NavList:

   

Reply

Sorry to say, no. Only that I did re-read it someplace this or last year and 
say to myself "Ahah!" and making a pointed mental note of it, with the link 
that last time I went out in "4-6 waves" and they were very much 8-10 to 
everyone on board, that explained the difference.

>
> From: David Weilacher 
> Date: 2004/07/23 Fri AM 06:42:03 CDT
> To: NAVIGATION-L@LISTSERV.WEBKAHUNA.COM
> Subject: Re: Level of observation accuracy in medium seas
>
> Hi Jarad;
>
> Can you point me to your source for Noaa wave height definition?
>
> Dave W
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jared Sherman 
> Sent: Jul 22, 2004 9:34 PM
> To: NAVIGATION-L@LISTSERV.WEBKAHUNA.COM
> Subject: Re: Level of observation accuracy in medium seas
>
> Dave-
>  <50 foot waves with a mile between peaks.  I take my shot when my boat is
> at the top of a wave.  This is easy to tell because I can actually see a
> horizon.  The horizon I see is 8 miles away.>
>  Seems like short horizon. NOAA says that waves are measured from the sea
> level, not from the trough to peak, so are you talking about real fifty foot
> waves, or "real" 50 foot waves, which most sailors would call hundred
> footers?
>
> If the former, you're observing from 25' above sea level, figure ten more
> for your deck and standing eye height, since you've got a good enough grip
> to rider those doggies. That's 35' asf now, about your eight miles.
> (7.9+)
>
> Nah, you're only in 25' waves, that's the problem. Wait for rougher weather,
> you'll get a better horizon.
>
> But you could certainly figure the math. A sphere (close enough) 25,000
> miles in circumference, two points 8 miles apart on that. Change the radius
> of one by the 25' your far wave is blocking you...run some tangents and
> angles..."A simple exercise left to the reader."
>
> Just remember, you're only in 25' waves.
>
>
> Dave Weilacher
> .US Coast Guard licensed captain
> .    #889968
> .ASA instructor evaluator and celestial
> .    navigation instructor #990800
> .IBM AS400 RPG contract programmer
>

   

Reply