Leopard 46 lost in French Polynesia - stunning rescue pictures

[estarzinger]

well, this is sort of interesting . . . . there does not appear to be a currently published official chart of Beveridge detail - I checked with UK, NZ, French and US hydro offices. That's pretty unusual in this day and age where almost everything is charted and surveyed within cm's. It is also curious that it is obscured in google earth - not sure what that is about.

[toddster8]

Google Earth does not have satellite images for most of the Pacific. Only near select "points of interest." The rest is low-resolution bathymetry.

Notice for example, that Google shows satellite images of the main islands around Fiji, but those images do not always extend to the reefs surrounding the islands.
!

[estarzinger]

Originally Posted by toddster8

Google Earth does not have satellite images for most of the Pacific. Only near select "points of interest." The rest is low-resolution bathymetry.

mmm . . . well Minerva Reef, which is pretty equivalent to Beveridge is shown in good detail.



and Beveridge looks to me intentionally obscured - note the pretty good sea surface detail around the reef area, but the jpg blocks only right over the reef. I am wondering if someone somehow is using this as one of their copy write infringement checks (remember the whole island that was put on e-charts that did not exist at all for this purpose, and there was a very similar obscuring over that area on google earth).

[gbgreen59]

Originally Posted by estarzinger

mmm . . . well Minerva Reef (both N and S), which is pretty equivalent to Beveridge is shown in good detail.

Attachment 155064

Also, there are pictures of Beveridge Reef on the web that look like the one above. Not sure why those aren't inserted into Google Earth. Maybe there is some copyright infringement issue.

https://www.bing.com/images/search?v...x=0&ajaxhist=0

[Paul L]

Hm, last time I checked GE had good images of North Minerva, but not South.
P

[estarzinger]

Originally Posted by Paul L

Hm, last time I checked GE had good images of North Minerva, but not South.
P

yea, you are right - south, like Beveridge, has good sea surface detail but has these obscuring blocks over it. While North is show at the same good detail as the sea surface without the obscuring. I find it all a bit odd.

[lateral]

Originally Posted by estarzinger

mmm . . . well Minerva Reef (both N and S), which is pretty equivalent to Beveridge is shown in good detail.

Attachment 155064

and Beveridge looks to me intentionally obscured - note the pretty good sea surface detail around the reef area, but the jpg blocks only right over the reef. I am wondering if someone somehow is using this as one of their copy write infringement checks (remember the whole island that was put on e-charts that did not exist at all for this purpose, and there was a very similar obscuring over that area on google earth).

Attachment 155066

I get the same blurring out of Minerva as Beveridge.
Has anyone got KAP files of Nth Minerva?
Hmmm... got north minerva now. GE had updated and
places was not checked. Think my computer needs cleaning!
Slow as.

[toddster8]

I see, there is actually an image for Beveridge reef in Google Earth but not in Google Maps.
You are not seeing "see surface detail" but an annoying animation of generic waves superimposed over the bathymetry. There is apparently only one image for the reef at rather low resolution, so I think you are not seeing "obscuring blocks" but only the shape of the image blown up beyond useful resolution. The adjacent "waves" are fake. If you watch, they move in an animated loop each time you change resolution. There may be a way to turn that off.

[Paul L]

Is it possible that Dick Cheney has a place there and that is why the image is obscured​ on GE?

[DumnMad]

Here's the Nuie reef wreck story.
Another resilient family. 200,000miles would give you some confidence in modern nav systems but like our more experienced CF navigators say, the flaws are there.
Love the way, despite the trauma and knowledge of how lucky they were, they're not afraid to continue the dream.

British couple relive terrifying moment they told their kids to 'abandon ship!' - NZ Herald

[malbert73]

Originally Posted by DumnMad

Here's the Nuie reef wreck story.
Another resilient family. 200,000miles would give you some confidence in modern nav systems but like our more experienced CF navigators say, the flaws are there.
Love the way, despite the trauma and knowledge of how lucky they were, they're not afraid to continue the dream.

British couple relive terrifying moment they told their kids to 'abandon ship!' - NZ Herald

More like the Volvo ocean race than the Leopard of this thread. Sounds like they were on passage and unaware due to their use of electronics rather than attempting landfall at night. When will we all learn of the zoom out issues of e-charts??


Sent from my iPhone using Cruisers Sailing Forum

[matt w]

Wow, what a lucky family! And I admire their resolve. With 200k miles experience, you'd think he would know to zoom the chart and use other sources. But, we all make mistakes. I know I make them all the time!

[fxykty]

Excellent response by the parents to the negative comments regarding their "risking" their children. I totally support crossing oceans with kids and had the good fortune of 3 years cruising with my parents between 12 and 15, plus a round trip to Hawaii from Victoria when I was 9. Good on the family and their positive attitude.

I'm very happy to hear they have insurance. It will be very interesting to see how that turns out. I've checked my policy with Global Yacht Cover and it doesn't say anything about navigation, other than staying within the geographic limits of the policy, so hopefully they'll be OK.

But once again, reliance on e-chart and no mention of paper. Even the 1:10,000,000 NZ 14061 South Pacific Ocean chart (NZ to Easter Island) shows the reef.

For goodness sakes people, use chart plotters for your primary navigation, but check reality with paper charts when passage planning. Small scale charts of your passage areas, even for a round the world trip, do not cost very much at all.

[gbgreen59]

It seems that the companies providing chart plotters should add a feature that recognizes that there is a boat is on a collision course with land. All the information is available to the software. Should be an easy feature to add. Not sure why they don't already have this.

[fxykty]

Originally Posted by gbgreen59

It seems that the companies providing chart plotters should add a feature that recognizes that there is a boat is on a collision course with land. All the information is available to the software. Should be an easy feature to add. Not sure why they don't already have this.

You have got to be kidding - nanny state much? There is no 'should' in free market economics. Besides which, can you imagine the liability nightmare if the chart plotter warns and the boat still runs aground? Or if the plotter doesn't warn because the track it knows about is clear of any land, but then the track changes? And how do you define "land"?

But you go ahead and request the feature. If the companies see that it's a wanted feature that can differentiate their offering and they're happy to wear the liability then they'll offer the feature.

Meanwhile, put on your big-boy pants and promote personal responsibility.