General Chat

You be careful, Von. You start looking at things like that ad, beore you know it, you end up like me with a head that contains no sense at all but that is cramme with stuff that nobody needs to know!

I started off thinking that I was safe just having a little look at a map ad now i am a poor sad shuffling old heap who spend all their money on books nobody else ever wants to read about things nobody else on Earth wants to talk about.

Taken from Wikipedia

During the Anglo-Saxon period, the North German foot of 13.2 inches (335 millimetres) was the nominal basis for other units of linear measurement. The foot was divided into 4 palms or 12 thumbs. A cubit was 2 feet, an elne 4 feet. The rod was 15 Anglo-Saxon feet, the furlong 10 rods.

You learn something new everyday ;-) ;-)

Sorry Von. Didn't see your post.

I don't think you can be as precise as that with a spring tide, even with electronics, and this was the Romano-Saxon period when I am sure the devil would have had a hand in your house being innundated.

Any time. You're very welcome. :-)

Thank you.

i kind of hoped I might get a bit of maritime expertise from your direction.

My first thought was that Sharron was right and that it was 5' 06", then I remembered two things.

Tidal heights these days are metric and the tides along the South Coast are a lot higher than 5ft.

A bit of googling told me that the tides at Romney Marsh today rise by about 7 metres, so I think what you read should have been 5.06m.

(Tides used to be in feet and inches. As far as I know, they have never been in fractions of a foot.)

Being low-lying, we have to worry about getting our feet wet on the Marsh !

The sheep are not keen on paddling either.

Thanks Gwyn.

That is even more precise for a tide line isn't it.

I wonder if they meant five and a half foot.

Your neck of the woods had a mention, Romney Marsh.

It's almost 3/4 of an inch in old money or 0.72 of an inch.

Sorry hadn't seen Gwyn's answer.

Sharron - might need to be precise if there's a danger it's coming in your property ;-)

My in-house experts gave me the wrong answer - it is 0.72. So Gwyn is right.

0.06 is 6 hundredths of a foot, so nearly 3/4 of an inch........ I think .

So total of 5 feet plus nearly 3 quarters of an inch.

Thank you.

I don't know why they had to put it in foreign measurements at all. It will have been measured in proper inches and that is very precise for tides isn't it?

It,s about 7.2 inches.

You know I can barely count?

Well, I have just come across something about sprig tides being 5.06 ft above some point.

What is .06 of a foot please?