Re: Expedition 15 - Carneddau - Trip Reports



On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 12:00:33 +0100, Dominic Sexton
<{d-sep03}@dscs.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>>my Terrano will go places your
>>Disco can only dream of!

>
>Tesco's car park? ;-)


HO! HO! HO!

(Thanks for that. My quick wit is letting me down this morning)

Judith
 
On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 12:00:33 +0100, Dominic Sexton
<{d-sep03}@dscs.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>In article <[email protected]>, Paul Rooney
><[email protected]> writes
>>my Terrano will go places your
>>Disco can only dream of!

>
>Tesco's car park? ;-)


After dropping the kids off at school, yes!

--

Paul


(Watch this space)
 
In article <[email protected]>, Paul Rooney
<[email protected]> writes
>On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 12:00:33 +0100, Dominic Sexton
><{d-sep03}@dscs.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>In article <[email protected]>, Paul Rooney
>><[email protected]> writes
>>>my Terrano will go places your
>>>Disco can only dream of!

>>
>>Tesco's car park? ;-)

>
>After dropping the kids off at school, yes!
>


Steady on old boy, doing Tesco and the school run in one day might be a
bit much!

--

Dominic Sexton
http://www.dscs.demon.co.uk/
 
Chris Malcolm <[email protected]> wrote
>"Paul Cummings" <[email protected]> writes:
>
>>When I walk with others, I do seem to walk slower, especially if the
>>conversation is interesting.

>
>One of the reasons I like walking with others is that you get a kind
>of conversation when walking that no amount of sitting around talking
>can reach. That's one of the reasons I hate the way the infernal
>combustion engine has taken over our cities: the noise is too great to
>have easy comfortable conversations while strolling in city streets.
>

Unfortunately this does not seem to deter the mobile phone users!
--
Gordon
 
Judith <[email protected]> wrote
>
>(By the way, if anyone actually suggests that I am weak because of my
>sex I shall challenge him to a duel..... but I shall be in the
>Discovery and I shall win. You have been warned.)
>

You are weak because of your shopping chromosome.

OK, since you are the challenger I have the choice of weapons.
The feathers from the soft pillows will make a helluva mess of your
Discovery.
--
Gordon
 
W. D. Grey <[email protected]> wrote
>
>I can easily lose my wife in a telephone box so there !
>

Are you complaining or bragging, and does it work for all
wives/girlfriends?
--
Gordon
 
Judith <[email protected]> wrote
>On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 09:10:44 +0100, "W. D. Grey"
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Paul supplied the route NOT the dark .....oops!

>
>I did think there was something of the night about him!
>
>Judith


Are you sure you only met him last weekend? You sound as though you
have known him for years.

You're not in Human Resources or personnel selection are you?
--
Gordon
 
On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 15:47:07 +0100, Gordon <[email protected]>
wrote:

>The feathers from the soft pillows will make a helluva mess of your
>Discovery.



Ooh, you b*tch! You wouldn't! I'd be picking them out of the carpets
for months.

Judith
 
On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 15:52:41 +0100, Gordon <[email protected]>
wrote:

>You sound as though you
>have known him for years.


You can learn a lot from lurking!
 
The message <[email protected]>
from Roger <[email protected]> contains these words:

> The message <[email protected]>
> from Gordon <[email protected]> contains these words:


> > Everyone is different, and age takes it's toll at different rates on
> > different people.


> > How does Naismith deal with that problem?
> > Or is his Rule calculated on the average walker, who doesn't actually
> > exist?


> If you search this ng for previous years you will probably find the
> message in which I quoted the origin of Naismiths Rule.


I decided to do a search myself and eventually found it much earlier
than I had thought.

*****************************************************************************
21/1/98

Quite by chance I happened to come across what purports to be the
true derivation of Naismiths rule in the June 1974 edition of Climber
and Rambler under the heading 'What did Naismith really say?'. I quote
in full:

"Eric Langmuir {same one as above} writes - You would expect such a
sacred formula to be written up in an article somewhere, supported by
lengthy arguments. In fact, it first appears, as far as I can find
out, in the 'Notes and Queries' section of Volume 2, S.M.C.J. of 1892.

Naismith is giving an account of an ascent of Cruach Ardrain,
Stobinian and Ben More on May 2nd when, he says, the hills did not
have their customary cover of spring snow (changed days!). He points
out the route entails 10 miles of walking, 6,300 ft of climbing and
that it took him 6 and a 1/2 hours. He concludes, 'This tallies with
a simple formula, that may be found useful in estimating what time
men in fair conditions should allow for easy expeditions, namely, an
hour for every 3 miles on the map, with an additional hour for every
2,000 ft of ascent.'

So spoke the great man, but it is probably worth reminding your
readers to allow for the well known fact that members of the SMC are
at least a mile an hour faster than ordinary mortals."

*********************************************************

Note that he intended it for "easy expeditions" which doesn't quite
tally with my previous comments about a full days walking. OTOH I don't
think the sample mentioned above would ever have been an easy day for
me.

--
Roger Chapman so far this year 39 summits
New - 22 (Marilyns 8, Sweats 5, Outlying Fells 11)
Repeats - 17( Marilyns 6, Sweats 12, Wainwrights 11)
Knackered knee - 4 times
 
On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 19:34:11 +0100, Roger <[email protected]>
wrote:

>an
>hour for every 3 miles on the map, with an additional hour for every
>2,000 ft of ascent.'


Flippin''eck.

I allow 2 miles an hour (averaged over a long walk to account for
lunch stops etc) and add on a couple of days for any hilly bits.

I walk in kilometres nowadays. On a road, eg at the end of a walk when
I have a train to catch and have to get a move on, I can walk at 6kmph
(which by my reckoning is about 3.75 mph) but my legs just aren't long
enough to go much faster.

Judith
 
In article <[email protected]>, Judith
<[email protected]> writes
>I walk in kilometres nowadays. On a road, eg at the end of a walk when
>I have a train to catch and have to get a move on, I can walk at 6kmph
>(which by my reckoning is about 3.75 mph) but my legs just aren't long
>enough to go much faster.


So do I - it looks much better in a TR :)

Anyway my boots are size 45 which is sort of metric - well Euro or
something so it is appropriate to walk in Kms. The height ascended is
usually reported in feet though - gives a better impression :)
--
Bill Grey
http://www.billboy.co.uk
 
Judith <[email protected]> wrote
>On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 19:34:11 +0100, Roger <[email protected]>
>wrote:
>
>>an
>>hour for every 3 miles on the map, with an additional hour for every
>>2,000 ft of ascent.'

>
>Flippin''eck.
>
>I allow 2 miles an hour (averaged over a long walk to account for
>lunch stops etc) and add on a couple of days for any hilly bits.
>

I aim at 2mph, including stops.

I'm not disappointed if the overall average is less, it usually means
something or somewhere interesting to hang about, like the village pub
where we got chatting to a local, who brought some foxes tails.
I wheedled one out of him for M, but she was spooked by it, so I may fix
it on the back of my Tilley hat like Davy Crockett. :)

I assume that he shot them for the local farmers.
--
Gordon
 
[email protected] said...
> > In
> > any case the formula hardly applied to Emily and Nicky - they probably
> > did a Very Hard walk.

>
> Indeed. So are you suggesting we add an inside leg measurement into the
> formula? ;-)
>

You'd never get them to stand still for long enough to be
measured.
--
Fran
If you need my email address please ask.
 
Judith wrote on Wed, 14 Jul 2004 23:44:51 +0100....
> (By the way, if anyone actually suggests that I am weak because of my
> sex I shall challenge him to a duel..... but I shall be in the
> Discovery and I shall win. You have been warned.)


<quakes in boots, hoping she's forgotten the time I called her a
bimbo>

--
Tim Jackson
[email protected]lid
(Change '.invalid' to '.co.uk' to reply direct)
Absurd patents: visit http://www.patent.freeserve.co.uk
 
On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 23:43:12 +0100, Tim Jackson
<[email protected]> wrote:

>hoping she's forgotten the time I called her a
>bimbo>


Er, yes, I had forgotten .... but I'm going to google for it now.

Judith
 
On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 23:49:40 +0100, Judith
<[email protected]> wrote:

>
>>hoping she's forgotten the time I called her a
>>bimbo>

>
>Er, yes, I had forgotten .... but I'm going to google for it now.


Don't worry, you're off the hook. You asked me if I would rather be
called a bimbo than a rambler. Fran said she'd love to be called a
bimbo ..... so you called her a bimbo.

Anyway, I'm half way down a pint of Guinness and not really in a
fighting mood.

Chill

Judith
 
[email protected] said...
> In article <[email protected]>, Paul Saunders
> <[email protected]> writes
> >The true essence depends to a large extent on who turns up and thus
> >varies from one expedition to the next. The character of the "wild"
> >expeditions has been very different to the ones on proper camp sites.

>
> The only "wild" expedition of which I have any knowledge was the one
> last October.


<Waves> Me too!

> I feel that I contributed in my own way to some
> considerable extent ( and enjoyed so doing) even though I didn't do
> your walk.


Me too!

> For me it was good to meet the "new" lads and then for Roger
> to turn up and for me to meet Phil again albeit on his departure from
> the site.


Err. Well, I met up with Bill, and we waited a while to see if
the expeditioners would return to base, but they didn't, and
then Nicky slipped off a rock and ended up in the lake, which was
wet, and then we walked back to our respective vehicles.

> The attendees obviously affect the outcome of an expedition.
> Make no mistake I thoroughly enjoyed last weekend - as I've previously
> said the social event was a total success.


Me too!

> >Anyway, the problem, as ever, comes down to planning beforehand. This
> >expedition was unusual in that no-one really seemed interested in
> >suggesting any walks, but even on other expeditions, the tendency, as
> >you say, does tend to be that long walks get emphasised.

> ...and herein lies the problem. Without appearing to place any place any
> responsibility for these more "strenuous/long" walks an anyone in
> particular, these are the predominant suggestions and do have the effect
> of leaving some out in the cold.


We shall all have to behave better in future. I think my own
problem is that I have never arranged - as such - a walk. I look
at a lump and say I'd like to walk up it, and then someone else
(usually Charlie) looks at the map and suggests a way of doing
so. Not knowing any better I concur, and off we go. I shall
learn to plan and navigate. There, I have molished a decision.

> It would take some bottle to suggest a short route in such gatherings so
> stuffed with testosterone - you have to agree. If I suggested another
> walk less than the one on the table I would be in a minority of 1


No you wouldn't - you'd probably find quite a few folk
shamefacedly admitting that they, too, quite fancy something a
little less strenuous :)

> >BTW, I hope that those who weren't there aren't getting the impression
> >that the weekend was a bad one for any reason. The walks could have
> >been better planned but we all had a good time.

>
> Hear! Hear! I've already stated as such.


Ditto!
--
Fran
If you need my email address please ask.