| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Monster waves
Monster waves boost for sea perils defence
Research says freak waves more frequent than previously thought, writes James Brewer December 02 2003 Lloyds List "SHIPS are far more at peril from monster ocean waves than many experts have previously realised, according to new research. Growing evidence that waves of more than 30 m in height can occur randomly ..." "During a three-week radar satellite study, the German Aerospace Centre found a total of 10 monster waves around the world, ranging from 26 m to 30 m in height." "It concluded: 'If the satellite data is right, it looks as if freak waves occur in the deep ocean far more frequently than the traditional linear model would predict.'" Your are perfectly safe, Nil. Since they tend to occur far more frequently in the deep ocean, odds are overwhelming that you will never see one. Rick |
Monster waves
That's interesting beacuse most of the static wave height measurements
suggested a rather low frequency of monster waves. Over what time scale and area was this measurement? Cheers MC Rick wrote: Monster waves boost for sea perils defence Research says freak waves more frequent than previously thought, writes James Brewer December 02 2003 Lloyds List "SHIPS are far more at peril from monster ocean waves than many experts have previously realised, according to new research. Growing evidence that waves of more than 30 m in height can occur randomly ..." "During a three-week radar satellite study, the German Aerospace Centre found a total of 10 monster waves around the world, ranging from 26 m to 30 m in height." "It concluded: 'If the satellite data is right, it looks as if freak waves occur in the deep ocean far more frequently than the traditional linear model would predict.'" Your are perfectly safe, Nil. Since they tend to occur far more frequently in the deep ocean, odds are overwhelming that you will never see one. Rick |
Monster waves
Those monster waves don't cause me any fear or
trepidation. The odds of myself or any boat being where they are when they are is still relatively slim. Besides, you seem to forget my fine yacht has positive flotation. Even if it gets rolled over a couple times I will be able to bale it out and get under way again. S.Simon "Rick" wrote in message hlink.net... Monster waves boost for sea perils defence Research says freak waves more frequent than previously thought, writes James Brewer December 02 2003 Lloyds List "SHIPS are far more at peril from monster ocean waves than many experts have previously realised, according to new research. Growing evidence that waves of more than 30 m in height can occur randomly ..." "During a three-week radar satellite study, the German Aerospace Centre found a total of 10 monster waves around the world, ranging from 26 m to 30 m in height." "It concluded: 'If the satellite data is right, it looks as if freak waves occur in the deep ocean far more frequently than the traditional linear model would predict.'" Your are perfectly safe, Nil. Since they tend to occur far more frequently in the deep ocean, odds are overwhelming that you will never see one. Rick |
Monster waves
The_navigator© wrote:
That's interesting beacuse most of the static wave height measurements suggested a rather low frequency of monster waves. Over what time scale and area was this measurement? The article stated: "During a three-week radar satellite study, the German Aerospace Centre found a total of 10 monster waves around the world, ranging from 26 m to 30 m in height." I read that as 10 waves worldwide in a 3 weeks time. Rick |
Monster waves
a couple times I will be able to bale it out and
get under way again. S.Simon After encountering a 30 metre wave? Now that I'd like to see! When Neal types such things it only makes it even more clear that he's no sailor. Add to that the following: That he chose one of the cheapest boats around and you get the whole picture. A real sailor would have chosen a Cape Dory 30, any alberg or Bristol or even an old Pearson Wanderer. All better in every way and proven designs. Instead he lives on a tiny cramped vessel known to be poor in nearly every regard anc quite comely as well. RB |
Monster waves
My last recollection of a reported "monster wave" was the one which hit
the liner Michaelangelo (or it's sister), and stove in a good portion of the forward side of the house. From reports, it's not necessarily the size of the wave (30m is not common but not unheard of in open ocean storms) but the fact that it may appear during an otherwise calm condition, unexpectedly when the ship is least apt to be at a speed and/or heading to deal with it. otn |
Monster waves
They don't say what spacecraft was used for the observation. To get that
resolution, it had to be in low orbit. I'd guess some type of radar might work, but the target area would be small, perhaps less than 100 miles. This might mean that this was 10 monster waves within a 10,000 square miles in 3 weeks, which seems quite high. Some clarification is needed. Do we have an original link? "Rick" wrote in message hlink.net... The_navigator© wrote: That's interesting beacuse most of the static wave height measurements suggested a rather low frequency of monster waves. Over what time scale and area was this measurement? The article stated: "During a three-week radar satellite study, the German Aerospace Centre found a total of 10 monster waves around the world, ranging from 26 m to 30 m in height." I read that as 10 waves worldwide in a 3 weeks time. Rick |
Monster waves
nearly every regard anc quite comely as well.
RB Comely? Didn't you mean homely? I meant to say "Not comely." RB |
Monster waves
Do you agree with me that such a monster wave is more
likely to damage a large ship than a cockle shell that will likely ride up and over with little or no damage? S.Simon "otnmbrd" wrote in message hlink.net... My last recollection of a reported "monster wave" was the one which hit the liner Michaelangelo (or it's sister), and stove in a good portion of the forward side of the house. From reports, it's not necessarily the size of the wave (30m is not common but not unheard of in open ocean storms) but the fact that it may appear during an otherwise calm condition, unexpectedly when the ship is least apt to be at a speed and/or heading to deal with it. otn |
Monster waves
|
Monster waves
Jeff Morris wrote:
Some clarification is needed. Do we have an original link? December 2nd Lloyd's List. Maybe Google the German study for online info. Rick |
Monster waves
Simple Simon wrote:
Do you agree with me that such a monster wave is more likely to damage a large ship than a cockle shell that will likely ride up and over with little or no damage? On what do you base your silly assumption, Nil? If you had ever seen a 30 meter wave you probably die of fear but assuming the worst and you lived you wouldn't need to ask. Your little insult to cockle shells would be reduced to a debris field of plastic waste rather than the offensive agglomeration it is now. Rick |
Monster waves
You are about as stupid as the other motor boat captains
who continue to plague this group even though I have pointed out time and time again how unwelcome they all are. Big rogue waves are not necessarily breaking waves. You should realize this. Don't you even recall the fact that in the open ocean, off soundings tsunamis are not even noticeable from the deck of a ship or a sailboat. This is because even thought they may be 100 feet tall they have such a long wave length that are more like the rise and fall of the tide than a wave. Not all rogue waves are like you poor motorboat schmucks envision. You idiots watch movies like the "Perfect Storm" and see some stupid fishing boat attempting to motor up the face of a huge breaking wave and think that is how it is done. Any fool knows that is NOT how it is done in a sailboat. Any ballasted sailboat has a much greater ability to remain upright on the face of such a rogue wave than a motorboat without such an advantageous stability curve. Now, back to the question of big ships being more damaged by these freak waves. Yes, they are. They can be stove in because they present far more area to water crashing down on the structure and they are not designed to survive such forces. Small vessels have smaller surface area and only need to withstand much smaller forces. If this were not the case one would not see so many unbroken light bulbs littering the beaches where such fragile items have landed after voyages of thousands of sea miles. Try using your head for something else than growing lice and dandruff. S.Simon "Rick" wrote in message hlink.net... Simple Simon wrote: Do you agree with me that such a monster wave is more likely to damage a large ship than a cockle shell that will likely ride up and over with little or no damage? On what do you base your silly assumption, Nil? If you had ever seen a 30 meter wave you probably die of fear but assuming the worst and you lived you wouldn't need to ask. Your little insult to cockle shells would be reduced to a debris field of plastic waste rather than the offensive agglomeration it is now. Rick |
Monster waves
Funny, we don't hear Neal talk of his ''next boat'', or call his Coronado a
''stepping stone''. He seems quite satisfied with the boat he OWNS. Scotty S/V Lisa Marie Balt. MD USA "****Head" wrote When Neal types such things it only makes it even more clear that he's no sailor. Add to that the following: That he chose one of the cheapest boats around and you get the whole picture. A real sailor would have chosen a Cape Dory 30, any alberg or Bristol or even an old Pearson Wanderer. All better in every way and proven designs. Instead he lives on a tiny cramped vessel known to be poor in nearly every regard anc quite comely as well. RB |
Monster waves
Of more interest is the wave period (length) as a measure of steepness.
Doesn't matter if it's a huge wave as long as it isn't steep and/or breaking. Just a bulge in the ocean, who cares???? PDW In article , The_navigator© wrote: That's interesting beacuse most of the static wave height measurements suggested a rather low frequency of monster waves. Over what time scale and area was this measurement? Cheers MC Rick wrote: Monster waves boost for sea perils defence Research says freak waves more frequent than previously thought, writes James Brewer December 02 2003 Lloyds List "SHIPS are far more at peril from monster ocean waves than many experts have previously realised, according to new research. Growing evidence that waves of more than 30 m in height can occur randomly ..." "During a three-week radar satellite study, the German Aerospace Centre found a total of 10 monster waves around the world, ranging from 26 m to 30 m in height." "It concluded: 'If the satellite data is right, it looks as if freak waves occur in the deep ocean far more frequently than the traditional linear model would predict.'" Your are perfectly safe, Nil. Since they tend to occur far more frequently in the deep ocean, odds are overwhelming that you will never see one. Rick |
Monster waves
It's true. He's one of many here that love their boat. While many of us
would like something different, it's a bit like comparing a pretty girl on the street to your partner, she may may not be quite a 'luxurious' or 'fast' but she's all you really need and you love her -even for her imperfections. Cheers MC Scott Vernon wrote: Funny, we don't hear Neal talk of his ''next boat'', or call his Coronado a ''stepping stone''. He seems quite satisfied with the boat he OWNS. Scotty S/V Lisa Marie Balt. MD USA "****Head" wrote When Neal types such things it only makes it even more clear that he's no sailor. Add to that the following: That he chose one of the cheapest boats around and you get the whole picture. A real sailor would have chosen a Cape Dory 30, any alberg or Bristol or even an old Pearson Wanderer. All better in every way and proven designs. Instead he lives on a tiny cramped vessel known to be poor in nearly every regard anc quite comely as well. RB |
Monster waves
Simple Simon wrote: Do you agree with me that such a monster wave is more likely to damage a large ship than a cockle shell that will likely ride up and over with little or no damage? S.Simon No .... it depends entirely on the circumstances, when it hits ..... height; breaking or not; angle it hits you; speed you're making at the time; basic stability .... so on and so forth. otn |
Monster waves
Funny, we don't hear Neal talk of his ''next boat'', or call his Coronado a
''stepping stone''. He seems quite satisfied with the boat he OWNS. When it comes to loyalty to a boat, a true sailor is only as faithful as their options. Scotty and Neal have none. RB |
Monster waves
If it were a trochoidal wave in deep ocean its velocity would be huge
and possibly approaching supersonic speeds (I think). No, I think it must be due to superposition of shorter waves. Cheers MC Peter Wiley wrote: Of more interest is the wave period (length) as a measure of steepness. Doesn't matter if it's a huge wave as long as it isn't steep and/or breaking. Just a bulge in the ocean, who cares???? PDW In article , The_navigator© wrote: That's interesting beacuse most of the static wave height measurements suggested a rather low frequency of monster waves. Over what time scale and area was this measurement? Cheers MC Rick wrote: Monster waves boost for sea perils defence Research says freak waves more frequent than previously thought, writes James Brewer December 02 2003 Lloyds List "SHIPS are far more at peril from monster ocean waves than many experts have previously realised, according to new research. Growing evidence that waves of more than 30 m in height can occur randomly ..." "During a three-week radar satellite study, the German Aerospace Centre found a total of 10 monster waves around the world, ranging from 26 m to 30 m in height." "It concluded: 'If the satellite data is right, it looks as if freak waves occur in the deep ocean far more frequently than the traditional linear model would predict.'" Your are perfectly safe, Nil. Since they tend to occur far more frequently in the deep ocean, odds are overwhelming that you will never see one. Rick |
Monster waves
Funny, we don't hear Neal talk of his ''next boat'', or call his Coronado a
''stepping stone''. He seems quite satisfied with the boat he OWNS. Hey, look! A Siedleman owner comes to the defense of a Coronado owner! RB |
Monster waves
Yeah all true, but he does stow his fenders.
"Bobsprit" wrote in message ... a couple times I will be able to bale it out and get under way again. S.Simon After encountering a 30 metre wave? Now that I'd like to see! When Neal types such things it only makes it even more clear that he's no sailor. Add to that the following: That he chose one of the cheapest boats around and you get the whole picture. A real sailor would have chosen a Cape Dory 30, any alberg or Bristol or even an old Pearson Wanderer. All better in every way and proven designs. Instead he lives on a tiny cramped vessel known to be poor in nearly every regard anc quite comely as well. RB |
Monster waves
comments interspersed:
Simple Simon wrote: You are about as stupid as the other motor boat captains who continue to plague this group even though I have pointed out time and time again how unwelcome they all are. Big rogue waves are not necessarily breaking waves. You should realize this. Don't you even recall the fact that in the open ocean, off soundings tsunamis are not even noticeable from the deck of a ship or a sailboat. This is because even thought they may be 100 feet tall they have such a long wave length that are more like the rise and fall of the tide than a wave. I think you'll find that a Tsunami, doesn't gain height until it approaches shoaling water, but agree, that a "rogue" is not necessarily a breaking wave. Not all rogue waves are like you poor motorboat schmucks envision. You idiots watch movies like the "Perfect Storm" and see some stupid fishing boat attempting to motor up the face of a huge breaking wave and think that is how it is done. Any fool knows that is NOT how it is done in a sailboat. BG I don't need Hollywood to show me 30cm waves .... been dere done dat, and normally, if we are in a storm like that we will endeavor to be taking those seas on the bow, rather than head on, but a rogue doesn't always give you the time to set this up (sometimes, head on is all you can do BG and you're happy to be able to do that). Any ballasted sailboat has a much greater ability to remain upright on the face of such a rogue wave than a motorboat without such an advantageous stability curve. G now your an expert on stability? I doubt it. Now, back to the question of big ships being more damaged by these freak waves. Yes, they are. They can be stove in because they present far more area to water crashing down on the structure and they are not designed to survive such forces. Small vessels have smaller surface area and only need to withstand much smaller forces. If this were not the case one would not see so many unbroken light bulbs littering the beaches where such fragile items have landed after voyages of thousands of sea miles. Your general lack of experience is showing again .... stick to small sailboats in Tampa Bay. otn |
Monster waves
And that's one of the few, very few, things that can be said in a positive
way about Neal. He's got a boat, he loves it, and that's what counts in the long term. "The_navigator©" wrote in message ... It's true. He's one of many here that love their boat. While many of us would like something different, it's a bit like comparing a pretty girl on the street to your partner, she may may not be quite a 'luxurious' or 'fast' but she's all you really need and you love her -even for her imperfections. Cheers MC Scott Vernon wrote: Funny, we don't hear Neal talk of his ''next boat'', or call his Coronado a ''stepping stone''. He seems quite satisfied with the boat he OWNS. Scotty S/V Lisa Marie Balt. MD USA "****Head" wrote When Neal types such things it only makes it even more clear that he's no sailor. Add to that the following: That he chose one of the cheapest boats around and you get the whole picture. A real sailor would have chosen a Cape Dory 30, any alberg or Bristol or even an old Pearson Wanderer. All better in every way and proven designs. Instead he lives on a tiny cramped vessel known to be poor in nearly every regard anc quite comely as well. RB |
Monster waves
Poor Booby, he knows nothing but his childish insistence
upon appearances. He is motivated primarily by what others might think of his stuff. His entire life revolves around trying to please other people with his stuff. What he will never learn that unless his stuff pleases HIM he is wasting his time with it. I'm afraid no boat will ever please Booby, however. The reason being he cannot eat it. S.Simon "Bobsprit" wrote in message ... Funny, we don't hear Neal talk of his ''next boat'', or call his Coronado a ''stepping stone''. He seems quite satisfied with the boat he OWNS. Hey, look! A Siedleman owner comes to the defense of a Coronado owner! RB |
Monster waves
I take it your wife's out for the evening?
Scotty "The_navigator©" wrote in message ... It's true. He's one of many here that love their boat. While many of us would like something different, it's a bit like comparing a pretty girl on the street to your partner, she may may not be quite a 'luxurious' or 'fast' but she's all you really need and you love her -even for her imperfections. Cheers MC Scott Vernon wrote: Funny, we don't hear Neal talk of his ''next boat'', or call his Coronado a ''stepping stone''. He seems quite satisfied with the boat he OWNS. Scotty S/V Lisa Marie Balt. MD USA "****Head" wrote When Neal types such things it only makes it even more clear that he's no sailor. Add to that the following: That he chose one of the cheapest boats around and you get the whole picture. A real sailor would have chosen a Cape Dory 30, any alberg or Bristol or even an old Pearson Wanderer. All better in every way and proven designs. Instead he lives on a tiny cramped vessel known to be poor in nearly every regard anc quite comely as well. RB |
Monster waves
Yup! A real sailor knows this to be true.
Scotty "Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message ... And that's one of the few, very few, things that can be said in a positive way about Neal. He's got a boat, he loves it, and that's what counts in the long term. "The_navigator©" wrote in message ... It's true. He's one of many here that love their boat. While many of us would like something different, it's a bit like comparing a pretty girl on the street to your partner, she may may not be quite a 'luxurious' or 'fast' but she's all you really need and you love her -even for her imperfections. Cheers MC Scott Vernon wrote: Funny, we don't hear Neal talk of his ''next boat'', or call his Coronado a ''stepping stone''. He seems quite satisfied with the boat he OWNS. Scotty S/V Lisa Marie Balt. MD USA "****Head" wrote When Neal types such things it only makes it even more clear that he's no sailor. Add to that the following: That he chose one of the cheapest boats around and you get the whole picture. A real sailor would have chosen a Cape Dory 30, any alberg or Bristol or even an old Pearson Wanderer. All better in every way and proven designs. Instead he lives on a tiny cramped vessel known to be poor in nearly every regard anc quite comely as well. RB |
Monster waves
"****Head" couldn't think of anything intelligent to say so he wrote When it comes to loyalty to a boat, a true sailor is only as faithful as their options. |
Monster waves
What insight!
"Simple Simon" wrote in message ... Poor Booby, he knows nothing but his childish insistence upon appearances. He is motivated primarily by what others might think of his stuff. His entire life revolves around trying to please other people with his stuff. What he will never learn that unless his stuff pleases HIM he is wasting his time with it. I'm afraid no boat will ever please Booby, however. The reason being he cannot eat it. S.Simon "Bobsprit" wrote in message ... Funny, we don't hear Neal talk of his ''next boat'', or call his Coronado a ''stepping stone''. He seems quite satisfied with the boat he OWNS. Hey, look! A Siedleman owner comes to the defense of a Coronado owner! RB |
Monster waves
"****Head" couldn't think of anything intelligent to say
so he wrote Oh, the irony! RB |
Monster waves
I'm not the one bragging about being aboard boats that
get structure stove in by large waves am I? I've sailed up and down many a fifty footer with no problem. Any and all structure aboard my boat is still intact and shows no wave damage. I'll admit I've never even seen a hundred-footer in person but that's because I'm smart enough to avoid them. Can you claim the same? S.Simon "otnmbrd" wrote in message hlink.net... comments interspersed: Simple Simon wrote: You are about as stupid as the other motor boat captains who continue to plague this group even though I have pointed out time and time again how unwelcome they all are. Big rogue waves are not necessarily breaking waves. You should realize this. Don't you even recall the fact that in the open ocean, off soundings tsunamis are not even noticeable from the deck of a ship or a sailboat. This is because even thought they may be 100 feet tall they have such a long wave length that are more like the rise and fall of the tide than a wave. I think you'll find that a Tsunami, doesn't gain height until it approaches shoaling water, but agree, that a "rogue" is not necessarily a breaking wave. Not all rogue waves are like you poor motorboat schmucks envision. You idiots watch movies like the "Perfect Storm" and see some stupid fishing boat attempting to motor up the face of a huge breaking wave and think that is how it is done. Any fool knows that is NOT how it is done in a sailboat. BG I don't need Hollywood to show me 30cm waves .... been dere done dat, and normally, if we are in a storm like that we will endeavor to be taking those seas on the bow, rather than head on, but a rogue doesn't always give you the time to set this up (sometimes, head on is all you can do BG and you're happy to be able to do that). Any ballasted sailboat has a much greater ability to remain upright on the face of such a rogue wave than a motorboat without such an advantageous stability curve. G now your an expert on stability? I doubt it. Now, back to the question of big ships being more damaged by these freak waves. Yes, they are. They can be stove in because they present far more area to water crashing down on the structure and they are not designed to survive such forces. Small vessels have smaller surface area and only need to withstand much smaller forces. If this were not the case one would not see so many unbroken light bulbs littering the beaches where such fragile items have landed after voyages of thousands of sea miles. Your general lack of experience is showing again .... stick to small sailboats in Tampa Bay. otn |
Monster waves
BG Comments interspersed .... I see you didn't want to touch the
subjects of tsunami's and stability. Your lack of knowledge and inexperience showing again? Simple Simon wrote: I'm not the one bragging about being aboard boats that get structure stove in by large waves am I? Didn't see any bragging on my part, and considering the potential for damage to that ship, what she sustained and survived would be considered acceptable. I've sailed up and down many a fifty footer with no problem. Any and all structure aboard my boat is still intact and shows no wave damage. Doubt you've ever seen a 50 footer. You haven't done enough deep sea sailing. If by chance you had seen even a 30 footer ..... we all get lucky. I'll admit I've never even seen a hundred-footer in person but that's because I'm smart enough to avoid them. Can you claim the same? Once again, your lack of experience showing. If you go to sea long enough, where you are trying to get from point A to point B, you are bound to run into conditions that mean you will have to deal with some serious weather. You can avoid some things, but others you just have to deal with. I remember a picture which was making the rounds of the web, showing a tanker in heavy weather, going to Alaska. I have been Master of that tanker, on that run, and seen the same .... sometimes you are stuck dealing with what you are dealt, and in the case of a rogue, you generally have no fore warning, which means, in your case, odds on, we wouldn't be having this discussion if you had ever run across one. BG Try as you might, Neal, you will never see the conditions, I've seen.... and to be honest, I hope you don't. otn |
Monster waves
otnmbrd wrote:
I remember a picture which was making the rounds of the web, showing a tanker in heavy weather, going to Alaska. I have been Master of that tanker, on that run, and seen the same .... sometimes you are stuck dealing with what you are dealt, and in the case of a rogue, you generally have no fore warning, which means, in your case, odds on, we wouldn't be having this discussion if you had ever run across one. BG Try as you might, Neal, you will never see the conditions, I've seen.... and to be honest, I hope you don't. All of us who have sailed on the Valdez run had a more than a fair share of that kind of seas. When we started running from Valdez to the Far East is when it got really nasty and on one trip we really did have 30 meter waves for several days straight with winds steady in the 80's and gusting to over a hundred. Could hardly tell the difference between sea and sky most of the time. Nil would have crawled into a lifeboat and cried if he could have made it that far. Would love to have Nil experience that sometime. Would shut the fool up maybe if he didn't move to Kansas. Either way if it got him off the water the seas would be a lot safer. Of course by the sound of his seamanship and general nautical knowledge I am not sure he has much contact with the sea aside from buying canned tuna anyway. Rick |
Monster waves
Simple Simon wrote:
I've been out there and been in sight of very large ships that went completely out of sight behind such waves. Have you ever been out on a boat, Nil? Consider that on your tiny toy boat your height of eye is about 6 feet and the trough of nearly any wave or swell will put you out of sight of anything over a few dozen feet away in the trough of another wave or swell. What a frigging idiot ... Simple, yes. Mariner? Bwahahahahahahahahaahahaha Rick |
Monster waves
There are no facts to support this.
"Simple Simon" wrote in message ... I'm afraid no boat will ever please Booby, however. The reason being he cannot eat it. S.Simon "Bobsprit" wrote in message ... Funny, we don't hear Neal talk of his ''next boat'', or call his Coronado a ''stepping stone''. He seems quite satisfied with the boat he OWNS. Hey, look! A Siedleman owner comes to the defense of a Coronado owner! RB |
Monster waves
Comments interspersed:
Simple Simon wrote: We have a little old current around this neck of the woods called the Gulf Stream. In the wintertime when we get northers the wind acts against the current and produces fifty-foot, short period waves on a regular basis. BS. Although you will see some nasty seas on the East Coast of Fla, during NE Gales, 50 footers are rare (generally not enough fetch to develop them until you clear the Bahamas) Doubt you've ever been out there to experience them. If you are ever up this way I'll take you out into the axis of the Steam in a northerly gale and show you a fifty footer or two. I've been out there and been in sight of very large ships that went completely out of sight behind such waves. ROFL Just because you're always sailing in the lee of your little islands does not mean real waves don't occur in other places. Give it a rest, Neal. You rarely leave Tampa Bay S.Simon |
Monster waves
Hey, putz. I was on top of one wave and the ship in the trough of
another a ways off and it went out of sight. I know you've never been in such seas but please try to imagine them at least. S.Simon "Rick" wrote in message hlink.net... Simple Simon wrote: I've been out there and been in sight of very large ships that went completely out of sight behind such waves. Have you ever been out on a boat, Nil? Consider that on your tiny toy boat your height of eye is about 6 feet and the trough of nearly any wave or swell will put you out of sight of anything over a few dozen feet away in the trough of another wave or swell. What a frigging idiot ... Simple, yes. Mariner? Bwahahahahahahahahaahahaha Rick |
Monster waves
I love it when the tugboat captains all get together
and stroke each other's flagging egos. Their old memories are those of a fisherman who caught a minnow which grew into a whale in the telling . . . S.Simon "Rick" wrote in message hlink.net... otnmbrd wrote: I remember a picture which was making the rounds of the web, showing a tanker in heavy weather, going to Alaska. I have been Master of that tanker, on that run, and seen the same .... sometimes you are stuck dealing with what you are dealt, and in the case of a rogue, you generally have no fore warning, which means, in your case, odds on, we wouldn't be having this discussion if you had ever run across one. BG Try as you might, Neal, you will never see the conditions, I've seen.... and to be honest, I hope you don't. All of us who have sailed on the Valdez run had a more than a fair share of that kind of seas. When we started running from Valdez to the Far East is when it got really nasty and on one trip we really did have 30 meter waves for several days straight with winds steady in the 80's and gusting to over a hundred. Could hardly tell the difference between sea and sky most of the time. Nil would have crawled into a lifeboat and cried if he could have made it that far. Would love to have Nil experience that sometime. Would shut the fool up maybe if he didn't move to Kansas. Either way if it got him off the water the seas would be a lot safer. Of course by the sound of his seamanship and general nautical knowledge I am not sure he has much contact with the sea aside from buying canned tuna anyway. Rick |
Monster waves
ROFLMAO Didn't think you'd be able to come up with any response that
would show any experience with "heavy weather". Stick to the Bay, Neal, we'll all be safer Simple Simon wrote: I love it when the tugboat captains all get together and stroke each other's flagging egos. Their old memories are those of a fisherman who caught a minnow which grew into a whale in the telling . . . S.Simon "Rick" wrote in message hlink.net... otnmbrd wrote: I remember a picture which was making the rounds of the web, showing a tanker in heavy weather, going to Alaska. I have been Master of that tanker, on that run, and seen the same .... sometimes you are stuck dealing with what you are dealt, and in the case of a rogue, you generally have no fore warning, which means, in your case, odds on, we wouldn't be having this discussion if you had ever run across one. BG Try as you might, Neal, you will never see the conditions, I've seen.... and to be honest, I hope you don't. All of us who have sailed on the Valdez run had a more than a fair share of that kind of seas. When we started running from Valdez to the Far East is when it got really nasty and on one trip we really did have 30 meter waves for several days straight with winds steady in the 80's and gusting to over a hundred. Could hardly tell the difference between sea and sky most of the time. Nil would have crawled into a lifeboat and cried if he could have made it that far. Would love to have Nil experience that sometime. Would shut the fool up maybe if he didn't move to Kansas. Either way if it got him off the water the seas would be a lot safer. Of course by the sound of his seamanship and general nautical knowledge I am not sure he has much contact with the sea aside from buying canned tuna anyway. Rick |
Monster waves
Simple Simon wrote:
Poor old Nil. Never was never will. Rick |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:09 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com