Chart Sticker Shock 2018

[Cheechako]

Originally Posted by Benz

I don't have an electrical system: everything electronic I use (handheld GPS and a couple LED headlamps) runs on AA and AAA batteries. Measuring not required.

Yes but are those batteries 1.50 volts or 1-1/2 volts?

[martinworswick]

Originally Posted by Cheechako

Yes but are those batteries 1.50 volts or 1-1/2 volts?

and either way it'd still be be volts,which are metric as are amperes and watts,watts are the only one with an equivalent which is HP

[ArmyDaveNY]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Just like any mission critical system -- have backups.

Charts can "take a dump", too -- they can get blown away overboard, things spilled on them, etc.

But I also think that being without cartography or position data is not the end of the world for a reasonably competent mariner.

Tony Stewart, the first, and perhaps unsurprisingly the only, person to circumnavigate in a 20 foot open boat, lost his charts five days into the journey. He figured that Columbus and others never had charts so he used a world map and a compass to complete the trip.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1QkZN35RZfU

[Jim Cate]

Originally Posted by ArmyDaveNY

Tony Stewart, the first, and perhaps unsurprisingly the only, person to circumnavigate in a 20 foot open boat, lost his charts five days into the journey. He figured that Columbus and others never had charts so he used a world map and a compass to complete the trip.

A great accomplishment, but didn't Webb Chiles also rtw in a 19 foot Drascombe Lugger?

Jim

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by ArmyDaveNY

Tony Stewart, the first, and perhaps unsurprisingly the only, person to circumnavigate in a 20 foot open boat, lost his charts five days into the journey. He figured that Columbus and others never had charts so he used a world map and a compass to complete the trip.

Ya, of course. Charts are really interesting only around coasts. You don't need them to cross oceans.

[El Pinguino]

Originally Posted by Jim Cate

A great accomplishment, but didn't Webb Chiles also rtw in a 19 foot Drascombe Lugger?

Jim

Not quite... only got 80% or 7/8ths or thereabout.... gave up after his boat was vandalised in the Canaries.....

There was a second Lugger... 'Triangle Island' from Canada... I know he got as far as the Red Sea... not sure if he went the whole way or not.

I guess I could google it..... works for others...

[ArmyDaveNY]

Hi Jim and El Pinguino, Your comments got me thinking and I did a quick, although certainly not exhaustive search, and found this:
Food list

It talks about famous small boats and their journeys. There is a guy named Serge Teste who circumnavigated in a 12 foot sailboat from 1984 to 1987. I thought that would be an open boat but it actually had a cabin/pilot house. Here are some photos:
https://www.bing.com/images/search?q...boat&FORM=IGRE

This first link lists Ant Stewart as the first open boat circumnavigation. They don't show any others but that doesn't mean the list is complete. Regardless, they list some impressive sailing feats.

[Cadence]

Originally Posted by ArmyDaveNY

Hi Jim and El Pinguino, Your comments got me thinking and I did a quick, although certainly not exhaustive search, and found this:
Food list

It talks about famous small boats and their journeys. There is a guy named Serge Teste who circumnavigated in a 12 foot sailboat from 1984 to 1987. I thought that would be an open boat but it actually had a cabin/pilot house. Here are some photos:
https://www.bing.com/images/search?q...boat&FORM=IGRE

This first link lists Ant Stewart as the first open boat circumnavigation. They don't show any others but that doesn't mean the list is complete. Regardless, they list some impressive sailing feats.

Thanks! Looks like a twelve foot boat with all the comforts of home.

[ArmyDaveNY]

Originally Posted by Cadence

Thanks! Looks like a twelve foot boat with all the comforts of home.

That boat reminded me of a customer who was sailing down the east coast of the U.S. in a Scamp. He was then going to Costa Rica and from there to Cuba! His wife didn't seem as enthusiastic as he was!

In case one is not familiar with the Scamp, it looks like an Optimist with a small cuddy cabin. It is 11 feet 11 inches long or just under 3 meters for those who use that other system, or 8 cubits (being all inclusive and that sort of thing)!! It's also a very stable vessel and as the video below shows, it takes some effort to capsize it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wRZNWAkdkXM&t=174s

[TonyBe]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

For us sailors, it doesn't make much difference which system we use. But for industry and science, the simplification, standardization, and rationalization of units has vast advantages, reducing the risk of mistakes in conversion, reducing overhead involved with calculating anything, improving visualization of unit. Non-metric units are simply not used in science, not anywhere -- ask any scientist what he thinks about the metric system. It's fine to wax over the quaint "beauty" of traditional measures, but this beauty is not visible to serious users of measures who have to do complex calculations involving different types of measures. Traditional systems of measures, often using fractions instead of decimals, with a large number of different measures with complex relationships to each other, and varying from one country to another (and formerly even from one county to another), are poorly suited to any kind of high level use of measures.

Following on from this, I recently came across an O-level maths exam that my father took back in the 1950s (for non-Brits, this was a national exam taken by about the top 20% of pupils at age 16). This is a question from the arithmetic section:-

If certain goods cost £9 6s, 8d. per ton what is the price of 19 cwt. 3 qr. 14 lb.?

To answer this question, the 16 year old in the 1950s would need to remember that there are:-

14 pounds in a stone
2 stones in a quarter
4 quarters in a hundredweight
20 hundredweight in a ton.


Isn't it just far easier to work in metric?

If certain goods cost £9.3333 per 1016kg what is the price of 1009.7kg

[Jim Cate]

Isn't it just far easier to work in metric?

NO!!! By using metric units you are furthering a Communist plot to destroy our minds.

Jim

[Kelkara]

Originally Posted by TonyBe

Following on from this, I recently came across an O-level maths exam that my father took back in the 1950s (for non-Brits, this was a national exam taken by about the top 20% of pupils at age 16). This is a question from the arithmetic section:-

If certain goods cost £9 6s, 8d. per ton what is the price of 19 cwt. 3 qr. 14 lb.?

Isn't it just far easier to work in metric?

If certain goods cost £9.3333 per 1016kg what is the price of 1009.7kg

In this particular case ... no, it is not easier like that.

The correct solution is indeed to reduce the abomination of units to something simpler, but Kg and decimal currency are the wrong frame of reference.

The trick is to realise that £9 6s 8d per ton = 2240d per 2240 lbs or 1d/lb.
The calculation is now trivial ... 19 cwt. 3 qr. 14 lb is just 14lb less than a ton, so the cost will be 14d or 1s 2d less = £9 5s 6d.

O-level maths was never about the arithmetic, but about finding simple and elegant solutions to problems.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by TonyBe

Following on from this, I recently came across an O-level maths exam that my father took back in the 1950s (for non-Brits, this was a national exam taken by about the top 20% of pupils at age 16). This is a question from the arithmetic section:-




To answer this question, the 16 year old in the 1950s would need to remember that there are:-

14 pounds in a stone
2 stones in a quarter
4 quarters in a hundredweight
20 hundredweight in a ton.


Isn't it just far easier to work in metric?

If certain goods cost £9.3333 per 1016kg what is the price of 1009.7kg

Sure, but Benz's point was that "easy" is not the primary value -- those who have brains don't necessarily need "easy". I actually agree with him there! But "easy" is not the only, or even the main advantage of the metric system.

When I was in school, I had a chemistry teacher who passionately hated non-metric measures, using words like "perversion". This was in the mid '70's (dating myself here). As a joke, a pal of mine and I wrote a paper where all the units of pressure were in stones per square furlong, volume in gills, area in square rods, etc., etc., etc. It was hilarious. He loved it It was not at all easy to put together! In those days when "electronic calculators" still cost thousands of dollars.

[SuW]

Originally Posted by boatpoker

The Great Lakes are mostly rock and have not changed much since the 1800's when originally charted...

Well, apart from the St. Lawrence Seaway and the Welland Canal and most harbour entrances...

Originally Posted by boatpoker

If they accurately re-charted the whole route tonight, it would be wrong next month. I have never been concerned about using old charts in these waters as by far the most important navigation tool you have is your own eyesight.

This is the most important point. Even if your charts are wrong and you hit something (that isn't another boat) it's your own darn fault!

[Alan Mighty]

Originally Posted by ArmyDaveNY

Hi Jim and El Pinguino, Your comments got me thinking and I did a quick, although certainly not exhaustive search, and found this:
Food list

It talks about famous small boats and their journeys. There is a guy named Serge Teste who circumnavigated in a 12 foot sailboat from 1984 to 1987. I thought that would be an open boat but it actually had a cabin/pilot house. Here are some photos:
https://www.bing.com/images/search?q...boat&FORM=IGRE

Snap!

Serge has his current boat, a large catamaran, in the marina I use as my base. And his famous circumnav boat is in a local museum. I see Serge on the dock every now and then.