Modern Technology

To actually answer the question, no you were not, and the reason you were not is that flares apart you were out there on your own responsibility and had it all gone wrong you would, as I think Blondie Hasler famously said, die like Gentlemen.

The problem comes when you actually expect someone to set off, possibly in dangerous conditions, in order to save you. Anyone who goes to sea with a radio on which they can ask for help, is therefore honour bound to add all the other goodies that might prevent an emergency, or make rescue swifter and easier.




<hr width=100% size=1>John
<A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.allgadgets.co.uk>http://www.allgadgets.co.uk</A>
 
Re: Time to put ideas into action

Don't see any reason why donkey banned, though I'd take a dim view of a boat sneaking in ahead under donkey just because they ended up downwind of destination!

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
\'Course yer not nuts

I too did similar. However, it would be silly to ignore modern equipment that brings greater safety or peace of mind (which is important to me).

The problem I find is that people buy kit but don't take the time to learn either how to use it or it's limitations - Ref Wakhuna/P&O Nedlloyd - where neither party fully understood what they were dealing with.

I was on someones yacht recently (a very nice chap incidentally); it had a radar (I haven't got one). I asked to see it and whether it was difficult to use (a chap I used to know in the RNR once told me that setting the radar up correctly and then interpreting what you see correctly is not easy). Anyway, he told me it was simplicity itself....but when pressed, the person in question struggled to turn it on and definitely could find his way around the menu system. What would happen in a crisis is anybody's guess. Point made.

Magic

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://practical-business.co.uk>Click for website!</A>
 
Re: Time to put ideas into action

Kind of defeats the object, dunnit? The main purpose seems to be to test skills and expertise against the elements and conditions using basic tools but without equipment to gain an advantage. The donkey could be used to gain just as much advantage as GPS, and wouldn't be cricket, IMHO.

Agree it should be allowed for collision avoidance or other serious situations, but record time and distance covered and make some form of adjustment at the end.

<hr width=100% size=1>I'm average size, Its just that everybody else is short.
 
Re: Time to put ideas into action

Good point, I'm quite happy to not use donkey. Once spent a very pleasant couple of days drifting up and down the channel between shipping lanes. Becalmed, no donkey. Didn't have much of a wine cellar to show on eventual return to UK waters, another French shopping success!

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Re: Imagination

Hope you never get a nav lighting failure, cause it wont be much use shining a torch on your sails to identify yourself, but it should look pretty cool by day.

What was the name of "Disaster Area's" black ship (if indeed it had a name) in "Restaurant at the End of the Universe", the one that Zephod nicked.

<hr width=100% size=1>Bring me that horizon.
 
Re: Now youre getting

to the kind of question I was expecting when I posted this thread.

I must admit I was somewhat surprised when you looneys all decided to trip off down memory lane like an extended cast from Last of the Summer Wine.

Don't get me wrong I'm not complaining about the different direction, in fact, I find it quite exhilarating. I may even be tempted to join you although I suspect my little job may be a little slow compared to your race honed thoroughbreds.

When I posted the thread I was really offering the opportunity for a nice little whinge about all those supersillious Dilberts who tell you to wear lifejackets everytime your near water more that 35mm deep(Ive just found a use for the metric system, its easier to type 35mm that one & a half inches) All those pain in the arses who tell you that you need a liferaft for a trip from Chichester to Bembridge. You know the GPS is so cheap your positively negligent if you haven't got six on board.

To throw some fat on the fire. Why is it more dangerous to cross the shipping lanes today than it was 25 years ago. To me the principles still the same. Might is right & your plain idiotic if you expect those ships out there to see you let alone alter course for someone as insignificant as you. Most of the crews were probably drunk anyway!

The real reason that it feels more dangerous today is because your conditioned to think that way.

I have a mate, who will, get involved in all kinds of stupidity in the name of a laugh. His son is just coming up to that age when he might consider his first car. My mate now thinks that any car over three years old isn't built to a high enough safety standard. Now when I think of some of the scrapyard fodder I have owned, particularly, in my motoring formative years.

If it was safe enough for us 20 or 25 or 35 or 45 years ago, why not now.

Martin

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Re: Imagination

Without checking... was it the "Heart of Darkness"?

<hr width=100% size=1>my opinion is complete rubbish, probably.
 
Re: Now youre getting

Martin

Couldn't agree more. Matter of fact I think I'd prefer to get into the half-inflated dinghy than trust a liferaft. Also suspect that a lot of yachters waste time paying heed to cross track errors than we did with our precalculated Rhumb lines.

John

<hr width=100% size=1>my opinion is complete rubbish, probably.
 
Re: Density of shipping - foolish?

Actually what we really need are two groups. 1)No modern aids 2)Using GPS and compare to see who gets the "best track".

<hr width=100% size=1>I Have The Body Of A God... Buddha
 
Re: Now youre getting

I tend to agree with much of what you say, and amused by your post.

I wasn't around in Slocums day but cannot say that I've noticed a huge increase in channel traffic over the past 25 yrs. Not quite the M25. Big ships were just as painful then, and not a lot slower.

If you don't think you could keep up, why not hitch a ride on one of the boats?

Compo

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Density of shipping - question

Given that ships are bigger and faster than they used to be, doesn't it follow that in days of old, there had to be more ships than there are now just to keep trade flowing?

I've no idea, just asking.

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.writeforweb.com/twister1>Let's Twist Again</A>
 
Re: Imagination

Sail colour wasnt an option - simply a consequence of fabric choices (actually at least one jib is a more normal colour and the storm sails have to be orange).

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Re: Density of shipping - foolish?

I'm not at all sure that GPS makes the shipping lanes safer. Equally - radar is only a significant asset in poor visibility. If I can see the ships, then I find a hand bearing compass quicker and easier. In poor vis, I have to say nothing would induce me out unless I had radar aboard!

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top