Now, one app does it all. iNavX just announced that it’s available for Android. And, it can run Navionics.
One stop shopping. Comes at a price: $30. That’s an expensive app. But it used to be $50, and worth it, even before it integrated with other chart app software. So, you get what you pay for – and sometimes you get rewarded and pay less for it!
Who cares? What’s so special about iNavX?
First, a word or 50 about charting apps. They’re a great resource when you have cell service on the water – which, for most of us, is most of the time. They show where you are in real time just like a dedicated GPS chartplotter but for pennies on the dollar. Even without cell service, you can look at the charts for planning purposes. However, just as with anything else electronic, they can fail, go overboard, or just run out of power. And, you can’t plot a course or position on them with a pencil.
Having said that, most of us want to be using them to supplement our paper charts. It’s just as foolish to swear off them as to over-rely on them.
And now, why iNavX…
iNavX is the quintessential (if not only) chart app that uses digital imagery of real charts. It’s a static display. What you see on the chart is what you get on the screen. You can zoom in and out, but it’s like cropping a photo. The same stuff is there.
Example of iNavX:
Screen capture of an approach to the Cape Cod Canal from iNavX chart app. This is what the equivalent paper chart would look like, as this is scanned directly from the same file.
Pros:
like we said – what you see is what you get: consistency.
More practice reading the same style chart makes it all faster and easier.
Cons:
not available for all areas.
Must ‘switch’ charts in the app when your position crosses the boundary.
The popular Navionics app uses ‘vector’ scan tech. The app uses its own colors and presentation to display essentially the same data that a chart would, but it is responsive and dynamic. As one zooms in or out, the scale changes. If the user selects a different size area, the amount of detail changes in inverse proportion. Translation: what you see is what the app chooses to show you. Ask for more area, and you get less detail. Stuff disappears.
Example of Navionics:
Navionics display of basically same area and scale as the previous iNavX image. This is vector scanning. Captured from the Navionics web site. Resolution slightly degraded from how it would likely appear in-app, but you get the picture. Different type of display. Nb: the near complete lack of depth soundings – prime example of data disappearing.
Pros:
broad coverage: more regions available worldwide.
seamlessly switches ‘charts’ without interruption or input from user.
Cons:
changing graphics causes visual confusion
inconsistency with paper chart presentation can do the same
both above slow things down
And, like we said – the chief culprit? Stuff disappears. If one zooms out pretty far for ‘small’ scale (large area in smaller detail), reefs and shoals can disappear, and the app doesn’t tell you that it just erased something – including the shoal you were, and still are, aimed at.
A few years ago, a boat in the Volvo Ocean Race ran aground off a tiny island essentially in the middle of nowhere in the Indian Ocean. The area is called the Cargados Carajos Shoals, about 270 miles off Maritius. Everyone on all the boats knew they were going to pass close by one of the islands. One ran aground while sailing at close to 20 knots at night. It’s somewhere between possible and probable that vector scan charting software that was overzoomed contributed to this mistake. Fortunately, no one was hurt. But, the coral was damaged, and the boat was essentially wrecked.
Our recommendation? Get iNavX and be done with it. If you want to play around with vector charts as well, then get the $29 add-on for Navionics and run that within iNavX so you have options at your disposal. In the interest of full disclosure, Navionics alone, outside of iNavX, is $10. It’s called Boating and has a similar logo.
It’s not going well for the formerly very reputable Clipper Round the World Race. So far in this season’s event, one vessel was totaled when it ran aground, and another lost a crew member overboard who tragically didn’t survive.
In the 2015/16 race, one vessel suffered two separate fatalities – a trauma injury aboard, and an overboard fatality.
The Clipper Race vessel ICHOR COAL, as shown in the UK’s marine accident report.
So, what’s going on? Is it like the Greek ferry system – enough volume that there will be inevitable accidents – or is something rotten here?
Time will tell, we suppose, but in the meantime, the British Government weighed in after the dual tragedy of the 2015 race, and issued some findings. But first, some background for context…
The Clipper Race is a multi-leg, circumnavigation event with large one-design (basically identical) racing yachts. What sets it apart from the Volvo Ocean Race and other events is the amateur status of the crews. There’s a professional skipper on each vessel, with crew who are not. These amateurs, who pay to play, sign on for anywhere from one leg to the entire event, and go through formal training specific to and run by the event organizers before participating.
This is the 11th running of the Race. It’s had a clean history until 2015. This is trans oceanic racing, and it’s sometimes grueling. Stuff is going to happen from time to time. But, casualties are not expected even for serious offshore racing. Fatalities do occur, but are rare and usually confined to very severe weather events. So, what’s going wrong here?
Perhaps the British Government has some insights. Their Marine Accident Investigation Board convened an inquiry after the 2014 deaths. Their core conclusion? Perhaps one ‘pro’ skipper isn’t enough:
‘While a single employee on board a commercial yacht may provide sufficient company oversight in many circumstances, the special nature of the Clipper Round the World Yacht Race places a huge responsibility on one person to ensure the safety of the yacht and its crew at all times.
‘Therefore, in addition to acknowledging the completed and ongoing actions taken following the two accidents featured in this report, I am recommending Clipper Ventures plc review and modify its onboard manning policy and shore-based management procedures so that Clipper yacht skippers are effectively supported and, where appropriate, challenged to ensure that safe working practices are maintained continuously on board. In particular, consideration should be given to the merits of manning each yacht with a second employee or contracted ‘seafarer’ with appropriate competence and a duty to take reasonable care for the health and safety of other persons on board.’
-Steve Clinch, Chief Inspector of Maritime Accidents, in his Foreword to the “Report on the investigations of two fatal accidents on board the UK registered yacht CV21 122nm west of Porto, Portugal on 4 September 2015 and mid-Pacific Ocean (39° 05.3N, 160° 21.5E) on 1 April 2016”
The report is extensive, and you can read as little or as much as you like on your own here. The quote above is worth noting on its own due to the nature of the event.
Here’s another:
“Although MOB drills had been briefed on board CV21, no practical MOB drills were completed with the crew for the Race leg together, an omission in common with other Clipper yachts.”
-from the synopses of the report.
Several of our own students at New York Sailing Center have gone on to do trans oceanic voyages, including one who participated in the Clipper Race and was himself washed overboard in rough weather but remained tethered to the yacht. Sarah Young, the overboard victim in the 2015 race, was not tethered to the vessel. Simon Speirs, who perished in the current race, was tethered, but the gear failed. Both sailors were lost in gale or near-gale force winds. We sail in those sometimes in Long Island Sound with advanced classes, but it’s not the same. Winds in the 30’s that are ‘offshore,’ or blowing from land to sea, don’t create large waves that can make the vessel pitch dramatically and also break over the boat and literally pick people up and deposit them wherever.
Sarah Young’s failure to clip on in those conditions was an anomaly, but the gear failure that allowed Simon Spiers to be separated from the boat was a testament to the forces involved – and not a totally freak occurrence. In the real rough stuff, it’s been known to happen before in offshore circles.
Given the amateur nature of the Clipper Race crew make up, perhaps there should be rules governing when people may go forward on the boats in rough weather. In this case, it was to do a headsail change. That’s inherently dangerous in large seas. If the necessity to do this is due to the choice of rigging, maybe it needs to be changed. If it’s due to the size of headsails that are allowed, perhaps those should be limited. Perhaps once seas kick up to a certain height that suggests worse to come, but is reasonable at the time, that ought to be the point at which a proactive headsail change is done if the equipment can’t be altered to accommodate staying in the cockpit. If modern furling systems aren’t up to the task of open ocean racing, then that’s the next best thing.
The Clipper yachts use ‘cutter’ rigs, where there are two places to have sails forward on the vessel. That should allow very good flexibility in sail plan choice, and reduce the time spent forward dealing with sails – or potentially eliminate it. I don’t claim to be an expert in open ocean sailing, but if there’s a pattern developing with safety issues in this event, then let’s keep everyone safer – and still on an even keel – with gear changes and strict safety rules that mitigate this risk.
Here’s a link to the UK’s accident report, and also the Clipper Race site…
By now, you’ve probably heard about the two women who were sailing a yacht from Hawaii to Tahiti, and wound up at sea for five months before being rescued from their sailboat, the Sea Nymph. They wound up much closer to Japan than their declared destination by the time they were approached by a tender from a US warship (video at end of post).
Here’s a happy moment after rescue. Apparently, the surf’s up…
Still clip from US Navy footage. One of the rescued women tethered to her surf or SUP board, aboard a navy tender.
The voyage, as they reported it, sounded quite dramatic. Soon after departure, they got caught in a tough storm that cost them their engine and compromised their rigging. And then…
They made distress calls for 98 days with no reply.
Their water purification system failed, but they fixed it.
They departed with a projected 1-year supply of food, but it was 90% gone by the time they abandoned the vessel.
On at least two occasions, sharks showed up and attacked the boat.
After being rescued, they said that that they believed they would have died within 24 hours of when the US Navy arrived.
But, it doesn’t add up. Some of it seemed shaky to this writer when the story first broke, and more questions have surfaced since.
Three of the four now-so-happy campers as a navy tender approaches close aboard. The vessel looks low in the water in this still, but it was just rocking. Boat was floating high and fine. Pic by US Navy.
The rig looked fine. The mast was intact, and the boom was attached with the main roughly secured on it. Barring halyard failure, which wasn’t mentioned, there was no visible reason why the main couldn’t go up. The headsail was smoothly furled up with waiting sheets. The only specific indication in any news report was that there was spreader damage – but the spreaders looked perfect. So, did they sail? Also not mentioned in any news report we saw.
They said they were caught in a “Force 11” storm right after departure, with wave heights to 30 feet and winds to 60 knots – for three days. Or was it more? Depends who you listen to.
“We had no way to realize we were about to enter a typhoon that had winds of 110-150 miles an hour and minimum wave heights of 40 foot in height.”
-from an interview on CNN, according to an article by NPR.
This supposedly cost them their engine, and possibly the proper functioning of their mast or attached rigging and electronics. However, the National Weather Service says there was no “organized storm” activity near Hawaii at the time. NASA satellite imagery confirms. Kinda hard to miss a weather system of this magnitude. (The NWS did issue a small craft advisory for some areas in Hawaiian waters on the day they departed, but that’s pretty f-in far from Force 11.)
The owner of the boat (one of the women on the voyage) claims to have added 6 tons of fiberglass to the 50-foot boat in order to beef it up. Perhaps this was a misprint of some kind, but assuming any part of that was correctly reported by the news outlets – the number, the material, or the unit of measurement ton were correct – it still makes no sense.
Regarding sharks attacking the boat: one of the women said she could hear her own teeth rattle in her head when they rammed it, and they they all lay down together inside the boat and tried to be quiet. She said the sharks could hear them breath, and smell them, and that they told their dogs not to bark. Dog Whisperers?
A 50-foot vessel would be more than twice the length, and probably more than three times, of any sharks they might have encountered. If they brushed up against the boat, or butted their heads against it, no doubt it would have frightened just about anyone. But lets not blow it completely out of proportion. Many sharks use contact to assess whether something is worthwhile (or actual) prey. But even large species, including tiger sharks mentioned in the press, aren’t known to ram vessels far larger than themselves. Sometimes they bite running engines, as the electrical field generated by them mimics that of living things they track and prey on. But this engine was gone, and ostensibly, most of their electronics.
Apparently, that didn’t stop them from communicating near Tahiti, their stated destination, in June. According to the Coast Guard, contact was made with a vessel called the Sea Nymph (same as the womens’ vessel). The captain of the Sea Nymph said they were not in distress and that they intended to make landfall soon. That begs the question of how they basically got to Tahiti, turned around, and then wound up most of the way to Japan. The discrepancy is staggering: between 3,500 and 5,000 nautical miles. This very rough estimate is due to secrecy of the US Navy on final position, which was approximately 900 miles from Japan.
They reported that they had six forms of communication when they departed, and that all failed. That in itself is somewhat suspicious. One was a cell phone that went overboard soon after departure. Fair enough. I didn’t see a list of all the others anywhere yet. But the most interesting one of all was the EPIRB. This didn’t actually fail. TURNS OUT… It was never used! They didn’t mention having one in their initial interviews. But when the Coast Guard got through with them (and perhaps they’re not yet), they said they had one and chose not to deploy it. An EPIRB is a satellite based rescue beacon that is highly reliable, and would almost certainly have resulted in their position being known. They said in retrospect that there were two occasions where they should probably have activated it. The owner contradicted herself somewhat regarding EPIRB use. On the one hand, she said in interviews that when they were found, they believed they wouldn’t have survived another 24 hours. But she also told the Coast Guard that in her “experience” (her language), they shouldn’t be deployed unless death is imminent within 24 hours.
Speaking of this 24-hour threshold, it’s quite completely unclear why they felt they had only about 24 hours left to live. Reports were somewhat conflicted, but according to ABC News, the owner said they could not speak on why they felt they only had 24 hours left. She stated very specifically:
“I would love to answer that question now. I’m not actually allowed to answer that as long as we are on the vessel,” Appel said before going on to detail how their sailboat was damaged while it was being towed by the Taiwanese vessel.
“The pictures speak a thousand words. It is absolutely phenomenal the amount of damage that they did to the structure of that boat. So that kind of help speaks for itself.”
(They reported that they were first discovered by a Taiwanese fishing vessel, and that the owner swam from her vessel to this one to make a radio distress call. (HEL-lo: sharks?????). Sounds like they were taken in tow at some point for some undisclosed amount of time, and they make it sound like this damaged their vessel. )
Their two dogs and they looked surprisingly healthy upon rescue despite all this.
And now, the video clip we promised…
If/as more details come to light, we’ll report and poke around here.
It’s the name of a Cable TV show that NY Sailing Center was featured in once, and it’s also an internal mandate at the good old US Navy with the help of some Congressional pressure as well.
After several well publicized collisions in foreign waters, resulting in loss of life, the navy took stock. The findings were basically this:
watches (shifts on duty) were often too long;
systematic evaluation of risk of collision wasn’t being done;
stealthing (cloaking/hiding) were making it harder for other vessels to see warships
Navy destroyer John S McCain after collision recently.
While vessels at war really don’t want to be seen until you’re sunk (or at least until they’ve fired at you), it’s becoming a problem in some heavily trafficked areas. Most large vessels, recreational included, use electronic tracking (AIS) that broadcasts direction, speed, and vessel info to other vessels nearby. This is the opposite of radar, where vessels look for others they don’t know about. If both are used systematically, along with a well placed visual lookout, then there should never be any collisions.
Of course, it’s never as simple as that. And in the case of warships, they are off the radar – literally, sometimes, as they’re designed to be poor ‘targets’ for it. That means radar doesn’t easily pick up warships. They’re built that way. Warships also use fewer lights, and sometimes don’t use AIS. When they do, they don’t always provide as much information as other vessels.
Senator John McCain recently took an Admiral to task over all this. Coincidentally, the warship named after him was involved in a collision. More on that in the article we link to below.
I’ve never used AIS, but have enough experience with radar both in ‘school’ and in real life to understand the difficulties involved. Even if there’s a dedicated radar observer, it can be hard to identify things in the dark and be sure about what they’re doing. Once a warship disables AIS, and visibility is poor, it’s risky business on the high seas.
The same re-focus on basics applies to navigation in the sense of getting from A to B without hitting C (the subtitle of our own coastal navigation text book). The US Coast Guard routinely cites failure to keep a dead reckoning plot (speed, time, distance calculations) as a factor in groundings of commercial vessels. All the bells and whistles don’t ring themselves. That’s why courses on traditional methods of navigation are needed now more than ever, with everyone getting distracted with their gadgets.
Here’s a link to the New York Times article that reported on this recently, which has links to other previous articles that help complete the fuzzy radar picture…
The J Class is an awesome and venerable racing design. They go back to at least 1929, with roots extending back to the origin of the America’s Cup. They were the stuff of inspiration for many a noted marine photographer (including Stanley Rosenfeld).
J-Class yacht of older vintage, photographer unknown.
Now, they’re back! Modern renditions of this traditional design are out shredding up the race course, so to speak. To my delight, I saw that they are holding a world championship.
The J-Class design, sometimes called a J Boat, should not be confused with the modern designer and manufacturer J/Boats. This very successful line of racers and racer/cruisers is altogether different. The very popular J/24 is one of the most important sailing designs ever created due to how extensively it was raced, but it made a piss-poor learning platform. It is still widely used for that due to the abundant availability of cheap older boats – not because they are well suited to teaching sailing. There are over 5,500 of them around the world.
There are over 5,000 International Folkboats, too, and we have one – but wouldn’t use it for learn-to-sail instruction, and we wish people would steer clear of J/24’s for that purpose as well. The Folkboat has very traditional lines that are reminiscent of J-Class yachts.
I was struck once again by the simple, elegant beauty of these large beasts of boats when I saw some pics by Ingrid Abery. I’ve taken the liberty of pasting one of her copyrighted images here to tempt you to see more on her site.
It’s not running a boat onto a coral reef.Some people do that of course, but that’s just called running a boat onto a coral reef.
“Reefing” is bypassing part of a sail so it’s temporarily smaller.It’s done when a boat is overpowered, or about to be, by increasing wind.It can be done with almost any mainsail, which is the one attached behind the mast, and some genoas, which attach to the front wire supporting the mast (headstay or forestay).
Here’s one of our Beneteau First 21 sloops sailing conservatively with a reef in the main, and the small jib (front sail that doesn’t pass the mast). It was windy and gusty that morning as we prepared to be interviewed and filmed by Fox 5 News. There’s a link below to the story and video on their site, which shows this reefed mainsail well…
“Closer Than You Think:” summer series on Fox 5 News. This episode was about City Island, and they visited us at NY Sailing Center. Click the pic or follow the link below to see the video.
The details differ, but the concept is the same.Smaller sails equal less power.Less power means the boat doesn’t lean (heel) to the side as much.Too much healing to one side makes the boat try to turn the other way (due to buoyancy and deflection and other mumbo-jumbo), and there’s less control.It’s also somewhat uncomfortable and potentially a little dangerous if people slide downhill, so to speak, when the boat heels too much.Most people find heeling fun, but it can freak out beginners until their body accepts what their mind keeps telling them: sailboats are meant to heel, and it’s not inherently dangerous.
So, back to reefing.
It’s a powerful tool to reduce heeling, and not only gives the boat more control, but maintains its speed.Yes, that’s right.Less power can equal more speed.Why?Sailboats are less efficient moving through the water when heeled too much, and the turning effect causes the rudder (steering fin) to be held to one side just to go straight. That’s basically a brake.
Reef the mainsail, and it’s smaller.Less power.Less heeling.
But wait – there’s more!(or is that less?)The sail is also lower.When it’s reefed, the bottom is bypassed, so the sail isn’t raised as high on the rig.Less height equals less leverage.Even less heeling.
But there’s a third benefit that’s less obvious.Who can figure this one out?If you learned to sail with us, you might remember this one. Post a comment in reply to this if you think you have the answer!
Here’s a link to the Fox 5 News piece, “Closer Than You Think: City Island.” Check out City Island’s nautical heritage; see us at NY Sailing Center – and take a good look or three at that reefed mainsail!..
That’s the deal with City Island, which Fox 5 covered as part of an ongoing summer series. They’re featuring places worth seeing in NYC that are, well… closer than you think.
Reporter Christal Young and crew swung by City Island recently to check out its maritime heritage and flavor. They hit the Nautical Museum and visited us at NY Sailing Center as well. Of course, we went for a sail.
How close is City Island? As they say on Fox, Closer Than You Think. Want to drive from UWS or UES? 20-30 minutes if no traffic. Taking public? 45′ to an hour and 20′ from UWS or UES depending on connections. We can usually pick you up from Pelham Bay Park, where the 6 train ends (and when we drop you back off, there’s usually a 6 waiting for you to step aboard). It’s also accessible by Metro North with a short taxi connection or again, us picking you up. (About 30′ on Metro North from Grand Central to Pelham is typical.) When we pick you up, you can shave 10-15′ off the travel time, too.
It takes less time to get to us from UES for example than it does to get to New Jersey, where several “NYC” schools actually make you come to sail their boats – including one school/club with “Manhattan” in it’s name!
Even if it takes longer for you to get to us, you get far better sailing. Why save time to get to the Hudson River and New York Harbor, and basically waste the entire day dodging commercial shipping, ferries, strong currents, narrow passages, and wicked wind shears from tall buildings? Come to City Island, and the entire day on the water is productive and fun. Look out toward Hart Island, Long Island and the Sound, and it’s hard to believe you’re still in NYC.
Click the image above or the link below to see the video on Fox’s site or read the short print story. See why Christal spoke what we show above in quotes. Follow the link back to us (New York Sailing Center) if you’re stoked about seeing how we can get you sailing in Long Island Sound this summer or fall!
We’re overdue for a good old fashioned product review. This one’s a Part II after a few solid years of use, and a little abuse.
Lifeproof is a well known and very popular manufacturer of water and shock resistant cases for phones and tablets. They make sleek, form fitting products that are exactly customized to specific devices, and are generally well thought out to give full functionality so that the device can just stay in the case.
The Lifeproof “Life Jacket” and iPhone case for the 5 series, with a suitably rugged backdrop.
I’ve used their cases for iPhone 4 and 5 series phones. I was stoked about them at first, until they seemed to wear out prematurely. I’ll go on record right now as saying that I’m rough on gear. So, when I had trouble with my iPhone 4 case wearing away and falling apart, I thought it was me, but I put in a warranty claim anyway, and, BAM. New case for free. Good customer service!
The only problem is that it kept happening. First, the 4, and then with the 5. On our last Instructional Sailing Vacation trip in the Virgin Islands, one of the new cases leaked while snorkeling and almost ruined my phone. I saved it with fresh water and then electrical contact cleaner, but it malfunctioned for a week and caused me some trouble with calls. (Yes, I did a proper water integrity test before putting the phone in. And, yes – I got some really kewl video footage of marine life for you that’s on our Instagram.)
As well as the wearing-away issue and the leak, the buttons that control the volume on/off switch, and the microphone port sealing screw, failed on two different replacement cases.
The case comes with a mic/headset adaptor that seals the phone when using either. That protects the phone if the connection gets wet, and only the mic/headset is at risk. However, they never worked properly with any kind of headset.
In my humble opinion, my issues boil down to two things:
Lifeproof made an accessory called the Life Jacket for the 4 and 5 series phones. It’s a bulky foam-rubber case that floats the device and also provides way more shock resistance. It actually blocks wind noise for phones, too. Unfortunately, the Life Jacket is very hard to get on and off the case, and wears it down quickly. Must be done, as there’s no way to charge the phone with the Life Jacket on. (Never got around to trying some Exacto-knife surgical modifications.)
Durability issue with original cases, compounded by poor quality control in manufacturing of replacements. New cases had halves that didn’t line up well, were warped, broke easily without using the Life Jacket, and in one case arrived with a loose broken part that had nothing to do with packing and shipping.
Sure, the company gladly kept sending replacements, and they made an easy process easier. (I had to wonder if that reflected growing problems with quality and higher return rates.) However, when I got fed up and asked more questions about where they were made, and whether I could expect better quality replacements for later models (6 and 7 series phones), I got a meaningless first response and no answer to a follow up.
So, I’m stuck with kewl Life Jacket accessories and broken cases.
There’s growing competition for this style of drop & drink resistant case for mobile devices. One manufacturer, who has been around for decades making similar products, is Pelican. They now make an iPhone case for the iPhone 6 and 6plus series phones that looks very similar to the Lifeproof products. I might have to give them a try despite the lack of Life Jacket and figure out a workaround.
At least one if not several companies make dedicated snorkeling cases for the iPhone as well. One is the TAT7 iPhone Scuba Case. It’s a simple, clear case that has three dedicated buttons: home screen, camera app, and shutter. It’s rated for depths up to 100 feet. Once the phone is in, all one can do is shoot and stop (and toggle between pic and video, apparently). It has a built in wrist strap, which the Pelican doesn’t appear to. Looks worthy of consideration. (Couldn’t find a dedicated web site so that might be a slight red flag, but they are in product reviews and on Amazon.)
Anyway, here are links to Lifeproof and Pelican so you can do your own research and make your own decisions…
A client of ours is originally from Canada, and two buddies and he did 103 and 104 with us one season before doing their first bareboat charter in the BVI.
Adam’s uncle got involved with a latent lighthouse in Ontario, Canada. He’s on the local preservation committee, and had been trying to get it lit back up. Apparently, it was a somewhat uphill battle as there were concerns about the light shining on shoreside homes at night and being intrusive. The major’s office was involved and favored the light being back on, so that helped.
Here’s an excerpt from the original Notice to Mariners in 1917 that announced the construction of this light!..
For its return, the compromise was to aim the light across the bay at another peninsula rather than sweep across the shore or just aim 360 all around. Our mission: confirm the exact bearing, and show/explain why we came up with the magic number.
(Truth be told, Adam was more than capable of doing this himself, having successfully taken and passed 103, 104 and 105 with us and then applied it in the BVI. But this had to come from us as the outside experts.)
Anywho, Adam enlisted us to be the alleged experts to plot the angle of the light and show how we’d done it.
Dividers (nautical drafting compass) set exactly on the two points; protractor triangle was laid carefully against them to be on the correct bearing. Then, triangle was carefully moved to a meridian of longitude to read the bearing in true degrees. This was converted to magnetic so bearings could be taken from either point in real time to confirm.
1. Get the right chart. Adam took care of this: NOAA #14832, Upper Niagara River, ending in Lake Erie.
2. ID the light in question: “Light House,” on Point Abino. No characteristics shown as it’s idle.
3. ID the exact spot the new light is supposed to be aimed at: SW corner of the peninsula across the bay at the other end of Crystal Beach.
4. Measure the bearing painstakingly several times with at least two methods and get a consistent answer: 61 degrees magnetic.
There you have it. And thar she glows…
The light house at Point Abino, Ontario, with its beacon aimed back across the bay.
Our inaugural Kid/Parent trip is in the books, and it was a resounding success. We’d been planning to do this for awhile. It’s always nice when a trip exceeds your expectations, and that’s what happened. Now, we’re thinking of an annual Kid/Parent flotilla during the Presidents’ Week.
Meet the First Families… (Note: click any pic for full size/res – can click twice on lap/desktops)
The afternoon sun had us all squinting but it’s all good. Just about to depart!
Both Moms were graduates of our adult learn-to-sail program and continued sailing with us. One had already gone on to get her own 27 footer locally in the northeast. All the kids had some exposure to sailing, and were mostly the same age, so it was a good fit. We scheduled a slightly shorter week than normal for logistical reasons and at the end of it, we were hearing,.. ” I don’t want to leave.” That’s a good trip.
While it was mostly oriented at the kids, in this case aged 10-12, the difference between a kids’ itinerary and one for adults is mostly details. The allure of the watery and warm environment, swimming and snorkeling, and some hiking and sight seeing works for all.
Grins are good. Running along the north shore of Tortola en route to Jost Van Dyke.
We managed to get in a fairly typical itinerary of islands and anchorages, even including Anegada as the winds were relatively calm. Jumping in from the swim platform seemed to rank highest in customer satisfaction. Snorkeling and running around like banshees on the beach placed and showed respectably. One medium hike and one that was arguably a little too long went over surprisingly well.
Marine sightings included one dolphin, several large sea turtles, more large tarpon than usual, a spotted eagle ray that came flying out of the water like a bat out of hell chasing bait fish, a fairly curious ‘cuda (just for the Captain who was off on a snorkeling flyer), and numerous colorful and oddly shaped reef fish found by several of the kids and adults
Winds were light this time, and we didn’t have to reef once. We saw others with reduced sail plans on occasion but we didn’t see the need, even with kids. The boat just didn’t heel much. When it was ‘sailing for the sake of sailing,’ the kids were fond of pointing out when the boat speed dipped below a few knots, and when it made more sense, we occasionally motor sailed to keep it moving.
Day One: mid-afternoon departure, after receiving the boat at noon, so lucky to get to an anchorage at all and happy to punch it under power. Went to Marina Cay, a good jumping off point for other anchorages. Great shake-down snorkel for all, all of whom were brand new to it with one exception.
Captain Casual, trying to not be Captain Obvious (as in not over coaching, as she got it right away). First leg of trip, less than half an hour out.
Day Two: off to Anegada. Forecast seemed to favor it, and once we poked our nose out past the main islands, it was confirmed in real time. This was one of the best sails of the trip, never needing to motor to keep up a good cruising speed. All who wanted to steer got plenty of time. Some ocean swells, but nothing we couldn’t handle from a comfort standpoint.
Made lunch and then took an open-air taxi ride to Loblolly Bay and Beach on the north shore, one of several great spots. Across the inland pond we were able to see part of the resident pink flamingo colony of the island. Far away, but they were there. Snorkeling, scrubbing energy on the beach, tightrope and hammock games, and a little ice cream didn’t hurt.
Apres snorkel ice cream. Loblolly Beach, Anegada.
Day Three: Virgin Gorda. not enough wind to justify trying to sail back so we motored and made the time pass with games and snacks. Moored up at Saba Rock, then the kids did what they do best: jump off the boat for awhile. The Captain organized a day trip for the group to The Baths, the famous boulder formations at the other end of Virgin Gorda. They had a blast while the Captain caught up on correspondence, scoped out a new snorkeling spot, and shot some pool with pepperoni pizza for sustenance.
Not a typical scene anywhere – except at The Baths on Virgin Gorda. This is just one of many spectacular pools amongst the boulders.
Day Four: on to Jost Van Dyke. Combo of sailing and motoring to get the miles under the keel, but it was a fun ride. Gentle ocean swells at times and otherwise flat. First, we moored off Sandy Cay and did a dinghy drop of passengers to play and explore the small island, which was donated by Rockefeller in 2008. It’s a delightful swim over a sandy bottom to get ashore, then one can take a short scenic hike to the top and back down the other side for great vistas and getting the wiggles out. Huge hermit crabs are scattered around the trail here.
Much taller than it looks, little Sandy Cay is a great day stop. Swim in from your moored or well anchored yacht; hike up the trail to the top and back around the other side.
We anchored off Little Jost Van Dyke for the evening, affording more diving maneuvers (mostly cannonballs) off the swim platform before we did a group trip to he Bubbly Pool, a moderate walk from the dinghy dock. This is a small beach almost completely enclosed with lava formations and rocks, through which the open Caribbean surf rolls in from time to time making a foamy whirlpool of things. Very fun and relaxing; well worth the walk.
The Bubbly Pool, Jost Van Dyke. Waves break through the rocks and tumble in, creating a foamy, refreshing bubble bath.
Day Five: more snorkeling and swimming before weighing anchor and setting sail for Norman Island, our last anchorage of the trip. We sailed most of the way, furling up before negotiating Thatch Cut at the west end of Tortola, and then enjoying our first real beat of the trip with several tacks thrown in as we zig-zagged along St. John.
After mooring in the Bight at Norman, we dinghied in for the long hike to Money Bay towards the other end of Norman. One kid/parent turned back after making a good show of it and played at the main beach, including a kayak rental. The rest of us trudged on and made it to Money Bay for a secluded snorkeling expedition followed by lunch and a more downhill return. Followed, of course, by ice cream and virgin daiquiris…
One of the scenic overlooks on the Norman Island hike.
Next up: snorkeling at the Caves off the headland of the Bight. Excellent visibility this time; not many schools of fish but plenty of large parrot fish, a few trumpets, and other individual and paired sightings. Followed, of course, but scores of jumps off the back of the boat once we returned.
Rinse & repeat. And repeat. This never got old for them.
What didn’t we do? The Willy T, appropriately. There’s always the March 18-25 trip (still room for two more people…).
Kids & Parents in the BVI. it was meant to be, and will be again next year. Many of you have asked about this; we’ve been preparing for it; and now it’s a reality that we’ll keep exploring with you in the BVI and elsewhere.
See some more pics and clips from this and other trips on ourInstagram!
