@rstevens15 the point I’m making is that the user is claiming as best as I can tell that GPS is going to be inaccurate because of wind and tide.
the point is GPS reported speed is speed regardless of the actions you are taking and the existing conditions.
Absolutely agree. The disparity is essentislly in how I explained.
Wind, tide, current and waves impact speed positively and negatively. I differentiate between tide and current because I view current as a constant, while tides reverse. However, that warrants a separate discussion - briefly: rivers have a constant outflow that’s influenced by precipiration, tides within the tidal zone, and dams that moderate river flow. Winds also impact speed; the higher the wind speed the greater the impact. Wind driven waves will generate a current the longer it blows in the same direction (wind blowing at 10 mph overnight might generate a current of .6 mph, then that current manifests differently depending on how it interacts with standing current. Therefore, wind driven waves that are kicked up by a localized storm is very different than waves generated by a distant hurricane. My point is that an 18 inch wave can have more influence on your paddling experience depending on duration, direction, changing in tidal flow, bottom contours and depth, channel restrictions, lee vs. windward exposure, on. Otherwise, a wave is a wave, just don’t take it for granted.
So why does it matter. If your goal is to piddle-paddle for 1/2 hour then turn around, conditions could easily add an hour or more to the return trip. The following explanation describes how I strategize for trip planning. If your goal is to just go out and have fun, don’t waste your time reading past this point, and please, PLEASE don’t post a comment that, “Speed isn’t everything, or I just want to have fun” - this just simply won’t benefit you. You can post that, but all I can say is good idea, good luck, and go do that!
@szihn explained how he often encounters fast moving weather systems that sweep over high cliffs surrounding the lake that he paddles. Such storms may give him less than 20 to 30 minutes to reach a safe shore before being overwhelmed. During early conversations with him, I considered meeting him to paddle. I now realize that neither my boat nor my skill level is suited for that environment. The main primary factor in my paddling environment is current; Steve doesn’t typically face current that impedes his ability. The greater threat for him is the wind.
While current typically impacts speed one-to-one (current moving at .5 mph will reduce your speed by .5 mph, based on constant energy output, which can be monitor by remaining in an aerobic state or by keeping your heart rate constant. On the other hand, wind only slow your progress by a percentage of the felt wind speed. However, wind over a certain velocity will impact performance more significantly and exponentially. I’m consistently able to compensate and handle wind, tidal flow, current and waves from any direction between 10 - 15 mph, with gusts to 20 mph, but everything changes when the gusts increase to just 25 mph - the impact is as high as .3 to .5 mph (that’s my assesment, and I’m sticking to it, like itbor lump it). The difference becomes obvious because that will cause the bow of my 145 Tsunsmi to fly on the peak of the biggest waves and plunge into the trough of the next wave. In the 145 Tsumami, I have a choice of backing off on speed, or powering through and allow the boat to plunge. The “consequence” is spray that splashes over my head and a sheet of water that washes over the front deck and into the cockpit on my lap (I don’t use a spray skirt).
My options, for example, include sustaining an average speed of 4.1 mph and risk going aneorobic, or dropping to 3.2 mph, taking a speed hit and accept a lower overall average speed. The strategy involves a decision regarding energy management. Without consulting a GPS, it seems reasonable to believe it’s easier to simply take advantage of the wind and current when it’s at your back - that is another topic, but I personally find that weather cocking becomes an issue that saps more energy than fighting a headwind. My primary 145 Tsunami has no rudder. The other one has a rudder, but I typically have no need for it, because winds are typically in a manageable state of 10 - 15 mph with 20 mph gusts or less, if I’m lucky. When I anticipate going out in 25 mph gusts, I prefer to take my 175 Tsunami, but I often err on thecsidebofvthe 145. Because the 175 is hard to transport. The main benefit is that it doesn’t climb and plunge, and the water washing over the deck will part before washing into the cockpit and onto my lap. The rudder allows me to correct weather cocking, and I can take advantage of the wind assist without noticing a rudder drag penalty. Rudder drag is still there, but the control offered by the rudder allows me to better manage directional control - power output goes into speed rather than fighting for control of the boat. Consequently, I can use more energy to power into the waves, and accept the .5 mph rudder drag penalty, while gaining .5 mph from better control.
The take away should be that boat length, width, rudders, and skegs, involve trick mathatical calculations about hull speed, wetted surfaces, drag coefficients, and load water line. The effects of wind, tide, current and waves should not be viewed as a plus or minus or as a constant. It can be if you think like a mule. Rudders and skegs are designed to keep your boat tracking straight. The drag can be negated if you know how and when to use them.
It’s short sighted to assume paddling into conditions will be harder than paddling with the conditions acting as an assist. If you don’t use a GPS, all of this will remain a mystery. By understanding your boat and equipment, knowing the capabilities, monitoring you energy output, knowing how long you can sustain aerobic output and the duration you can dwell in an aneorobic state longer, as you decide where to make up speed.
I have Tsunami models including the 120 SP, 125, as well as multiple 140s with rudder, several 145s with and without a rudder, and the 175 with rudder. I can tell you how the one 125, 145 and 175 perform, and how the 120 SP and 140 handle in varied conditions when paddled by someone in the proper weight class.
Anyone can argue that wind, tide, waves and current have an impact on peak speed and moving average speed - I don’t disagree. It absolutely does. However, in all the years and miles that I’ve paddled, whether 8.5 miles, 21.5 miles, or 38.75 mile, I’ve rarely, or more previsely have actually never, had the advantage of a two-way assist. Anyone who has experienced that in paddling is living a blessed existence. At best, the timing will split conditions by half, but most of my long trips are 80% cross current. The worst condition is a 4 to 8 mph wind at your back on the return trip. That is living in the pits of hell, because a 4.5 to 4.8 mph speed neutralizes the effect of felt wind. I prefer a zero wind day, because forward motion creates airflow. Otherwise, the best option is a course across the prevailing wind. Especially so, when water is near 82°, air temp is in the high 90s, humidity is 90 to 100%. You stew in your basting sauce and pray for a headwind.
No, for me, conditions have nothing to do with average speed. For me, cruising speed is the final average moving speed that registers when I stop. My posted speed includes the effect of wind, tide, current, and waves. Since a GPS typically reads movement over a certain drift speed, any rest breaks continue to factor into moving average, unless the boat is beached and stabilized to prevent movement. Consequently, a 40 second water break registersxas paddling at or near 1 mph for that period. I mention that only because that means my actual average could skewed upward by .1 mph, but the amount is too petty to factor into the record. If I post a wishbone trip from Dundee to Hammerman and back, its nearly as perfectly divided between the advantages and disadvantsges of existing conditions. If you live in that area, let me know and I give you a tour so you can experience what I’m saying first hand.
One early response to my description of the Upper Bay expressed confusion about me saying the bay is a harsh environment, then in subsequent posts saying that it’s not. It can be both, but it doesn’t present the same challenge that Steve faces in Wyoming or the conditions faced in the Lower Chesapeake Bay or even greater extremes found on the ocean, San Franscico Bay or the Great Lakes. Many who boat on the Chesapeake Bay say it’s unpredictable; I disagree, because that is only true if you don’t understand it. Weather systems typically give at least 20 to 30 minutes warning, which means things can happen fast. The problem arises when you can’t land on restricted military property or if you miss critical atmospheric cues.
On one trip, I stopped to assess conditions after I made a turn. Rather than setting off to cross the bay after making a turn, I stopped to assess conditions, despite no forecasts of storms. I noticed three indicators that changed my mind. The first was a whisp in the peak of an otherwise stable cummulus cloud to the north. Next was an alert on the VHF weather station notifying of a storm with hail located over 60 miles to the north (the black lines bracket the whisp which was so short-lived that it nearly disappeared before I gotbto my phone 39 sevonds later; the arrow shows the storm clouds 60 miles away). Checking the weather radar on my stowed smart phone showed the storm with hail in York, as well as the direction of travel going toward the northeast of my location, with minor storms popping along the Appalachian moutain chain to the west. Although there was nothing of immediate concern, additional change that I typically don’t follow, caused me to pause - the barometer was falling, and I could feel on my face that the wind had noticably veered over a period of only one hour. I decided to return to the launch, a 35 minute trip rather than commit to a cross bay round trip of at least 4 hours to 4 hours and 30 minutes from that present location. As I landed, the sky was darkening. Loading the boat was uneventful, but on the 20 minute drive home, the storm hit as a massive fast mover. My brother happened to be fishing in a power boat a few miles to the north of where I diverted and return to the launch point. The wind, waves and driving rain were so bad, they had to stop. If I had ignored the warning signs.(notably the barometer and wind direction, my back would have been to the advancing storm. I would have been caught mid way, with not enough time to reach the far shore an no way to return.
Sorry for the treatise (thanks Craig), but my point is that an understanding of energy management,
the impact conditions have on boat performance, situational awareness, proper equipment, and an ability to read weather indicators is far more important than devices. The devices are valuable as training aids, but when the slop hits the fan, you only have your knowledge, training, stamina and existing skill to save your skin. The bottom line is you don’t have to agree with me, but I suggest you figure it out, or stay within 30 minutes of safe harbor. Then cruising speed, average speed, and accuracy of the GPS is irrelevant.
No your true speed may be affected by wind and current either positively or negatively.
@rstevens15, you manage to say essentially what I tried to say but in 25 words or less. If I had read your post before starting my post, I could have fit a kayaking trip into my schedule. Hope someone who is just starting in kayaking or canoing can glean something from my rambling. The basic difference between canoeing and kayaking typically exposes the kayaker to more open water experiences.
I occasionally encounter beginning kayakers in rec boats beyond certain landmark points that are the demarcation between protected waters and the bay proper. The distinction is important for new kayakers to understand. A short rec boat can be a valuable training tool.
On an early trip, I was accompanied by my sister in a 14 ft kayak, and my son-in-law in a 12 ft kayak, while I was using a 9 ft rec boat. The trip out was under easy conditions, but the wind expectedly picked up around noon. We rounded a point and headed directly into a NNW 10 to 15 mph wind (right into the teeth). Paddling for about 10 minutes covered about 250 yards over ground. My headway speed was about .5 mph. Any more than that caused the boat to rise and plunge, with water sheeting into the cockpit and drenching my lap. It was no problem, because I could maintain forward speed at an aerobic level without overexerting (.5 mph for 1.5 miles at that level of energy for one hour and thirty minutes). I hung with my sister, while my son-in-law just powered into the waves and made it back without issue. Then my sister said she had to rest. I suggesting that she do the math. An alternate plan if she faltered was to redirect to a protected lagoon on the lee side of the peninsula, but I didn’t want to add another 1/4 mile to her trip. She pushed through and finished. I though that ended her adventures in kayaking, but she persevered and improved considerably, covering trips of 21.5 to 25 miles with ease. In fact, on several trips when we happened to be out and she would hear thunder, I wouldn’t have to mention we should turn around. Whenever she heard thunder, I couldn’t catch her.
Which illustrates conditioning and determination. Whe she’d acvompany me from the beginning of a season, she could match my speed acceptably well. When missing a trip she can’t equal my progress. Conditioning is critical to improvement. Missing a week is measurable and can amount to a drop in speed of a few tenths of a mph. I’m stating that point, not arguing it.
Ain’t that the truth. 
Yes, he has a way with few words.
Your not suggesting who should or should not make a contribution . . . Or are you?
If you saw that point me to it😆
I typically paddle a lake with light to no wind, usually in the mornings. Afternoons it can get up to 15-20mph but I’m usually out in 5-12mph and I tend to stay on the protected side of the lake. Occasionally I’ll get out in the 20mph just for fun but I’m not really comparing data when it’s like that. Just more for enjoyment at that point than workout data. I usually have 3 GPS’ going at the same time; my phone, my Garmin Instinct watch and my Garim eTrex 20x. In the end, they’re all nearly identical for data results so I do just assume they’re correct. Never thought to double check or question them.
No desire to do so.
I’m totally comfortable, but the ley is to reading the current speed. I focus on keeping speeds between +/- .2 mph of the target speed. Some of the variation registers from actual speed fluctuations, delay in readout, or wind/current. If you padfle on flat water with near zero wind or current, you can remain on the target speed for seversl stroke, and the fluctuations are less. Paddling into waves, will drop the speed from 4.2 mph to 3.2 mph when a wave breaks over the bow. If you look at my 3.8 mph avg chart, you’ll notice the jagged spikes. I can enlarge the segments and analyze them more closely for clarification, but there is still error (reading is typically withing a 12 ft margin of error). Still, its possible to keep within (+/-) .2 mph readout, with very occasional spikes going hitting .1 to .2 outside that range. If it errs up, it will also err down about the same amount. Therefore, the accuracy depends on how consistently you bracket your speed. If the device registers 1/3rd of the readings above 4.3 mph, 1/3rd of readings at 4.5 mph, and 1/3rd below 4.7 mph, that means you’re averaging 4.5 mph. I believe, based on years of analyzing logs and conditions, that if the GPS is inconsistent, it is consistently inconsistant, which makes it predictable. If the you get random spikes that hit 4.1 mph, make sure you get a spike of 4.9 mph.
My GPS is set to refresh or readout (whatever you want to call it) evey second. Obviously, that means the part of your actual speed pulses are misses. Longer sample intervals mean more satellites contributing to the bracketing. My other device is reading at closer intervals (fewer satellites involved), but it will sample more. If you compare the two devices, times are accurate, distances are within tenths of miles (remember the chart Intold you to construct) so the variation comes to within 30 seconds. That’s petty and irrelevant. I loose as much as 30 seconds and up to 90 seconds while starting and stowing the recording, then the same amount when I pause the app trip recording (which doesn’t the time, which also contributes error to overall average, but that includes stop time. That has no real relevance to the moving average. Additionally, when I stop for a water break, I try to make it 30 seconds, because the device continues to record any movement, which reduces actual average speed reading. That doesn’t bother me, because that means my average speed is always higher than reported, but less than .1 mph, which is insignificant. (Consult your speed distance chart that breaks distance down by minutes (I don’t recall the chart, but I think it was about .02 to .05 for each 30 second difference. The accuracy depends on how consistently you paddle and anslyze the data. It’s a tool, which is more accurste than perception, which I often found was off by as much as 1 mph.
As noted elsewhere, current drops your speed equal to the current. Wind increases effort exponentially as the speed increases. Wind up to 8 mph isn’t significant to me. When it hits 15 mph, the impact is noticeable. Gusts over 20, especially when hitting 25 mph, will cut my predicted average by .3 to .5 mph. I don’t view the graph until I open the pelican case holding my phone, but I know what the graph will look like.
So what’s the point. If you know the conditions, and are aware of your physical capabilities, you can plot a trip based on how long you will paddle into, with or across condotions, and predict how long it will take. That’s critical in open tidal water with changing wind velocity. I allow you to plan a trip and prevent surprises. Paddling for 4 hours with a 3 mph current could allow you to paddle 5.5 mph with ease, then the retun trip could drop to .5 mph and best the snot outbof you if you go aneorobic. You have to learn what 60% effort feels like. It’s all about interpretation. Learning how to read your instruments will help you learn your about assessing you physical output. Many paddlers just paddle until they feel tired then turn around.
Speed is speed as measured, irrespective of outside influences.
if they slow you down you record a slower speed, and the converse is true if they speed you up.
they have nothing to do with the measurement and recording of your speed.
Absolutely. Nothing beats flat water. @Craig_S, you encounter the same conditions that I face. The only difference is my “wishbone” course provides instant verification of performance. That’s because wind, tides, current, and waves present differently by paddling into or against conditions every 2 miles and there is a .25 mile flat at the tip, where the Battery Point tidal reading are calculated (putting a stick at the launch point waterline to verify tidal movement from start to finish, if you don’t trust the website). Speed can be verified and checked by the amount of time lapsed, when you reach the turns at Battery Point and reverse the course at Hammerman Beach, or you can see visually on the graph afterwards, because I always stop for water at the 1/4 way point to create a down spike on the graph. Noting the time to reach each /1/4 point will give you the average speed for that leg. That can be verified against the readout on the apps/GPS.
Its frustrating to keep repeating it because it’s an automatic process for me, near perfect intervals and it enables me to dissect the segment to fully and immediately understand my performance in four 30 minute intervals. The GPS is essentially unneccessary. Unfortunately, the concept is difficult for many to comprehend. The argument goes into attacking the device rather than reading my explanation. I know who comments without reading by the questions. It’s either difficulty with comprehesion, or my inadequate description. That doesnt matter, because each challenge improves my scrutiny and reinforces my confidence. If it helps a new kayake, it’s worth the circular effort. Other paddlers typically don’t have the same measured course, but the data I gain might be useful to someone. Unfortunstely, it usually ends up in a cat fight. A few members have used the info.
There are natural signs that help to verify actual wind speed. After a while, you begin to understand how the forces influence the boat. I intended to buy a different kayak, but I’ve become so dialed into the 145 Tsunami, I don’t want to go through that learning curve again with a new boat. Performance would only change by a few tenths of an mph.
Here is an example of how I chart a specific course. Unless you do this, you’re just making up comments as the topic goes along. Look at how easy it is with a chart like this to calculate the difference 30 seconds makes over a 10 mile course. When I discuss speed, it’s easy to see who . . . You know! That’s why I believe your numbers, because you gave me all the details off line that I need to figure out your posted info. Discussing speed with @szihn, I began to realize that he wasn’t aware of the speeds he was hitting. He has since figured it out.
Check the math to verify accuracy.
You made the claim.
Not sure what claim, but if I made it, it must be valid, unless the claim was misinterpreted. My claims are supported by facts. I find that the things I say are sometimes misunderstood or misquoted. That doesn’t change my point of view or validity of what I said. My data backs me. The problem is thst some simply don’t read it, don’t understand it, or have a bias against it because I said it. I’ve asked detractors to crunch the number . . . but no response. Leave me alone unless you can show my numbers are wrong. Then have at it. Sometimes my msth . . . It is not so good. Sometimes my speak, it not so good. Sometimes my spell check . . . It is not so good. But my ideas . . . They are sometimes very good. You no like, you don’t read. You find problemo . . . You fix! Help everybody, but at least read and comprehend - savy!
It does have to do with truthful top speed of you hull and ability.
I went under a bridge super current hit 12 mph that’s not my top hull speed unaided. Should I come here and claim my CD Extreme does 12 mph?
To see true speed I go in a mile long canal with no current or wind.
You ask the question so back it up.
You want my lake data on a calm day, because that reflects pretty much my race data. Or is there some magical element that;ll affect your perception of this Perhaps Curvature of the earth you know then I’m paddling downhill on a lake!?!?
Hull Speed of a Tsunami 175 is 6.451 MPH. I run at race speed 5.90mph and 4.9x just tooling about.
If there’s wind I run directly into it, and then 180 degrees about with it. It’s the same method they use at the Salt flats to determine vehicle speed the average negates any pluses one way or minuses the other.
Or are you saying everyone who measures speed is wrong and you are the only guy who gets it right. If so that’s mighty presumptuous.
You haven’t read a word that either Craig or I have
said. You’re stuck in a loop implying that I’m posting my top speed and claiming it as the average. Average is the average. I don’t make excuses that I could have reached 5.5 mph if it hadn’t been for the dsrned conditions, or I paddle 10 miles at 22 mikes an hour yesterday (for 3 minutes). Discussing the topic of speed with you is like watching a dog chase it’s tail. The only metric you bring up is top speed. If you look at the charts, you’ll notice that the top speed is typically only around 5.4 or 5.6 mph. I recently posted a trip with an average speed of 3.8 mph. The average during that trip started at 4.2 mph and dropped to 3.6 mph from battling conditions and exploring a salt marsh. Then I pulled the finishing avg speed up to 3.8 mph while fighting conditions. 3.8 mph isn’t fast to me - instead of harping on current and wind, I showed comparitive graphs of conditions that varied only in the wind gust intensity and direction.
You’re characterizing my content into a bragging contest about “look what I can do!” 3.8 mph?!? Then you slip in how you wentt 12 mph. I don’t believe you, because my top speed with a following wave assist was 8.0 mph, but feel free to insist that GPS wa wrong. That would make me curious about how you knew you reached 12 mph. You didn’t read that my speed was 5.67 mph - said it was 3.8 mph, even though the GPS showed top speeds of 6.4 to 6.5 mph on wave peaks. Read my post and show that I claimed going 6.5 mph as you imply. On another graph, I actuall cut off the max speed segment as irrelevant. Another stat shows a max peak of 6.5 mph, but that was not use to reflect my speed. I rarely highlight top speed and when I do, it’s to highlight the force of the waves, not my paddling ability, yet you consistently diminish everything I document by interjecting top speed.
The above posts were directed specifically to two members. I’ve been exchanging information with both of them, and since both were participating on this thread, I posted the data on the open forum. The data from the best trip average over a set course that I’ve been able to achieves since I destroyed my left rotator cuff, as well as my worst, was compared to show the effect of conditions. The only difference between the trips was the wind gusts and wind direction. Ironically, that answers your dig about wind speed. I CLAIM that the direction and an increase in wind speed cut into my average by .3 mph. The problem is that you’re too stuck on trying to make me look like an ass to accept my data. I know you don’t read the posts or possibly can’t comprehend the data. It’s frustrating to compile information only to have it challenge consistently by someone who doesn’t get it.
You’re more experienced than me. So I’ll ask you again to tell me what you think about the impact conditions had on avg speed. Given the data, I suspect one of three possibilities. You just want to be argumentative, or you don’t want to accept it, or you don’t have a clue. The intended recipients got it, so now I can sit back and wait for either one to confirm or refute what I offered. You! You’ll keep on agonizing over my audacity to post something contrary to your belief.
By the way, you challenge my view on the efficiency of low angle paddling and insist that it’ll make the boat waddle like a duck. That opinion is based on your lack of low angle technique. All you have to do is look at the two sets of data, then compare tracks for deviation. Its so bloody apparent I could format it in braille so a blind person could read it. I’m also using a 250cm Kalliste, which I’ve been told is too long, and the paddle feels like paddling hard and going nowhere. That opinion simply illustrates that the contributor doesn’t know proper low angle technique.
Rather than ask a question, its easier to attack what the unfamiliar - do you think that if you can’t do it nobody else can? It doesn’t matter who thinks my post is self-aggrandizing fluff. The purpose is to offer my point of view on how to paddle efficiently. Invariably, the forum gets a question about recovery from shoulder injury. My shoulder is permanently damaged - I can’t raise my arm above level, so I adapted by going exclusively to low angle. Did it occur to you that my experimentation could benefit someone with similar damage. Did it occur to you that high angle paddling may have contributed to my shoulder damage, and that I might be able to offer an effective alternative. Hopefully, you didn’t think that far.
Anyone can look at my data and accept it or reject it. The data conicals my recovery, not my physical prowess. You made your point, and I made mine. Speed depends on wind and current. I get it!!!
