Old Weather Forum

Old Weather: Classic => The Dockyard => Topic started by: AvastMH on 21 October 2012, 17:48:10

Title: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: AvastMH on 21 October 2012, 17:48:10
Add your questions and comments to this topic.



For Yukon II (1899-1923) see: Yukon II -- Discussion: Questions and Comments (http://forum.oldweather.org/index.php?topic=3347.0)



If you need help transcribing see: Yukon I -- Reference: Transcription Example and Log Description (http://forum.oldweather.org/index.php?topic=3326.)

If you are interested in the names of crew members see: Yukon I -- Crew Lists (http://forum.oldweather.org/index.php?topic=3412.0)

Title: Re: USCS Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Janet Jaguar on 24 October 2012, 12:17:50
Her first logbook:
Quote
No. 2 LOG-BOOK AND JOURNAL   
U.S.Schr."Yukon" 
G.Bradford, Asst. com'g.   
from April 9th 1875 to Oct. 31st 1875
 

It'll be interesting, seeing what she was doing back then.

(http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%201/IMG_4037_1.jpg)
Title: Re: USCS Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Randi on 24 October 2012, 16:25:22
The first pair of pages - actually a blank page and a data page (9&10 April 1875) appears to have been photographed 3 times.
http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%201/IMG_4040_1.jpg
http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%201/IMG_4041_1.jpg
http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%201/IMG_4042_1.jpg

Just transcribe the first instance and click "I'm finished with this page" on the next occurrence(s).

This is standard for the case where the same page was scanned multiple times.
If it is the same date but not the same page (i.e., the page was written out twice), please transcribe it. The science team is likes to compare them to see how accurate the log keepers/copiers were. (On an RN ship, I saw a case where there were some significant differences.)



Just in case anyone finds it helpful, attached is a section of my page with the gray markers - having 2 pressure values does make it tricky ;)  (See the corresponding Reference topic for help.)
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: navalhistory on 29 October 2012, 07:37:51
HI Randi,

Just discovered the log book scans appear to be Yukon (1), but the images on OW ship pages are Yukon (II).

Please confirm which Yukon we're working on and which photos we should have. If photos need changing, can you ask the OW team to do so.

It makes me realise that when we have ships with the same names on the OW lists, we need to add the number after them.

All best,

Gordon

Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Randi on 29 October 2012, 07:47:28
Yes, it is Yukon (I) - and we have the correct picture here (http://forum.oldweather.org/index.php?topic=3326.msg53852#msg53852 - it probably looks familiar!)

I will send a PM to Arfon.
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: AvastMH on 30 October 2012, 10:31:55
Hi Randi - you are showing as the captain of the Yukon now!
 ;D
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 02 November 2012, 04:49:45
There is a small error in the 1875 portion of the Reference Transcription of the Yukon.

Quote
If there are aneroid (first barometer column, heading A.) and mercurial (second barometer column, heading M.) pressure readings, they should both be entered. This needs to be done as two entries created on the same line. Draw one magnifier window shifted slightly leftward (to make it easier to edit) and enter the hour and the aneroid reading. Draw another magnifier window shifted rightward and enter the hour, the aneroid reading, and all the other data.

I think "mercurial reading" was intended on the last line.
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 02 November 2012, 07:04:08
The Yukon is quite enjoyable once you get used to it. It took me a few minutes to understand that the the four temperatures correspond exactly to and are in the same order as Ther Att, Dry, Wet, Water. The log headings are Att., Det., W.B, Water. I guess "Det." is "detached"? The rest are obvious if you can read them, but they are not often written clearly.

I also learned never to make short boxes because the magnifier is not justified to the left in this case. This makes it necessary to move the capture box back and forth to be able to click on the appropriate menu item and then to enter the data. It would be helpful to always have the magnifier justified to the left. This is not only a problem with the Yukon. It happens in other logs for Fuel, Location and lat/long. Making the box the width of the page avoids the problem.

It's strange that the log keeper never seems to enter the location  ???

Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Randi on 02 November 2012, 07:08:12
There is a small error in the 1875 portion of the Reference Transcription of the Yukon.

Quote
If there are aneroid (first barometer column, heading A.) and mercurial (second barometer column, heading M.) pressure readings, they should both be entered. This needs to be done as two entries created on the same line. Draw one magnifier window shifted slightly leftward (to make it easier to edit) and enter the hour and the aneroid reading. Draw another magnifier window shifted rightward and enter the hour, the aneroid reading, and all the other data.

I think "mercurial reading" was intended on the last line.

THANKS for catching that!
fixed ;D
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 02 November 2012, 07:45:28
I found the suggestions and examples very helpful  8)
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 03 November 2012, 04:48:31
Around the beginning of May 1875 there are no longer any mercurial barometer readings, only aneroid. This lasts for about 20 pages. I presume it is necessary to continue putting in the overlapped line for it, even though it will be blank for this period?

Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Janet Jaguar on 03 November 2012, 06:53:08
I've never put in totally blank lines for anything, except sometimes Date in the old interface only to get rid of its insistence to get filled.
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Randi on 03 November 2012, 07:05:49
I agree, a blank line doesn't make much sense...

I do the overlapped because it is the only way to enter 2 barometer readings.
On a couple of occasions when one or the other was missing I only did a single box for the line.

I put the aneroid by itself since that attached thermometer does not apply. Perhaps it would be a good idea to continue with the 2 boxes and leave the pressure blank in the second if there is no mercury reading.
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 03 November 2012, 07:49:00
My preference would be to not have a second blank line and send a message to the science team explaining our decision. How does that sound?
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Janet Jaguar on 03 November 2012, 08:30:16
That works. :)
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Randi on 03 November 2012, 08:54:57
What do you mean by 'a second blank line' ?

For 8 am on the 28'th (http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%201/IMG_4047_0.jpg) I would enter

8 am   30.03 the aneroid in one box
and
8 am   West   1   29.95   58   50   52   58   bh the mercurial in the other.



If there was no mercurial reading, we could do either:
8 am   West   1   30.03   58   50   52   58   bh
OR
8 am   30.03   and   8 am   West   1           58   50   52   58   bh



If there is no aneroid reading then you definitely do not need two boxes ;)
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 03 November 2012, 10:42:03
when there is no mercurial reading there is no attached temperature so I would put only one line as follows:

8 am   West   1   30.03          50   52   58   bh
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Randi on 03 November 2012, 10:58:42
One box is fine by me ;D

(Since my example had a mercurial reading there was an attached temperature and I forgot to take it out in the example :-[)

I will note the date ranges with / without mercurial readings in Type What You See - Questions and Comments  (http://forum.oldweather.org/index.php?topic=3192.msg51626#msg51626)
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 03 November 2012, 11:13:28
You can continue to put in a blank line for the missing mercurial and you will regain your captainship  ;D
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Randi on 03 November 2012, 11:18:34
 :o
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Randi on 03 November 2012, 12:35:16
29 April 1875
Quote
At 6am the tug Mary Ann came alongside and after passing over the sounding gear, Instruments etc. the party went onboard (leaving the carpenter and 2 men on board the Yukon) and went out over the bar. One line only was run close under Land, as the as the weather was to foggy and the swell to rough. Made the boat fast to a Buoy on Trinidad Harbor at 0h30m pm.

30 April 1875
Quote
Tide-gauge-man J.H. Arthington disappeared from station at Humboldt Pt. together with boat.
:o :o :o
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Janet Jaguar on 03 November 2012, 14:05:20
That's not just desertion, that is Grand Theft Auto navy-style. :o
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: AvastMH on 03 November 2012, 14:37:04
 ;D
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Randi on 03 November 2012, 16:02:49
Moved here:
Looking at Craigs urls, this one has me puzzled, "In the afternoon took the house on board."
http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%201/IMG_4047_0.jpg (http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%201/IMG_4047_0.jpg)

Without reading pages from a ship I am not on to find out.  What house?

Thats what I read too ;D
They seem to have temporarily moved from Yukon to the steam tug Mary Ann for a couple of months. It doesn't say why.
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Kevin on 04 November 2012, 08:02:37
I saw something in processing 'while back about a house-boat being towed around for a field survey crew to use...
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 04 November 2012, 09:25:55
It could be helpful to point out in the Reference page for 1875 the problem of duplicate log pages. http://forum.oldweather.org/index.php?topic=3383.msg55262#msg55262. Should there be a warning to skip the duplicates and triplicates?
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Randi on 04 November 2012, 10:22:42
Yes, I'll put something in - I already did it for Patterson.
You will be seeing a new log format very soon - I still have to write that one up ;D

Please let me know when you get to it (they might have skipped a section).
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 04 November 2012, 10:54:57
When I looked ahead for duplicates to the end of the 1875 log book I saw that beginning in Sept. 5 they just have verbal weather desriptions and they show 7 or 8 days per page. The log book finishes on Oct. 31.

http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%201/IMG_4091_0.jpg
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Janet Jaguar on 04 November 2012, 12:09:09
I looked up what was reported to congress on the work of the Yukon in 1875, and this is what Assistant Bradford was doing during all that boring "office work". :)
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Janet Jaguar on 04 November 2012, 12:10:43
Second part of report...
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Janet Jaguar on 04 November 2012, 12:11:34
End of report.

I couldn't get more than one in at a time.
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 04 November 2012, 12:47:47
Thanks, Janet. It's helpful to know what they're doing.
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 05 November 2012, 06:29:25

30 April 1875
Quote
Tide-gauge-man J.H. Arthington disappeared from station at Humboldt Pt. together with boat.
:o :o :o

May 27 1875: THe body of J H Arthington was found by Indians on the Beach and brought to Eureka.
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Randi on 05 November 2012, 09:16:34
I have checked with Philip about what to do in September and October when there are 7-8 days per page.

He says to please enter the whole date - provided the information is on the page.
If the month and year are not given, then just put the day (dd/  /).
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Randi on 05 November 2012, 14:44:27
I just got a reply from Philip on an earlier question about the Weather and Atmosphere columns. While waiting for a reply, I had said to transcribe both. That was incorrect. SORRY!

Here are the revised instructions:
Only enter the description from the column headed Weather in the Weather Code box. Do not enter the description from the column headed Atmosphere. The weather description may be actual weather codes or a word such as Foggy, Cloudy, or Rainy.
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 05 November 2012, 15:01:58
Thanks, Randi.
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 06 November 2012, 08:01:20
Your techinque (described in Reference - Notes for transcribers) for recording both pressure readings works well, Randi. I found that if I draw the first window for the aneroid pressure just up to the beginning of the Wind Direction, when I come back to do the second pass for the  remaining items I can click just to the right of the the aneroid grey area and the second window is aligned perfectly. However, before beginning the second pass you have to draw a window the full width of the log page, but this only needs to be done once. (I leave the Date for the second pass and make a full-width window for it).
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: AvastMH on 06 November 2012, 08:09:08
Craig,
Sounds positively balletic!
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Randi on 06 November 2012, 08:17:21
I put the hour in both. Originally the hour field was just to help the transcribers, but Philip is now interested in it too.

From a PM:
Quote
Note: the weather entries have an explicit time field - this should always be filled in wherever possible.
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 06 November 2012, 11:00:53
I'm not surprised. With all the different formats it would be difficult to determine the time from the position on the page.
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 06 November 2012, 11:11:29
I put the hour in both. Originally the hour field was just to help the transcribers, but Philip is now interested in it too.

From a PM:
Quote
Note: the weather entries have an explicit time field - this should always be filled in wherever possible.

With the Yukon there are only 3 weather reports per day and it usually goes 8AM, 2PM, 8PM. I am thinking it might be helpful to enter the AM and PM?
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Randi on 06 November 2012, 11:21:19
Yes, I have been.
Easy with drop-downs!
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 09 November 2012, 08:13:35
What do you recommend transcribing for the last two months of the Yukon log? Here is a typical page:
http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%201/IMG_4092_0.jpg

It's a shame not to use the little weather data that are given but TWYS rule prevents me from putting it into codes. I suppose we will have an opportunity to do this with the review interface?
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Randi on 09 November 2012, 09:03:59
With no pressure or temperature I'm not sure how useful it would really be.

Officially the only thing to transcribe on that page is the dates.
(And that is another tricky issue. Normally, it is strictly TWYS (13/  /  ). However, because multiple days per page is so complicated and Philip would like whole dates when possible, he is willing to make an exception in this particular case.)

Again officially, on other pages: date and location are 'required'; sea ice, animals, people, places, ships, refueling, and anything that interests you are requested.

Personally, I would transcribe most of the comments - and definitely the weather. If you split them up carefully, Firefox drop-downs will do most of the work for you.
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 09 November 2012, 10:40:24
I always interpret your suggestions with the knowledge that you are a nutcase devoted transcriber.  ;D
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Janet Jaguar on 09 November 2012, 10:54:58
Well, I also would TWYS for all the weather statements, at least - it's all that we have.  And trust the climatologists to know to read comments during the decades when the provided log books didn't give the log keepers a pre-printed weather chart - recording a description of the weather was required in the logbook directions and is very predictably there.


Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 09 November 2012, 11:11:56
Well, it's not a big job to transcribe them all since there are only 7 or 8 pages but I would be interested in knowing how the climate scientists would use this information.
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Randi on 09 November 2012, 17:32:55
I always interpret your suggestions with the knowledge that you are a nutcase devoted transcriber.  ;D

 :P
You will notice that I did distinguish between the 'official' advice and what I would do ;D
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 11 November 2012, 07:07:52
Beginning new log book with different format http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%202/IMG_4102_0.jpg April 29, 1873 - voyage from San Francisco to Unalaska.

I see lat by DR and Obs at the bottom of the page as well as long by Obs. I guess "Lon. In" means longitude by Instrument. Is that the same as DR?

What is "Diff. of Lon."?
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Randi on 11 November 2012, 07:37:14
NOTE - this log uses Nautical Days - see Yukon Reference
The first post in Yukon Reference is for 1874 and it is very close to this, but not exactly the same.

I'm not quite sure what "Lon. In" means.
Yes, I think it is the same as DR.
1. There already is an Observed long.
2. In 1874 (http://www.djcosmik.com/oldweather/yukon_book6_img_4518.jpg) the corresponding box is labeled DR.

(Normally, I would say that by Instrument (measured) is observed, but it seems to be DR, so maybe In is not Instrument ???)


What is "Diff. of Lon."?
Just that, I think! ;)
April 30 DR long is 127 50 (http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%202/IMG_4102_1.jpg)
April 29 DR long is 124 52 (http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%202/IMG_4102_0.jpg)
The difference between the two is 2 degrees and 58 seconds or 178 seconds (shown on 30'th)
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 11 November 2012, 08:11:12
Ha! Once again I didn't look carefully.  :-[  I assumed you hadn't seen this one yet because I could only see it after completing the first log. I should know by now that Mods are omnicient  ;D
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 11 November 2012, 09:15:11
I am resisting the temptation to combine the ditto for wind direction with the pressure and temperature data in the previous hour, even though it is very likely the same. No wind direction is given with pressure and temperature in the couple of pages I have done so far.

http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%202/IMG_4103_0.jpg
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Randi on 11 November 2012, 09:28:34
I have seen that sort of thing before.
Different people with different tasks? Beginning of watch vs. end of watch?

You are handling it correctly ;)
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 12 November 2012, 07:53:48
I would capture the weather information in the comments if Philip gave us some indicatation that the science team would use it. Otherwise, I see no point. It would be a shame to waste it.
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Randi on 12 November 2012, 08:30:59
As far as I know Philip does not presently plan to use the comments.
BUT
Philip has said elsewhere that this data will be kept for the use of future researchers.
 :-\ ;D
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 12 November 2012, 08:42:16
I have started capturing weather related comments, but selectively avoiding duplication.
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Kevin on 12 November 2012, 10:02:01
Weather and related information is still the Number 1 objective - but certainly our partners at the National Archives are also interested in any optional transcriptions of remarks. And I expect everything we do with the records will eventually find a permanent home alongside the hi-res digital images we are producing simultaneously for the Archives. And of course all the people in the future will be able to access both...as an aside, the last time I was in the reference section for an hour there were two requests for these logbooks (one for cutter NORTHLAND, which is on our list).
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 12 November 2012, 11:35:15
Quite so, Kevin. I'm always on the look out for interesting remarks for the archivists. The crew just caught 40 fine cod, which they cleaned and salted! Historians will look back on this with great interest and envy when there are no longer any fine fish left in the oceans.
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Janet Jaguar on 13 November 2012, 03:21:57
I found this in the NOAA Photo Library - album "ships with bad days".  http://www.photolib.noaa.gov/htmls/theb0440.htm

(http://www.photolib.noaa.gov/700s/theb0440.jpg)
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Randi on 13 November 2012, 03:25:24
"Coast and Geodetic Survey Steamer YUKON. In service 1898-1923. Pacific service. Aground on tide flats of Kasilof River Bar."
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 15 November 2012, 07:16:02
The log says that "this day has 36 hours to end sea time" and there is a 6 PM weather line at the bottom of the page.

http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%202/IMG_4137_1.jpg

The date is Sunday June 29 beginning at 1 PM so if this nautical day is 36 hours it should go to July 1 at 12 AM. The last entry on the page is 6 PM so this should correspond to the 6 PM entry on the following page. The following page is dated June 30th and begins at 1 PM so there must be an overlap?  But the entry for 6 PM is not the same as the last line on the June 29th page.

My guess is that when the Yukon arrives in port it changes from nautical to civil time. I have seen a mention of this in previous pages but I ignored them. Note, however,  that AM is crossed out on top of every page in the remarks section so all log pages supposedly begin at 1 PM of the date mentioned.

I know I should just transcribe it as it is written but should the science team be notified? This is very confusing.
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Janet Jaguar on 15 November 2012, 10:35:37
I've sent them this, thanks - you are right, they seem to not end what they ended.
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Randi on 15 November 2012, 10:41:40
I copied it to Type What You See - Questions and Comments - http://forum.oldweather.org/index.php?topic=3192.msg51626#msg51626
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 19 November 2012, 06:44:38
Here are the periods during the 1873 voyage to Alaska where the Yukon is on nautical time:

From http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%202/IMG_4102_0.jpg  Apr 29
To http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%202/IMG_4112_1.jpg  May 20

From http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%202/IMG_4129_0.jpg  Jun 12
To http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%202/IMG_4132_0.jpg   Jun 18

From http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%202/IMG_4137_0.jpg  Jun 28
To http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%202/IMG_4137_1.jpg   Jun 29

From http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%202/IMG_4151_0.jpg  Jul 24
To  http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%202/IMG_4151_0.jpg   Jul 24

From http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%202/IMG_4158_0.jpg  Aug 7
To http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%202/IMG_4164_0.jpg   Aug 17

From http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%202/IMG_4169_1.jpg  Aug 28
To http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%202/IMG_4172_0.jpg   Aug 31

From http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%202/IMG_4187_0.jpg  Sep 26
To http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%202/IMG_4191_1.jpg   Oct 5

From http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%202/IMG_4195_1.jpg  Oct 17
To http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%202/IMG_4204_1.jpg   Nov 6

(Nov. 6 is the last page in this log book)

I did not enter the AM and PM times correctly when transcribing so they should be ignored.
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Janet Jaguar on 19 November 2012, 07:46:47
The analysts have so been told.  Thank you. :)
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 24 November 2012, 08:21:02
Not sure where this goes anymore so I'll put it here:

http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%202/IMG_4192_1.jpg

Times have been cut off on the left. I only entered AM and PM except for noon in both cases where 2 M is visible.  Here the problem is the scanning so I am not sure if TWYS applies since we would not be second guessing the log keeper if we put in the complete time? The sequence goes 6 AM 12 M, 6 PM, 6 AM 12 M, 6 PM (two days per log page). I can go back and correct this if you agree?
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Janet Jaguar on 24 November 2012, 10:25:16
There are 2 choices of action:


I'm leaving it to the transcribers to choose.  When the numbers get buried in the binding crease, option 2 is the only one to go with.
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Randi on 15 December 2012, 18:30:53
28 June 1875 - http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%201/IMG_4071_1.jpg
Quote
Stopped at the wharf on account of fog. Received from Buhnes store 1 Bale of oakum  1 can of Lard oil

Buhne's Chandlery:
http://extras.times-standard.com/preserve/old/pages/2_05/page3.pdf
continued on
http://extras.times-standard.com/preserve/old/pages/2_05/page2.pdf
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 18 December 2012, 07:50:10
They have reset my position to the beginning of the Yukon logs in April 1875. http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%201/IMG_4040_1.jpg

I hope they didn't delete all the work I have done. I don't want to do it again. I guess I'll just stick with the Jeannette.
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Randi on 18 December 2012, 09:02:47
Are you sure you did the page you were given.
I jumped back, but it was a page I hadn't done.
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 18 December 2012, 09:18:59
It's certainly the case for the Jeannette. There are a dozen or so pages at the beginning with lists that I didn't get when I began it. For the Yukon, I don't know. I will try doing a few pages later on to see.

But why did this happen for both ships now?
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Randi on 18 December 2012, 09:24:04
Software 'update' :-X
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 27 December 2012, 06:56:28
Do you think they will ever get around to deleting the Mate's log? Or perhaps they don't intend to and want us to transcribe it, even though it's a duplicate?
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Randi on 27 December 2012, 07:29:07
No, they don't want us to transcribe it.
It will be deleted, but with some people thinking Christmas and New Year are vacations, it may take a bit longer. ;D
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 27 December 2012, 07:52:17
There's no accounting for that type of thinking. They should get their priorities straight.  ;D
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Randi on 27 December 2012, 08:08:33
Definitely! ;D
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Kevin on 26 January 2013, 11:05:03
Duplicate (mate's / rough) logs should now be gone unless it is the singular copy.
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Randi on 26 January 2013, 11:17:16
Great! Thanks Kevin.
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Janet Jaguar on 26 January 2013, 12:42:17
Thanks, Kevin! :)
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 26 January 2013, 14:52:18
Thanks, Kevin. It's now Nov. 10, 1873 and we're back in SanFranciso harbor.

Now I am torn between this and the Jeannette. Clewi has graciously conceded the capitaincy to me so I feel somewhat oblige to continue with the Jeannette for the time being. Besides I was getting a bit tired of reading about Dr. Dall, Capt. Herendun and three seamen going to shore for various reasons and then coming back in the afternoon.  ;D
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Kevin on 26 January 2013, 21:05:49
Maybe that's Capt. Herendeen? Well known in Alaska and member of the Point Barrow Int'l Polar Expedition - one of these guys: http://www.arctic.noaa.gov/aro/ipy-1/images/B-91070.JPG
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 26 January 2013, 22:16:04
Yes, my mistake. It is Herendeen.
Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Hanibal94 on 26 February 2013, 10:05:53
I have come across log books from the second Yukon (the one in service from 1898 to 1923).
Example: http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%2022/IMG_4501_0.jpg

Title: Re: Yukon -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Randi on 26 February 2013, 11:13:00
I have come across log books from the second Yukon (the one in service from 1898 to 1923).
Example: http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%2022/IMG_4501_0.jpg

Thanks for letting us know. I will move what we have on Yukon II to The Dockyard!
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Randi on 26 February 2013, 12:40:11
Yukon II Reference, Discussion, and Crew topics now available!
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 18 March 2013, 11:31:40
What a comedown to be back on the Yukon after 3 months of the Jeannette! The handwriting and spelling are atrocious and the information is very spotty compared to the other ships I have done. I am continuing to capture (with great pain) the handwritten weather information in the hope that at some point we can codify it. Where is DeLong when we need him?   :'(

Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 24 March 2013, 08:13:41
The last 3 days of Book 4 (April 21 to April 23) are crossed out and the exact same information is logged at the beginning of Book 5.

I skipped over the three pages that were crossed out:

http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%204/IMG_4402_0.jpg
http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%204/IMG_4402_1.jpg
http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%204/IMG_4403_0.jpg

http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%205/IMG_4410_1.jpg
http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%205/IMG_4411_0.jpg
http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%205/IMG_4411_1.jpg

This is not a scanning problem so I recorded it here.
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Janet Jaguar on 24 March 2013, 09:51:07
Perfect.  Thanks.
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 25 March 2013, 14:27:16
My resolution is beginning to flag somewhat regarding the faithful transcription of weather comments for the Yukon. I don't imagine they are of particular interest to historians and I wouldn't even transcribe them if it weren't for the fact that they contain valuable information that may eventually be coded for the climate team (I volunteer for that if there is any interest?). Also, the log keeper's atrocious spelling may also brush off on me as I repeatedly type "wether" and "lite". (Just in case you conclude that he was following American practice of distancing himself from British spelling, he writes "harbour").

All this to say that I would prefer to shorten the weather comments to the strict minimum. For example, "This day comes in with lite misty wether" would be shortened to "1 PM light misty". (The Yukon is on sea time at this point).

Ideally, I would just type codes as per http://forum.oldweather.org/index.php?topic=843.msg53365#msg53365. (These would go in an Events box, not the weather boxes). The logger is faithful to this terminology. So, I would code 2 for light breeze and m for misty: "1 PM 2 m". We would have to agree on a format to make it understandable since not all information is given in each entry. If you agree in principle, I will propose a suitable format.

If there is little hope of this information being used in climate models I won't bother entering it. Perhaps we could get Philip's or Kevin's opinion on this point?
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Randi on 25 March 2013, 14:37:08
I'll check, but it violates the TWYS rule...
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 25 March 2013, 14:57:29
Consider it a yes ... but  ;D
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Randi on 25 March 2013, 15:00:24
For the moment, consider it a no ;D

After all, if you are the only one who does it (i.e., "1 PM 2 m"), it won't be very useful :'(
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 25 March 2013, 15:17:23
I will consider it a NO for now, but I doubt that anyone else will capture the weather comments anyway. I will ask  Hannibal94 what s/he has done. I think s/he is has finished Yukon 1.
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 26 March 2013, 08:02:53
Sea time:
http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%204/IMG_4356_0.jpg    25 01 1874
http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%204/IMG_4371_1.jpg     21 02 1874

Sea time:
http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%205/IMG_4409_1.jpg   21/04/1874
http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%205/IMG_4417_0.jpg   03/05 1874 Sitka Harbour. This day is recorded on 2 pages.




Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: philip.brohan on 26 March 2013, 09:42:59
There is an interesting idea here, but at the moment we wouldn't be able to use records put in as you suggest, so please stick to transcribing as the comments appear in the log if you choose to transcribe them at all (it's OK not to transcribe text weather comments, unless they refer explicitly to sea-ice).

At the moment, we use the quantitative weather observations - putting them into the climate databases for widespread use. In the latest oW, we've also started to use text sea-ice comments - this is more experimental, but very promising. I don't currently use general text comments 'lite misty wether' in this way - though they do end up in the permanent database and the edited logs. Your proposal would make those comments more useful, but only if we set up a standard way to capture such entries and trained everybody to use them in the same way.

We're still learning how to use the sea-ice observations, and that learning process involves working out how the logs' vocabulary for describing ice relates to present-day observations, and to do that we need to preserve the vocabulary in the logs as precisely as possible. I am not sure, but it seems likely to me that other future uses of the logs will also rely on the details of their language, so we're keen to preserve that language - so, TWYS.

Essentially, to be useful we either need standardised specialised entry protocols and forms, or verbatim transcription, so please stick to TWYS. But remember that non-standard text-weather comments are optional (unless about ice) - it's acceptable to skip over them.

If the log-keeper's driving you bonkers, how about a few days holiday? I'm hearing good things about Zooniverse safari tours (http://blog.zooniverse.org/2012/12/11/snapshot-serengeti/) - guaranteed no mist, ice, or bad spelling. Just remember to come back afterwards, we'd hate to lose you.

Philip

My resolution is beginning to flag somewhat regarding the faithful transcription of weather comments for the Yukon. I don't imagine they are of particular interest to historians and I wouldn't even transcribe them if it weren't for the fact that they contain valuable information that may eventually be coded for the climate team (I volunteer for that if there is any interest?). Also, the log keeper's atrocious spelling may also brush off on me as I repeatedly type "wether" and "lite". (Just in case you conclude that he was following American practice of distancing himself from British spelling, he writes "harbour").

All this to say that I would prefer to shorten the weather comments to the strict minimum. For example, "This day comes in with lite misty wether" would be shortened to "1 PM light misty". (The Yukon is on sea time at this point).

Ideally, I would just type codes as per http://forum.oldweather.org/index.php?topic=843.msg53365#msg53365. (These would go in an Events box, not the weather boxes). The logger is faithful to this terminology. So, I would code 2 for light breeze and m for misty: "1 PM 2 m". We would have to agree on a format to make it understandable since not all information is given in each entry. If you agree in principle, I will propose a suitable format.

If there is little hope of this information being used in climate models I won't bother entering it. Perhaps we could get Philip's or Kevin's opinion on this point?
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 26 March 2013, 11:33:12
Thanks, Philip. I have transcribed several hundred pages of textual weather reports now, so that should be enough to give people an idea of the language (and bad spelling!) used. I notice the logkeeper is fairly consistent in his terminology, although he deviates occasionally with "fine" instead of "lite" and "strong" instead of "stiff" or "fresh".

Thanks for the offer of a trip to the Serengeti. I heard a discouraging report about it recently (what else is new!). It seems that the tributaries to Lake Victoria are drying up and this will reduce the rainfall near the Serengeti and eventually eliminate the grass that is responsible for the wildebeest migrations. All the more important to classify the animals that are there now.
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 27 March 2013, 08:13:58
Here's an excerpt from a brief history of Lituya Bay, Alaska, visited by the Yukon in 1874

Quote
Here the party on the YUKON had much difficulty in preventing the persistent attempts of the natives to board the vessel, but fortunately they were kept off without bloodshed. It is added in the report that these natives distill their own rum, and are well supplied with the best kinds of firearms.

http://www.history.noaa.gov/stories_tales/lituya.html
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Kevin on 27 March 2013, 10:20:47
Speaking of language this is where the word 'hooch' (for liquor) comes from - short for 'hoochinoo' - the native term for the product of the gun-barrel stills in wide use throughout Alaska. A primary mission of the revenue service was to stop the trade in guns, molasses, and alcohol carried on for the most part by the Yankee whalers.
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Randi on 27 March 2013, 12:14:51
Neat!
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 27 March 2013, 15:47:01
straight up  ;D
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Randi on 27 March 2013, 17:25:32
 :P
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Kevin on 27 March 2013, 22:17:16
Oddly enough for a sailor I prefer 'on the rocks'. Though speaking of which, the only bar-emptying brawl I was ever in had to do with this very question... The poor fellow who set the spark had no idea that every single person in the place belonged to the same ship and all quite loyal to Mr. 'Neat'.
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 28 March 2013, 10:59:39
Did you eventually get your drink with ice?
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Kevin on 29 March 2013, 00:28:00
Nope, once we were in a scrum in the middle of the street outside the Cap't Kidd someone had the idea we should put to sea before local constabulary arrived. Which we did.
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 31 March 2013, 09:39:21
The Yukon log is getting very confusing because of the fequent changes between regular time and sea time as they skip from island to island along the Aleutians.

I will update the list of intervals for Sea Time later (if you think it is necessary to mention it in this thread for each switch?). I have them all in a Word file.

When he changes back to regular time there are usually 36 hours on a single page, as in this one http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%205/IMG_4440_0.jpg. However, the "12 AM" should be "12 PM" (I put AM).

When he is on standard time, there are two days recorded on each page: http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%205/IMG_4440_1.jpg
I record the two dates when this occurs.
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Randi on 31 March 2013, 10:17:26
WOW - good work!
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Janet Jaguar on 31 March 2013, 10:26:05
Oi vey, mama mia!!!  changing times and formats!!!  The previous page has one date and 36 hours!!
http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%205/IMG_4440_0.jpg

No, we don't need notice every time!! Yukon I is hereby on notice that it is a freeform log with no guaranteed time parameters.  Please transcribe the am/pm they always write out, the team will need that.  TWYS rules.  :)
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 02 April 2013, 07:42:16
Here's a conundrum for TWYS

Either you assume the log keeper meant to put the pressure and temperature on the same line as the wind at 6 PM or,

You assume that the interval is 2 hours so the pressure and temp was intended for 8 PM.

http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%205/IMG_4457_0.jpg

My inclination would be to put 8 PM.
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Randi on 02 April 2013, 08:26:26
I would be inclined to 8 PM also.
That is where it IS.

It is hard to say what he meant. Earlier on the page the wind and pressure/temp don't always line up. On the next page they do ::)
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 06 April 2013, 08:18:14
There is a new log format for the voyage beginning 14/05/1880 with a column for weather. The log keeper does not use codes, however. I T'dWIS

http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%207/IMG_4568_1.jpg

This was only for the first day. From then on weather is recorded in the remarks column.
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Janet Jaguar on 06 April 2013, 10:28:23
Then only on the first day do those words get typed into the weather readings.  Clearly a log keeper who sticks by old habits, which do not include the codes.
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 07 April 2013, 09:41:13
Quote
8 PM one of the Jamestown Boats brought Mr Baker on board, he having just arrived from the Hoochenoo Country.
http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%207/IMG_4578_0.jpg

Here's an interesting news article about Sitka Alaska from Sept 26, 1882 (where the Yukon and Jamestown were in June 1880).

Quote
ANARCHY IN ALASKA

San Francisco, Sept. 25 - Sitka advises state: Large quantities of hoochenoo is manufactured in Hoonah and vicinity. Fighting, gambling and witchcraft are a daily occurrence. A squaw was stabbed to death and several others tied up to exorcise the evil spirit. At Juneau an Indian got drunk, and in attempting to break into the States house, was severely injured. Other Indians coming, a general fight took place, and a number of Indians were badly hurt. Miners drove the Indians off. The natives threatened to murder the whites.
****

http://www.newspaperabstracts.com/link.php?action=detail&id=15876
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 07 April 2013, 10:13:40
They began recording what looks to be hygrometer readings.

http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%207/IMG_4579_1.jpg

Since the boxes for "Ther attached" and "Wet" are not used, it would be convenient to use them for "Dry" and "Wet" hygrometer if this information is desired?
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Randi on 07 April 2013, 10:31:43
That would require the scientists knowing it is there and two other transcribers transcribing it the same way - and Hanibal94 is past that point...

It seems to continue till at least: http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%207/IMG_4660_0.jpg

I will check with Philip, but I suspect that it will either be as an Event or not at all.
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 08 April 2013, 08:22:17
Good fishing in Ugolnov Bay  :o  I'll bet it got away  ;D

Dr Dall the Capt Mr Baker Mr Noyes & Dr Bean all went up the Bay to see the Glacier. I took the yawl and went fishing: caught one halibut weighing 132 lbs.

http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%207/IMG_4589_0.jpg
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Kevin on 08 April 2013, 11:08:34
They got this one on board the RUSH -
http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/arctic/rediscover/gallery/rush/79_69_2_013.jpg
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Janet Jaguar on 08 April 2013, 12:32:42
No wonder halibut is always sold in slices, never whole!!  132 pounds is reasonable on that one.  :)
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 08 April 2013, 12:34:04
Yes, but the Yukon log keeper caught his from a yawl? How big was their yawl? I don't imagine he was alone, in any case.
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Kevin on 09 April 2013, 22:13:29
The interesting thing about halibut is they often come up as deadweight - until they get to the boat, at which point they flurry (not good if they're already IN the boat)!
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Janet Jaguar on 09 April 2013, 23:05:38
According to Wiki, a yawl isn't all that small.

Quote
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yawl
A yawl (from Dutch jol) is a two-masted sailing craft similar to a sloop or cutter but with an additional mast (mizzenmast or mizzen mast) located well aft of the main mast, often right on the transom, specifically aft of the rudder post.
...
The above is an accepted modern definition, but it may not be correct within a historical context.
     YAWL, n. A small ships boat, usually rowed by four or six oars. (Webster's dictionary 1828)
The seminal American yacht designer of the first half of last century, Francis Herreshoff, reflected this traditional definition of a yawl as "a ship's boat resembling the pinnace" set up to be primarily rowed.
To add a sailing rig to a rowboat, the masts must not interfere with the rowers. ...
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Kevin on 09 April 2013, 23:58:54
Also a small powered side-boat used as a tender to a larger sailing vessel as:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/30209400@N04/2920778894/in/faves-classic-sailing/

Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Janet Jaguar on 10 April 2013, 00:09:30
Now, that kind of yawl would make landing a halibut a very interesting struggle. :)
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 10 April 2013, 07:53:34
That would require the scientists knowing it is there and two other transcribers transcribing it the same way - and Hanibal94 is past that point...

It seems to continue till at least: http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%207/IMG_4660_0.jpg

I will check with Philip, but I suspect that it will either be as an Event or not at all.


I looked again at the Wiki article on wet and dry bulb hygrometers (also called psychrometers) and they are simply thermometers. The wet bulb seems to be exactly what we want in our interface box by that name. The dry bulb, if I understood correctly, is just an ordinary dry bulb thermometer. However, there doesn't seem to be any correlation between its readings and the main dry bulb thermometer reading. I could enter the wet bulb reading in the appropriate box of the interface if you agree. Is it worth the trouble to go back an fill them for the last several days that I have been ignoring them?

In any case, I guess the answer will be no for both questions since I would be the only one transcribing it.
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 10 April 2013, 09:06:38
Yukon meets Corwin in Plover Bay 12/08/1880

Quote
at 5 PM saw a steamer coming out of Plover Bay she kept away for one and when we came up to her it proved to be the Thomas Corwin. we hove too and Capt Hooper came on board. said he had been within 20 miles of Herald Island and had not heard anything of the Jeannette or the missing Whalers and was now going to Point Barrow. he went on board and steamed away for the Arctic we filled away and at 10 PM come to Anchor in Port Providence Plover Bay in 17 fathoms of water.

http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%207/IMG_4611_1.jpg
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Randi on 12 April 2013, 13:18:12
That would require the scientists knowing it is there and two other transcribers transcribing it the same way - and Hanibal94 is past that point...

It seems to continue till at least: http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%207/IMG_4660_0.jpg

I will check with Philip, but I suspect that it will either be as an Event or not at all.


I looked again at the Wiki article on wet and dry bulb hygrometers (also called psychrometers) and they are simply thermometers. The wet bulb seems to be exactly what we want in our interface box by that name. The dry bulb, if I understood correctly, is just an ordinary dry bulb thermometer. However, there doesn't seem to be any correlation between its readings and the main dry bulb thermometer reading. I could enter the wet bulb reading in the appropriate box of the interface if you agree. Is it worth the trouble to go back an fill them for the last several days that I have been ignoring them?

In any case, I guess the answer will be no for both questions since I would be the only one transcribing it.



From Philip:
Quote
It looks as if their 'hygrometer' here is just a wet/dry bulb thermometer pair, but presumably exposed somewhat differently from the standard instruments as the dry-bulb temperatures don't agree.

 The ideal way to enter those data is as a second observation for each hour, just with wet and dry bulb temperatures. Please don't re-use empty sections in the main entry (as this will just confuse me when analysing it).

 I think this is an optional extra though - nobody need feel obliged to put it in.
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 12 April 2013, 14:03:02
Thanks, Philip. I will need more encouragement than that in order to transcribe these data.   ;D 
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Janet Jaguar on 12 April 2013, 16:14:03
We got an answer from Philip on this.  Everyone was right, this is not part of the main readings and should be an optional extra.  We were wrong about this being an Event.  I'm attaching his PM.

Sorry, I missed this one.

 It looks as if their 'hygrometer' here is just a wet/dry bulb thermometer pair, but presumably exposed somewhat differently from the standard instruments as the dry-bulb temperatures don't agree.

 The ideal way to enter those data is as a second observation for each hour, just with wet and dry bulb temperatures. Please don't re-use empty sections in the main entry (as this will just confuse me when analysing it).

 I think this is an optional extra though - nobody need feel obliged to put it in.

Cheers, Philip


Hi Philip,

Sorry to bother you...

They began recording what looks to be hygrometer readings.

http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%207/IMG_4579_1.jpg [11 June 1880]

Since the boxes for "Ther attached" and "Wet" are not used, it would be convenient to use them for "Dry" and "Wet" hygrometer if this information is desired?

That would require the scientists knowing it is there and two other transcribers transcribing it the same way - and Hanibal94 is past that point...

It seems to continue till at least: http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%207/IMG_4660_0.jpg [27 Nov 1880]

I will check with Philip, but I suspect that it will either be as an Event or not at all.

Thanks,
Randi
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Kevin on 18 April 2013, 18:30:13
Here is a picture of Wm. Dall at the time he was in charge of the schooner Yukon (1878, age 34). This comes from a cache of a thousand or more pictures scanned by Milla while we were getting A2 set up for hi-res logbook imaging.
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 18 April 2013, 18:45:26
It's good to have a face to go along with the name. The logs don't give much information about him. Typically, Dr. Dall, Mr. Baker and Mr. Noyes go ashore for observations. Then Mr. Dall, Dr. Baker and Mr. Noyes  return to the ship. Except for this signal event:

Quote
Dr Dall the Capt Mr Baker Mr Noyes & Dr Bean all went up the Bay to see the Glacier. I took the yawl and went fishing: caught one halibut weighing 132 lbs.
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 30 April 2013, 08:20:51
I just began the 1915 voyage. The recorded temperatures are in the low teens in late June and early July. Must be Celsius, especially since it's raining.

http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%2020/IMG_5644_0.jpg
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Randi on 30 April 2013, 09:20:22
Brrr
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 02 May 2013, 09:00:40

Inserted page:

Quote
Medical attention was rendered to the following parties by Dr. Park A. Moore, Osteopathic physician during the months of July to October 1917

http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%2022/IMG_4466_0.jpg
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 05 May 2013, 08:18:06
Not a single air temperature recorded in the whole 1923 voyage!   :o  They could have anticipated that we would need these for our climate models.  ::)
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 14 May 2013, 09:22:18
I have completed the Yukon. Hanibal94 has also finished. As far as I can tell, nobody else is working on her now.

Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Randi on 14 May 2013, 09:28:03
I'll be back soon ;D
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Zovacor on 27 June 2013, 22:18:43
Plugging my way through it as it sails out the Aleutian Chain.

Also, do we know what happened to the records of the observations that are made when the Capt and others go ashore? I wonder what they were observing.
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Janet Jaguar on 27 June 2013, 22:31:07
I believe - I'm not certain about these particular field trips - that the field notes from many of those expeditions are in separate journals also in the National Archives.  I'm sure a number of folks are wondering what it would take to get the funding to scan and transcribe those also.  Keep it as a pipe dream, keeping us from every running out of business.  ;)
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 28 June 2013, 07:39:33
Hi Zovocar

The main purpose of the Yukon's many voyages was to take various hydrological and geographical measurements. They are usually sounding or going ashore to measure distances of various sorts. On some voyages they built signals (or markers) on prominent places on shore that can be seen from the sea. So I would guess the information they collected would have ended up on coastal navigation maps. You will find they spent a lot of time off the coast of Washington, Oregon and California on other voyages.

In most ships's logs all the weather information is recorded in code form but the Yukon logs are different since some of the information is not coded and is written in the Remarks. Since I completed this ship a decision has been made to capture the wind force and weather observations from the remarks. Since these are not in code form they had been ignored up until recently. So, for example, you can put "moderate breezes" or "fresh gale" into the Wind Force box and you can put "cloudy" or "rainy" into the Weather Code box. This is easy to do if you are using the Firefox browser because it has an automatic completion feature. Once you have written a phrase the first time, it will come up by typing the first letter thereafter.
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Randi on 28 June 2013, 08:05:07
Hi Zovocar,

If you choose to transcribe the weather data in the Remarks, please see the (ongoing) discussion in Jamestown -- Discussion: Questions and Comments.

Here is part of it:
NOTE: This only applies when there are no weather grids.

I have updated this example based on discussions with Philip and Craig.
If you are willing to, you can also transcribe the wind direction, wind force, and weather. Some of these descriptions, like "light breezes" (as a wind force), will not be useable in the current analysis, but they may be used in the future. Some entries are straightforward, but some are a compromise between TWYS and mapping to the fields. Just do your best ;)

Craig has noted that when the Jamestown is in port (e.g., http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USS%20Jamestown/vol001of067/vol001of067_054_0.jpg) sometimes there are no formal weather records, but the air and water temperatures are recorded intermittently in the remarks.

Silvia also noted this on Bear.

Philip has asked us to transcribe this data as Weather Records using the end time of the watch.
Please see Bear -- Reference: Transcription Example and Log Description (http://forum.oldweather.org/index.php?topic=3615.msg62962#msg62962) an an example.

This example from Jamestown is slightly more complicated because they are using nautical days (see: http://forum.oldweather.org/index.php?topic=3191.msg51629#msg51629)

Philip says to please add AM & PM to avoid confusion.


For the above page:
Hour |Wind Dir |Force |Bar Height |Ther Attached |Dry|Wet |Water |Weather Code |Cloud code |Clear Sky |
6 PMS'd + W'dlight breezes8382cloudy, light rain
8 PMWest'dlight breezes8282passing clouds
4 AMvariablelight breezes8081squally appearances, heavy rain, vivid lightening
8 AMWest'dlight airs8182cloudy, vivid lightening
meridianvariablelight airs8282squally appearances



Don't forget that we are learning how to handle many of these cases as they arise ;)
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Zovacor on 30 June 2013, 20:35:50
Thanks.  I have been recording the wether [sic] observations in the Events field. I will record them in the appropriate fields from now on. I imagine the data clear-up on the back end must be quite a process.
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 30 June 2013, 21:37:14
Hi Zovocar,

The science team will probably not use the "wether" (I almost got in the habit of writing it like that too  ;D) information from the Remarks for the time being. You are right that it would take some work to code it properly. However, some of us found it a shame to not transcribe it now while we are going through the logs since it is unlikely that anyone else will go through them again. Before Philip gave us the go ahead to record it in the Weather Observations screen I was putting it in Events fields too for a time.  It's so much easier now.

Personally, I would like to know more about the back end processing.
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Randi on 06 July 2013, 13:10:13
I had a question from someone who is a relative of Edward (Ned) Herendeen who was (he believes) the ship's master from 1873-1874.
Does anyone remember him being mentioned specifically?
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Janet Jaguar on 06 July 2013, 13:46:02
He is most definitely included in the logbook.  Searching found me this post, listing all the periods when the ship sifted to Nautical Days:  http://forum.oldweather.org/index.php?topic=3346.msg56362;topicseen#msg56362
 
This gave me links to the 1873 book, and I looked at what was noted as the beginning of the book (no names mentioned at all) and the end.  That was this:  http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%202/IMG_4204_1.jpg
"Dr. Dall, Mes Baker and Noyes and Herendeen went on shore".

So he was most definitely on that crew.

Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Randi on 06 July 2013, 15:22:50
I already PMed him a bunch of log page links and a link to Kevin's mention of Herendeen in this topic.
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 06 July 2013, 15:31:39
I was just about to post a message to that effect.  :D
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Kevin on 07 July 2013, 01:23:12
Herendeen was a member of the Pt Barrow International Polar Expedition 1881-1883 too. Did I mention that before? I also sailed with one of his decendants.
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 07 July 2013, 07:51:49
You mentioned the expedition, Kevin, but not the fact that you had sailed with one of this descendants.

http://forum.oldweather.org/index.php?topic=3346.msg60520;topicseen#msg60520
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: AvastMH on 20 September 2013, 14:32:40
This is also in the Barometer ph3 thread:

"Barometer ashore being compared with mercurial at Signal Service Observatory"
USS Yukon 16/12/1877:
http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%209/IMG_4795_1.jpg

apologies if this is a duplication.


24/12/1877 - not a good Christmas present:
"Barometer so much out of repair as to be useless."
http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%209/IMG_4799_1.jpg
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 20 September 2013, 17:00:42
I think I might have posted that one. How does it make you feel after transcribing all those pressure records, Joan?  He could have gone back in the log book and warned us, for goodness sake.  :D
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: AvastMH on 20 September 2013, 21:25:30
Too true! That went through my mind. I wonder what made them worry about the readings..the depth of the final storm (29.16)?
Still - it's not a very taxing log to do. Apart from the details being slightly out of order it's a bit of a doddle - especially after the Patterson ::).
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Janet Jaguar on 20 September 2013, 21:50:56
Put your opinion in the Star Poll please, Joan, I think we are working our way out of the hard Yukon I in to Yukon II which changes the rating.
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: AvastMH on 20 September 2013, 22:40:04
Been there - done that. I left it at 3 because, if I were a newbie, I'd probably rate it at that. For anyone getting long in the tooth in OW terms it's really not a huge hassle. At least it's readable - unlike some of Patterson and it's wibbly-wobbly pages.  :D
Off to bed now zzzzzzzzzzzz  ;)
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Janet Jaguar on 20 September 2013, 22:46:16
Thanks.  :)
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Randi on 21 September 2013, 07:11:54
Yukon I is 1873-1894 and Yukon II is 1899-1923.

93% complete and currently transcribing 1878.

Doesn't seem like there could be many pages for Yukon II :-\
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 21 September 2013, 08:19:04
I was putting weather remarks into Event boxes for a long time for the Yukon. This was before Philip agreed to allow them in the Weather Observations tab. This was tedious rather than difficult. However, I note that the Unalgas are rated 3. The log pages seem to be quite regular (albeit very dense with data). If these ships are 3's it must be because of all the references to persons in hand writing that is often faded and difficult to read. But recording this is optional so nobody has to do it unless thay are nutcases obsessive.  ;D
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Randi on 21 September 2013, 08:57:44
I think it was because there is no attached thermometer column, but you are probably right about changing it to two stars.
We're still learning ;)
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 21 September 2013, 12:50:28
Indeed, it is hard to get a good idea without looking at a number of different ships in different log books.

The problem with missing attached thermometer data is the possibility of misalignment when filling. I make this mistake often but I notice it when I don't get to the end of the line, or when look at the summary of temperatures on the right. However, with vertical filling, this mistake would not be made (as long as the column itself is correctly identified, of course).
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: AvastMH on 21 September 2013, 13:53:49

The problem with missing attached thermometer data is the possibility of misalignment when filling. I make this mistake often but I notice it when I don't get to the end of the line, or when look at the summary of temperatures on the right. However, with vertical filling, this mistake would not be made (as long as the column itself is correctly identified, of course).

Can equate with this point Craig!
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: AvastMH on 25 September 2013, 18:26:14
I'm confused. this afternoon I did a couple of pages of Yukon 1878 - and I knew that there were only 2/3 pages left in that log.
I just went in to see if they still needed knocking off and got a page for 1915...help - what's happening?
Just off to the land of nod so will find out more tomorrow.  8)
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Randi on 25 September 2013, 18:45:11
Looks like we are now on Yukon II!
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Janet Jaguar on 25 September 2013, 20:01:18
Yep, we've moved from I to II!!  Good news.  And that is true for other people with no where near a full log's worth of pages.

Time to switch the discussion to http://forum.oldweather.org/index.php?topic=3347.0

 ;D
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: AvastMH on 28 September 2013, 19:35:25
28 July 1915 USS Yukon
http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%2020/IMG_5674_0.jpg
Dry air temp missing for hours 12pm to 8 om inc. Log reports: "thermometer taken for base line work"
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 28 September 2013, 19:52:39
Yeah, I was really annoyed when I saw that. The nerve of them taking away our thermometer!  :D
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: AvastMH on 28 September 2013, 20:08:40
 ;D
What really worries me Craig is that they went off on a serious surveying trip and they took just one thermometer - doh! I guess when they got to the thermometer shop at Warehouse Bluff they were closed for holidays? ::) ;D
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 28 September 2013, 21:42:04
Indeed!

If it had been the Jeannette, Melville would have fabricated one using some overproof wiskey.  :D
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: AvastMH on 30 September 2013, 15:31:07
Now starting a log from 1917 in Yukon 1 - looks like about 116 pages at just 2 barometer readings per day and virtually no activity. :-\
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 30 September 2013, 16:19:24
That might be when I began putting wind force and weather remarks into Events, Joan. Can't remember exactly when. That was before Philip had agreed we could put them into the weather observations screen.
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: AvastMH on 30 September 2013, 17:25:46
Also posted in Nat Phenomena
http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%2022/IMG_4478_1.jpg

USS Yukon. 24/07/1917 Earthquake shock of about 4.5 seconds duration at 5:20 PM

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%2022/IMG_4479_1.jpg
USS Yukon 25/07/1917 Earthquake shock of 2. seconds duration (occurred at 12:35pm) 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
26th July - no earthquake report
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%2022/IMG_4481_1.jpg
USS Yukon 27/07/1917 Earthquake of 30 seconds duration at 3:15 PM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%2022/IMG_4482_1.jpg
USS Yukon 28/07/1917 Two light earthquakes. [Transcriber's note: time not noted]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
29th July - no earthquake report
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%2022/IMG_4484_1.jpg
USS Yukon 30/07/1917 Earth quake of short duration.
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: AvastMH on 30 September 2013, 18:31:32

http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%2022/IMG_4486_0.jpg

Purchased from P.A.F. 1 pr 6'- Strap hinges; 1 broad axe; 1 pr 1.25" x 5.5" x 10ft boat planking; 1 pkg washing powder.

Just another one of those household comments that makes my brain explode with laughter.
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Janet Jaguar on 30 September 2013, 19:09:15
Joan, laundry has gotta happen, along with repairing boats and chopping firewood.  :)
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: AvastMH on 02 October 2013, 14:29:54
Commanding Officer and C.W. painted anchor chains.

http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%2022/IMG_4558_1.jpg 08/10/1917 Yukon
It's nice to know that the boss can chip in when needed!
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: AvastMH on 03 October 2013, 05:59:53
http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%2024/IMG_4601_0.jpg
26/5/1923 The Yukon Tardis has just moved on another 6 years or so.
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: AvastMH on 03 October 2013, 09:07:29
"8.00am Crew turned to and continued work of previous day. Knocked off at noon."

Luckily some entertainment was put on for them later on that day:
"8.30PM Str. Discoverer entered harbour and went alongside Cannery Dock."

http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%2024/IMG_4601_1.jpg  26/05/1923

Oh no - another comedy head explosion for Joan... I can just see this lot getting up, unshaven, grabbing a bite of breakfast, taking deckchair turns on deck as one broom gets passed around and pushed across the deck. Then, exhausted, they knock off for an early lunch and the rest of the day.  ;D

Oh yes - for interested linguists, the log keeper IS spelling 'harbour' the English way.  :o
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: AvastMH on 03 October 2013, 09:44:23
 But the next day they went mad....
"Sunday. Regular holiday routine."

Now boys - don't over do it! ;)
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: jil on 03 October 2013, 10:34:46
Wardroom supplies for Yukon May 28th [1923]
http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%2024/IMG_4603_1.jpg
1 case eggs
1 box apples
1 " oranges
6 pks corn flakes
10 lbs salt pork
98 lbs flour
1 case milk
6 tins jam
3 lbs corn starch
10 lbs split peas
12 Tins green peas
12 string beans
6 tins Pineapple
6 " Peaches
6 " Pears
6 " Cherries
6 " Cooking Cherries
6 " Corn
6 " Succotash
6 " Beets
6 " Spinnach
6 " Apples
50 Lb Sugar
10 Lbs Soda Crackers
10 Lbs Butter
10 Lbs Prunes
10 Lbs Raisins
3 Bot. Olives
2 " Salad dressing
2 sides bacon
1 Ham
2 Legs lamb
2 loins pork
1 loin beef
1/2 lb hop
1 bag potatoes
20 lbs rutabagas [swede or neeps]
10 lbs tapicocoa [chocolate tapioca  ;D]
2 pks cream of wheat
2 pks oatmeal
5 lbs coffee
2 lbs cocoa
6 roasting chickens
6 Frying chickens
5 lbs tea
10 lbs corned beef
6 tins tongue
12 cans sardines
10 lbs navy beans
12 tins asparagus
12 " Lima beans
2 jars mustard
4 bottles mustard pickles
6 pks gelatine
4 lbs salt
12 tins clams
1 can syrup
12 cans tomatoes
9 lbs macaroni
12 cans soup
1 Bot. Catsup
1 Bot. Chili Sauce
1 pk baking powder
12 tins pork & Beans
10 Lbs Nuts
6 tins shrimp
6 pks Jello
1 bottle Lea & Perrins Sauce
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: jil on 03 October 2013, 11:03:46
Supplies put aboard Yukon to date Foreward Mess
http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%2024/IMG_4604_1.jpg
(I'm assuming the numbers on the right are the price?)

Lima beans ----151lbs ----- 1.50
Barley ---------- 101lbs ------- 65
clams------------ 1 doz ------ 2.00
asst crackers -- 20lbs ------ 4.80
Evap apples --- 25 lbs ----- 2.70
Mollasses ------- 1 gal --------.50
white paper ------1 lb --------.50
Sprup [syrup?]--1 gal --------.70
Pilot bread ---- 1 case -----5.46
corn starch ---- 6 pkgs -------.45
rice 30 lbs ---------------------1.35
Spaghetti --------1 bx -------1.50
macaroni ---------1 bx -------1.50
Coffee ---------- 20 lbs ------5.00
Cocoa ----------- 5 lbs -------1.50
Van camps -----1 case ----- 2.70
Baking pwdr ----------------- 1.62
A.H soda ------- 1 pkg ---------08
Comp yeast ---- 3 lbs ------ 1.05
Wor. sauce ---- 1 gal -------- .80
catsup ---------- 1 gal -------- .55
Lard ------------- 1 tin ------- 1.35
Butter --------- 33 lbs ----- 16.00
Eggs 1 case ----------------- 9.30
Milk ------------ 1 case ------ 4.85
Jam ------------ 1 pail ------- 2.25
Vinegar ------- 1 keg ------- 1.20
Wesson oil --- 2 gals ------ 3.40
corn ----------- 3 doz ------- 3.84
Van extract --- 1 pt ---------- .65
Thyme -------------------------- 25
curry Pwdr --------------------- 48
Mustard ------------------------ 40
Mixed spices ------------------ 50
Nutmeg ------------------------ 50
ginger -------------------------- 50
Sauerkraut ------------------- .75
Tea ------------- 5 lbs ------- 1.32
Sugar -------- 175 lbs ---- 18.00
flour ---------- 200 lbs ------ 8.50
Corn meal ------ 50 --------- 1.75
Mince meat --- 1 pail ------- 4.00
Apples -------- 1 case ------ 4.30
Cream of wheat -- 6 pkg -- 1.25
Spilt peas  ----- 50 lbs ----- 3.25
Beans ---------- 20 lbs ----- 1.65
Pumpkin  ------ 6 cans ------ ..75
string beans -- 1 1/2 case - 3.45
peas ----------- 1 case ------ 2.30
Tomatoes --- 1 1/4 case --- 3.25
Appricots ------ 1. doz ------ 2.10
Pears ---------- 1. doz ------- 2.25
peaches ---- 1 1/2 cases --- 6.30
Magic yeast ----- 2 ------------- 10
corn flakes ---- 1 case ------ 2.90
Beets ----------- 1 case ------ 3.50
Potatoes --- 2 1/2 sacks -----2.50
carrots -------- 1 sack -------- 1.25
Bagoes [??] & onions --------- 55

Bacon --- 12 cuts --- @2.95 ----- 35.40
Hams ----- 4 --------- @3.38 ----- 13.50
Pork loin -------- 1 -------------------2.95
Beef ----------- 375lbs ------------ 52.50
Corn beef ------ 1 bbl ------------- 21.00
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: jil on 03 October 2013, 11:04:17
Instruments Received from Discoverer May 28 1923
http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%2024/IMG_4605_1.jpg
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 03 October 2013, 11:29:04
"8.00am Crew turned to and continued work of previous day. Knocked off at noon."

Luckily some entertainment was put on for them later on that day:
"8.30PM Str. Discoverer entered harbour and went alongside Cannery Dock."

http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%2024/IMG_4601_1.jpg  26/05/1923

Oh no - another comedy head explosion for Joan... I can just see this lot getting up, unshaven, grabbing a bite of breakfast, taking deckchair turns on deck as one broom gets passed around and pushed across the deck. Then, exhausted, they knock off for an early lunch and the rest of the day.  ;D

Oh yes - for interested linguists, the log keeper IS spelling 'harbour' the English way.  :o

We can count on you, Joan, to inject some humour (and humor) into this log. They should have had you on board to do the writing!
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: AvastMH on 03 October 2013, 17:29:57
I'll carry on doing my best Craig.   Those Saturday entries were SO brief - even so I could feel their relief at just being able to write about Sunday in 4 words.

I imagine that having to get all jil's stores sorted out must have seemed quite ghastly!  ;) :o

Hey Jil - you hadn't had enough after the Jeannette lists?  ;) Great job here! 8)
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: jil on 04 October 2013, 07:51:03
I do like a good list - especially of food. Although I had to stop part way through and eat some cake   :P
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: jil on 04 October 2013, 08:36:14
More stuff! http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%2024/IMG_4621_1.jpg

Supplies put aboard Yukon June 12 1923 Forward Mess
18 lbs corned beef
2 tins baking powder
12 " Beets
12 " String beans
3 " Peas
20 lbs Coffee
1 Cans Syrup
1 Sk. Potatoes
12 tins spinach
15 lbs onions
bacon 24 lbs
Meat 60 Beef 30 Veal
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: jil on 04 October 2013, 11:26:53
And more - http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%2024/IMG_4623_1.jpg
Wardroom Supplies June 13 1923
1 case eggs
1 box apples
6 pks corn flakes
1 Sk flour
1 case milk
3 cans jam
2 Pks Corn Starch
6 tins Pineapple
6 " Peaches
6 " Pears
6 " Cherries
6 " Cooking Cherries
6 " Corn
6 " Peas
6 " String Beans
3 " Succotash
3 " Spinach
3 " Beets
6 " Apples
25 Lbs Butter
3 Bot. Olives
12 Cans Soup
1 Bot. Catsup
8 Lbs. Salt
1 Sd. bacon
1 Leg lamb
1 loin Pork
1 loin Beef
1/2 lb hop
1/2 sack potatoes
10 lbs tapiocoa
1 Pk cream of wheat
1 Pk oatmeal
5 lbs coffee
4 lbs cocoa
4 Frying chickens
5 lbs tea
12 cans sardines
6 " asparagus
6 " Lima beans
6 Pks gelatine
6 Pks Jello
6 cans shrimp
10 Lbs Nuts
1 Bot Powder
6 Cans Tomatoes
3 Pks Grape Nuts
3 Bot Pickles
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: asterix135 on 04 October 2013, 11:58:58
1 Bot Powder

Mmm,  unidentified powder....


(and yes, I assume it's baking powder....)
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: jil on 05 October 2013, 13:41:52
Forward Mess Supplies Received June 28 1923
http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%2024/IMG_4640_1.jpg
12 Cans Pumpkin
2 sks Potatoes
2 Cases Eggs
50 Lbs Coffee
5 lbs Cocoa
8 Lbs Baking Powder
1 QT Vanilla Extract
1 Gal Wesson Oil
12 Pks Yeast
2 Box Hops
50 Lbs Pancake Flour
259 Lbs White Flour
1 Case Corn
2 Cases String Beans
1 Box Ev. Apples
1 Case Pork & Beans
1 Case Peaches
1 Case Tomatoes
1 Case Catsup
2 Cases Milk
2 Gal. Syrup
100 lbs Sugar
25 lbs Beans
35 Lbs Rice
1 Box Prunes
2 Doz Oranges
3 Lbs Tea
12 Cans Clams
1/2 Cheese
1 Lb Pepper
1/2 sack salt
4 Hams
1 Leg Pork
6 Sides Bacon
2 Legs Lamb
3 Loins Pork
1 Case Chicken
64 lbs Butter
1 Hind Quarter Beef
3 Lbs Sausages
2 Boxes Raisins
15 lbs Pens Peas [a little more tasty  :)]

3 bolts Signal cloth
1 Can cement
10 gal. Lime
12 Rolls Toilet Paper
12 Tin D. Cleanser
40 - 2 x 4s
20 - 1 x 4s
1 Case Kerosene
Jacks
2 dinghy Oars
Matches
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Caro on 05 October 2013, 15:52:55
I wondered ...
What were the '15 lbs pens' listed with the food? Female swans?!


Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Randi on 05 October 2013, 17:08:11
Looking at the a and n in Raisins (just above),
I wonder if it could be Peas ?
It doesn't have that little initial hook that the n has.
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: jil on 05 October 2013, 17:39:00
Looking at the page again and zooming in a lot it does look like 'peas' - which does make a lot more sense!
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Caro on 05 October 2013, 18:44:15
Yep, that does make a lot more sense. I will fix my transcription too.  ;D
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Zovacor on 09 October 2013, 00:03:13
OK, it says 100% but I think this log book goes out another 10 days or so. Will try to finish tomorrow (unless someone wants to beat me to it)!
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: jil on 09 October 2013, 05:45:33
A few more pages done - still not quite there though. I have to go out and buy food now - just not got my priorities right  ;)
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Caro on 09 October 2013, 05:57:12
I'm on August 22, 1923. Getting there.  ;)
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: jil on 09 October 2013, 09:35:07
Provisioning complete  :)

I thought Yukon was going to be completed as well as I transcribed through the end pages of a log book but then got the front cover of the log book for August 31 to Sept 18. I can't take the tension!
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: camiller on 09 October 2013, 13:40:47
Wow! I went away for a while, so I wasn't surprised to see "100%" on the completion line when I got back.  I clicked "Transcribe" anyway....
and now it's Sept. 4, 1923 on the Yukon.  But where is it?  Can someone help me with the location of the anchorage in Wide Bay?  The mapping programs show at least 3 Wide Bays in Alaska.  Thanks!

http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%2025/IMG_4722_0.jpg
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: jil on 09 October 2013, 13:54:35
I can't work out what it says before 'Wide Bay' but they've been in the Wide Bay at about 57.38/-156.33 (on main land opposite Kodiak Island)
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Janet Jaguar on 09 October 2013, 14:12:28
On the 5th they move to someplace called "Titcliff" Island, if that helps spot it on a map.  That name isn't on the Alaskan list, or it would have set off a number of jokes in the Discussion topic.  :)
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: camiller on 09 October 2013, 14:19:57
It must be that Wide Island; I'm on the 5th now, too, and they're at Shelikof Strait.  No mention of Titcliff Island on the weather-side page.
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: camiller on 09 October 2013, 14:32:06
Titcliff Island is the island between the mainland (Cape Kayakliut) and Slaughter Island!  No place resembles that name from 4 Sept, though.

http://www.oceangrafix.com/chart/zoom?chart=16568
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Randi on 09 October 2013, 14:59:41
As a matter of fact, it is: http://forum.oldweather.org/index.php?topic=3643.msg75109#msg75109
Our members are too polite (and respectful of forum rules) to make an issue of it - and bird lovers to boot ;)
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Janet Jaguar on 09 October 2013, 15:06:24
I know that, Carolyn, but I kept a private google map when I was transcribing ships that didn't believe in giving us lat/long readings, putting markers on a saved map.  I found it very useful when I wanted to search historical charts for names shaped liked the scribble, and knowledge of where we came from the day before or were going the day after that helped pin it down. 

There are many ways to keep track of your ship's location, very few of which are grounded in the specific day's transcription since they get used as backup when that is less than helpful.  I offer this as a possibility.


You are right, Randi, I forgot to search the discussion thread for new names.  Being polite bird-lovers (truth!) doesn't seem to dent our sense of humor much, nor our ability to do it while maintaining family-friendly vocabulary.  :)
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Caro on 09 October 2013, 15:32:51
I can't work out what it says before 'Wide Bay' but they've been in the Wide Bay at about 57.38/-156.33 (on main land opposite Kodiak Island)

I think it's Shannon, for Mount Shannon probably.
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: AvastMH on 09 October 2013, 17:39:23
Sure looks like Shannon to me.
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: AvastMH on 09 October 2013, 17:41:31
I'm still getting pages.
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Janet Jaguar on 09 October 2013, 17:53:24
I'm just going on the current book - I can't tell if there are any orphan pages scattered thru-out waiting for a 3rd transcriber.  But these are the pages I see:

next one to transcribe: http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%2025/IMG_4727_0.jpg
book back cover: http://oldweather.s3.amazonaws.com/ow3/final/USCS%20Yukon/Book%2025/IMG_4742_0.jpg

that makes 15 pages left, and the last 2 are blank.  :)
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: camiller on 09 October 2013, 20:59:29
Mt. Shannon!  Yes!  Thanks, Caro! 

And thanks for the Google Maps suggestion, Janet!
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Caro on 10 October 2013, 03:59:38
No more pages for me.
As the log writer said, 'Finis'.  :)
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: jil on 10 October 2013, 04:38:46
Splice the mainbrace! Dress the ship overall! (Probably best to do those the other way round)  :)
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: AvastMH on 10 October 2013, 06:10:44
Well fetch me another mug of grog - I tried to get a page and I was sent instantly to the Albatross. Brace the mainsplices, why not indeed! Hic! ;D
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Janet Jaguar on 10 October 2013, 06:31:15
I'll tell the PTB to change her to VAL - she is DONE.  When I go to transcribe, I get sent to Abatross.  :D

(http://us.cdn2.123rf.com/168nwm/mitay20/mitay201207/mitay20120700211/14296788-glass-of-rum-and-bottle.jpg)
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 10 October 2013, 07:26:31
Good work! I'm glad you finally made it home.   8)
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: camiller on 10 October 2013, 09:12:30
 :D :D :D
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Zovacor on 10 October 2013, 18:28:08
Yay! What to do next?!
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: AvastMH on 10 October 2013, 19:46:29
Hi Zovacor!  It's a nice feeling to see one finished.  8)  I'm just off back to the Patterson. I probably shouldn't say this but, it's not the easiest to read and not that exciting either. Though they  are going round S. America and it's good learning more about the places there. Plus the pages were not copied flat so the transcribing lines are wonky. The Albatrosses look very popular - and Perry seemed quite nice when I gave it a go.  Enjoy your next ship! :D
Joan
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Craig on 10 October 2013, 21:22:55
There is still lots to do for the Bear too. It's up north, which is what Kevin likes. I did a page today and found it a bit difficult, though, because of the slant (not copied flat, like the Patterson logs). I guess it gets easier with practice.
Title: Re: Yukon I -- Discussion: Questions and Comments
Post by: Randi on 11 October 2013, 03:14:59
I'd kind of like to leave Albatross (1890) for newbies ;)