Mid

2018 Rolex Sydney Hobart Yacht Race: The Race Committee has lodged a protest against Wild Oats XI

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, frant said:

Speaking of tin foil hat conspiracy theories was that the cameraman’s tin foil hat that fried the AIS splitter by redirection of microwaves?

 

 Crackpot lead hats would be more useful when complaining about cheats.  Get some out of a kingpost. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the interview:

Subsequently Wild Oats XI found that there is a website that can be used to check AIS transmission strength, however, they were not aware of it at the time. 

Are they seriously expecting us to believe of all the people on Wild Oats X! there wasn't one who had heard of Marine Traffic? Bullshit!

The whole interview is complete crap, written by very poor PR people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a race near me in the other hemisphere that I've raced in a few times.  It's no Sydney Hobart but kind of a big deal around here - about 200 boats.  They use a medium large Navy Boat for the start boat.  Each time I have found myself too close to that boat my wind speed increases to over 100 knots (and I might still be on the L1!) and comes from every direction.  But somehow we manage and things return to normal after we get clear about 1/4 mile - sort of.  The instruments all reset to their factory defaults.  That was when I started writing down the offsets so we could re-calibrate everything quickly.  That Navy boat has something going on!  And it confuses the hell out of the electronics on my boat when I get too close.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Forourselves said:

Those who matter will respect their achievements, those that don't matter will continue screaming their crack pot tin foil hat conspiracies from the rafters attempting to diminish what is a well deserved legacy. 

It’s obvious you are s fan of arrogance. I first saw MR at the Sanctuary Cove boat show some years ago ago walking to an interview. A young kid asked for him to sign a hat. “Not now I’m needed for an interview” true!

He thinks he is bigger than the sport and his behaviour since hasnt changed my opinion on that. Sad that

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Forourselves said:

But still, the court of public opinion will continue with the fake outrage

Make no mistake oh precious Oatley troll.

The fucking outrage is real.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More than 24 hours after the protest was dismissed Richards is still very upset that the integrity of the Wild Oats XI crew is being questioned. They include some of the top sailors in the world from America's Cup, Volvo Ocean Race and other topline events.

Claims that Wild Oats XI's AIS was turned off deliberately are just cheap-shots, which quickly lead the online chatterati down the path of making claims about rule cheating, and then the imposition of draconian penalties, including disqualification for the race and bans from competing in the sport.

“We think the Race Committee should make a public apology to us. Their equipment created this problem. We have been accused of something which simply never happened', Richards says. Still irate.

https://www.sail-world.com/news/213456/Wild-Oats-XIs-skipper-answers-critics-on-S2H-row

So the race finishes Friday morning and Harburg lights the AISGATE bonfire

Richards response is - not mandatory - they could eyeball us all time - storm in a teacup  or basically fuck off.

Within hours of this WOXI's AIS TX starts working ( presumably simply by bypassing the splitter, or having a replacement at hand)

Later that night or around 12 hours after WOXI finish the RC lodges a AIS Protest, one doomed to according to RRS.

Richards sole response pre Hearing the next day is - AIS was on but we didn't know it wasn't transmitting. he makes no mention of receiving. A #2 get fucked but using less words.

Two WOXI representatives (ex RO CEO/RC/ full time Oatley employee/ RRS expert and a Comms expert) appear before the IJ early Saturday afternoon presumably with all the evidence they can muster in over 24 hours including detailed account of the Media uplink off Bradleys Head on the morning of the start tripping onboard electronics, video it seems of Vila doing a AIS check, a printout of their AIS transmission via the Interweb (that it seems 20 odd people on WOXI didn't know of its existence or if they did, left their cell phones at home) and no doubt the fried splitter in hand.

The IJ determine the Protest is invalid very quickly and Richards hits the informal Presser, giving interviews etc making no mention of AISGATE other than to say protests are horrible things.

At this point the AISGATE bonfire takes off (look at this thread as just example) with the flames reaching record heights. Why???

The answer is pretty simple. There is no cold water on hand to put the fire out because Richards is the only one holding the water bucket, labeled "stuff we were ready to present to the Hearing" if the Protest was deemed valid.

It takes Mumbles PR and Richards over two days as the bonfire goes out of control before saying anything. What he says is with his amateur (loved that one) parrot feathers afire, is a mix of giving BJ/Harburg/Squark/Butters a spray, revealing the contents of the bucket for the first time, but now demanding an apology from the RC because they adhere to World Sailing Rules for equipment on board (with operation by SI amendment), and those speculating over this matter, like all of us all here, are complete fuckwits.

Interestingly AISGATE has forced him to admit a year after the event and for the first time that they cocked up last year, but in the interim leaving everyone with the WOXI and WOXI fanboy view, being Comanche/Cooney was a cockhead for protesting in 2017. There is also 100's keep the marine industry alive and the Oatly's generosity is not missed, though he was lax in not mentioning who Australian Sailing had as a very generous landlord. 

So two years in a row he has provided a competitor with the Rules Zippo Lighter begging them or someone to flick it and light his feathers, thinking he wont be burnt to a crisp. Peter Harburg has done no one any favors by fumbling and dropping the lighter, unlike the Coon guy..  

Richards really has to be either the most arrogant and or dumbest fuckin parrot going.

Anyway he will be back next year for the 75th as his owner has found a pet shop guy who will gladly say he is not dead and make him fly again, but this time maybe with asbestos plumage, just in case things happen in threes.

     

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Forourselves said:

 But still, the court of public opinion will continue with the fake outrage.

Fake Outrage?

If you believe the nicely crafted story, then;

MR has admitted that they were not in compliance with the SIs, found out just after the finish, but decided against taking any action to atone for the error.

He is still not the sailor I will be pointing my 11 YO son at as an example of a good sportsman.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hopefully everyone here remembers that WO has had channel 7 camera men on board and transmitting for how many starts - 8 ? - 10 ? - I really don't know.

How come the on board VHF gear wasn't fried years ago ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, hoppy said:

It is a lot easier to fill the entry list when most of the British, Irish, French, Dutch, German and Danish entries have a delivery trip that is shorter than the distance from Sydney to the border north or south.

Then the CYCA does not help itself with it's no-multi and no-short handed. 

The CYCA/AS stablility requirements don't help when they prevent boats like Shaggy's Pogo from entering.

 

The RSHYR has the glamour of having the best Maxi 100's, regardless of their age. Only half of WOIX is 10+ years old. It does have that over the Fastnet

Clearly from the 2018 race thread, it's more than the media who focus's on the 100's and ignores that Tatts

 

 

You are correct - it is not cheap to take a boat to Oz OR back. It cost a king's ransom to bring the Cookson back 2 years ago.

The CYCA certainly don't appear to like anything that may impinge on their rather conservative ideas on safety as you mention.

However more than the media focus on the 100s as outside Hobart and certainly outside Australia that's just about all you hear about. It is indicative that the media circus appears  more important to the event than the actual racing. The evidence for that is surely the CYCA holding the prizegiving while close to 20 crews couldn't be there to "put their hands together" for the winners because they were still racing. I find that insulting to the Corinthians in the smaller boats. Bad form by the CYCA!!

Actually the 100 footers are not Maxis, that term relates back to the MAXIMUM allowed rating under IOR. They have just 'acquired' that nickname almost by default. Funny how language evolves.

If you want a top 10 finish in the (proper) RSHYC however you stand a much better chance with a 50 footer rather than a 100 footer - history proves that.

Still a great race as are all the 600 milers.

SS 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, savoir said:

Hopefully everyone here remembers that WO has had channel 7 camera men on board and transmitting for how many starts - 8 ? - 10 ? - I really don't know.

How come the on board VHF gear wasn't fried years ago ?

Because its bullshit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rather disingenuous article/damage control, to say it politely.

Absolute topper IMHO: 

"I was tired, we'd had a hard race, and I was blindsided by the question. We had no idea what they were talking about. That was when I made the comments about AIS not being mandatory under the Col Regs for ships at sea - which it isn't generally also for boats our size [or under 300 tonnes]. My comments were taken out of context, I was referring to the Col Regs, where it is clear that AIS is a voluntary navigational aid."

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All this pratting on about technicalities is irrelevant.
He disadvantaged his competitors by infringing the SIs.
He knows he has done this.
He collected first prize.
He has not handed it back.

In a sporting contest, that matters.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, random said:

Make no mistake oh precious Oatley troll.

The fucking outrage is real.

Get back to your mastabatorium. 

Keep wanking the good wank Champ. 

Drug cheats, two doors down, on the left. 

Sandpaper users. On the right, just down the corridor. 

Spot fixers? Yep, next on the left. 

Sport. And life. Is full of cheating cunts. 

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I expect he is drinking a tankard of his own jism. Celebrating New Years Eve, and everything. And his, what... thousand SA posts in 48 hours? What skills. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Cal20sailor said:

Accountant?  Sorry, still in a pissy mood but you don't get it.  

Think of a rock concert, can you hear them backstage?

Ah no, MSEE. Your mood does not negate the physics.

A dipole antenna works (as noted above) by focusing energy toward a plane.

Signal energy vs (solid) angle is a matter of antenna design, whips are omnidirectional in plane, perpendicular to the axis of the antenna  with propagation lobes above and below the plane that have smaller angles at higher gains (longer, higher fractions of a wavelength) The higher gain in plane is due to out of plane energy being directed into the plane, much like a Fresnel lens.  The argument about effective range vs gain is classic if the antenna is on a moving pitching/heeling vessel  

Signal energy vs distance for a given angle is a function of the propagation surface area at the distance, for a zero gain theoretical point source (such as a handheld stub, it spherical) or 1/radius^3 , for high gain dipole whip it’s essentially cylindrical or 1/radius^2, 

the AIS satellites are in LEO, at 300 -2000 km and not Overhead GeoSynchronous at 22k miles. 

Any minor “axial leakage” energy would propagate as spherical, and an “overhead” satellite would be farther away with 1/1000 to 1/1000000 the energy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/30/2018 at 3:00 PM, Rail Meat said:

I don't have enough facts to conclusively determine if one or more people on WOXI cheated. Frankly, the facts that are available don't paint a very pretty picture. However,  it is far from conclusive. 

What is conclusive and indisputable is that they failed to meet their obligations under the SI to transmit AIS. And that failure gave them a advantage. 

That failure should have resulted in some form of penalty.  Probably enough to cost them the victory given the tight racing.  And any other boat that failed to transmit should also be penalized.  Not necessarily dsq, but penalized in some way. 

Winning under these circumstances is a tarnished victory, and lacks honor. 

And I would be happy to tell that to anyone in the crew or the Oatleys that. In person or email. 

Michael Hennessy

I have been incommunicado for a while which is latin for "I needed to rest up after a thrilling race". So many individual boats of all sizes experienced and did things way above their weight, snakes and ladders which this race is renoun for reigned supreme and which makes it so interesting compared to a 600+nm drag race.

Now I'm back (many will probably go ogh fuck), but nothing to be gained by replying to many posts upthread, but this one of RM's caught my eye and in particular the second sentence. That is, WOXI  failed to meet their obligations under the SI to transmit AIS. Whether it was either unknowingly or knowingly is beside the point and a point lost on many, including the Skipper of WOXI who is the mouthpiece for owner and and team. However it is now and indisputable fact as confirmed by Richards own statements up thread revealed around 6 hours ago.

As for a penalty it is irrelevant now as the RC's protest was deemed invalid as it should be. Not irrelevant however is actions by Team WOXI's response upon finding out or otherwise knowing they had breeched the rules. By their own admission revealing an electronics failure off Bradleys Head two hours before the start and after the finish is now a fact and no longer the subject of debate. Their response was to ignore the self policing foundations of the RRS and tough it out. Some  may say an understandable excuse for not falling on their sword was the frustration of missing out for the last three years. My only response to that is thinking of many VG sailors and in the crewed race department, say Bouwe Bekking (on InfoTrack as a Watch Leader ) I think eight RTW's and 5 or so as skipper and never quite got the gong. More frustration sitting in his one fingernail there I suggest in terms of time spent and miles sailed than in the body say of someone who has never ventured outside his own postcode bar one Transpac.

As  for RM's reference to penalty I disagree. Without a place penalty a time penalty that doesn't alter the result means nothing, particularly one where there is a on course advantage gained. By comparison the RC penalised InfoTrack 20 places or so last year in this race just for getting their post race declaration in late.

Who do I blame for this fucking debacle? Well there is a few.

1. WOXI with the sport in mind should have fallen of their sword. They didn't but then threw petrol on the flames by saying essentially nothing until weight of public opinion overwhelmed them to make a detailed public statement over 3 days after they finished and over 2 days after a IJ ruling. That is unforgivable. 

2. BJ with owner on board elected to have a cry on TV and then sit back, ignoring RRS and hoping the RC would step in and they would not be painted as the bad guy. They actually didn't care about the lack of WOXI AIS TX until the Flinders Is rounding in the dark and no breeze and they were on the inside and WOXI was out wide with a light finish up ahead that favoured only them and WOXI, not the fat boys. In effect they are really no different than WOXI having little regard for this self policing sport.

3. The RC who have to be the biggest soft cocks of all. Without WOXI falling on its sword and BJ having no balls they went a RC specific protest knowing it would be deemed invalid by the IJ, letting them off the hook. They had then and still have today like any 3rd party an ability to lodge a Protest using say Rule 69 that the IJ could not deem invalid. They didn't happen for obvious reasons.The RO is like a Junkie on 100' Heroin, yet wonder why smaller cast member numbers in this 26th December production diminish every year.  

This appalling outcome is thanks to all three in varying degrees. I hope they feel proud of what they have done to this race and the knock on effect for sailing at large in Australia and elsewhere. My guess is many are just now waking up to this shit and it won't go away in sailing media land.

Happy New Year to you all out there in keyboard land.      

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LionessRacing said:

Ah no, MSEE. Your mood does not negate the physics.

A dipole antenna works (as noted above) by focusing energy toward a plane.

Signal energy vs (solid) angle is a matter of antenna design, whips are omnidirectional in plane, perpendicular to the axis of the antenna  with propagation lobes above and below the plane that have smaller angles at higher gains (longer, higher fractions of a wavelength) The higher gain in plane is due to out of plane energy being directed into the plane, much like a Fresnel lens.  The argument about effective range vs gain is classic if the antenna is on a moving pitching/heeling vessel  

Signal energy vs distance for a given angle is a function of the propagation surface area at the distance, for a zero gain theoretical point source (such as a handheld stub, it spherical) or 1/radius^3 , for high gain dipole whip it’s essentially cylindrical or 1/radius^2, 

the AIS satellites are in LEO, at 300 -2000 km and not Overhead GeoSynchronous at 22k miles. 

Any minor “axial leakage” energy would propagate as spherical, and an “overhead” satellite would be farther away with 1/1000 to 1/1000000 the energy. 

Reality now not theory lads.

A Class B AIS VHF signal will be received by low level geostationary sats over/close to eastern Australia and this race course. There will be drop outs caused by some signal loss over and above min RX power of Class B of either pursuassion (2w or 5w) due to antenna design but more will occur due to most coax cable installations in sailboats to the antenna, mast or deck mounted. In this race mostly downhill and and or with light stuff masthead mounts (most in this race) wouldn't be too effected. Go to a Interweb AIS platform and pick various boats in this race when away from terrestrial stations etc proves that point.

If you don't believe that think of Apollo II 50 years ago next year. From that tin can that today defies imagination and with computing power a fraction of your smart phone beamed live coverage back to earth  from the moon many miles distant in comparison (albeit receiving antenna end covered the size of a few house blocks) of two men standing on that moon.

1603764687_WOXITSHIRT.jpg.ad607d8cbda1a1dc7ae2cfc898490196.jpg   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, random said:

Definitely.  But true sportsman should have retired.

BASIC PRINCIPLES
SPORTSMANSHIP AND THE RULES
Competitors in the sport of sailing are governed by a body of rules that they are expected to follow and enforce. A fundamental principle of sportsmanship is that when competitors break a rule they will promptly take a penalty, which may be to retire."
 
"2 FAIR SAILING
A boat and her owner shall compete in compliance with recognized principles of sportsmanship and fair play. A boat may be penalized under this rule only if it is clearly established that these principles have been violated. The penalty shall be either disqualification or disqualification that is not excludable."

Oh SPORTSMANSHIP, so they should have told woxi they didn't see them on AIS when they first noticed. That would have been sportsmanship. It goes both ways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, TPG said:

Oh SPORTSMANSHIP, so they should have told woxi they didn't see them on AIS when they first noticed.

Well they should have if serious and not playing the 100' big dick game to the exclusion of the sports interests.

Stop feeding Randumb with bread more stale than his, where his point though good disappears. He folds like a cheap suit with no food

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/28/2018 at 8:24 AM, Laser1 said:

Pitch fork, check.  Tar, check.  Feathers, check. :lol:

WHAT A BUNCH OF CRY BABIES 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Cal20sailor said:

Do you really think Trump has had a bad lie in the rough?  

But you're right, I've seen pro golfers take a penalty (many $$$$$$) for incidental infractions.  

Best ask Stormy about that one. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, VOA said:

Randy could take this to the highest sailing body in the country. 

But he won’t. 

He could prove there are woxi socks here.

But he won't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Varan said:
Quote

We did an AIS check, there is video footage of Juan Vila [top Volvo Ocean Race navigator] doing the AIS check on the way out to the start", an indignant Richards told Sail-World from Sydney.

I’m gonna have to call bullshit on this one. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Richards had given this explanation early on 27 December it probably would have been accepted by everyone. No further questions. Coming three days later following different versions of the same story, it is far less plausible and anyone recalling his indignation and protestations over WOXI’s after race fiasco last year should have a bad taste in their mouths.

If WOXI had VHF/AIS issues before the start they didn’t notify CYCA. They should have.

If CYCA knew there were AIS signalling problems during the race including WOXI, CYCA did nothing to manage it. They should have.

Did CYCA come on board immediately after WOXI docked and flick the AIS switch? They should have.

Did WOXI provide this explanation with their declaration? They should have.

Did CYCA upon receiving WOXI’s “clean” declaration ask for a demonstration and evidence of any subsequent repair? They should have.

Richards admitted AIS “failure” and non compliance and still took the prize whilst playing the victim. How arrogant and unsportsmanlike.

CYCA were complicit in all of this and used Blackjack as a way out. How gutless. I could use other words......

WOXI is an outstanding boat whose achievements will always be a part of sailing history, sadly tarnished by Richards’ actions and behaviour over the last two years.

 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Woodsies Troppo said:

It’s obvious you are s fan of arrogance. I first saw MR at the Sanctuary Cove boat show some years ago ago walking to an interview. A young kid asked for him to sign a hat. “Not now I’m needed for an interview” true!

He thinks he is bigger than the sport and his behaviour since hasnt changed my opinion on that. Sad that

He’s not alone with that attitude, a certain British America’s cup skipper has been seen doing the same thing. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sadly the repercussion of this situation does nothing but tarnish the event and diminish the accomplishments of all the boats and crews that participated.

really shitty outcome...because of one man and the decisions he made in not taking responsibility for putting other boats and his crew at risk by failing to maintain the safety of his boat as specified by the rules.

Lest we forget the insurance debacle that impounded a boat prevented the boat and crew from racing...how is this rule breech different from AIS "failure"?

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MR is like schoolboy with "Dog ate my homework" excuse after getting caught cheating.

If you break rules and it is really not your fault then you will fill request for redress form.

Making excuses days after finish is just pathetic and discredits our sport.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/30/2018 at 6:29 PM, MelbourneA31 said:

Ok, so I've bit my tongue for the past couple of days but there is so much ignorant crap flying around that I can't stand it for a second longer.

The RRS run over the four year cycle of the Olympic Games and the Special Regs attached to the back of them comes into force from July so that you don't have a change to the Special Regs half way through the sailing season in Australia.

The Special Regs that came into force in July 2013 were reviewed in late 2011. A decision was made to replace an imperfect piece of equipment being a radar reflector with a far superior piece of technology called an AIS. The fitting of AIS was mandated for Cat 1 Races from 2015 to allow a phase in period and recommended for Cat 2 races.

Prior to 2015, if you wanted to track your competitors, who all had mandated radar reflectors, the purpose of which was to make them more visible to commercial shipping, you could fit a radar to your racing yacht, as did most of the Whitbread 60's. With some knowledge of relative motion and a plotting sheet you could determine the course and speed of your competitors or any other traffic by plotting them.

AIS is part of the Global Maritime Distress and Safety System and was considered a worthwhile addition to yachts racing in Cat 1 and Cat 2 races. I notice that in the Sydney to Hobart Notices to Competitors that AIS Man Overboard devices are being promoted. Again, another worthwhile piece of safety equipment because a yacht cannot receive a PLB signal without advice from a shoreside receiver. Clearly you cannot track a MOB if your AIS is switched off!

The side effect that AIS could be used as a tactical tool was discussed and discounted due to the far greater benefits for SOLAS and collision avoidance with commercial traffic. Yachts are horrendously poor radar targets.

To say that AIS is only a requirement this year is wrong, it has been in force for the last three editions of the Sydney to Hobart. the Special Regs only require it to be operational, the S.I's require it to be functioning at all times. I would expect that whoever did the Safety Audit of WOXI would have determined that the equipment was functioning correctly.

BTW VHF DSC and MF/HF DSC were also added to the Special Regs in that same review.

To finish of the year I went looking for a post that would be most interesting to reply to. Your opening sentence caught my eye "Ok, so I've bit my tongue for the past couple of days but there is so much ignorant crap flying around that I can't stand it for a second longer".

It was then I found out to my disappointment all you could offer was  simply a chronology of how AIS ended up in WS's Special Regs etc and  concluded with your penultimate statement saying "AIS is only a requirement this year is wrong, it has been in force for the last three editions of the Sydney to Hobart". Now while maybe inferred to your SI's reference, you fail to mention that this year is in fact the first year that the S2H SI's mandate AIS's to be turned on, particularly the TX function that on any serious race boat can be turned off at the flick of an optional switch to RX only or "pirate mode" for most races unless mandated.

So I thought to myself, In your own words you say you have been biting your tongue for days, then post to clear the ignorant swamp, but are totally ignorant yourself?? WTF I thought. Then I read further and it got better under your own hand.

On 12/30/2018 at 7:51 PM, savoir said:

On behalf of myself and all the other dumbfuckers here on SA I extend my gratitude .

How lucky are we boys and girls to have MelbourneA31 both in our presence AND dispensing his wisdom at the same time ?

 

On 12/30/2018 at 8:10 PM, MelbourneA31 said:

Go fuck yourself dickhead - I sat on the sub-committee that did the re-write. Got a smart arse answer to that arsehole?

Now I haven't explored further down thread to see if @savoir responded but my guess it got a bit ugly on account of your erudite response, so I will step into his shoes.

First @MelbourneA31 thank you very much putting your time into improving the rules of racing in this sport. However I'm afraid that time invested is where my largese ceases.

I cannot believe someone at the pointy end of rule making at a State/National level chimes in to this thread with nothing to add other than ignorant crap and has no opinion on the foundation of this debacle being "self policing" of the rules.

Please stop doing what your doing in the rule making department for offshore sailing and fuck off. My guess is you have never been outside the sight of the Committee boat, let alone land.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, VOA said:

Randy could take this to the highest sailing body in the country. 

But he won’t. 

The building owner won't let him past the door. Wonder who that is???

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, frant said:

Jack I’m holding you fully responsible for this whole sorry affair. Or at least your tin foil hat that is.

frant I object very strongly to your inference there. I will have you know I can move very comfortably between both the analogue and digital world.Though in this instance I was confused when @mad said I had to go to the white phone, when the prick knows I'm colour blind.

603955494_MadsPhone.thumb.jpeg.22f90c5a13df4c006eb3469d9bfff149.jpeg 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Varan said:

“We were very disadvantaged because they had their AIS switched off,” Harburg said. “And the rules say it’s got to be on all the time."

A sensible fair-minded skipper of a line honours boat, on hearing the above, said by a respected rival, would immediately and graciously retire. How can this skipper hold up his head and claim he has won when he knows his rival has been disadvantaged?  Why would Harburg say what he is reported as saying unless he believed it to be true?

If the skipper in question thinks his rival might possibly be mistaken about the AIS status he could of course ask around to verify that what his rival had said was right, and when it was confirmed, could then retire. No protest should be necessary. Yacht racing is a sport for gentlemen.

This very entertaining "sail-world" window into the frailty of human nature throws light on the magnitude of personal ego, human weakness and folly, and the embarrassing lengths people will go to try to defend a certain type of behaviour. You only have to ask yourself on reading this piece is "If this skipper was in the right, why would he be so upset and why would he be saying all these things?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, staysail said:

“We were very disadvantaged because they had their AIS switched off,” Harburg said. “And the rules say it’s got to be on all the time."

A sensible fair-minded skipper of a line honours boat, on hearing the above, said by a respected rival, would immediately and graciously retire. How can this skipper hold up his head and claim he has won when he knows his rival has been disadvantaged?  Why would Harburg say what he is reported as saying unless he believed it to be true?

If the skipper in question thinks his rival might possibly be mistaken about the AIS status he could of course ask around to verify that what his rival had said was right, and when it was confirmed, could then retire. No protest should be necessary. Yacht racing is a sport for gentlemen.

This very entertaining "sail-world" window into the frailty of human nature throws light on the magnitude of personal ego, human weakness and folly, and the embarrassing lengths people will go to try to defend a certain type of behaviour. You only have to ask yourself on reading this piece is "If this skipper was in the right, why would he be so upset and why would he be saying all these things?"

Not too sure about your respect thought and you forget Richards now confirmed today it is all AIS true. There is a bit of interesting history between those two teams that goes back that has been buried in recent times, but post the passing of one old guy and this race outcome, that friction has bubbled to the top. Both of these two fuckers have no idea of the damage they are doing to the race itself and by knock-on effect to the sport and quite frankly where they don't appear to give two hoots. After all how long are they both around for, one more 75th S2H, at best?

Two cockwobblers making us all dance to their tune. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In case you don't know, you can verify your AIS is working by simply loading the "FindShip" app on any smartphone and look up any vessel that has reported a location that made it all the way back to shore. Works great. I use it every time I turn on the boat's communication systems at the dock, just to make sure my signal is getting out. In fact, I'm looking at Wild Oats XI, right now on FindShip. She's heading north at 10.1kts off of Nadgee. Closest boat to her is Melanesian Pride. 

AIS is cool. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The “not mandatory” was the true Ricko. The interview reads like it was thoroughly vetted, lawyerd, and spindoctored by the Oatleys. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, JasonSeibert said:

In case you don't know, you can verify your AIS is working by simply loading the "FindShip" app on any smartphone and look up any vessel that has reported a location that made it all the way back to shore. Works great

Many small device AIS apps and via browser and via sat so a boat doesn't have to be close to shore. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, 10thTonner said:

The “not mandatory” was the true Ricko. The interview reads like it was thoroughly vetted, lawyerd, and spindoctored by the Oatleys. 

Give him a break. You can only polish a turd so far.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, JasonSeibert said:

In case you don't know, you can verify your AIS is working by simply loading the "FindShip" app on any smartphone and look up any vessel that has reported a location that made it all the way back to shore. Works great. I use it every time I turn on the boat's communication systems at the dock, just to make sure my signal is getting out. In fact, I'm looking at Wild Oats XI, right now on FindShip. She's heading north at 10.1kts off of Nadgee. Closest boat to her is Melanesian Pride. 

AIS is cool. 

Sure and anyone who uses AIS knows that within phone range of shore you only have to have a quick peep at web sites like Marine traffic, Vesselfinder etc. to see a totally independent confirmation that you are "seen" by all, and if I were in a serious race where AIS was mandated I would use that method to check. Who wouldn't?

Sure if you don't bother to check by some such foolproof ways, it is possible you might just possibly not know if you have a malfunction, but that does nothing to change the advantage that gives you over your competitors, and everyone I know who races and understands AIS and its link to pc based navigation for sure does know about switching it off if you don't want others to see your data. My kit came with an optional pair of terminals for wiring up to a switch for exactly that purpose! So far though, I haven't been in a race where even having AIS has been compulsory and I don't think this "mandating" of modern navigation/safety features is a good idea. Where would it all end? Rule books as thick as a bible!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

Many small device AIS apps and via browser and via sat so a boat doesn't have to be close to shore. 

My sentence was poorly written. The boat doesn't have to be close to shore, it was the location I was referring to. The information packet has to bounce enough through the mesh to make it from ship to ship to a "base station" where ever that may be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, staysail said:

So far though, I haven't been in a race where even having AIS has been compulsory and I don't think this "mandating" of modern navigation/safety features is a good idea. Where would it all end? Rule books as thick as a bible!

Post 1998 the RO is very gun shy about safety. You probably haven't been in too many races where 6 people have died. The south coast of NSW conditions permitting are alive with fishing boats, many now having AIS and in addition many fixed/drift fishing devices with AIS transponders on the race course. A decision therefore was made to make turning AIS on for this race mandatory, noting AIS Class B fitted has been in World Sailing Offshore Reg for Cat  0/1 Races for years .

With your extensive Cat 0/1 experience in mind Stay despite not knowing this, you should contact WS and the RO of this race and set them straight.   

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, JasonSeibert said:

My sentence was poorly written. The boat doesn't have to be close to shore, it was the location I was referring to. The information packet has to bounce enough through the mesh to make it from ship to ship to a "base station" where ever that may be

English comprehension is now a dead art? No it doesn't have to do some ship/shore bounce thing. Sats pick up Class B AIS direct in this postcode, despite what you may have read here. You can see the pings of Comanche and BJ in history below. The straight line is WOXI with only two pings, pre start and post finish and did the last bit with wheels.

50 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

and via sat so a boat doesn't have to be close to shore

1603764687_WOXITSHIRT.jpg.ad607d8cbda1a1dc7ae2cfc898490196.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, LionessRacing said:

Ah no, MSEE. Your mood does not negate the physics.

A dipole antenna works (as noted above) by focusing energy toward a plane.

Signal energy vs (solid) angle is a matter of antenna design, whips are omnidirectional in plane, perpendicular to the axis of the antenna  with propagation lobes above and below the plane that have smaller angles at higher gains (longer, higher fractions of a wavelength) The higher gain in plane is due to out of plane energy being directed into the plane, much like a Fresnel lens.  The argument about effective range vs gain is classic if the antenna is on a moving pitching/heeling vessel  

Signal energy vs distance for a given angle is a function of the propagation surface area at the distance, for a zero gain theoretical point source (such as a handheld stub, it spherical) or 1/radius^3 , for high gain dipole whip it’s essentially cylindrical or 1/radius^2, 

the AIS satellites are in LEO, at 300 -2000 km and not Overhead GeoSynchronous at 22k miles. 

Any minor “axial leakage” energy would propagate as spherical, and an “overhead” satellite would be farther away with 1/1000 to 1/1000000 the energy. 

You had to go and mention Fresnel lenses.  When I started in my field, computers were very slow and we processed our data (recorded on film) with optical computing.  Pretty fun to see real time Fourier transforms and we were able to process at about twice real time.  The limits were how much xylene we were willing to have stream out of the liquid gate we used for the film.  Even then xylene was a well known carcinogen.  Much better mood today and thanks for calling me out.  

For the rest, Fresnel lenses were commonly used in lighthouses and have some really cool characteristics.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Cal20sailor said:

For the rest, Fresnel lenses were commonly used in lighthouses and have some really cool characteristics

Yes. Putting aside Franklin connecting to lightening with his key on a string in the mid 18th century both the optics work of Fresenel and Faraday's with electricity occured around the same time in the early 19th century. It took around  another 50 years however for the two to join up in a lighthouse using electricity. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

English comprehension is now a dead art? No it doesn't have to do some ship/shore bounce thing. Sats pick up Class B AIS direct in this postcode, despite what you may have read here. You can see the pings of Comanche and BJ in history below. The straight line is WOXI with only two pings, pre start and post finish and did the last bit with wheels.

1603764687_WOXITSHIRT.jpg.ad607d8cbda1a1dc7ae2cfc898490196.jpg

I'm not sure we are on the same page when it comes to AIS transceivers. But that's not important to the discussion. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, JasonSeibert said:

I'm not sure we are on the same page when it comes to AIS transceivers. But that's not important to the discussion. 

Clearly not if you insist a offshore AIS TX "information packet has to bounce enough through the mesh to make it from ship to ship to a "base station" where ever that may be" and not sat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jack_sparrow said:

Clearly not if you insist a offshore AIS TX "information packet has to bounce enough through the mesh to make it from ship to ship to a "base station" where ever that may be" and not sat.

Not all AIS transceivers communicate with satellites, nor are they required to. If you don't know that, then we don't really need to have this discussion. There are several flavors of AIS transceivers. I suppose what matters is what was required for the race. IF the race required a Class B high power with satellite link, or a Class A with satellite link, then great you are correct. However, most AIS transceivers don't have the functionality. Sooo... we are not having the same discussion with the same assumptions. 

For my boats, the AIS transceiver doesn't know a damn thing about a satellite. Sooooo - that means that my signal has to make it to a location in the mesh where the signal could get to a base station. That's pretty much how it works. It sounds like you are assuming that the AIS systems on every boat talk to satellites. Is that what you are assuming? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, JasonSeibert said:

Here's some interesting information from the Coast Guard related to LED lighting causing signal interference.

https://www.dco.uscg.mil/Portals/9/DCO Documents/5p/CG-5PC/INV/Alerts/1318.pdf?ver=2018-08-16-091109-630

 

While only dated this year that advice is many years old and is a receive not transmit issue. Not one recognised Nav light maker produces gear anymore that generates such interference 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

11.4 Changes to Special Regulations • Special Regulation 3.24.5 (c): The minimum amount of engine fuel that shall be carried at the start of the race shall be at least Litres = LWL(metres)/0.135. • Special Regulation 3.25.1(d): All boats shall carry on board a satellite phone. The satellite phone shall have coverage and be switched on for the duration of the race and be connected to main power or have a spare battery. • Special Regulation 4.09 (a): An AIS Transponder shall be carried and be switched on, such that it is receiving and transmitting.

The rule is mum as to the quality of the AIS transponder - only that it must be on and receiving and transmitting. 

A class B can be high power or low power. Obviously the high power AIS class b will send further distances. but the low power will not. 

This is the unit I use: https://www.em-trak-usa.com/product-page/b100-standard-ais-class-b-robust-plug-play-connectivity-uscg-certified

It only transmits at 2 watts.

Edited by JasonSeibert
Updated information.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, JasonSeibert said:

Not all AIS transceivers communicate with satellites

Every Class B AIS transciever ever built will communicate with a satellite if both are in range and there are no TX issues. I have no idea where you get this sat enabled/not enabled AIS shit from..I do know you are getting close to turnip territory though if you keep persisting with this drivel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, jack_sparrow said:

Every Class B AIS transciever ever built will communicate with a satelite if both are in range and there are no TX issues. I have no idea where you get this sat enabled AIS stuff from..

When you say "satellite" do you mean the thingy flying in the sky a few miles up in the air?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This might help explain the misconceptions for those on the fence. In particular I like this quote: 

Quote

However, around ten years ago various organisations discovered that, much to everyone’s surprise, these short range signals could in fact be picked up from above the Earth’s atmosphere. This was not expected as the maximum horizontal range at sea level is around 50 nautical miles (74 kms), yet these same signals could be received on the ISS, 400 kilometres up. 

http://www.bigoceandata.com/news/satellite-ais-addressing-some-misconceptions/

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, JasonSeibert said:

When you say "satellite" do you mean the thingy flying in the sky a few miles up in the air?

Yes.If you look out the window from what ever planet you are on, you might see one wizz by.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, JasonSeibert said:

Not all AIS transceivers communicate with satellites, nor are they required to. If you don't know that, then we don't really need to have this discussion. There are several flavors of AIS transceivers. I suppose what matters is what was required for the race. IF the race required a Class B high power with satellite link, or a Class A with satellite link, then great you are correct. However, most AIS transceivers don't have the functionality. Sooo... we are not having the same discussion with the same assumptions. 

For my boats, the AIS transceiver doesn't know a damn thing about a satellite. Sooooo - that means that my signal has to make it to a location in the mesh where the signal could get to a base station. That's pretty much how it works. It sounds like you are assuming that the AIS systems on every boat talk to satellites. Is that what you are assuming? 

Hmm.  I think you are wrong.  Your AIS transceiver does NOT have to have any additional capabilities to be picked up by a satellite receiver.  No "uplink", no special transmission hardware or software.  It just pumps out its VHF signal, and then if the satellite has a specialized receiver it will pick up that VHF signal.  The AIS transceivers that are higher power (e.g. 5 watt versus 2) have a better chance of being heard by the satellites, but its still possible for the lower power signal to be heard.

There is fairly simple explanation available on the site that Just a Skosh used to pull his screen shots from, Big Ocean Data.  Its a good service if anyone is in the market for AIS tracking.

http://www.bigoceandata.com/news/satellite-ais-addressing-some-misconceptions/

 

(EDIT -  Ha, Jon beat me to it)

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, JonRowe said:

This might help explain the misconceptions for those on the fence. In particular I like this quote: 

http://www.bigoceandata.com/news/satellite-ais-addressing-some-misconceptions/

And with only a decoding program and antenna you can download NOAA weather sat pics direct from their satellites and be looking at them before they do and many hours later issue a forecast using them. Space is fence free.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, JasonSeibert said:

This is what people sometimes refer to as satellite AIS

What people? Mate give up. Be assured there is no such thing as satellite AIS that you keep banging on about other than subscription services who take normal AIS VHF band (Class a&b) transmissions received via satellite and then on sell that data. You are blinkered thinking AIS VHF regardless of class A or B power output is not picked by low orbiting satellites. It is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I forgot, Jack, you speak for EVERYONE on the planet. Cool. How this devolved into a semantics discussion is interesting. I suppose that means the whole thing is beat to death. My apologies to the group for allowing that to happen.

Bringing it back to the relevant discussion for a moment: 

I used this splitter https://www2.vespermarine.com/antennas-splitters/antenna-splitter-sp160 on Gamble with a Vesper antennae to increase clarity and range on my AIS install on the recommendation of my riggers here in Texas. Prior to this, on my O30, I used a dedicated AIS antennae mounted on the pushpit that I also used as the backup VHF antennae in the event of main failure. 

I also used their specific antennae: https://www2.vespermarine.com/antennas-splitters/shared-ais-antenna

Cheers.

 

Edited by JasonSeibert
Updated information

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Cal20sailor said:

You had to go and mention Fresnel lenses.  When I started in my field, computers were very slow and we processed our data (recorded on film) with optical computing.  Pretty fun to see real time Fourier transforms and we were able to process at about twice real time.  The limits were how much xylene we were willing to have stream out of the liquid gate we used for the film.  Even then xylene was a well known carcinogen.  Much better mood today and thanks for calling me out.  

For the rest, Fresnel lenses were commonly used in lighthouses and have some really cool characteristics.  

It’s moments like these when I feel like a Luddite 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, JasonSeibert said:

I forgot, Jack, you speak for EVERYONE on the planet. Cool.

I have been very polite so far, Now fuck off noting the Vespa door is down the hallway.

Vespa.jpg

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are a few misconceptions here. Let's review a few basics.

  1. AIS transponders receive GPS position information from satellites; the communicate with other vessels in range via VHF both sending and receiving position, course, speed, etc.
  2. AIS has no explicit mechanism for transmitting information to satellites
  3. There are satellites that include VHF receivers specifically to listen to terrestrial AIS broadcasts
  4. A vessel-based AIS Class-B 2W VHF transmitter equipped with a dipole antenna situated to broadcast to other vessels is unlikely to be received reliably by a satellite in low earth orbit. There's insufficient radiated energy to be received at that distance. Recent changes to the Class-B standard allow 5W transmission and greatly improve the reliability of satellite reception.
  5. No vessel retransmits the information produced by other vessels. If there are two vessels, A & B, that are not in AIS range of one another, the presence of a third vessel, C that is in range of both A & B does not magically cause A and B to see one another
  6. AIS does not provide real-time position, course and speed information. Class-B vessels moving faster than 2 knots transmit that information twice per minute. While substantially faster than a tracker, this is hardly real time
  7. Marine Traffic and other sites obtain vessel AIS information primarily through terrestrial receivers run by volunteers. You can get your own AIS receiver, connect it to a PC and become a contributor of such information. In addition, they also receive information from satellite receivers, however, this is primarily interesting only for Class-A equipped vessels that transmit at 12.5W and therefore more reliabily received by satellites
  8. The OSR requires the AIS and VHF antenna to be at the mast head and this means a splitter must be used on a sloop. Similarly, the rules require a maximum of 50% loss in the antenna cable. Therefore, all power levels need to be divided by about 2 when considering radiated power at the antenna. If a class B AIS transponder is not getting at least 1W out the antenna, the yacht is not compliant.
  9. The best way to determine transmitted power is via SWR. The SRT radio, used in all commercially available AIS transponders of which I'm aware, measure and report SWR via a free PC-based applications called ProAIS2 that is connected via USB to the AIS transponder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Moonduster said:

A vessel-based AIS Class-B 2W VHF transmitter equipped with a dipole antenna situated to broadcast to other vessels is unlikely to be received reliably by a satellite in low earth orbit. There's insufficient radiated energy to be received at that distance. Recent changes to the Class-B standard allow 5W transmission and greatly improve the reliability of satellite reception.

Moon agree certainly not reliable by any measns, but there is a truck load of evidence of properly setup Class B 2w with masthead dipoles being picked up by low level sat on this race course. As you say Class B SOTDMA 5w units increase that prospect.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, JasonSeibert said:

Working with some blockchain solutions for tracking this data

Right... that sounds like a great idea, bitcoin for AIS

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

Moon agree certainly not reliable by any measns, but there is a truck load of evidence of properly setup Class B 2w with masthead dipoles being picked up by low level sat on this race course. As you say Class B SOTDMA 5w units increase that prospect.    

I agree with Jack's statement.  I have seen mid ocean transmissions show up on tracking sites from boats that I am 100% confident have a 2W AIS transmission.  Which is most pleasure boats at the moment since 5 W Class B units are new to the market in the last 18 months or so.

I can't speak to the reliability of those 2W transmissions being picked up by satellites, and I am sure 5 W is more reliable at being picked up.  But you can absolutely get a 2W signal off the birds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Snowden said:

Right... that sounds like a great idea, bitcoin for AIS

Ha! Not quite, but sort of. The problem is dispute resolution between two parties when they don't trust each other, and/or when cargo arrival/delivery time is disputed. One party says X while the other says Y. Through a combination of sending messages through communications channels in the AIS transmission protocol, and verification of the data transmission through sat-com integrated devices, the information can be audited and stored in a blockchain distributed database. It's called the "internet of things" and blockchain solutions can provide the neutral third party evidence to resolve payment issues. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Snowden said:

Right... that sounds like a great idea, bitcoin for AIS

Blockchain is bigger than bitcoin.  It has a lot of the weirdo, conspiracy theory fringe folks who gravitate to Bitcoin circling around in the space, but the reality is that blockchain itself as a software concept is powerful and is going to crop up in more and more applications.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Rail Meat said:

Blockchain is bigger than bitcoin.  It has a lot of the weirdo, conspiracy theory fringe folks who gravitate to Bitcoin circling around in the space, but the reality is that blockchain itself as a software concept is powerful and is going to crop up in more and more applications.

I hear this a lot, but it’s been around for near enough ten years now and I haven’t yet seen a truly decentralised and permissionless implementation where the blockchain tech adds real value over one party maintaining a database. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Rail Meat said:

Blockchain is bigger than bitcoin.  It has a lot of the weirdo, conspiracy theory fringe folks who gravitate to Bitcoin circling around in the space, but the reality is that blockchain itself as a software concept is powerful and is going to crop up in more and more applications.

Blockchain is merely a database. the reliability of the database is its distribution across diverse parties on a global scale. Currently, the Bitcoin blockchain is the most diverse and widely distributed with billions of dollars in infrastructure. Without the distribution, the trust component of the database degrades. A blockchain with only one node is just a database. The real interesting prospects that I'm seeing are around side chains to larger backed existing chains. 

For the shipping solution, I looked at moving the client towards a side chain with audits to the bitcoin blockchain. essentially hashing the sidechain data into the bitcoin chain for preservation of data. But that's off topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Snowden said:

I hear this a lot, but it’s been around for near enough ten years now and I haven’t yet seen a truly decentralised and permissionless implementation where the blockchain tech adds real value over one party maintaining a database. 

Industries are slow to change. they fear change. Interestingly, the bitcoin protocol is based off of a 1980s encryption concept. So, it's really been around for nearly 40 years. Just slow to implement, slow to be adopted. But "internet of things" is a big deal, and having a reliable data source for that information, trusted enough to solve disputes, is a worthy thing. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This should be the nextgen AIS systems - full data mesh networks. Here, they use AIS to help route efficiently. 

https://www.cut.ac.cy/digitalAssets/106/106626_1mcecn-2011.pdf

One thing this proposal does not address, and is also a current weakness of AIS data, is corruption and security issues. But that can be addressed in time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't say that 2W transmissions could not be received, I said that they are unlikely to be received reliably. The best evidence for this is that the change to 5W has been approved.

I believe we're all in heated agreement.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bitcoin graphs are like the weather ..you are hoping for a lift and you get headed or depending which side of the ledger you are on, expected it on the nose but find yourself going down hill doing 20kt+ and smiling. This one dated July this year indicated the bottom had been reached and is labeled as "despair" but would quickly return to "mean". However between July and now it went of another cliff so I'm not too sure what the current label is?? Suicidal for everyone? 

Bitcoin.png

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, mad said:
2 hours ago, Cal20sailor said:

You had to go and mention Fresnel lenses.  When I started in my field, computers were very slow and we processed our data (recorded on film) with optical computing.  Pretty fun to see real time Fourier transforms and we were able to process at about twice real time.  The limits were how much xylene we were willing to have stream out of the liquid gate we used for the film.  Even then xylene was a well known carcinogen.  Much better mood today and thanks for calling me out.  

For the rest, Fresnel lenses were commonly used in lighthouses and have some really cool characteristics.  

It’s moments like these when I feel like a Luddite 

Me too, after all that turkey. Where would we get one at this hour???

B)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jack_sparrow said:

Bitcoin graphs are like the weather ..you are hoping for a lift and you get headed or depending which side of the ledger you are on find yourself going down hill doing 20kt+. This one dated July this year indicated the bottom had been reached and is labeled as despair. Between July and now it went of another cliff so I'm not sure what the current label is?? Suicidal? 

Bitcoin.png

Don't be mad, Jack. It's okay. This is all off-topic. We can go back to you talking about sailing, but if you WANT to talk about bitcoin, you might want to rethink your process. People think of bitcoin as an investment, or that there should be some expectation of a return. That's where the entire process fails.

Bitcoin is two things: A brand, and a protocol. It is also what most people think of as an intergalactic credit.  It is a value transfer protocol that people store value in the network, and then transmit/transfer it from point to point. The current "price" of bitcoin is the reflected perceived value of the network and the effort put into it. That is in contrast to a "stable coin" where people expect the value in to be the value out as backed by some fixed price. If you put $100 into Bitcoin when it was $100, you would have converted $100 USD into 1 BTC. Today, the world values that BTC at about $4,000. Pretty good value. But what do you do with it? IF you don't know why it is used, how it is used, when, where, why, or IF it should be used, don't use it. That simple. If you are going to invest in Bitcoin, don't. You'll spend too much time looking at these graphs.
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites