On Course for New World Record?

Charles · 05 November 2006, 08:33

The Deacons are at it again!
Mike and Dave left Lymington at 06:15 this morning to break the Round British Southern Isles Record http://www.hotribs.com/03press/241-suzuki/suzuki.asp
A short time ago they past La Corbiere, Jersey at an average speed of 58 knts in 2.5 hrs heading towards the Scillies.
We wish them good luck - could not have asked for a better day as the sea is a mill-pond at the mo

codprawn · 05 November 2006, 11:35

Good luck to them but I am not sure I approve of some of these "records"!!! These quotes sum it up -

"these days everyone is much more aware not only of fuel costs but also the impact on the environment"

"The inventors of the Challenge have devised a points system relating to fuel
consumption, so it is not necessarily the fastest boat that will take the
title"

Looks like an event designed to promote Suzuki outboards more than anything else.

Maybe I will set a new World record - the slowest circumnavigation of Swansea Bay with an egg balanced on my head.....

It's NOT just this attempt - it's happening all the time - "The best assent of Mount Everest whilst playing a piano" type thing!!!

Sorry but I just don't approve of events where the person who wins isn't the winner!!!

Nos4r2 · 05 November 2006, 11:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by codprawn

Good luck to them but I am not sure I approve of some of these "records"!!! These quotes sum it up -

"these days everyone is much more aware not only of fuel costs but also the impact on the environment"

"The inventors of the Challenge have devised a points system relating to fuel
consumption, so it is not necessarily the fastest boat that will take the
title"

Looks like an event designed to promote Suzuki outboards more than anything else.

Maybe I will set a new World record - the slowest circumnavigation of Swansea Bay with an egg balanced on my head.....

It's NOT just this attempt - it's happening all the time - "The best assent of Mount Everest whilst playing a piano" type thing!!!

Sorry but I just don't approve of events where the person who wins isn't the winner!!!

Couldn't agree more...it smacks too much of the farce that was the tall ships race where the winner was the crew who contributed most to international harmony or somesuch bollocks. Why even bother turning up? Do you think they haven't sussed that a race is a RACE...?

No disrespect to those competing-I just think that rules like that belittle the people out there on the sharp end.

qcamel · 05 November 2006, 12:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nos4r2

Couldn't agree more...it smacks too much of the farce that was the tall ships race where the winner was the crew who contributed most to international harmony or somesuch bollocks. Why even bother turning up? Do you think they haven't sussed that a race is a RACE...?

No disrespect to those competing-I just think that rules like that belittle the people out there on the sharp end.

I think that with all respect these two have proved time and again that they are at the sharp end and the fact that they were last seen doing over 50 kn probably says they are not exactly taking their time. Probably quite a challenge to watch fuel consumption and also set a fast time...

codprawn · 05 November 2006, 12:38

It says 58kts in 2.5hrs - not per hour!!!

I am NOT trying to belittle the Deacons themselves - their achievments with Hot Lemon were awesome and getting around Britain in the fastest time possible is very fair game!!! I just think things like this are a total waste of time.

Nos4r2 · 05 November 2006, 13:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by codprawn

It says 58kts in 2.5hrs - not per hour!!!

I am NOT trying to belittle the Deacons themselves - their achievments with Hot Lemon were awesome and getting around Britain in the fastest time possible is very fair game!!! I just think things like this are a total waste of time.

Ditto.

qcamel · 05 November 2006, 16:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by codprawn

It says 58kts in 2.5hrs - not per hour!!!

I am NOT trying to belittle the Deacons themselves - their achievments with Hot Lemon were awesome and getting around Britain in the fastest time possible is very fair game!!! I just think things like this are a total waste of time.

am I thick?how can you average 58 knts in 2.5 hours and it not be 58 knts per hour? Surely its saying that over 2.5 hours their average speed was 58 knts meaning at times they will have been going quicker. Failed at algebra but explain the logic here Mr Prawn..

Charles · 05 November 2006, 16:37

Ollie

Let the post whore speak - he does so about every subject known to man!

Cheers to the Deacons!

Roy Smith · 05 November 2006, 17:03

Not sure if i have got this right, is this an atemp to go as fast as they can around a route, namly the southern Isles, to get a record, if so good luck to them, and a safe journey.
whats all the stuff about tall ships got to do with it, if he fails there will be no Guinness book of records entry only a large fuel bill,
Its the challange

simmons0 · 05 November 2006, 17:22

Its a combination of speed and fuel efficiency

"Challengers can select their own route round the Isle of Wight, Alderney,
Jersey, Guernsey and the Scilly Isles but the course must be completed within a 24-hour period. The inventors of the Challenge have devised a points system relating to fuel consumption, so it's not necessarily the fastest boat that will take the title.

Challenge Point formula = (Distance traveled x Avg Speed x Fuel consumed x Total stop time x Total time in minutes) / 100000."

alystra · 05 November 2006, 19:33

Shows how much I know then. If they're going for a speed record, I thought the object was to get round the islands as quickly as they can. If, as CP and others have said, they were doing 58knts per hour then I would have thought they'll have no problems at all provided they keep going.

Like others here, my maths isn't brill, but ...

58knts per hour = 58 nautical miles per hour per hour. So I think that after travelling for 2.5 hours they will have reached a speed of 145 knts. and still be accelerating.

I've no idea how far they're going, but I'd have thought they're likely to get round faster than most. Good luck to them, they're paying for the fuel and ever so much more fuel duty than I am. As to the point of it all? Well, I sympathise with CP.

Just a thought from Northern Britain. Nuffin to do wiv me how you chaps from the sarf get your kicks - but if 58 knts per hour is right, then you don't arf make some fast RIB's. :-)

Cheers Tony.

codprawn · 05 November 2006, 21:53

The comment was - "58kts in 2.5hrs" - maybe I misinterpreted it but it sounded to me as though they actually covered 58kts in 2.5hrs - which would be fairly logical if they are trying to save fuel - I really can't see that the boat's optimum fuel efficient speed is 58kts - but you never know!!!

Unless it SHOULD have read - 58kts over 2.5hrs???

Biggles · 05 November 2006, 22:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by codprawn

The comment was - "58kts in 2.5hrs" - maybe I misinterpreted it but it sounded to me as though they actually covered 58kts in 2.5hrs - which would be fairly logical if they are trying to save fuel - I really can't see that the boat's optimum fuel efficient speed is 58kts - but you never know!!!

Unless it SHOULD have read - 58kts over 2.5hrs???

Maybe they are trying to save the planet.

jwalker · 05 November 2006, 22:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by codprawn

..maybe I misinterpreted it but it sounded to me as though they actually covered 58kts in 2.5hrs .

That's not possible. Knots is a speed not a distance. Cod, you're the one who frequently suggests folk should read carefully what has been written. Now it's your turn.

It seemed clear enough to me. They had been running for 2.5 hours at an average speed of 58knots.

codprawn · 05 November 2006, 22:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by jwalker

That's not possible. Knots is a speed not a distance. Cod, you're the one who frequently suggests folk should read carefully what has been written. Now it's your turn.

It seemed clear enough to me. They had been running for 2.5 hours at an average speed of 58knots.

I am well aware of that - the post was somewhat ambiguous. It did not say for 2.5hrs it said "in" - makes a world of difference.

IF fuel economey hadn't been mentioned I also assumed it meant they were goingf at 58kts which ain't bad at all.

jwalker · 05 November 2006, 23:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by codprawn

I am well aware of that - the post was somewhat ambiguous. It did not say for 2.5hrs it said "in" - makes a world of difference.

I agree the wording seems awkward but 'for' would not be correct. Turn the words about...in a time period of 2.5 hours they averaged 58knots. Averaged 58knots for 2.5 hours means they travelled at 58knts continuously for 2.5hrs.

Anyway, WTF. It's still a good speed for a long run.

Julian · 06 November 2006, 09:32

Well done to both Mike and Dave, They recorded a time of 9hrs 57 mins to complete well over 500 miles.

Another record to add to the list.

Julian

codprawn · 06 November 2006, 12:56

So it looks like they WERE going as fast as they can - that's fair enough!!!

Nauti Buoy · 06 November 2006, 16:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by Julian

Well done to both Mike and Dave, They recorded a time of 9hrs 57 mins to complete well over 500 miles.

Another record to add to the list.

Julian

Brilliant, well done lads.

Nos4r2 · 06 November 2006, 16:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Julian

Well done to both Mike and Dave, They recorded a time of 9hrs 57 mins to complete well over 500 miles.

Another record to add to the list.

Julian

That's impressive-faster average speed than a truck on a motorway!