River Grades - Rafts vs Kayaks
 

Anyone know the differences in the two grading systems?

A friend has just come back from South Africa where (as a complete
rafting novice) he was running Grade 5. The kayakers supporting the
raft all went off to do a Grade 6 run in the afternoon. The numbers
seem a bit high to me.

Any ideas? Is a grade 6 raft-rapid actually a grade 4/5 kayak-run?

Zatt.

River Grades - Rafts vs Kayaks
 

ZattleBone wrote:
Anyone know the differences in the two grading systems?

A friend has just come back from South Africa where (as a complete
rafting novice) he was running Grade 5. The kayakers supporting the
raft all went off to do a Grade 6 run in the afternoon. The numbers
seem a bit high to me.

Any ideas? Is a grade 6 raft-rapid actually a grade 4/5 kayak-run?

Having seen a couple of rafting company adverts in different countries
and having heard a couple of the raft guides talk to their customers, I
got the impression that they overrate the difficulty rather routinely.
Of course, they do seem to want to impress their customers... My guess
is that helps raise the tip.

Then again, there are some raft guides who run some pretty impressive
stuff with inexperienced customers, some of the big rapids on the Grand
Canyon and Zambezi come to mind.

--
Wilko van den Bergh
Eindhoven The Netherlands Europe
Look at the possibilities, don't worry about the limitations.
http://wilko.webzone.ru/

River Grades - Rafts vs Kayaks
 

Hopefully, the river is rated based on it's features, characteristics,
and dangers. What craft you are in has no bearing on the river. It
doesn't care what you may fall out of.

Many novice rafters can safely enjoy a Class (Grade) 4 run, while some
novice kayakers may have their hands full on Class 3. That is not a
hard and fast rule, but an over simplification. Some runs greatly
favor kayaks because of size. Large boats don't always fit where
small boats fit.

I don't think there are many Class six runs being done routinely.

(Wilko, I hope I am correct in assuming that European standards are
substantially the same as U.S.?)


Just my $.02 (while I try to help breathe some life back into RBP)


-Dan


On 11 Sep 2003 02:11:48 -0700, (ZattleBone)
wrote:

Anyone know the differences in the two grading systems?

A friend has just come back from South Africa where (as a complete
rafting novice) he was running Grade 5. The kayakers supporting the
raft all went off to do a Grade 6 run in the afternoon. The numbers
seem a bit high to me.

Any ideas? Is a grade 6 raft-rapid actually a grade 4/5 kayak-run?

Zatt.

River Grades - Rafts vs Kayaks
 

Dan Valleskey wrote:

I don't think there are many Class six runs being done routinely.

Same story here.

(Wilko, I hope I am correct in assuming that European standards are
substantially the same as U.S.?)

From what I've seen in the U.S., I would say so. Maybe the comparison
with western U.S. rivers/ratings fits the type of rivers here better,
though.

--
Wilko van den Bergh
Eindhoven The Netherlands Europe
Look at the possibilities, don't worry about the limitations.
http://wilko.webzone.ru/

River Grades - Rafts vs Kayaks
 

"Wilko" wrote in message
news:1fg8b.37557$tK5.4769674@zonnet-reader-1...

Dan Valleskey wrote:

I don't think there are many Class six runs being done routinely.

Same story here.

(Wilko, I hope I am correct in assuming that European standards are
substantially the same as U.S.?)

From what I've seen in the U.S., I would say so. Maybe the comparison
with western U.S. rivers/ratings fits the type of rivers here better,
though.


The interesting thing about western ratings is that there is no numerical
classification for 'unrunnable'. Class 10 often is described as "an
inexperienced boatman in a good quality boat has less than a 50-50 chance of
making it right-side up." I like the 10-step breakdown, too, since it
clears up some of that vast grey area between Class III and Class IV on the
traditional grading scale.

--riverman

(and it sounds a lot like Spinal Tap, too.)

River Grades - Rafts vs Kayaks
 

Could just be that the locals have decided to make up their own grading
system so that they sound cool, or possibly just lied.

There are a few examples of rivers that are not graded on the
international scale (Grand Canyon 1-10?) but as far as I know people
have converted these to real terms by now.

I have seen some discrepancy over raft vs kayak grading when I've been
in the US, or at least that is our assumption. Some guidebooks have
different grades to others and the best idea we could come up with was
that sometimes big stoppers will look more difficult to kayaks and
narrow technical sections will look more difficult to rafts. This does
not mean that grade 4 in a rafting guide always equates to grade 5 in a
kayak or anything, just that where we have noticed differences of
opinions it depended on which type of craft would find the rapid easier
or harder.

It could also be that the river(s) in question were last graded 20 years
ago when a lot of stuff was overgraded due to thought of consequences. I
fully agree that danger should not be factored into the grade, but
almost every guidebook does so at some time, I've even found myself
using it in my reasoning and I think it's wrong!

There is also the possibility that the outfit is a bit suspect and does
regularly run grade 5 with beginners and the guides do head off and run
grade 6 every day after work - people doing, or claiming to do, that
sort of thing are usually complete dopeheads who have long since
forgotten what grading really means anyway. They probably also aren't
very useful as safety boaters!

There is a fairly good case for expanding the grading system but no-one
will actually make a stand and attempt to do it.

Anyway Zatt, will you be bringing some beginners to Scotland so I can
show them some nice grade 7 stuff????

JIM

ZattleBone wrote:

Anyone know the differences in the two grading systems?

A friend has just come back from South Africa where (as a complete
rafting novice) he was running Grade 5. The kayakers supporting the
raft all went off to do a Grade 6 run in the afternoon. The numbers
seem a bit high to me.

Any ideas? Is a grade 6 raft-rapid actually a grade 4/5 kayak-run?

Zatt.

River Grades - Rafts vs Kayaks
 

"Jim Wallis" wrote in message
news:vpjsjb.qgf.ln@Eskdale...

There is a fairly good case for expanding the grading system but no-one
will actually make a stand and attempt to do it.


Jim,

Can you imagine the legal liability that would expose you to? Just think,
someone gets injured or dies on a river that you had just graded as a Class
3. All of a sudden the plaintiffs are trying to make it out as a Class 6 and
of course the victim would never have run it except for the fact that you
graded it as something they could do.

I think that's why we won't see any attempts at grading things in the
future.

Steve Holtzman
Southern CA

River Grades - Rafts vs Kayaks
 

Seakayaker wrote:

Can you imagine the legal liability that would expose you to? Just think,
someone gets injured or dies on a river that you had just graded as a Class
3. All of a sudden the plaintiffs are trying to make it out as a Class 6 and
of course the victim would never have run it except for the fact that you
graded it as something they could do.

I think that's why we won't see any attempts at grading things in the
future.

In a particular lawyer infested bit of the US on a very bad day
possibly, but there's been no sign of anyone doing that with climbing
guides here which are every bit as open to the same problems. The
problem with doing it isn't legal action, but knowing you need to do a
good job and not being prepared to make do with a bad one.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch University of Dundee
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Medical Physics, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

River Grades - Rafts vs Kayaks
 

I was going to reply but then I thought there was something familiar
about that name - is this the so called lawyer troll that has wrecked
r.b.p? It would explain why his post is irrelevant.

Seakayaker wrote:

"Jim Wallis" wrote in message
news:vpjsjb.qgf.ln@Eskdale...


There is a fairly good case for expanding the grading system but no-one
will actually make a stand and attempt to do it.



Jim,

Can you imagine the legal liability that would expose you to? Just think,
someone gets injured or dies on a river that you had just graded as a Class
3. All of a sudden the plaintiffs are trying to make it out as a Class 6 and
of course the victim would never have run it except for the fact that you
graded it as something they could do.

I think that's why we won't see any attempts at grading things in the
future.

Steve Holtzman
Southern CA

River Grades - Rafts vs Kayaks
 

Lets face it the grading thing is not an objective thing but it should
be.

The grading system is closed and this is its problem. Either the grade
system has to be open ended and so we have grade 7 8 ..And as equipment
and skills improve higher or we have to regularly down grade the rapids
because they are easier now than when they were originally graded many
when the paddlers were in canvas boats. This was tried several years ago
but the general boating public ignored it.

In reality it does not matter because once you get to what is currently
accepted as grade 4 in a kayak then you know what you are doing and can
make an informed choice. Grade 5 is what you are aspiring to and once
you get to that level then you have no real worries about what the grade
is but what the water level is!
--
Dave Manby
Details of the Coruh river and my book "Many Rivers To Run" at
http://www.dmanby.demon.co.uk

River Grades - Rafts vs Kayaks
 

riverman wrote:

The interesting thing about western ratings is that there is no numerical
classification for 'unrunnable'.

Ehm, having only run a few rivers west of the Appalachians, I think that
you might mistake Grand Canyon ratings for "western rivers" ratings,
Myron. The creeks and rivers I saw up close in Colorado were classified
I to VI, noting that my paddling buddy is from Colorado...


Class 10 often is described as "an
inexperienced boatman in a good quality boat has less than a 50-50 chance of
making it right-side up."

I know a rapid or two that fits this desciption... big grin


I like the 10-step breakdown, too, since it
clears up some of that vast grey area between Class III and Class IV on the
traditional grading scale.

Hmmm, that's one of the few level distinctions that I find very clear.
IMO a class III paddler will immediately know when they've hit a IV
rapid. For a class IV (and over) paddler, a line in a class III rapid
will not be anything to note.

(and it sounds a lot like Spinal Tap, too.)

:-)

--
Wilko van den Bergh
Eindhoven The Netherlands Europe
Look at the possibilities, don't worry about the limitations.
http://wilko.webzone.ru/

River Grades - Rafts vs Kayaks
 

Wilko wrote:
riverman wrote:


The interesting thing about western ratings is that there is no numerical
classification for 'unrunnable'.


Ehm, having only run a few rivers west of the Appalachians, I think that
you might mistake Grand Canyon ratings for "western rivers" ratings,
Myron. The creeks and rivers I saw up close in Colorado were classified
I to VI, noting that my paddling buddy is from Colorado...


Myron et al, are refering to the "Deseret Scale", which goes from 1-10
and was applied to the Grand Canyon and several other large volume
rivers without difficult rapids. Rumored that 1-10 was for how high the
waves were (in feet) in that rapid.

--Chris

River Grades - Rafts vs Kayaks
 

"Wilko" wrote in message
news:8Nq9b.42339$tK5.5098975@zonnet-reader-1...
riverman wrote:

The interesting thing about western ratings is that there is no
numerical
classification for 'unrunnable'.

Ehm, having only run a few rivers west of the Appalachians, I think that
you might mistake Grand Canyon ratings for "western rivers" ratings,
Myron. The creeks and rivers I saw up close in Colorado were classified
I to VI, noting that my paddling buddy is from Colorado...



Hmmm, I guess I missed the gist of your post, then , Wilko. Other than the
Grand Canyon scale (which I have never heard anyone but the Utah Mormons,
novices or marketers refer to as the 'Deseret Scale') there isn't a separate
rating scale for Western Rivers, so you must be referring to how the rivers
are rated? I know that because of geology, geography, plant cover and
relative age, Western water has a completely different 'feel' than Eastern
water, so as a result a Western class 4 can be completely different than an
Eastern class 4. And the nature of the boaters and their skills plays a big
part in that, too. The western boaters are more familar with open, big
water, so 'Carolina Steep Creeks' have been traditionally a challenge.
Eastern boaters are used to manuvering through rock gardens, so the
traditional '40 foot wave' is a real challenge to them. Also, the
familiarity with the types of boats plays a real role.
I once heard this summary, which is pretty good:

Back when the Americas were settled (from East to West), the natives in the
East used canoes as essential transportation, so from the earliest days,
everyone in the East had canoes and were taking them through the tightest of
spots, rather than take the time to portage. As people got more adventuous,
they began running more technical rivers in canoes, and the recreation
industry developed to support this, with durable boats and paddling gear,
and the right techniques.
The western natives, OTOH, did not run their rivers because they didn't take
them anywhere they wanted to go, and in many cases the rivers were hard to
access. That was, until after WW2, when a surplus of army rafts became
available and people started taking them on rivers for recreation. Rafts
have never been 'essential transportation'.

As a result, eastern rivers are rated for canoes, and eastern boaters have
grown up with hard boats as part of their culture for 250 years. Western
rivers are rated for rafts, and western boaters have had rafts are part of
their culture for 50 years. It wasn't until the mid 70s that the two started
to mix: some eastern boaters brought canoes to the west and started running
the big and small rivers (hey, *I* even managed to bag a first descent!) and
some western boaters brought rafts to the east and started running the
narrow rivers.

As a result, the very foundations of the east vs. west rating system is
different. The boats, the culture surrounding the boats, the 'genetic
resonance' of the boaters, and the entire outlook on the style of water is
different.

Is that what you meant?

--riverman

River Grades - Rafts vs Kayaks
 

riverman wrote:

As a result, the very foundations of the east vs. west rating system is
different. The boats, the culture surrounding the boats, the 'genetic
resonance' of the boaters, and the entire outlook on the style of water is
different.

Is that what you meant?

Bingo! :-)

From what I've paddled in Europe, and (mostly the eastern part of) the
U.S., I got the impression that western U.S. rivers are more like what
we have over here. Sure, there are pool and drop as well as more
continuous rivers here, and there definately is a big difference in
volume between the multitude of rivers and creeks here.

In general, I found the rating of the rivers I ran in the east to be
quite different from those I ran in Europe. From the experiences of
those Eastern U.S. paddlers that I've taken on trips in Europe, I got
the impression that they weren't so used to the more continuous nature
of the creeks and rivers I took them on. They tended to rate those
European creeks/rivers higher than I would, I assume that had to do with
the more continuous nature of those streams.

--
Wilko van den Bergh
Eindhoven The Netherlands Europe
Look at the possibilities, don't worry about the limitations.
http://wilko.webzone.ru/

River Grades - Rafts vs Kayaks
 

"Wilko" wrote in message
news:pwG9b.44887$tK5.5159039@zonnet-reader-1...

From what I've paddled in Europe, and (mostly the eastern part of) the
U.S., I got the impression that western U.S. rivers are more like what
we have over here. Sure, there are pool and drop as well as more
continuous rivers here, and there definately is a big difference in
volume between the multitude of rivers and creeks here.

In general, I found the rating of the rivers I ran in the east to be
quite different from those I ran in Europe. From the experiences of
those Eastern U.S. paddlers that I've taken on trips in Europe, I got
the impression that they weren't so used to the more continuous nature
of the creeks and rivers I took them on. They tended to rate those
European creeks/rivers higher than I would, I assume that had to do with
the more continuous nature of those streams.

Hmmm, good observations, and I don't see any simple explanation. However, my
experience is that European rivers (if there is such a generic term) are a
differnet animal entirely than Eastern or Western water.

The eastern US rivers tend to be relatively short and intense, as the
Appalacians are an old, narrow mountain belt, and there is often only a few
miles between where the water has enough volume to have carved a good bed,
and when the rivers dump out onto the piedmont and flatten out with mud
bottoms. So, yes, eastern boaters will run a 2-mile stretch of rocky water
several times, and call that a 'run'. Several larger rivers (the Hudson, for
example) have several play stretches, but mostly because the rivers cut
across resistant geology and develop rapids in areas where they could easily
be long, class 1-2 stretches instead.

Western rivers, OTOH, tend to drain huge drainage basins, and the mountains
belts are very wide and relatively young. So the rivers can come down out of
the hills already with substantial volume, toss among miles-long stretches
of boulders, then canyon out and become long fla****er floats. The
whitewater stretches can be VERY continuous (my personal favorite is the
dozen-mile long nonstop 'Idaho Class 3' stretch at the top of the MidFork
Salmon.), but once the river changes its nature, its a long-term change.

European rivers, OTThirdH, are a mix of the two. The mountains are very old
and worn down, like the Appalacians, however they are very wide and can
support large rivers. The european steep creeks (like the ones in Slovenia)
are similar to the Eastern US rivers in nature, but because of the
dependable drainage of the Alps, they run more consistently and carry a lot
more debris through their drainout. However, because of the intermittent
nature of big floods, the rocks are sharp, poorly sorted, and the river bed
is relatively immature. So you end up with an eastern-style rocky creek,
that runs a western-style length before it changes its nature.

I think both eastern and western boaters overrate anything they are
unfamiliar with. Calling Hance in the Grand Canyon a '10' is a joke to any
eastern boater who can navigate rocks. Calling Magic Falls on the Kennebec a
'4-5' is a farce to any western boater who has run the V-wave in Lava. Any
US boater who comes to Europe is going to overrate the rapids, until they
get used to the continuous and rocky nature of them. I think European
boaters see both long runs, and rocky runs, so they might not overrate US
rivers quite so easily.

I know here in Kinshasa, I have had so many people tell me how the rapids on
the outskirts of town here are 'Unrunnable' that I want to puke. Its
basically a solid class 5-, with an entrance where you skirt a huge Lava
LedgeHole-sized pourover, run a Hance Lookalike wave train, then catch a
Niagara Whirlpool-sized eddy. I've run stuff this big in rafts a dozen times
with no problem. The stuff downstream is rumored to be worse, but I wonder
if its just continuous instead......

--riverman

River Grades - Rafts vs Kayaks
 

To get back to the original post. the numbers could be simply correct.Take
the Zambezi, I believe beginners are taken down grade 5 in rafts on the
Zambezi and if your safety boater was Alex Nicks then he could well be up
for grade 6 after tea!

"ZattleBone" wrote in message
om...
Anyone know the differences in the two grading systems?

A friend has just come back from South Africa where (as a complete
rafting novice) he was running Grade 5. The kayakers supporting the
raft all went off to do a Grade 6 run in the afternoon. The numbers
seem a bit high to me.

Any ideas? Is a grade 6 raft-rapid actually a grade 4/5 kayak-run?

Zatt.

River Grades - Rafts vs Kayaks
 

To get back to the original query
Maybe these grades are not that high. take the Zambezi. I believe beginners
are regularly taken down grade 5 rapids here and if your safety boater was
Alex Nicks then he could well be up for grade 6 after tea !

"ZattleBone" wrote in message
om...
Anyone know the differences in the two grading systems?

A friend has just come back from South Africa where (as a complete
rafting novice) he was running Grade 5. The kayakers supporting the
raft all went off to do a Grade 6 run in the afternoon. The numbers
seem a bit high to me.

Any ideas? Is a grade 6 raft-rapid actually a grade 4/5 kayak-run?

Zatt.

River Grades - Rafts vs Kayaks
 

riverman wrote:

European rivers, OTThirdH, are a mix of the two. The mountains are very old
and worn down, like the Appalacians, however they are very wide and can
support large rivers. The european steep creeks (like the ones in Slovenia)
are similar to the Eastern US rivers in nature, but because of the
dependable drainage of the Alps, they run more consistently and carry a lot
more debris through their drainout. However, because of the intermittent
nature of big floods, the rocks are sharp, poorly sorted, and the river bed
is relatively immature. So you end up with an eastern-style rocky creek,
that runs a western-style length before it changes its nature.

Funny that you use the Slovenian creeks as an example, I spent almost
two weeks at the end of August paddling there. Then again, having come
used to the difficulty levels of those stretches, because I ran them
more than a dozen times this year, I also find that I tend to lessen the
perceived difficulty in my mind. That makes it difficult to rate them
more or less objectively, especially when explaining them to first timers.

I think both eastern and western boaters overrate anything they are
unfamiliar with. Calling Hance in the Grand Canyon a '10' is a joke to any
eastern boater who can navigate rocks. Calling Magic Falls on the Kennebec a
'4-5' is a farce to any western boater who has run the V-wave in Lava. Any
US boater who comes to Europe is going to overrate the rapids, until they
get used to the continuous and rocky nature of them. I think European
boaters see both long runs, and rocky runs, so they might not overrate US
rivers quite so easily.

Then again, there might be such a thing as big water and huge water
(Niagara Gorge, Zambezi). I haven't seen any of them up close, but just
watching the videos gives me an uneasy feeling in my stomach. Again, not
being used to that kind of water influences my perception of the
difficulties involved.

I know here in Kinshasa, I have had so many people tell me how the rapids on
the outskirts of town here are 'Unrunnable' that I want to puke. Its
basically a solid class 5-, with an entrance where you skirt a huge Lava
LedgeHole-sized pourover, run a Hance Lookalike wave train, then catch a
Niagara Whirlpool-sized eddy. I've run stuff this big in rafts a dozen times
with no problem. The stuff downstream is rumored to be worse, but I wonder
if its just continuous instead......

Sounds like you need to get a couple of rafters and their equipment over
there... :-)

--
Wilko van den Bergh
Eindhoven The Netherlands Europe
Look at the possibilities, don't worry about the limitations.
http://wilko.webzone.ru/

River Grades - Rafts vs Kayaks
 

One of the biggest differences between Europe and the USA in grades is
the description that goes with it. British paddlers are notorious at
understating the river - not under-grading - but understating it. Brits
may well tell you - with little knowledge of your ability maybe 'You'll
be OK its only a grade IV ' whereas in the states you are likely to be
told 'Its graded IV but the crux has a nasty undercut........ '

The first time I ran the Gauley I was very cautious to begin with - till
I teamed up with a bunch of other kayak paddlers (I was travelling on my
own) - I was expecting run like the bottom end of the Ubaye whereas it
turned out to be more like the racecourse section in my memories (1987)



In message , Stuart
Miller writes
To get back to the original query
Maybe these grades are not that high. take the Zambezi. I believe beginners
are regularly taken down grade 5 rapids here and if your safety boater was
Alex Nicks then he could well be up for grade 6 after tea !

"ZattleBone" wrote in message
. com...
Anyone know the differences in the two grading systems?

A friend has just come back from South Africa where (as a complete
rafting novice) he was running Grade 5. The kayakers supporting the
raft all went off to do a Grade 6 run in the afternoon. The numbers
seem a bit high to me.

Any ideas? Is a grade 6 raft-rapid actually a grade 4/5 kayak-run?

Zatt.



--
Dave Manby
Details of the Coruh river and my book "Many Rivers To Run" at
http://www.dmanby.demon.co.uk

River Grades - Rafts vs Kayaks
 

Excellent debate guys!

I'm rather intrigued by the eastern US vs western US vs Europe thing.
I've only paddled in Europe and the Western US and it has struck me that
most regions have a few rivers of each type!

If I was going to generalise I'd have to point out that Britain is
completely different to all of the above :-)

Take for example a couple of Californian classics like Dry Meadow Creek
and Brush Creek (have run the latter, only looked at the former) - they
really are not a lot different in character to some of Scotland's
granite gorge rivers, like the Meig and tributaries of the Etive.
Scotland is a bit short of high volume runs, but in a good spate rivers
like the Orchy and Spean develop a character like the Inn, or the
Skykomish, not as big but similar in feel! I thought boating in the
volcanic gorges of the WF Hood and White Salmon was pretty special, and
then within a month of coming home I discovered that some of the Clyde
has a similar geology, except much older and more weathered so it takes
more looking for, and is actually nowhere near as spectacular!

Comparisons aside, Britain is different, it's mainly different because
it doesn't have a snowpack so all rivers are rainfall fed, which
generally means we have to do them in the winter - that can really
affect your optimism for a certain grade! Then again the US is
different, I don't know a Tuolumne in Europe for example (maybe I
haven't looked hard enough?), the mountains are higher and as riverman
says the environment is younger, and in many cases less spoilt / more
wild which can add a lot both to enjoyment and consideration of what
you're going to do if it all goes wrong! The closest thing to the T
would be the Verdon canyon, totally different in character (limestone
gorge with siphons undercuts etc..) but similar length and commitment,
and both are pool drop although most of the T's drops are easier.

Anyway I think I digressed several times there!

I've learned to cope with a 6 grade system. I actually prefer the big
volume runs of the Western US (although some could do with the pools
shortening) and I don't have much problem matching up grades for very
different styles of river. However there are limitations, lets go back
to brush creek again shall we? It's graded 5, it has some largeish
drops, some blind chutes and a few falls with rocks at the bottom that
you can't really inspect, but is it really as hard as grade 5? Probably
not if I can paddle it in a playboat first time on it, but it is harder
than a 4, you can't obviously scout everything from the boat and
certainly can't see routes down everything. The same thing with the Meig
and various "rocky ditches" over here, there is no sustained difficulty,
there are some very technical moves sometimes potential for getting
badly hurt (lets keep grading objective?) and occasionally a leap of
faith is required (I love leading a competent grade 4 boater down the
Meig for their first time - you want me to do what?). Clearly some
things are outside of the boundaries of our 6 tier system - I don't
really know the way forward, adding higher grades as people do harder
stuff is one way but it doesn't address the differences in the nature of
the runs that we seem to agree is so important. Perhaps parallel grading
systems are required where some note about the nature of the run can
help with understanding what a grade means to you?

Here is an example, the St Joe (ID) at 8000 cfs, graded 4 for that flow.
It's not a terribly wide river so feels pretty huge with that flow, it
looked alright from the road so we got on. After a short while low
visibility (mainly due to the gradient, but partly due to mist) had us
climbing out to look at what might be a line of holes. From above it is
clearly a grade 2 wave train with the peaks just starting to break a
bit. Did that a couple more times, one bit was probably grade 3 and then
reached tumbledown falls. Yes grade 4 I guess, certainly wouldn't have
been very happy trying to read it from the river but inspection revealed
it be a 2 move rapid - launch, head left of centre on obvious green
wave, then cut hard right using a boily eddyline to take you onto the
tongue that avoids the ledge completely (OK perhaps the level was way
above what the grade was for?). After that we had decided that we were
happy with the feel of it having run the hardest part and finished it as
we would have started had it not been for the idea that there was going
to be some grade 4 round every corner (i.e. picking the biggest
wavetrains to wavewheel down). Ok so I'm partly arguing with the grade
here, it is now more common to grade for the average difficulty not the
hardest fall, but that aside had we known a bit more about the character
(big flushy water) (and yes we should have been able to work it out from
the road, but everything looks smaller from the road....) we probably
wouldn't have been looking out for an Orchy style grade 4 ledge drop
that gets harder in high flows (yes I know some of the Orchy drops get
easier) and would have played even harder on the first half :-)

Do I make some sense?

JIM

PS: everything I've run in the West (CA, OR, WA) has been graded on a
scale of 1-6!

riverman wrote:
"Wilko" wrote in message
news:pwG9b.44887$tK5.5159039@zonnet-reader-1...

From what I've paddled in Europe, and (mostly the eastern part of) the
U.S., I got the impression that western U.S. rivers are more like what
we have over here. Sure, there are pool and drop as well as more
continuous rivers here, and there definately is a big difference in
volume between the multitude of rivers and creeks here.

In general, I found the rating of the rivers I ran in the east to be
quite different from those I ran in Europe. From the experiences of
those Eastern U.S. paddlers that I've taken on trips in Europe, I got
the impression that they weren't so used to the more continuous nature
of the creeks and rivers I took them on. They tended to rate those
European creeks/rivers higher than I would, I assume that had to do with
the more continuous nature of those streams.


Hmmm, good observations, and I don't see any simple explanation. However, my
experience is that European rivers (if there is such a generic term) are a
differnet animal entirely than Eastern or Western water.

The eastern US rivers tend to be relatively short and intense, as the
Appalacians are an old, narrow mountain belt, and there is often only a few
miles between where the water has enough volume to have carved a good bed,
and when the rivers dump out onto the piedmont and flatten out with mud
bottoms. So, yes, eastern boaters will run a 2-mile stretch of rocky water
several times, and call that a 'run'. Several larger rivers (the Hudson, for
example) have several play stretches, but mostly because the rivers cut
across resistant geology and develop rapids in areas where they could easily
be long, class 1-2 stretches instead.

Western rivers, OTOH, tend to drain huge drainage basins, and the mountains
belts are very wide and relatively young. So the rivers can come down out of
the hills already with substantial volume, toss among miles-long stretches
of boulders, then canyon out and become long fla****er floats. The
whitewater stretches can be VERY continuous (my personal favorite is the
dozen-mile long nonstop 'Idaho Class 3' stretch at the top of the MidFork
Salmon.), but once the river changes its nature, its a long-term change.

European rivers, OTThirdH, are a mix of the two. The mountains are very old
and worn down, like the Appalacians, however they are very wide and can
support large rivers. The european steep creeks (like the ones in Slovenia)
are similar to the Eastern US rivers in nature, but because of the
dependable drainage of the Alps, they run more consistently and carry a lot
more debris through their drainout. However, because of the intermittent
nature of big floods, the rocks are sharp, poorly sorted, and the river bed
is relatively immature. So you end up with an eastern-style rocky creek,
that runs a western-style length before it changes its nature.

I think both eastern and western boaters overrate anything they are
unfamiliar with. Calling Hance in the Grand Canyon a '10' is a joke to any
eastern boater who can navigate rocks. Calling Magic Falls on the Kennebec a
'4-5' is a farce to any western boater who has run the V-wave in Lava. Any
US boater who comes to Europe is going to overrate the rapids, until they
get used to the continuous and rocky nature of them. I think European
boaters see both long runs, and rocky runs, so they might not overrate US
rivers quite so easily.

I know here in Kinshasa, I have had so many people tell me how the rapids on
the outskirts of town here are 'Unrunnable' that I want to puke. Its
basically a solid class 5-, with an entrance where you skirt a huge Lava
LedgeHole-sized pourover, run a Hance Lookalike wave train, then catch a
Niagara Whirlpool-sized eddy. I've run stuff this big in rafts a dozen times
with no problem. The stuff downstream is rumored to be worse, but I wonder
if its just continuous instead......

--riverman

River Grades - Rafts vs Kayaks
 

"riverman" typed

The interesting thing about western ratings is that there is no numerical
classification for 'unrunnable'. Class 10 often is described as "an
inexperienced boatman in a good quality boat has less than a 50-50 chance of
making it right-side up." I like the 10-step breakdown, too, since it
clears up some of that vast grey area between Class III and Class IV on the
traditional grading scale.

Myron, I think you bin away from home to long. As far as I know there
is no "western" 10-step scale in the US any longer. The only 10-step
scale I know about is the "Grand Canyon Scale", applied only on the
Grand Canyon, as an historical artifact.

The Class 10 you describe could only conceivably apply to rafts and
dories (only guessing about the latter, since I have no experience
with dories). I would say that, in the 6-step International Scale of
River Difficulty, which we and the Europeans try to follow, an
inexperienced kayaker or canoeist in a good quality boat would have
less than 50% chance of making it through a Class III rapid right-side
up. (In fact, the ratings map very closely to skill levels:
I-Beginner, II-Novice, III-Intermediate, IV-Advanced, V-Expert,
VI-God).

Which brings up a problem, and perhaps the reason the 10-step scale
has fallen into disuse: if the rating of the rapid must be changed to
suit the craft, then you are not actually rating the rapid, *per se*,
you are rating the rapid/craft combination. By contemporary thinking,
the difficulty of a rapid should be intrinsic to the rapid, measured
by objective criteria, and irrelevant to the nature of any craft that
might attempt the rapid.

I think.

-Richard, His Kanubic Travesty
--
================================================== ====================
Richard Hopley, Winston-Salem, NC, USA
rhopley[at]earthlink[dot]net 1-301-775-0471
Nothing really matters except Boats, Sex, and Rock'n'Roll.
rhople[at]wfubmc[dot]edu 1-336-713-5077
OK, OK; computer programming for scientific research also matters.
================================================== ====================

River Grades - Rafts vs Kayaks
 

Which brings up a problem, and perhaps the reason the 10-step scale
has fallen into disuse: if the rating of the rapid must be changed to
suit the craft, then you are not actually rating the rapid, *per se*,
you are rating the rapid/craft combination. By contemporary thinking,
the difficulty of a rapid should be intrinsic to the rapid, measured
by objective criteria, and irrelevant to the nature of any craft that
might attempt the rapid.

I think we should rate rapids based on a combination of both the rapid, the
boat, and the paddler. For instance, there is a rapid, that shall remain
nameless due to embarrassment, that flips me every time. It's "easier" than
many other rapids I paddle, and I've done it a few dozen times, and yet, it
flips me. I think it should be at least a V.

Geoff

River Grades - Rafts vs Kayaks
 

ZattleBone wrote:

A friend has just come back from South Africa where (as a complete
rafting novice) he was running Grade 5. The kayakers supporting the
raft all went off to do a Grade 6 run in the afternoon. The numbers
seem a bit high to me.

The original poster never followed up, so we don't know which rivers
these were. The Cassady/Dunlap book _World_Whitewater_ describes
only two difficult runs in South Africa:

Orange River (Senqu) gorge below Augrabies Falls, 8 km, class 4+ P
Tugela River, Colenso to Causeway Bridge, 64 km, class 4 P

Perhaps the "P" (for portage) is now being run and is class 5 or 5+.
In my opinion, if kayakers are regularly running a class 6 drop now,
either it was overrated, or has changed to class 5.

River Grades - Rafts vs Kayaks
 

"Wilko" wrote in message
news:FiI9b.44905$tK5.5172590@zonnet-reader-1...


I know here in Kinshasa, I have had so many people tell me how the
rapids on
the outskirts of town here are 'Unrunnable' that I want to puke. Its
basically a solid class 5-, with an entrance where you skirt a huge Lava
LedgeHole-sized pourover, run a Hance Lookalike wave train, then catch a
Niagara Whirlpool-sized eddy. I've run stuff this big in rafts a dozen
times
with no problem. The stuff downstream is rumored to be worse, but I
wonder
if its just continuous instead......

Sounds like you need to get a couple of rafters and their equipment over
there... :-)


Not that I haven't thought about that!! Some Belgian (or French) guys tried
to run the gorge about 10 years ago, and the story says that they
disappeared without a trace. Not that I doubt that some folks died trying
it, but the 'disappeared without a trace' part sounds like my information
sources are uneducated. And I know that boating technology has come a long
way in 10 years. Without seeing the actual gorge (thats in the works via
charter flight) I can't say for sure, but my gut feeling is that the gorge
is actually runnable, and its only a matter of logistics and equipment. I'm
really looking forward to the flyover.

I tell you what, if some posters (or lurkers) want to start planning an epic
expedition, I'm ready to participate. We'd need some safety kayakers.

--riverman

River Grades - Rafts vs Kayaks
 

"Oci-One Kanubi" wrote in message
m...
"riverman" typed
Which brings up a problem, and perhaps the reason the 10-step scale
has fallen into disuse: if the rating of the rapid must be changed to
suit the craft, then you are not actually rating the rapid, *per se*,
you are rating the rapid/craft combination. By contemporary thinking,
the difficulty of a rapid should be intrinsic to the rapid, measured
by objective criteria, and irrelevant to the nature of any craft that
might attempt the rapid.

I think.


Well, there you go thinking again. We've warned you about that. :-)

Anytime a rating description uses a boat, then its impossible for it NOT to
be a rapid/craft combination. The Class 10 explanation "An inexperienced
boatman in a dependable craft..." actually implies a rapid/craft/boatman
skill connection. However, I think these are all interpretations of the
river itself, and the craft/boatman connection comes out in the description
only. Exactly like what happens when you try to translate from one language
to another. Maybe "petit amie" translates exactly to "little friend" in
english, but any french-speaker know that it really means the equivalent
of 'girlfriend'. I say "the equavalent" because that is an English
translation of a French word. The actual word, to any Frenchman, is "petit
amie".

Saying "a rapid is Class III" means exactly the same thing to a canoeist, a
doryman, a kayaker, a paddleboater and a swimmer; the rapid is Class III.
How they translate that to a flatlander varies according to the boatman,
the craft, etc. The problem is that we keep trying to translate river
rating systems, even to other boatmen, when we really need to just learn to
think in them.

--riverman

River Grades - Rafts vs Kayaks
 

riverman wrote:

Well, there you go thinking again. We've warned you about that. :-)

Exactly like what happens when you try to translate from one language
to another. Maybe "petit amie" translates exactly to "little friend" in
english, but any french-speaker know that it really means the equivalent
of 'girlfriend'. I say "the equavalent" because that is an English
translation of a French word. The actual word, to any Frenchman, is "petit
amie".

Oh my, now you're getting on a slippery slope: with all the languages
being spoken by the posters on paddling forums, even those who share a
common language (i.e. English) can get confused by the use of that
language by other native speakers.

I remember an incident where a British paddler told a U.S. paddler who
just had a bad experience to get ****ed. The U.S. paddler took that as
to get mad, even though the advise of the first person was to get
completely drunk...

Saying "a rapid is Class III" means exactly the same thing to a canoeist, a
doryman, a kayaker, a paddleboater and a swimmer; the rapid is Class III.
How they translate that to a flatlander varies according to the boatman,
the craft, etc. The problem is that we keep trying to translate river
rating systems, even to other boatmen, when we really need to just learn to
think in them.

When I first started paddling with open boaters in the U.S., I
recognised their ratings of rapids. What baffled me was that their lines
seemed to be so much different than mine! If I rate a rapid, I take a
"virtual" line through a rapid in a kayak and I do so in the assumption
that it's the easiest route down. It's often possible to run harder
lines in that same rapid, but that's not all that interesting for rating
it, IMO.

Now here come these open boaters who run something unknown to me,
leading. I follow them blindly, faithfully, and get hammered in some holes!

A good lesson from those trips is to pick my own line, but taking their
remarks about possible dangers at heart! :-)
The best open boater's line through a rapid isn't always the best
kayaker's line.

--
Wilko van den Bergh
Eindhoven The Netherlands Europe
Look at the possibilities, don't worry about the limitations.
http://wilko.webzone.ru/

River Grades - Rafts vs Kayaks
 

Dave Manby wrote:

One of the biggest differences between Europe and the USA in grades is
the description that goes with it. British paddlers are notorious at
understating the river - not under-grading - but understating it. Brits
may well tell you - with little knowledge of your ability maybe 'You'll
be OK its only a grade IV ' whereas in the states you are likely to be
told 'Its graded IV but the crux has a nasty undercut........ '

Thinking about how we paddled stuff in Europe with a mixed U.S.-Euro
group, I was surprised by how often the danger factor was seemingly
seamlessly integrated by the U.S. paddlers in their rating of a rapid we
were looking at. We looked at the difficulty of staying on the line, and
we noted the dangers associated with messing up there.

The first time I ran the Gauley I was very cautious to begin with - till
I teamed up with a bunch of other kayak paddlers (I was travelling on my
own) - I was expecting run like the bottom end of the Ubaye whereas it
turned out to be more like the racecourse section in my memories (1987)

Ditto experience here.

The only difference in my first Gauley run was that someone had told me
that we would run the entire upper-middle-lower stretch, without me
knowing that it was a marathon length (40+ km) trip! For someone who's
used to paddling moving water, all those quiet floats in between the big
rapids take up an extraordinary amount of energy, especially in the hot
weather we had that day!

--
Wilko van den Bergh
Eindhoven The Netherlands Europe
Look at the possibilities, don't worry about the limitations.
http://wilko.webzone.ru/

River Grades - Rafts vs Kayaks
 

Geoff Jennings wrote:

I think we should rate rapids based on a combination of both the rapid, the
boat, and the paddler. For instance, there is a rapid, that shall remain
nameless due to embarrassment, that flips me every time. It's "easier" than
many other rapids I paddle, and I've done it a few dozen times, and yet, it
flips me. I think it should be at least a V.

big grin

Come to think of it, I know a rapid which my GF refuses to run, because
she's "not sure that she's good enough". She accidentally ran it several
years ago, acing it. Now that she's progressed several classes and finds
it well within her ability, she seems to find new excuses not to run it.

Funny thing is that she runs much harder stuff everywhere else, just not
that one rapid.

--
Wilko van den Bergh
Eindhoven The Netherlands Europe
Look at the possibilities, don't worry about the limitations.
http://wilko.webzone.ru/

River Grades - Rafts vs Kayaks
 

"Wilko" wrote in message
news:dKX9b.44958$tK5.5233861@zonnet-reader-1...
riverman wrote:

Well, there you go thinking again. We've warned you about that. :-)

Exactly like what happens when you try to translate from one language
to another. Maybe "petit amie" translates exactly to "little friend" in
english, but any french-speaker know that it really means the
equivalent
of 'girlfriend'. I say "the equavalent" because that is an English
translation of a French word. The actual word, to any Frenchman, is
"petit
amie".

Oh my, now you're getting on a slippery slope: with all the languages
being spoken by the posters on paddling forums, even those who share a
common language (i.e. English) can get confused by the use of that
language by other native speakers.


Too true, which highlights my statement that we all need to "think in River
Grades, not in translations of River Grades." When someone says 'its a class
4', everyone in every boat, every country, every experience level should be
visualizing the same type of difficulty. Then they can each determine for
themselves if they can run it, in the boat they currently are sitting in.
But the rating is a property of the rapid, not of the boater, boat or skill.

When I first started paddling with open boaters in the U.S., I
recognised their ratings of rapids. What baffled me was that their lines
seemed to be so much different than mine! If I rate a rapid, I take a
"virtual" line through a rapid in a kayak and I do so in the assumption
that it's the easiest route down. It's often possible to run harder
lines in that same rapid, but that's not all that interesting for rating
it, IMO.

Which brings us to the REAL question: is a rating for a rapid, or for a
line? I think that it should be for the line, exactly how climbers rate
climbs, not mountains. Saying "Zungo Rapids" is a IV could mean several
things: the easiest run through is a IV, the most common route is a IV, or
the 'average' route is a IV. These have vastly different ramifications, so
instead, it would be wise to say "the popular route down the middle is a IV,
the sneak route on the left is a II, and there's a class V run if you go
down the right." I think most boaters talk to each other that way all the
time, but the guidebooks seem out of synch.

And open boaters will alway overrate rapids. Its just too damn embarassing
to be that scared and wet after a class II rapid! It must have been class
IV... Mary had a post several years ago about swimming a class III, and it
really highlighted how people overrate rapids. I'll see if I can find it.

--riverman

River Grades - Rafts vs Kayaks
 

Dave Manby writes:

One of the biggest differences between Europe and the USA in grades is
the description that goes with it. British paddlers are notorious at
understating the river - not under-grading - but understating it. Brits
may well tell you - with little knowledge of your ability maybe 'You'll
be OK its only a grade IV ' whereas in the states you are likely to be
told 'Its graded IV but the crux has a nasty undercut........ '

Hee! My limited experience leads me to believe that that's a Brit
thing indeed, culturally, and not just limited to rivers. I'm
reminded of that bit from the movie "Casino Royale" when the
shooting starts and the American and Chinese and Russian generals
are going nuts and screaming on the phone, and the British general
is saying, "Em, Pernilla? I'm afraid I won't be home for tea. Bit
of a war's broken out!"

Ah yes, fond memories of the Sun Kosi and Rob Hind saying, "Bit of a
class II coming up, nothing but a few waves really..." Or Green
Slime saying, "The next rapid? Dunno, really...can't be much of
anything, can it?"

--
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::::
Mary Malmros
Some days you're the windshield,
Other days you're the bug.

River Grades - Rafts vs Kayaks
 

"Geoff Jennings" typed:

[snip hypothesis]

I think we should rate rapids based on a combination of both the rapid, the
boat, and the paddler. For instance, there is a rapid, that shall remain
nameless due to embarrassment, that flips me every time. It's "easier" than
many other rapids I paddle, and I've done it a few dozen times, and yet, it
flips me. I think it should be at least a V.

This, Geoff, seems like an elementary problem in physics. Get one of
yer grad students on it.

-Richard, His Kanubic Travesty
--
================================================== ====================
Richard Hopley, Winston-Salem, NC, USA
rhopley[at]earthlink[dot]net 1-301-775-0471
Nothing really matters except Boats, Sex, and Rock'n'Roll.
rhople[at]wfubmc[dot]edu 1-336-713-5077
OK, OK; computer programming for scientific research also matters.
================================================== ====================

River Grades - Rafts vs Kayaks
 

riverman wrote:

Which brings us to the REAL question: is a rating for a rapid, or for a
line? I think that it should be for the line, exactly how climbers rate
climbs, not mountains. Saying "Zungo Rapids" is a IV could mean several
things: the easiest run through is a IV, the most common route is a IV, or
the 'average' route is a IV. These have vastly different ramifications, so
instead, it would be wise to say "the popular route down the middle is a IV,
the sneak route on the left is a II, and there's a class V run if you go
down the right." I think most boaters talk to each other that way all the
time, but the guidebooks seem out of synch.

That's something we don't often have to worry about in Britain, most of
our rapids only have one line on those terms. That is to say you can hit
the same features in a variety of ways or places but mostly they are
either riverwide, or the difficulty doesn't change across the river :-)

When we talk about good or bad lines, we are normally talking about
those few inches that make a difference between styling and hurting!

Just thinking about some of the multi-line rapids over here, and almost
all are clearly described as such in any existing guides. Orchy chicken
chute: 3 left 4 right and centre, Tyne chicken chute: 2 left 4 centre 3
right, wow I can't easily think of any others where different routes
have different grades and I think I just noticed another clue in the
names of the ones that do :-)

Now different grades at different levels always amuses me, I like the
way that on the Orchy some rapids are harder at high flows and some are
easier :-)

JIM

River Grades - Rafts vs Kayaks
 

I always liked the way of describing grades as

grade 1 take the mother in law
grade 2 take the girlfriend
grade 3 take the wife
grade 4 take the mistress
grade 5 take the photographs
grade 6 take the mother-in-law

Change to suit your sex

old joke I know but someone might not have heard it
--
Dave Manby
Details of the Coruh river and my book "Many Rivers To Run" at
http://www.dmanby.demon.co.uk

River Grades - Rafts vs Kayaks
 

snipped

Ah yes, fond memories of the Sun Kosi and Rob Hind saying, "Bit of a
class II coming up, nothing but a few waves really..." Or Green
Slime saying, "The next rapid? Dunno, really...can't be much of
anything, can it?"

Many years of paddling with slime this is incredibly true to me. I
paddled in BC with him and he could remember almost every twist in the
road to get to the put in, he had paddled there a couple of years
earlier, but on the river he could not recall a single rapid till the
bottom of the run and then he would say "Oh yeah I remember that run,
I'm sure the take out is just round the next bend"!


--
Dave Manby
Details of the Coruh river and my book "Many Rivers To Run" at
http://www.dmanby.demon.co.uk

River Grades - Rafts vs Kayaks
 

Dave Manby writes:

I always liked the way of describing grades as

grade 1 take the mother in law
grade 2 take the girlfriend
grade 3 take the wife
grade 4 take the mistress
grade 5 take the photographs
grade 6 take the mother-in-law

Change to suit your sex

Not sure that'll work; women might have intentions toward members of
the opposite sex that go beyond either wanting to impress them or
wanting to kill them. Just guessing...

--
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::::
Mary Malmros
Some days you're the windshield,
Other days you're the bug.

River Grades - Rafts vs Kayaks
 

Having walked off high-flood 5's on winter N CA water - never along the road
(can you spell "dragging boats up 200 foot cliffs with throw ropes and/or
walking miles in wet tennies in the rain across hill country farmers meadows
dragging your boat behind you "). I concluded that I was a true dolt, since
I let it happen more than once a year. Good exercise though. And we were
always so happy to be out of the river.

Then, of course, there were the spring and summer shallow exploratory 2's
that turned into rocky 5's and impassible 6's. "No, let's scratch that one
off the possible list." "Nice day, though." "Lovely boat hike."

The lesson: take good comrades along.

John Adams

"Dave Manby" wrote in message
...
I always liked the way of describing grades as

grade 1 take the mother in law
grade 2 take the girlfriend
grade 3 take the wife
grade 4 take the mistress
grade 5 take the photographs
grade 6 take the mother-in-law

Change to suit your sex

old joke I know but someone might not have heard it
--
Dave Manby
Details of the Coruh river and my book "Many Rivers To Run" at
http://www.dmanby.demon.co.uk

River Grades - Rafts vs Kayaks
 

John Q Adams wrote:

Then, of course, there were the spring and summer shallow exploratory 2's
that turned into rocky 5's and impassible 6's. "No, let's scratch that one
off the possible list." "Nice day, though." "Lovely boat hike."

The lesson: take good comrades along.

Sounds more like you need to take *strong* comrades along... ;-)

I've climbed out of a gorge once when I spent more time in my new
playboat being vertical than horizontal. Taught me a good lesson about
trimming before paddling... :-)

--
Wilko van den Bergh
Eindhoven The Netherlands Europe
Look at the possibilities, don't worry about the limitations.
http://wilko.webzone.ru/

River Grades - Rafts vs Kayaks
 

In message , Mary Malmros
writes
Dave Manby writes:

I always liked the way of describing grades as

grade 1 take the mother in law
grade 2 take the girlfriend
grade 3 take the wife
grade 4 take the mistress
grade 5 take the photographs
grade 6 take the mother-in-law

Change to suit your sex

Not sure that'll work; women might have intentions toward members of
the opposite sex that go beyond either wanting to impress them or
wanting to kill them. Just guessing...

Joyce Mckinney has just returned to the radio station I listen to, as a
subject of conversation, she was the woman who kidnapped a Mormon
missionary and chained him to her bed and had her wicked way with him.
In the trail she came up with the immortal line -'I would have skied
down mount Everest naked with a rose between my teeth for him' - such
was her infatuation!


--
Dave Manby
Details of the Coruh river and my book "Many Rivers To Run" at
http://www.dmanby.demon.co.uk