look at a globe some time, or a map projection which distorts Antarctica less than the Mercator projection. The Transverse Mercator Projection (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...ercTranSph.png) is especially damning.

By the way, what's the point of crossing the equator twice? That's a completely arbitrary rule.

[Factor]

So then that exactly what Jesse Martin did, Ken Gourley did and Kay cottee did - so they didnt sail round the world either???

[smyjpmu]

Jesse Martin sailed around the world. In order to sail around the world, first you have to sail halfway around the world.

[Factor]

Keeping the record straight: Almost nobody sailed around the world if you use the Nancy Knudsen "rule"

Score so far:

1. Jesse Martin [youngest]: 21.514 nm (no circumnavigation: 86 nm short - took St Miguel as turning point)
2. Kay Cottee [first female]: 18.005 nm (no circumnavigation: 3.595 nm short - took St Peter and St Paul Rocks as turning point)
3. Jon Sanders [first double and first triple]: 18.220 nm x 3 = 54.660 nm (no circumnavigation x 3: 10.140 nm short - took St Peter and St Paul rocks as turning points and passed all meredians more then once, which does not count)
4. Ken Gourlay [fastest australian]: 19.275 nm (no circumnavigation: 1.125 nm short - took the route: south tasmania, south NZ, Tristan da Cunha, St. Helena, Ascension, Peter and Paul Rocks, Tristan da Cunha, home.

Sail world extensively reported of Ken Gourlays circumnavigation, not once mentioning it was no circumnavigation at all. (according to their own standards)

If Sanders took the same route as with his double circumnavigation in 1981, that record goes down the drain too.

[bengtinge]

Originally Posted by Factor

So then that exactly what Jesse Martin did, Ken Gourley did and Kay cottee did - so they didnt sail round the world either???

Jesse Martin did it correct, according to what I read. He rounded an Azores Island in the mid-Atlantic.

I did today some calculations in this matter, using Excel formulas. According to them, in order to fulfil this rule, in reality one must pass a waypoint that is near the antipode of the starting port. Only one waypoint besides the start is allowed in the calculation.

If not passing the antipode some other waypoint giving equal distance must be rounded. But this waypoint can't be located too far from the antipode.

Usually circumnavigations start in Europe or eastern US, then it is not possible to go straight to the antipode. This adds distance so it is not needed to visit the antipode, which also would be easier reachable in the neighbourhood of Australia or New Zealand. For example, the Vendée Globe starts at 46°N 2°W and has a waypoint at 57°S 180°E, enough distance, even if not passing the antipode directly.

Jesse Martin started in Melbourne at 38°S 145°W and rounded the Azores at 38°N 25°W. Together with the detour to round Africa and South America it gave long distance enough.

I think Jessica would have had to use a similar path as Jesse Martin to fulfil the rule.

I started a discussion in the Abby Sunderland thread about her. I think she will go far enough, starting at Marina del Rey at 34°N 118°W and having a waypoint in Cape Town at 34°S 18°E, but I am not sure.

I don't think starting at Cabo San Lucas and having a waypoint outside South Africa, according to the original plan, was enough. I think she would have had to visit the antipode of Cabo San Lucas.

[bengtinge]

Originally Posted by Factor

Keeping the record straight: Almost nobody sailed around the world if you use the Nancy Knudsen "rule"

Score so far:

1. Jesse Martin [youngest]: 21.514 nm (no circumnavigation: 86 nm short - took St Miguel as turning point)

How did you calculate this number? The WSSRC has approved Jesse Martins record as long enough.

[smyjpmu]

Sounds like a bad rule. Why should distance matter? To travel around the world, you go halfway around the world, then you go back home. All the nonsense about "rounding capes" and "turning points" and "meridians" and "the equator" are unnecessary.

The earth is (roughly) a sphere. Just because the most popular projection of it puts antarctica on the bottom and draws all lines of latitude as an equal distance, that doesn't mean that is correct. Stick Australia on the bottom, stretch out the bottom and top so you make a rectangle, and sail around Australia. Now can you say you sailed "around the world"?

[Jim D]

Originally Posted by smyjpmu

By the way, what's the point of crossing the equator twice? That's a completely arbitrary rule.

Aren't you arguing with yourself a bit on this one?
If you cross it once, then you must cross it again to get back to your starting point.
Even your version of what the course should be includes coming back to the start.

~

[smyjpmu]

Originally Posted by Jim D

Aren't you arguing with yourself a bit on this one?
If you cross it [the equator] once, then you must cross it again to get back to your starting point.

No, my point is that it's artificial and redundant. To go around the world, you have to cross *every* great circle twice. In fact, that's perhaps an even more succinct definition.

[Jim D]

Originally Posted by smyjpmu

Sounds like a bad rule. ...

The real problem, that leads to "bad" rules, is all those darn land masses stuck here and there on the globe. If we could just get over them, all this RTW definition activity would be far simpler. Astronauts and Cosmonauts have worked this problem for their global orbits.

Since we are discussing surface travel, and we acknowledge on many front that the "rules" and definitions are imperfect, it does seem to be attaining the dead horse status, as in "beating a dead horse".

smyjpmu, what sort of boat do you sail, where are you joining us from?

Jim
no boat
Texas
~

[clockwork orange]

So, by Nancys or any other definition would Kiwi, Peter Freemans 1984 trip from Victoria, BC to Victoria, BC (with one stop for repairs in Santa Barbara outbound) qualify as a legitimate circumnavigation? He covered 26776 miles in 268 days in a homebuilt 32 ft boat without fanfare.Would his trip qualify if it was started and finished from Santa Barbara? His one stop.Just curious.
Steve.

[bengtinge]

Originally Posted by Factor

Keeping the record straight: Almost nobody sailed around the world if you use the Nancy Knudsen "rule"

Score so far:

1. Jesse Martin [youngest]: 21.514 nm (no circumnavigation: 86 nm short - took St Miguel as turning point)

Originally Posted by bengtinge

How did you calculate this number? The WSSRC has approved Jesse Martins record as long enough.

I did a calculation on Jesse Martins voyage. First, adding his big capes along his route so he did not have to sail across continents, Cape Horn, Sao Miguel and Cape Good Hope gives 21,511 nm (I can not guarrantee my formula is exact).

When checking he route more in detail in the Bass strait and considering the size of Sao Miguel (34 nm) gives a little more. But what saves him is the rule that you don't have to draw the route south of 63°S. The shortest path between Melbourne and Cape Horn goes to 75°S. I get 21,811 nm.

[Bash]

There's a minor technical detail here: instead of leaving her antipodal point to starboard, she took it to port.

To a true cruiser, that's not as serious an infraction as painting the boat pink. Perhaps we're condemning her of the wrong sins?