SailNet Community banner

1 - 20 of 29 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,844 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I just finished reading Adam Mayers' Sea Of Dreams - about the 2002 Around Alone race.

I found it to be a good read, and it got quite gripping once he started describing going around the Horn.

One thing that put me off a bit was Mayers' constant use of the phrase, 'knots per hour' in reference to boat speed.

I noticed the same phrase in a recently posted newspaper article about the Vendée Globe race.

Doesn't the term 'knot' mean 'nautical miles per hour'? If so, why would one say, 'knots per hour'? It seems redundant.

Am I wrong in this?

Unfortunately that little technicality made me question any other technical information that Mayers wrote in his book.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,192 Posts
I just finished reading Adam Mayers' Sea Of Dreams - about the 2002 Around Alone race.

I found it to be a good read, and it got quite gripping once he started describing going around the Horn.

One thing that put me off a bit was Mayers' constant use of the phrase, 'knots per hour' in reference to boat speed.

I noticed the same phrase in a recently posted newspaper article about the Vendée Globe race.

Doesn't the term 'knot' mean 'nautical miles per hour'? If so, why would one say, 'knots per hour'? It seems redundant.

Am I wrong in this?

Unfortunately that little technicality made me question any other technical information that Mayers wrote in his book.
Good point. But I wouldn't write a person off for a little mistake like that. I'd probably be more upset with the proof readers and editors.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,680 Posts
Good point. But I wouldn't write a person off for a little mistake like that. I'd probably be more upset with the proof readers and editors.
In fact, the editors may have added that terminology, ignorantly thinking they were clarifying/improving the text. He may not have seen those final proofs and he may be pretty ticked about it. Poke around a bit -- who knows, he might have a blog where he discusses the book and this error.
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
19,489 Posts
That's a pretty serious error in a good sea story... and indeed is likely an editor's call (don't authors get to proof any of that? I'd be some ticked)

I remember years ago I was running a regatta and, of course, the local paper got a lot of things screwed up - boat names, boat types, ratings etc. The following year I offered to proof the story for technical terms etc and the editor was quite offended - no one was going to mess with her work...

This knot-per-hour is a very common mistake....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,491 Posts
Knots is indeed "knots per hour" implicitly, so I would agree that over-zealous, if unqualified, editing is at work. It wouldn't be the first time I had seen glaringly obvious "improvements" in a sailing narrative.
 

·
Telstar 28
Joined
·
1,000 Posts
Most landlubbers don't realize that the term Knots is explicitly defined as Nautical Miles Per Hour, and does not require a per hour addition to be understood.
 

·
Owner, Green Bay Packers
Joined
·
1,000 Posts
I've seen anemometer displays with two scales of wind speed; miles per hour and knots per hour. Most trouble in life begins by stretching just past one's level of competence.
 

·
Owner, Green Bay Packers
Joined
·
1,000 Posts
How then does one ever become competent?
It's purely a matter of faith that some day you'll evolve to the point where you can actually comment in some relevant way to the actual topic of the thread instead of issuing the, by now, usual troll-like irrelevant distraction. My faith in this matter remains weak.
 

·
Telstar 28
Joined
·
1,000 Posts
The data is against you Sway... :) It really is unlikely. But you never know, your faith may be rewarded... :)
It's purely a matter of faith that some day you'll evolve to the point where you can actually comment in some relevant way to the actual topic of the thread instead of issuing the, by now, usual troll-like irrelevant distraction. My faith in this matter remains weak.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,192 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,479 Posts
Yes, "knot" is a velocity term, as is the pluralised version "knots".

Engineers should not pluralise units, so "knot" it should be.

"Knots per hour" is a bit of a variation on the same theme, a nautical mile per hour. Strictly speaking, "knot per hour" would be more correct, or better still (almost never seen) is "naut per hour", but all will do.

It doesn't really matter, it is still about 6076 ft/hr, or about 1.69 ft/sec.
 

·
Telstar 28
Joined
·
1,000 Posts
Just curious, how can "Knots per hour" be considered proper usage, if "KNOTS" is defined as "Nautical miles per hour".

The terms "Knots per hour" and "knot per hour" don't make any sense, since the "per hour" is assumed by the term "knot" to begin with.

Knots is the proper plural form AFAICT... you wouldn't say "the boat was traveling at 40 knot", which seems to be what you're saying. That's just hogwash. :rolleyes:

Yes, "knot" is a velocity term, as is the pluralised version "knots".

Engineers should not pluralise units, so "knot" it should be.

"Knots per hour" is a bit of a variation on the same theme, a nautical mile per hour. Strictly speaking, "knot per hour" would be more correct, or better still (almost never seen) is "naut per hour", but all will do.

It doesn't really matter, it is still about 6076 ft/hr, or about 1.69 ft/sec.
 
1 - 20 of 29 Posts
Top