Anyone been up Loch Etive?

Sgeir

Sgeir

Well-Known Member
Joined
22 Nov 2004
Messages
14,792
Location
Stirling
s14.photobucket.com
Beyond Bonawe, that is. We don't have the fabled "uncorrected Admiralty chart 5076 (depth in fathoms)".

I believe that Webcraft or was it DaveS or MacHurley22(?) went up the loch, but I'm sure that Nick and Kathy are presently more focussed on Spain and Portugal.....

Anyway, once the overhead electric lines are cleared at Bonawe, am I justified in assuming that there are no big jaggy rocks waiting to gouge out our bottom? That is, can one sail prudently up the loch without this ancient chart?

Also, with echo-sounder and handheld plumb-line, are there any particular problems about a chartless anchor at the north end of the loch?

Lastly, is there anyone on the Forum who's bought the UKHO Small Craft Folio SC5611? Chart 19 of the Folio is entitled "Loch Etive". Does it cover the whole of the loch, or just the bit up to Bonawe (as in UKHO Admiralty chart 2378)?

Any responses appreciated.
 
The otherwise wonderful 5611 only covers as far as the narrows at Bonawe. I've not been up but seem to remember that there was a Trailer Jack article some years ago about launching at the north end. He probably doesn't need quite as much water as you though.
 
[ QUOTE ]
The otherwise wonderful 5611 only covers as far as the narrows at Bonawe.

[/ QUOTE ]Thanks Dave, although that does cause me to think that Chart 19 of the small craft folio SC5611 must be a bit on the small side, seeing as how the bulk of the loch is not included.

As I already own a relatively recent edition of 2378, and a magnifying glass, it seems that there is little need for me to spend mair bawbees on charts that don't do what they say on the cover. Strikes me therefore that chart 19 of the pack is being offered under false pretences.

Should we demand an OFT investigation?
 
[ QUOTE ]
Should we demand an OFT investigation?

[/ QUOTE ]
By all means. Do let us know how you get on. /forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif
 
By the use of the word "we", I'd (obviously under a misapprehension) meant a concerted campaign by all internetty sailing types in that area. I had thought that the understudy for a well known and local internet webfoot magnate would be a bit more, well, you know, supportive, but, there you go....
 
plenty of water and no rocks so just go for it.

PS Ive never been there or even know where "there" is .but that shouldnt be a bar to offering wisdom on this forum...
 
That sheems verry shound advishe, much better than that other shtuff. Don't think there are any barsh there, but who knowsh, who knowsh?

OK I'm going now. I'll tell you what it'sh like in the morning. Ackshully, maybe later.. Maybe shome time. OK? Look after yourshelf. G'night.
 
I haven't been up (and with Avilion's air draft I'm too feart to /forums/images/graemlins/frown.gif ), but my pal Jim has, a few years ago in an E boat. I'm fairly sure he used the old fathoms chart. The 1" survey map (sheet 46) shows 5 and 10 fathom contours and the loch appears pretty clear: past the narrows the middle half of it is all deeper than 10, and the only offlying islets are at the N end of Inverleiver Bay. It shows the head of the loch as shoal almost immediately past the pier.

For anchoring in funny places I recommend a FLS! /forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif

What's Shard's air draft?
 
Don't know the answer but I went there once during an ice climbing trip to Glencoe (winter obviously). It was absolutely stunning incredibly beautiful, I've always wanted to go there by sea.
 
[ QUOTE ]
What's Shard's air draft?

[/ QUOTE ]Don't know, but Mme Sgeir's going up the mast next week to recover the spinnaker (I know, I know) halyard from the masthead.

Must find that tape measure... /forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif

Re the power lines, there's 13m clearance, and the channel is certainly deep enough for passage enough even at the lowest tide. Don't know the position of the pylons, but I guess that by sticking close to the north side we'd be well away from the central droopy bit of the wires, thus increasing the clearance - as well as going through at low tide.

Must check the UKHO notes about clearance - does 13m clearance mean 13m <u>safe</u> clearance? How much do thae big sparks jump?

Thanks for the OS map suggestion Dave. Our current(ish) Sheet 50 doesn't show the contours, but amazingly, I still have a one inch map with 5 and 10 fathom contours... Knew it was worth not chucking away the auld maps. ;-)
 
My copy of Chart 5011 (Symbols & Abbreviations used on Admiralty Charts) is dated 1991, but hopefully, it hasn't changed much since. It says that beneath overhead power lines, the safe overhead clearance above HW is given in magenta, otherwise the physical clearance is shown in black. Better make bloody sure its magenta then & don't hold onto the back stay!
 
Taking TonyD's point, I would assume that if a safe clearance height is quoted then that is "worst" case scenario, i.e. HWS and the lines at maximum sag, i.e. warm weather and full rated load, but I'm not certain of this. (This is not actually the really worst case, but I assume you wouldn't want to be there in conditions where ice building up on the conductors was a possibility!)

Of course this does all rather assume that the line hasn't been restrung to different dimensions since the chart was drawn!

Trying to work out a safe clearance from a physical clearance isn't that easy since the "jump" distance varies with line voltage and air humidity. My old safety book has a table in it, but I've mislaid it. At a guess, assuming the line is 33 kV, I would allow at least a couple of metres, but I'd be happier getting that backed up by something a bit more authoritative. The HSE website might just list safe working distances for different voltages.

Going under the wires "off centre" obviously improves things, and if I could only remember the catenary equations and we knew the overall sag we could say by how much; I remember they involve sinh, cosh and possibly tanh, but not much else. OTOH the same equations work for anchor rodes, so there's bound to be a link to them from one of the endless chain v. rope arguments! And while you're waiting for the tide to go down you could have endless fun taking vertical sextant angles of the lowest wire attachment point and the bottom of the span to establish their heights and thus the sag and then do the sums...

Since I can't get under the bridge at HW, and don't fancy trying to get through the Falls at LW I'm excused this particular game!

One last thought: could you heel the boat (chain on the side deck, weight out on boom end etc.) to reduce the air draft - sort of avoiding grounding in the other direction? Oh I wish I hadn't thought of that - that might also work to get me through the bridge... /forums/images/graemlins/blush.gif
 
Hey! If you get throught the Falls the rest will be a piece of pi$$!

Been through in a Mirror dinghy. c1970

Donald
 
[ QUOTE ]
One last thought: could you heel the boat (chain on the side deck, weight out on boom end etc.) to reduce the air draft - sort of avoiding grounding in the other direction?

[/ QUOTE ] Too much information there Dave. /forums/images/graemlins/frown.gif It seems that if Mme Sgeir (who'll probably read this post) is going to climb the mast to retrieve the halyard, then I'll be the one that'll have to swing out on the boom...

I'm sure you could get into Loch Etive. /forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif There's 15m clearance at the Connel Bridge (south side of the channel), and the depths on the chart look OK for a passage at slack water LW, so if I chum you, I could do my boom hinging. Alternatively, if I position myself on the bridge, I could lasoo the top of your mast using the traffic lights as a belay, then release it once you're through.
 
Yes, last time in 2004 in a Westerly Falcon, about 11m mast height, some description here .

There's not much in the way of surprises. I don't have 5076 here to check but the one place from memory I think I wouldn't go close inshore without it is Inverliver Bay, which is quite rocky for quite a way out.
The head of the loch is not very sheltered; I would want a good forecast to spend the night there. It shallows very gradually at the head to mostly mud I think so the holding's OK.
If you want to borrow a 5076, get in touch.

Derek
 
Thanks for the kind offer - much appreciated. Also for your description - I was sure I'd read a report somewhere - should have looked at BlueMoment again /forums/images/graemlins/blush.gif.

As happens, I've just ordered a cancelled 5076 from Marine Chart Services, so problem solved. Interestingly enough, it seems that there are some new charts for the area, although it's not clear from the description what the "improved coverage" actually is:

Notices to Mariners - Weekly Edition 16/2006 SCOTLAND — West Coast, Loch
Linnhe, Central Part and Loch Etive — New Charts 2388 and 2389 —
Withdrawal of Chart 2378.
Charts SC5611·18, SC5611·19 WGS84 DATUM

Mariners should navigate with caution as new charts 2388 and 2389 have replaced chart 2378. The new charts are based on WGS84 Datum; chart 2388 provides improved coverage of Loch Etive and a new larger scale plan of Dunstaffnage Bay to Connell Bridge; chart 2389 provides improved coverage of the southern part of Loch Linnhe and a new larger scale plan of Glensanda Harbour. These changes will be included in the next new edition of SC5611.
 
That's awfully upsetting news; the boat lives on chart 2378. How could they cancel the chart and make it homeless?
I think I'll wait for the new edition of 5611.

Derek
 
Did you know old Admilralty charts of Scotland are online at the National Library of Scotland site here? Often worth a browse since, as they say, the rocks don't move! The one you'd be interested in is here.

Cheers
Patrick
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top