Standing O
I read it again, and thats really outstanding. Nice job. That can really inspire a guy to get married and go paddling! And then go paddling some more.
Thanks,
Tom L.
Do you remember
– Last Updated: Dec-21-06 10:41 PM EST –
Do you recall meeting me near the Ballard Locks? I was paddling the Assateague formerly owned by a mutual aquantanence employed at Werner? If so, what that the woman to which you proposed? If it was not, what was her name and phone number......
You’re too kind
Yes I do remember, and yes I’ve waited all these years to propose to that same woman!
Related question
Maybe it is circle 0…
I was kind of surprised reading about the recent Bellingham Bay rescue that two of the paddlers apparently had so much difficulty going in any direction but directly downwind. I guess I kind of thought that they would be able to turn towards shore even in big waves.
Seems to me the first rule of safety is to be able to make the kayak go the direction you want it to. I’ve been out where my skill/boat combination had me blowing sideways in the opposite direction from where I wanted to go and it sucked, even though I was in no danger.
So is it unusual for surf skiers to basically be forced to make a downwind run or was it their skill set combined with particularly nasty conditions? I mean no disrespect to anyone’s paddling ability or their boats. But I’d personally be leery of going out if I couldn’t get to shore paddling a quartering wind from the stern or get turned around to ferry upwind.
haresfur, do you have a link that…
…might give some more info about that incident in B’ham bay?
Legitimate question
– Last Updated: Dec-21-06 11:08 PM EST –
Good question.
I know each of these paddlers well. Big strong athletes (I'm talking strong) that have a wealth of surf ski talent and experience.
One of them circumnavigated the San Juans Islands, 86 miles, in one sitting in his Huki surf ski. A natural athlete, excellent paddling form, great student of the sport, and as resourceful as anyone I know. 6', 200lbs, without an ounce of body fat. Triathlete. Calculating. Brick Shithouse meets Thomas Edison. He regularly dukes it out with my best friend Kirk, who actually beat Brent Reitz at the Surf Ski Championships this year in San Fransisco. For the life of me, I can't imagine what the conditions were like if he could not turn his ski to take the wind and seas on the beam. I mean, I've read the data, got the beta from the boys, and from my house, sitting atop a hill a few miles away, I could see the waves breaking well over the break wall of Squalicum Harbor. But if he could not turn his boat, I know damn well I could not have done it either.
In my Romany...I don't know, I would have to think I could have controlled my boat, based on past experience. Theres not too much doubt, but I wasn't out there so I'll never know. You can have the same weather and wave data as another day, but its not necessarily the same conditions.
Yes they were pushing their respective envelopes, but in an incremental, calculated fashion. My humble, humble opinion is drysuits would have staved off the Coasties...but...who knows.
Thats the long explanation that probably doesn't answer your question.
I guess, yes it is unusual. What was illustrated was that no matter what your skill set, there is a limit to what can be done when it comes to Mother Nature and her stormy seas. (I belive it was the same storm system that took down literally thousands of trees at Vancouver's Stanley Park.)
It also is an illustration of the inherent dangers of "weathervaning" as opposed to "weathercocking". Weathercocking is when the kayaks bow gets turned "into" the wind, pointing the boat upwind. "Weathervaning" (as I've always heard the term) is the opposite of weathercocking, meaning the kayaks bow blows downwind. Stan Chladek always said a kayak that weathervanes (blows downwind) as opposed to weathercocks (bow faces upwind) is a death trap. My terminology may be inaccurate, but you get the point. The skeg/rudder (not retractable) would add quite a bit to the weather vaning problem.
Consider also, that the force of the wind on the boat actually increases as the cube of the velocity (force being a function of wind speed and the volume of the boat) so the force at 40mph is actually 8 times that of the force at 20mph (thank you Edoh and Veronica).
Does that answer your question? Sort of anyway?
Cheers
Yes, fair enough
Nasty conditions, well prepared paddlers, stuff happens. They survived. Happy ending.
Thanks for the insight.
Equipment only part of the equation
– Last Updated: Dec-22-06 11:21 AM EST –
Safety is a balance of a number of factors:
* Skill
* Conditioning
* Equipment
... to match the:
* Conditions
... using:
* Judgement
... Based on:
* Experience
* Knowledge ( = Information + Understanding)
* Wisdom
... and if one mismatches greatly:
* Help from others
So, with so many variables, one can make adjustments to match the (first set of variables) skills/conditioning/equipment combination to the conditions. The match is made using judgement, based on experience/knowledge/wisdom.
Let's consider what the question here is, in light of this balance. What are the trade-offs?
> One reason I paddle a Romany is the "rescue-ability" designed into the boat
> But if he could not turn his boat, I know damn well I could not have done it either.
> humble opinion is drysuits would have staved off the Coasties
> the menatlity is different in skis being more of a loner thing with you going fast
> leash so you don't loose boat as there are no deck lines and boat will not fill with water and is prone to blow away. And signaling device in case you need to be rescued
> "if you're 'bracing', then you're not 'racing'"
> you can't roll a ski (unless you put straps or a seatbelt on it)
> Origanilly skis were invented for life guards to get in and out of surf with to rescue people.
> In skis you are stable when you are moving, your best brace is the forward stroke
> I wouldn't take a ski out in those conditions, because I don't have enough big water time to do it safely.
> the limits have more to do with the paddler than the boat
> One of them circumnavigated the San Juans Islands, 86 miles, in one sitting
Is this a Romany Versus Surfski issue? A racing design versus touring design issue? A rudder versus chines issue? Drysuit versus wetsuit issue? Recovery (bracing) issue? Backup rescue methods (rolling) issue? Or a team/group/solo rescue-options issue?
> surf skis have a much smaller 1st Circle and very limted options in the 2nd Circle
> To me, that second cirlce is looking just a we bit anorexic.
In a wash-deck kayak (ski, sit-on-top, etc.) you may be able to roll it with the proper equipment, but a reenter-and-roll will probably be more trouble than a remount. (Assuming one has mastered these skills beforehand). Same goes for a paddle-float reentry or a T-Rescue. So, just because people don't need to use these other rescues with a wash-deck boat (because remounting is easier), does not mean the rescue options are limited or that this is a "problem".
On the equipment side, I, personally, would want to add a lap-belt to a ski and master rolling in it, to add to my "backup" options. Same goes for having deck lines, and all of the other typeical sea kayaking safety gear. Racing boats don't normally have all of this, so perhaps this is about racing boats. Had the paddlers had lap-belts for rolling and good rolling skills in their skis, perhaps there would not have been a problem.
How about turning (or, in general, controlling) surfskis in high winds? In high winds like these (50+ kt.), Steve Sinclair and others of Force 10 have shown a capable paddler can control them:
http://www.randomhouse.com/boldtype/0798/todhunter/essay1.html
http://www.manlypaddlers.com/extdoc/epicpaddle_sinclair.htm
So, I would not blame the equipment. Just because a paddler can paddle a long day does not mean they have mastered an entirely other set of conditions.
This to me sounds like a judgement problem: mismatching their skills/conditioning/equipment combination to the conditions. Skills and some equipment enhancements (rolling skills, lap-belts, safety lines, boat control, edge control, bracing) could have prevented problems, but so also would have choosing to stay closer to shore, choosing to end the trip earlier, or choosing another more protected area to paddle, etc.
The group chose to paddle and surf in a very major storm. They were curious about the predictions ... could the waves get that big? This approach was like an experiment. They wanted to see what would happen. Obvously they were pushed to their skill limits and beyond. Sure some equipment or skills could have avoided the C.G. rescue, but ultimately this was a judgement error.
When pushing your skill limits (experimenting), you need to have handy bailouts and lots of reliable rescue options. Their 4-boat group got split up, but they did not seem to have a plan for what to do about that, nor did they see that as much of a problem, yet that severely resctricted their rescue options. They did not seem to feel rescue and bailout options were very important. One pair did use assisted rescues (helping one-another to remount). But the other two (further out) were too far apart for that. Why?
Either staying together was not a priority or they were surfing "out of control". Not being able to turn toward shore is not being in control. They learned that, whether it was an equipment issue, a skill issue, or whatever, that they cannot control their boat in those conditions. This "boat control" lesson was the result of the "experiment" with extreme conditions.
Had they experimented in a place where the winds/waves would push them to a safe shore, then they would not have needed rescue from outside help. The other two in the group stayed closer to shore. One of those two missed the intended take-out, so they continued to a long beach to land. Why didn't the others stay close to shore? Did they over-estimate their skills or were they having too much fun surfing to notice what was happening? In either case it was a judgment problem.
I am not "judging" them. Just looking at the event and other possible outcomes, much as you would read in the book "Deep Trouble". In that book, there was a paddler, Tsunami Ranger Eric Soares, wishing the tables were turned -- that he had his surfski not his (borrowed) sit-in kayak. Why? Because he wanted a wash-deck cockpit (so he would not have to pump out the water) and a rudder (for boat control).
One more question
Are surf skis designed to weathervane aka lee-cock? I can see how that would be nice if your main goal is to head downwind but it sure doesn’t help in other directions.
Could they have paddled backwards to turn facing upwind?
…oh, I guess that was 2 questions;-)
I don’t think so much designed to
as not designed not to. A long hull with a high-volume bow and a big understern rudder isn’t necessarily the kind of thing you want to be trying to turn into a gale-force wind.
Congrats!!
Hey…been following the thread here…CONGRATS on the pending marriage man!that is awesome!!
Regarding the rest of the thread…I think it is time for me to pick up a surfski for ‘07!! See you on the water.
Cheers…Joe O’