Isle of Shoals Sept 16

[EEL]

And never forget that no matter how pleasant and easy a trip to the Shoals can be (our trip this July), it can also change to be a hard core L4 trip while you're out there(out trip last year).

I believe this fundamental fact was discussed in July when Gene broached the topic of a trip to Isle a Shoals, but perhaps it bears repeating. As was explained by others then, trip levels are not based on a hoped for sea state on the day of the trip, they are based on the nature of the venue. My interpretation is Level 4 assumes a competent participant would be a decent intermediate paddler. In other words, a paddler who does not find sea state 4 to 5, which appears to have be the situation on Sept. 16, troublesome.

By definition a trip to Isle of Shoals is a level 4 trip under the NSPN guidelines. Assuming on any given day and regardless of how mild the marine forecast happens to be you can get to Isle of Shoals and back in good form without having the skills and experience noted in the guidelines for a level 4 trip is a sucker's bet.

If you take that bet, then you may discover that "Zeus does not ratify all the designs of men" and you are "not in Kansas anymore". It is then you will rather quickly learn that your abilities are inadequate to the tasks at hand.

As Rick said, the important point is to recognize and acknowledge the failures and errors and lack of skills in order to become a better paddler.

Ed Lawson

[lhunt]

I just want to point something out, in case it hasn't been clear. The original plan was to stick together. The plan was changed because one person had to paddle slowly, and n people couldn't. As it fell out, those who felt more confident allied themselves with those who felt less so in both groups.

It would have been nice to have a backup plan. But it's hard to believe that standing on the beach we would be able to assess the exact circumstances of who felt confident where any better than we did in the water. Now that we have all had this experience it will be easier next time.

As to paddling slowly in rough water, it is clearly difficult. I had a mandate to stay with the slower pod, so I experimented with "slow paddling" techniques. (Reminds me of the old festival game of slow bicycle "races".) I noticed that the big 5-6 footers were coming in sets of 2 or 3 with "lulls" of 3-4' swells in between. So I paddled at a moderate speed over the big ones and came to a near stop in the lulls. Sometimes Gene was beside me, sometimes behind. Leon went ahead for a bit to communicate with the other pod, then dropped back to be with us. When they were both behind and talking I could keep back with them by ear. Otherwise I had to look back, also done during the lulls. With that boat (the Epic 18X I borrowed from Leon was on its best behavior) it worked out pretty well. I suspect it's different with other boats, though. And the wing paddle helps.

If Gene had chosen to paddle downwind, I would have used some other technique, I'm sure. To correct the record about that, I kept my comments on the heading carefully neutral. I said to Gene, "you guys decide - I'm sticking with you", carefully not slanting one way or another (until after the paddle was over). After some thought, Gene explained that he would be more comfortable seeing what was coming at him. It's important to listen to the advice of the most experienced paddler in the group and it's important to listen to the gut instincts of the ones who are feeling the challenges, too.

Sure, in a perfect world everybody is well practiced and comfortable in every imaginable situation. When your world is less than perfect you have to cope. Thank you all for a difficult but "learning full" day.

Lisa

(And PS - Bob and Leon, that was an awesome rescue!)

[Gcosloy]

Well in the spirit of "learning lessons" I am happy to put something out there for us to chew on.

A beach briefing should entail discussions about the worst case scenario, not just the best case. It was a fine late summer day when we left but we should have reviewed the plan when and if the weather changes. At that point paddlers could have expressed doubts about their skills and either stayed on the beach or had enough information to intelligently decide to go ahead. Each paddler should recite their experience level and comfort with wind, waves, surf etc. as well as their ability to self or assist in rescue. Any physical limitations or medical issues should be fully disclosed. Then and only then does the on-water plan have legitimacy or make sense. Given that paddlers all tend to have different abilities regarding pace, that should have been discussed ad nauseum until all were committed to how we were going to stay together.

The return leg needed to repeat the foregoing discussions before launching back. Everyone who has paddled with me for years now, knows my pace: I averaged about 3k on the entire trip; perfectly comfortable for one in a rather stable kayak. If some were in racing kayaks that tend to be less stable and need to go faster to feel comfortable, that could have been managed by a different pod distribution. Perhaps some were uncomfortable on a beam sea; perhaps some were uncomfortable paddling slower than their desired pace; perhaps a discussion before hand would have resulted in exactly what occurred naturally: three pods each, with paddlers feeling OK about their situation.

[emilie]

I went back and looked at the buoy data for Sept 16th. All the buoys are available from http://www.ndbc.noaa.gov/ I used Isles of Shoals for wind. To get wave data I used the Western Maine Shelf buoy which is half way between Isles of Shoals and Kennebunkport. Since that isn't quite where you guys were paddling, I got wind from that buoy too as a consistency check. What I found is that on the afternoon of the 16th:

Isles of Shoals wind was between 5kts and 20kts.

Western Maine Shelf wind was between 3kts and 15kts with a similar profile. So things may have been a little calmer at the western Maine shelf buoy, but not by that much. See the two graphs.

The ticks on the x axis of the Western Maine Shelf plot correspond to hours. Midnight is on the left, noon in the middle, and midnight on the right.

The Western Maine Shelf buoy reported that from noon to 4pm the waves were variable 1~1.5 ft high. And from 4pm onward they steadily increased in strength such that by 8pm they were at 2ft. (Since you guys said nothing about getting back after dark, I'm assuming you weren't out past 8pm.) These are average wave heights, so the higher ones will be slightly higher than 2ft.

The Western Maine Shelf buoy report for period has enough noise between noon and 4pm that I'm guessing there was not enough consistent wave to measure the period. From 4pm to 8pm the period went from 2s to 3s.

Based on all that data it looks like local wind blown chop.

For those who want to recreate my data here is the Isles of Shoals weather station and the Western Maine Shelf buoy. For Isles of Shoals, go to the link at the bottom for "Real Time Data" and then "Real time continuous winds data". For the Western Maine Shelf buoy use the "Search historical meteorological data for observations that meet your threshhold[sic] conditions" widget to plot data from sept 16th.

[...]

Emilie,

Thank you for the tutuorial! I was able to recreate your graphs. Your directions worked like a charm.

Warren

[Phil Allen]

Emilie- Is the data local time or GMT? Wave heights kept climbing and rose into the 1-2 meter range by the next morning.

Phil

[emilie]

Emilie- Is the data local time or GMT? Wave heights kept climbing and rose into the 1-2 meter range by the next morning.

Ah, thank you Phil, it looks like I was in error.

"Both Realtime and Historical files show times in UTC only." from NOAA http://www.ndbc.noaa.gov/measdes.shtml

and the gulf of Maine buoy plots clearly say "From 2010-09-16 0:00 to 2010-09-17 0:00 UTC"

So I need to go redo my analysis.

[tyson]

GOMOOS buoy/weather history:

http://gomoos.org/gnd/

From that I extracted the afternoon data for this past Thursday and so that I could compare with what we experience, our trip last July. The column headers in the text form don't align with the columns of data so I inserted new headers. I left the originals so that any errors could be caught.

BuoyData.txt

[EEL]

Ah, thank you Phil, it looks like I was in error.

"Both Realtime and Historical files show times in UTC only." from NOAA

So I need to go redo my analysis.

If you use the data from the GoMOS site for the Western Maine Shelf buoy, the history is in EDT so you don't have to convert. For the curious at that location the maximum reported wave height from 6 AM to 6PM EDT was about 2.8 feet at the end of the day and the max winds were around 15 kts with gusts under 20kts. At Isle of Shoals the wind was higher by around 5kts. Often the wind reported from that location seems high, but it was in the work range for sure as a true 20kts of wind is a strong wind. Also the period was short most of the day even though the height was running about 1/2 the period. The period and wave height were becoming closer late in the day. When the wave period and height are nearly equal as in 3 sec and 3 feet you are encountering steep waves which makes things more difficult.

It is important to remember that the wave height data is based upon an 8.5 minute measurement window every 30 minutes or hour and the figure shown is the average of all measurements during that window and is not a calculation of the significant wave height during the measurement window.

Most of the day the reported wave height was under 2 feet. That does not mean waves of six feet could not have been encountered. LHuntington's description of occasional large sets of three makes sense to me. Primarily because as I paddled around in a bubble bath during the weekend, I experienced large sets of three from the south along with more modest swells. Large as in they would almost make nearby lobster boats disappear.

Ed Lawson

[emilie]

Ok, I redid the plots all in EDT.

Wind speeds at Isles Of Shoals from noon to 6pm: 7Kts to 24Kts

Wind speeds at Western Maine Shelf from noon to 6pm: 9Kts to 15 Kts

Wave height at Western Maine Shelf from noon to 6pm: 1ft rising to 3ft

(see EEL's above note about this being an average)

Wave period at Western Maine Shelf noon to 6pm: 2 seconds rising to 4seconds

[djlewis]

...It was a fine late summer day when we left but we should have reviewed the plan when and if the weather changes.

I have several questions about whether the conditions could have been foreseen from various online forecasts, of which I've heard little. If not, or if the forecasts were just not on the table at launch, then it's really hard to get people to plan actively for the worst when things look copacetic at the beach briefing. That, IMHO, is one weakness of CAM in practice (though I assume, not in theory) -- no one person feels they have enough authority to be a wet blanket and raise issues when things look mild. I've seen too many CAM briefings that consist almost entirely of going around the circle to recite names.

Regarding the forecasts, one question -- what was the wind forecast for that area for the afternoon? Was the pickup in wind speed forecast? The experimental NOAA forecasts are quite localized. But wind forecasts are notoriously changeable, since winds are sensitive to the exact location of fronts.

Another -- why would the buoys show 2-3 feet of swell, when everyone experienced quite a bit more -- Lisa reported swell steadily 3-4 to 5-6. Were they really frequently up to 6' -- double overhead? That would not register as 2.5-3 on the buoy. My purpose in asking is whether, again, the detailed forecast (which I assume ~somebody~ checked) predicted the increase in swell.

Also, as someone pointed out, the wave period may have been a factor. With period increasing as the height increased, perhaps it felt like larger swells than they actually were. Of course that may be somewhat moot -- obviously the sea state was quite challenging, and if it was due to period as well as height, then the NOAA experimental forecast would not have shown that in the forecast. You'd have to go to one of the surfer models, like WetSand or MagicSeaweed for period.

Lastly, was there a significant wind-against swell effect, which would sharpen and steepen waves? I don't know if the NOAA Experimental site takes that into account in swell forecasts or if you have to figure out for yourself -- I'd guess the latter.

--David.

[leong]

I just want to point something out, in case it hasn't been clear. The original plan was to stick together. The plan was changed because one person had to paddle slowly, and n people couldn't. As it fell out, those who felt more confident allied themselves with those who felt less so in both groups.

It would have been nice to have a backup plan. But it's hard to believe that standing on the beach we would be able to assess the exact circumstances of who felt confident where any better than we did in the water. Now that we have all had this experience it will be easier next time.

As to paddling slowly in rough water, it is clearly difficult. I had a mandate to stay with the slower pod, so I experimented with "slow paddling" techniques. (Reminds me of the old festival game of slow bicycle "races".) I noticed that the big 5-6 footers were coming in sets of 2 or 3 with "lulls" of 3-4' swells in between. So I paddled at a moderate speed over the big ones and came to a near stop in the lulls. Sometimes Gene was beside me, sometimes behind. Leon went ahead for a bit to communicate with the other pod, then dropped back to be with us. When they were both behind and talking I could keep back with them by ear. Otherwise I had to look back, also done during the lulls. With that boat (the Epic 18X I borrowed from Leon was on its best behavior) it worked out pretty well. I suspect it's different with other boats, though. And the wing paddle helps.

If Gene had chosen to paddle downwind, I would have used some other technique, I'm sure. To correct the record about that, I kept my comments on the heading carefully neutral. I said to Gene, "you guys decide - I'm sticking with you", carefully not slanting one way or another (until after the paddle was over). After some thought, Gene explained that he would be more comfortable seeing what was coming at him. It's important to listen to the advice of the most experienced paddler in the group and it's important to listen to the gut instincts of the ones who are feeling the challenges, too.

Sure, in a perfect world everybody is well practiced and comfortable in every imaginable situation. When your world is less than perfect you have to cope. Thank you all for a difficult but "learning full" day.

Lisa

(And PS - Bob and Leon, that was an awesome rescue!)

Lisa said “Leon went ahead for a bit to communicate with the other pod, then dropped back to be with us.â€

This is a good place to jump in. To make things simple let’s use easy directions which are only approximate. The wind and waves were coming from the south and we had to travel due west to get back Rye Harbor. Thus some crab angle to the south of west would be the heading in order to travel a straight line back to the put-in. Thus, at this heading, we’d be traveling against some wind and wave current (both Lisa and I had GPSs pointing to Rye Harbor).

After noticing that Gene wasn’t making very good headway along this heading, I decided that it would be best to turn slightly downwind (about 10 or 15 degrees to the north of west) to get some wind and wave current at Gene’s back. Obviously, my motive was to reach shore as quickly as possible, even if it meant arriving north of the put-in (you know, in a storm any safe harbor is ok). I figured we’d worry about getting back to the put-in from the relative safety of being close to shore. I checked the weather stations several times to see what was being forecast - heard some talk about 5-7 foot waves coming soon, but I’m not sure that it referred to where we were. This increased my anxiety that we needed to do something to get to shore more quickly. However, I couldn’t listen to the wx for long periods because I wanted to continually monitor 16/72 for help calls from the four paddlers ahead of pod 3 (Lisa, Gene and me). Note that I had the VHF programmed to scan between 16 and 72 (72 being the channel designated for the IOS trip).

I VHF’d the four leading paddlers to inform them of my recommendation to head slightly north to gain speed. I was unable to communicate this message clearly and that’s when I sprinted forward to deliver the message in person to the leading pods (that’s what Lisa is referring to in the quote above). After arriving at the forward pods I gave them my recommendation about the negative crab angle and they agreed to do it (in fact they thought it was a good way to speed up to get to shore).

When I came back to pod 3 I yelled out to tell both Lisa and Gene of the new plan; Gene said he didn’t like it and then paddled the 50 feet ahead to talk to Lisa. When he returned he said that he would be been happy to go down wind but he felt that the risk to all the groups was increased. I told him that the other pods are already doing it. Then he said something like he didn’t like strong following seas and not being able to see the waves. I told him that the new heading would only be a small angle change to gain speed and that we’d be paddling at an angle across the waves, not perpendicular to the waves. He said that Lisa liked the current heading anyway and that he was not going to change. I gave up at that point

Lesson for me: When Gene went ahead to talk to Lisa I should have gone there too, but not for safety reasons (since Lisa was close by just treading water with her paddles) but to make my case, and perhaps kick ass.

The conversation that Lisa and Gene should have had should have gone something like this, but it obviously didn’t.

Lisa probably should have said things like:

1. We’d better listen to Leon, he’s the one that initiated the trip and, in effect, he’s the trip leader.

2. He’s the one who introduced both of us to sea kayaking and he has spent many hours teaching and coaching us.

3. He’s been out here at IOS many times and he was nice enough to take you (Gene) on your first trip to IOS. Besides, I’m sure that he has studied the dangers of IOS by talking to others that have made the trip in conditions like these.

4. He’s been paddling much longer than either of us (I think he told me 17 years). I’ve been ocean paddling two years (always with Leon, with one or two exceptions).

5. He usually knows what he’s talking about. He knows our capabilities pretty good (especially mine) and is only trying to protect both of us.

6. He could easily abandon us now; he could safely and quickly paddle into Rye alone. For gawd sakes Gene, a few weeks he beat dozen’s of 30 year-olds paddling through the rough conditions of Hell Gate in the New York Mayor’s Cup Kayak Championship. I could just imagine him drinking cocktails at Saunders restaurant in the harbor, waiting for me to return his new boat to him there. Or, if he wants to, he could follow the new heading too. I know that he’s physically capable of doing that, but I think he cares about us and won’t leave us.

7. But back to reality Gene; You and I know that he won’t leave us, but let’s not hold him hostage to that, it isn’t fair. So please Gene, we’d better listen to Leon. I’ll bet on Leon’s judgement almost all of the time, but just in case Leon’s gone off his rocker, let’s talk to him to see if his reasoning makes any sense to us (we can both raft up to him for this purpose). Perhaps ask him what angle downwind he wants to take. Perhaps ask him if it’s a small angle and that will really make it easy (we won’t be hit as broadside by waves as we’re being hit now and we’ll have a faster ride to shore). We’ll still be able to see the waves coming and we will not be too far down-wave to accidentally surf and broach, and we’ll go faster too. And we’ll land where the other pods land (I think Leon knows of a good landing beach farther north). Perhaps that is what he’ll say. And I bet that he’ll change back to the original heading if you have trouble following the new heading. For gawds sakes Gene, Leon’s not trying to kill either one of us. Beside, he wants his Epic 18X back, if I don’t make it back neither will the 18X that I’m paddling right now. No question about it, he wants the three of us to make it back safely (you, me and his boat).

And Gene would say: But we’ll end up too far from the put-in. And Lisa would respond that Leon’s very risk-adverse. I’m sure that he’s thought of that. Let’s just go and ask him. Then Gene might say that it’s Leon’s fault that the other pods are way ahead of us. Leon didn’t have a good beach briefing. Then Lisa might say, Gene it wouldn’t have made any damn difference. The four others on this trip insist on going faster than we’re going. We’re going too slow for them, and I’m certain that we’re not going at this pace to accommodate Leon or me.

[Shari G]

with all due respect, are people trying to discredit our reports of wave heights and conditions? the idea of a trip report is to give an overview of events for other paddlers to offer constructive thoughts and perhaps learn vicariously through errors that may have been made. our posting was done in good faith. having boated since i was in diapers, i can assure you that the waves were clearly over 3 or 4 ft for nearly the entire paddle back from IOS. for the record, I believe our group has correctly estimated waves consistently in the 5-6 range, with a few larger.

signed, the swimmer

[subaruguru]

with all due respect, are people trying to discredit our reports of wave heights and conditions? the idea of a trip report is to give an overview of events for other paddlers to offer constructive thoughts and perhaps learn vicariously through errors that may have been made. our posting was done in good faith. having boated since i was in diapers, i can assure you that the waves were clearly over 3 or 4 ft for nearly the entire paddle back from IOS. for the record, I believe our group has correctly estimated waves consistently in the 5-6 range, with a few larger.

signed, the swimmer

I'm sorry you had to write this, Shari.

I didn't bother to fully peruse Emilie's data-links, but will later for educational purposes.

But I too read between the lines a strong intimation that are report is somehow exaggerated.

So let's be clear: on the return leg beam waves started in the 1-2 ft range immediately off shore,

increasing SOON to 3-4 ft, then reaching a CONSISTENT 4-6 ft range at the capsize (about 1/3 of the way back), remaining in the 4-6' range FULLY throughout the remaining 2/3 (4-5 miles) return.

In that light I too question the reasoning behind Emilie's second and following posts.

The trip report was written in the spirit Lorrie so well described, and for which I'm thankful.

What's important here is that the decision-making process be scrutinized by the paddlers involved and other supportive "helpers" so that ALL in our nspn community can benefit from this experience.

Further, Leon is SURE that he was almost dumped by a rogue 8 footer.

Buoy shmmoey!

G'night.

[subaruguru]

Emilie,

I didn't mean to be harsh in response, but miight I suggest that you lift your posts and move them to a new thread re buoys or the like?

Bending this thread may not be the best idea right now. I'm already getting hammered because I wrote a report about a "private trip" and the "lurking sharks" will pounce. Oy....

Thanks.

Ern

[rylevine]

Were they really frequently up to 6' -- double overhead?

Yes.

Bob

[tyson]

I'm sorry you had to write this, Shari.

I didn't bother to fully peruse Emilie's data-links, but will later for educational purposes.

But I too read between the lines a strong intimation that are report is somehow exaggerated.

So let's be clear: on the return leg beam waves started in the 1-2 ft range immediately off shore,

increasing SOON to 3-4 ft, then reaching a CONSISTENT 4-6 ft range at the capsize (about 1/3 of the way back), remaining in the 4-6' range FULLY throughout the remaining 2/3 (4-5 miles) return.

In that light I too question the reasoning behind Emilie's second and following posts.

The trip report was written in the spirit Lorrie so well described, and for which I'm thankful.

What's important here is that the decision-making process be scrutinized by the paddlers involved and other supportive "helpers" so that ALL in our nspn community can benefit from this experience.

Further, Leon is SURE that he was almost dumped by a rogue 8 footer.

Buoy shmmoey!

G'night.

I have no doubt about the spirit of the report. ...and I know that there is much to be _learned_ from it by many. _Learning_ is what NSPN claims to endorse.

One of the _lessons_ is what it feels like when the waves approach and exceed eye height and the buoys say 2.5-4 ft. Keep in mind that eye height is around 2.5 ft.

Had Leon been hit by a rogue 8 footer with a 3-4 second period, it would have been breaking and he would have been fully submerged under it. That is something that I have _learned_ by spending as much time as I can afford in rough water.

I'm not sure what place censorship of objective, measured data that is directly related to this thread has on a forum for _learning_.

Ty

[tyson]

I'm already getting hammered because I wrote a report about a "private trip" and the "lurking sharks" will pounce.

Who is it that objects to others having the chance to _learn_ just how difficult kayaking can be when the buoys report 2.5-4 ft? People should know what to expect when the forecast or reported conditions are like that.

_Learning_ from this report could literally save the life of someone reading this forum.

If there is anyone on this forum who really believes that censorship if life saving information is a good idea, please speak up and I'll start censoring.

Ty

[EEL]

What's important here is that the decision-making process be scrutinized by the paddlers involved and other supportive "helpers" so that ALL in our nspn community can benefit from this experience.

Ok. In an effort to move things forward toward that goal I believe responses from the trip participants to the following questions might be constructive and beneficial to the NSPN community. I don't believe this is a full list, but hits, perhaps, a few points.

1. How many CAM or trip leadership training sessions have you attended?

2. Have you taken classes which are similar to the new BCU 3* or 4* trainings classes?

3. If you have done either of the above, in what ways did the your and the group's actions follow or deviate from what was taught in the above classes?

4. If your or the group's actions deviated why?

5. What steps do you plan to take to avoid having a similar experience?

6. How easy was it to maintain visual and aural contact with the other paddlers?

7. Did you have a tow belt? Were you wearing it? Have you towed anyone is 3' seas for any distance? Have you been towed for any distance in 3' seas.

8. Did you have or did someone provide you with a time management plan and/or "go/no go" points/events for the day's trip?

9. Did you plot anticipated courses before hand and have a chart with tide and information needed for day's trip written down. Did you determine or were you told what headings to use during the trip?

10. Did you listen to the marine and land forecasts before launching? Were they monitored during the day?

11. Did you check buoy information before launching?

12 Was a float plan left with anyone?

13. Did you have adequate gear to stay overnight on the Shoals if necessary?

14. Where you able to adequately provide yourself with needed food and water during the trip? If not, why not?

15. What would you describe as an adequate nutrition and hydration efforts during the trip?

16. Did you consider and did the group discuss how it should proceed in light of the incident early in the return leg?

17. Have you practiced a rescue in 2' seas? Have you practiced being rescued in 2' seas?

18. Have you practiced rolling in 2' seas? What percentage of the time do you successfully roll when knocked over unexpectedly while on a paddle?

19. Have you practiced cowboy re-entries and re-entries and rolls in 2' seas?

20. What did you carry on/in your PFD on this trip and why?

Ed Lawson

[alec]

I would like to thank everyone who has contributed to this thread. Those who were on the trip may not realise what an amazing lesson this thread is for all of us who were ashore.

Not speaking for Emilie, who I don't even know, but I think all of us are trying to understand the conditions (and the sequence of events, the equipment, even the personalities of those invovled) because all are potentially relevant to our next trip.

So I would urge everyone to keep talking and reflecting on the contributions of others. I have held back from asking questions partly because of the sense that much of this was still raw. But I'd love to hear more about the rescue and any thoughts on optimum pod sizes in difficult conditions.

[Phil Allen]

Tyson and Ed,

While I agree with your goals, reading your posts makes your points feel more like an interrogation of the trip participants rather than a useful analysis. And I wasn't on the trip. And I completely believe you didn't intend it this way.

That said, I'd argue that the buoy data is useful in the context that competent paddlers found themselves in conditions that made it difficult for them to communicate, make headway and act as a group. The point that the average wave height from the buoy didn't match up to the waves the paddlers had to deal with is important. This could be due a problem of statistics (1 hundred foot wave and 100 one foot waves have the same average height measured over the same period ), a problem of local geography (the buoy wasn't seeing what the paddlers saw), and many other things.

I thank Ernie for posting his report. As he said, and has probably been reminded, it was a private trip and the only reason to point out the difficulties they dealt with on this forum is for the education of the rest of us (Or they're completely masochistic ).

Phil

[tyson]

(Or they're completely masochistic ).

Is anyone who paddles a kayak to a remote island 7 miles off shore not masochistic?

...besides, a trip in conditions like that earns bragging rights. You can't brag if you keep it a secret.

[EEL]

While I agree with your goals, reading your posts makes your points feel more like an interrogation of the trip participants rather than a useful analysis.

Point well taken and I apologize if that is how it is perceived. Perhaps an occupational hazard.

Intent was to highlight the various steps in the decision making process from evaluating if personal skills suitable for the trip, to equipment selected, to planning/monitoring for the proposed trip, to what tools are good to have when sorting out a difficult situation. More a shopping list for folks to think about as opposed to questions I suppose.

I have no doubt the buoy data accurately reflects the wind and seas measured just as I have no doubt the participants are accurately reporting their experiences. As you said, the important part of comparing the info from both is that is may allow us to get a feel for how difficult things are when the buoys report certain conditions. When paddling out of Portsmouth area I check IOS and Western Maine Shelf buoy data before and after a trip and correlate with what I encountered. This gives me a SWAG baseline for what to expect on future paddles. If the buoy says waves of x with a period of y and a wind direction of z, then I have can make a semi-educated guess as to what I will encounter.

Ed Lawson

[lhunt]

Had Leon been hit by a rogue 8 footer with a 3-4 second period, it would have been breaking and he would have been fully submerged under it.

No. Surf, yes. Swells, no.*

First I think you guys need to decide if you believe the basic premise of the opening trip report post. You can't expect participation from the people who were there otherwise. If you really think that 7 experienced NSPN paddlers had trouble handling 3 foot swell, there is nothing to discuss, you know the answer already. We who were there will thrash it out in private and will learn from it.

Lisa

*

some of the swells were breaking at the top, but Leon didn't get swamped because he braced and rode the swell up and over

.

[leong]

I have no doubt about the spirit of the report. ...and I know that there is much to be _learned_ from it by many. _Learning_ is what NSPN claims to endorse.

One of the _lessons_ is what it feels like when the waves approach and exceed eye height and the buoys say 2.5-4 ft. Keep in mind that eye height is around 2.5 ft.

Had Leon been hit by a rogue 8 footer with a 3-4 second period, it would have been breaking and he would have been fully submerged under it. That is something that I have _learned_ by spending as much time as I can afford in rough water.

I'm not sure what place censorship of objective, measured data that is directly related to this thread has on a forum for _learning_.

Ty

Ty, the top of the wave was just starting to break (it wasn't breaking yet as Gene, to my left, went over it). As it hit me I quickly got pushed another 20? feet away from Gene and went almost completely over. My favorite cap (haven't raced without it for about 4 years) got knocked off by the foam on top of the wave. I don't really know whether it was really an 8-footer. But I sat on the floor yesterday looking at the wall to my left (at about the same distance away from where I saw Gene on top of the wave) trying to picture the wave height. Not very scientific I know, but from where I imagined the wave was on the wall, 8 feet seemed in the ballpark. If I had to bet my life on the minimal height I'd say 6 feet (but I'm risk adverse with my life, I think it was closer to 8 feet).

P.S. You can do a lot of thinking in a few seconds while waiting to be dumped by a wave about 5-miles from shore. I haven't practiced a roll with the Seda Impulse (that I was paddling on that trip) since buying the Epic earlier in the year. I feared that my roll wouldn't work! (The Impulse is hard to roll, even in Walden Pond conditions, especially with a wing paddle. Back of the cockpit is too high for a layback).