Most extreme rogue wave ever was recorded off BC coast, report finds
Вставка
- Опубліковано 9 лют 2022
- It's being called an event that happens "once in a millennium" as last week researchers published a scientific report that found a wave measuring 17.6 metres - as high as a four-storey building - was recorded off the coast of B.C. in November 2020.
Researchers say it's the most extreme rogue wave ever recorded and was measured off the coast of Vancouver Island, near Ucluelet, B.C., by Victoria-based MarineLabs Data Systems.
Rogue waves are those with more than double the height of the waves currently happening around them. According to MarineLabs, they can also be known as "freak" or "killer waves" due to their unexpected nature and given their size, can be very dangerous. Kylie Stanton reports on the wave and whether it posed a danger to the coastline.
For more info, please go to globalnews.ca/news/8607359/bi...
Subscribe to Global News Channel HERE: bit.ly/20fcXDc
Like Global News on Facebook HERE: bit.ly/255GMJQ
Follow Global News on Twitter HERE: bit.ly/1Toz8mt
Follow Global News on Instagram HERE: bit.ly/2QZaZIB
#GlobalNews
My US Navy ship was hit by a rogue wave out in the Atlantic during a major storm. The deck above my head was 65 feet above the waterline, but that wavetop was well above that. It knocked us over to the point that the tipping alarm sounded at 55 degrees. She struggled to regain an even keel. Scary moment, even 45 years later.
But, but…”they” said rogue waves of that size (17m) only happen once a millennium. So, what you thought you experienced was prob just an acid flashback.
Please forgive sarcasm, but I am disgusted with the arrogance of man; there is no possibility of knowing about all rogue waves today, much less for a 1,000 years.
Thanks for your story. Glad you’re able to tell it.
@bikerbruce1988 thats correct. How can they determine that if they haven't been studying them that long.
What sort of ship was it ?
@@bikerbruce1988 I agree that the “once in a millennium” line was reckless. They’ve recently shown with satellite data that there’s a rogue wave every couple of minutes somewhere on earth, so they still have a lot to learn and that comment was just sensationalism.
Thanks for that image, Jim. What a moment that must have been, watching a wave tower over a big ship like that. And being around to tell about it. Thank you for your service.
Imagine being a sailor 30 years ago. Sciencists called them crazy when they talked about rogue waves.
Imagine being a sailor 300 years ago 😳
How about 3000 yrs ago, when ancient texts claim western Mediterranean ships were on the Red Sea side? They either circumnavigated Africa, or circumnavigated the world. Possibly.
I always wondered why old ships like galleons had such ungainly, tallsuperstructures. Maybe to be less likely to get wiped out?
Imagine being a sailor 300 years ago..!
Why would scientists in their labs call sailors crazy when they are the ones out at sea lol
It's not once in a millennium, that is only to the linear model. Rogue waves happen all the time.
Exactly right. Not sure why the old linear model is even referenced any more, waves just don't behave that way and we know that know
The way I interpreted it, she was saying that was the likelihood of a rogue wave of that specific magnitude occurring. That's still probably not accurate, more likely they are just under-reported.
The US Navy reports at least 2 per year.
@@pc_buildyb0i935 why ? Because the Media doesn't do its research.
a rouge wave is usually compared to the current sea conditions.
and yes they do occur all the time but they usually dont stick out to much beeing like 2 times bigger then all the others. but the one in the simulation looked like 4 or 5 times bigger then the "normal" wave over there. thats probably what makes it super rare.
Its awesome this data was captured. People don't appreciate that our ability to record everything happening on earth is a very recent thing, but is still only getting better. Real time monitoring and notification to save lives should be a priority.
This is the problem. Too many time-wasters logging data with nothing behind it but speculation. The series don't add up and foolish Fanboys like yourself get behind a failed system that can do really great at describing but has zero for explanation. Such a time-waster
@@whattolearnfirstinlife.rea7419 Take your meds
Monkeyspank’s got my vote
Fr. Rogue waves use to be consider and old sailors tale. It’s only thanks to modern technology that we no they exist. Since often times they would destroy and kill the sailors that experienced them in those times.
There was a time rogue waves weren’t believed!
Its happening "more often" because technological advancement has allowed us to put eyes in even more places. Every one is recording something, and so are buoys, observation stations, satellite, radar, etc... Just because we are seeing it more doesn't necessarily mean it is literally happening more often...
It's a ridiculous statement unsupported by data.
Classic survivorship bias. Ships have been lost to rogue waves for millennia, we just didn't have cameras and mass communication to record it.
@@Soothsayer-rs5nb er.. no, it's not unsupported by data. That guy in the report is literally a rogue wave scientist. He studies rogue waves. I'm going to go out on a limb here and assume (because I know it's true) that he has in fact accounted for the fact we are recording more data.
17 meters is huge, but that oil rig in the North Sea recorded a 30meter wave.
It was an unusually tall rig, so it only had minor damage on its underside.
draupner
The Draupner oil rig your talking about recorded a 26 meter rogue wave, but rogue waves of almost 50 meters have been recorded by sattelite radar around the Cape of Good Hope, which is an infamous hotzone for monstrous rogue waves.
They mean a rogue wave so close to shore
There’s rogue waves in the open ocean over 100 feet high
The difference here is it was accuratly recorded. Draupner was an estimate based on video footage.
Excuse me? How can you possibly know that it’s happening “more frequently”? SATELLITES have found thousands of these container-ship-annihilating waves, which sailors had tried to describe for a millennium, especially around the Cape of Good Hope.
@@harrysatchel and yet people sit in similar size boats on the same seas with same potentially damaging waves as yesteryear
@@andybrown6981 They design fiberglass, self-righting yachts!
@@lisaschuster686 do you mean keeled modern yachts or another design?
@@andybrown6981 The one’s on the video I saw… 🤭
dude, THAT IS HOW THEY KNOW. They are recording the frequency of the waves, have been doing so for some decades, and are noticing that they become more frequent. Then... you take this information and look for a possible explanation - for instance, the fact the oceans are getting warmer means there is more energy in the system. Then you can model that to see if there is a possible connection. I mean ffs this is not hard.
“We can’t control what we don’t measure…” How would one control a rogue wave, pray tell?
They are scientists. Don't try to separate them from a large govt. grant.
Imagine just sitting in your boat on the calm seas and bam a 60 foot wave comes out of nowhere geez that’s terrifying
If you've ever seen the ocean during a Hurricane it leaves you in awe. Amazing yet something to be fearful of.
How high are the waves in the ocean during a severe storm?
@Hussain Bin SHAMSUDDIN Well the storm I'm referring to was Hurricane Bob in summer of 1991 off the east coast. It was only a a category 2 when it landed off the coast of Massachusetts. The waves looked to be the size of a 2 level apartment building which might not be so "scarry" but it did plenty damage to oceanfront properties.
@@USN23 That'd be terrifying for sure. Thank you, sir.
I've been out in a 25m fishing boat in a hurricane. Since then I've never felt the need to go on a 'scary' fairground ride as they're just a joke to me.
Sailed through several Typhoons, it gets pretty intense but survivable.
rogue waves are scary af. you think it's all good because it's not so high, but then you realize how high you are looking down
English much?
@@colonelJ77 do YOU english much? Theres nothing wrong with that sentence
@@SwiftyEmpire move along, kid. Your opinion isn't important to anyone here.
@colonelJ77 yours aint either 🤣
@@SwiftyEmpire exactly....now you're getting it
And that's only what's on record. I was on a car ferry once, back in the 80s, from France to Ireland, that was blown hundreds of miles off course by a sudden storm. And in that storm, I was young and dumb enough to defy the captain's order to remain inside and instead went out on deck and lashed myself with a handy rope against a convenient bulkhead. The waves we rode through were maybe half the size of this one--20 meters from top to trough--but even that was enough to make up seem like down and very nearly floundered us (and certainly would have if the crew hadn't managed to turn us directly into the breaking waves at the very last moment.) I have been in tornadoes, avalanches, blizzards and floods, etc, over the course of 60+ years, but I have never witnessed any power or fury like that of an angry ocean. And, okay, I've never experienced a volcanic eruption up close, but a) who has and lived to tell the tale? and b) that's not weather.
Before 1995, it was the common belief that rogue waves didn’t exist. That was until an 84 ft wave was discovered in the North Sea.
The bay of Biscaye is infamous for its weather, brutal seas and rogue waves. In fact one of the most infamous pictures ever taken of a rogue wave was taken there, a rogue wave of round about 30 meters as well. Must be really scary sailing there through bad weather!
That is the problem. Over a certain size wave nobody will survive to tell the tale. The maximum theoretical wave height is 60 meters for the new model. We only hear about 30m waves because nobody survives any bigger than that.
Newscaster: The probability of such an event occurring is once in a millennium
Also Newscaster: And it’s happening more frequently
Thank you.
Happens all the time.
2nd part is global warming propaganda insert for the parent news company
You really didn't try and understand what was being said at all. Firstly, when they say 1 in 1000 year event, it doesn't literally mean that it only occurs 1 in 1000 years. It's a probability. You could get two within two months and still be a 1 in 1000 year event. Secondly - and this is most important, because I cannot understand how half this comment section did not pick up on this.
THEY ARE REFERRING TO THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THIS SPECIFIC WAVE. The 1 in 1000 year event refers to the magnitude of this wave and it's relative size in the set. Saying the characteristics of THIS SPECIFIC WAVE is a 1 in 1000 year event, and that rogue waves in general are becoming more frequent is NOT mutually exclusive.
@@zoeherriot When we calculate theoretical probability, we take the number of observed outcomes and divide by the total number of outcomes. For a die, we can say the probability of rolling a 3 is 1 in 6 because I absolutely know there are only 6 possible outcomes when rolling a die.
A rogue wave, by definition, is ‘unpredictable’ and so to assert that, “the probability of such an event occurring is once in a millennium” is an aporia. Furthermore, even if one were to try and establish the probability of such an event, I would argue that the sample size is likely too small to accurately calculate the probability. How many years have waves been measured accurately? Are waves measured globally and in every environmental condition with consideration for ocean depth, wind, surrounding terrain, local climate? and more. To say that something is “happening” more frequently is to tacitly say that the probability is increasing. In this particular case, the most accurate statement would have been, “an event that was thought to be highly improbable has been observed more frequently”.
That, actually, isn't the most extreme rogue wave on record. This wave surpassed the surrounding waves by a factor of 2.93. Whilst impressive, there first of all were several other waves nearly as extreme: the Ramapo wave in 1933 had a factor difference of 2.83 and was also nearly twice as high as this wave. A wave recorded by an ESA satellite in the Atlantic ocean had a height of 29.8 meters and surpassed the surrounding waves by a factor of 2.9. Now, onto waves more extreme than this Vancouver wave, there was a rogue wave incident in 2011 which saw a 15-meter wave surpass the surrounding waves by a factor of 3.24. An incident in the Atlantic ocean involving the submarine Grouper saw a thirty-meter wall of water arise in calm seas (leading to an enormous factor difference). So, whilst impressive, the Vancouver wave is not the most extreme rogue wave on record
Why are you calling it the Vancouver wave? It's no where near Vancouver? There is Vancouver Island that blocks the mainland. Vancouver Island is the largest island on the entire Pacific coast of the Americas, North, Central and South.
thank you for the context !
Most extreme off of BC
@@deankruse2891 That's not what they said though. Basically everything in the report was wrong and misleading. There also isn't any evidence such waves appear more frequently in recent times. And their fear mongering footage showed a tidal bore from China that appears regularly and has been a tourist attraction for at least 1000 years.
any sources?
This is not the biggest ever recorded. In 1995 in the Norwegian North Sea on the Draupner natural gas platform in 230 feet of water, a rogue wave aptly called the "Draupner wave", was measured with lasers as the wave hit the platform with a recorded maximum wave height of 25.6 metres (84 ft) and peak elevation of 18.5 metres (61 ft). No damage was done to the platform. Video of this event can be found on the internet. While the Vancouver Island Rogue is not the biggest documented rogue, its still a major achievement to have captured this event and as stated in the video, it demonstrates the need for more instrumentation to know what's out there. Glad to know my "neighbors to the north" are doing great science for the benefit of us all, thank you!!!
The Draupner wave wasn't the biggest either. As far as I know, the waves in the Perfect Storm of 1991 are the biggest rogues on record
The Draupner wave was the first accurately and scientifically recorded rogue waves, but not the biggest by a long shot. There have been numerous rogue waves recorded of 30+ meters, and even a couple of more than 40 meters, close to 50 meters.
@@pieterveenders9793 Do you have sources for these measurements? I was under the impression I knew what the biggest rogues were on record, but if you've got sources for measurements greater than 28m, obviously I'm mistaken. Either way, I'd extremely curious!
In 1994 my hubby was working with the Coast Guard as a fish tec. A rogue wave hit the ship and he was thrown into the galley...He hit the fridge with such a force it broke his shoulder..He could no longer do that work after he healed..He had to be able to shoot his gun if necessary and couldn't do it so out of work..WBC retrained him to work for the Airlines as a dispatcher..
Only people who grow up next to the ocean or who have lived next to it for many years can fully appreciate its power and strength, your parents probably told you as a kid that monsters don't exist, well they lied to you, they do and they are out at sea.
The Monster is the sea, not what’s in it.
Sea in a storm is thing wise man fears.
Sooooo true.
yeah i mean rip currents at a beach are just as deadly especially since you cant see or hear them unless you know the waves
Those sea monkeys are terrifying
Happens more often than they think. Just not enough equipment to document them
Big wave, but how can anyone claim that an event that could not be recorded until very recently be a "once in a millennium" event.
I recall the largest rogue wave was 32 meters or 104 feet. It measured via geometry as the top of the wave lined up with the top of a mast as the bow was in the trough.
right,, and it was the Queen Mary II which experienced that wave near Reunion Island in the South Atlantic.
Such events would certainly account for unexplained disappearances of ships over the years, expecially
prior to the advent of modern technology and long-range weather forecasts.
" this is happening more frequently" is immediately followed by an explanation of how infrequently this has been measured in the past due to not having the instruments in place to measure it. So we do not know how often these occured in the past.
CBC
Strange the article also claims the drapner wave was 40ft? It was it was 26 meters+. Satellite imagery can tell us there absolutely has been waves exceeding 100 ft.
They did the math in their head lmao
We are talking about rouge waves, obviously there’s been waves over 100 feet and most likely rouge waves too but currently this is the biggest rouge wave recorded by modern technology
@@tdlvertigo6589 The Drapner wave was recorded. It was the first ever recorded rogue wave which was more than twice the local wave height. That was in, forgive me, 95, 96?
Again, satellite imagery has found waves in all oceans that were classed as, not storm or hurricane waves but rogue waves. The NOAA said there could be around TEN at any time.
The article is crap. End of.
Largest rouge wave ever recorded in general terminology. Rouge wave is a wave 2x the size of average wave conditions at the time. This particular wave was 3x the current ocean conditions. Thus largest "rouge" wave recorded not in the sense that was the largest wave but largest difference to current ocean state.
@@vlad1889 wrong
I regularly go salmon fishing off the coast of Ucluelet out of Bamfield. Of course, we're not out there in November when it can get pretty rough. Never underestimate the power of water. I live in Arizona where we normally get some wild weather during the Summer. Here, they have what's called "The Stupid Motorist Law". It means, if you enter a wash with running water and get stuck, or washed downstream, you pay all the bills associated with your rescue. That is, if you survive.
Probably not "once in a millennium", more likely they're under-recorded.
Everyone's talking about rogue waves, & not ONCE do they make a "Perfect Storm" reference!
A friend of mine was skippering a trawler, sitting in the bridge and he looked up and saw a wave coming towards them that completely blocked out his view of the sky. When it hit them, the entire ship went under and the bridge was completely filled with water. He said it ruined all their cigarette papers for the rest of the trip.
So "once in a millenium"? I don't think so.
The island of ascension gets hit by a Rouge wave every few hours. If you fish there you know this or you end up with a little cross on the rocks where you were last seen.
I hit a wave 3 meters high the whole boat went uboat for a few seconds. This was at night in calm seas, frightened the hell out of me. Passed it off as normal to the others.
RMS Queen Mary was hit by a 65 foot wave in 1943 and very nearly capsized with 16,000 men on it, it laid over 55 degrees and it would only have taken another couple and she would not have righted herself.
Having been in the US Navy during the 80's, sailors can attest to these being real even though no one would believe us.
"We can't control what we don't measure. We can't apply policy to what we don't measure."
How about, "we can't understand what we don't measure." I don't think anyone is going to "control" waves.
Coming back from fishing the continental shelf off the coast of New England and NewYork one time. I ran into a 15' tidal surge wave or something as we passed off shore from Montauk NY. What was terrifying was it was mill pond still that evening and out of nowhere came this 15' rolling wave that went for as far as we could see. We hit it head on and were amazed there wasnt a set of waves behind it ! Luckiky we were on a decent sized sport fishing boat and it was nothing really. But anything smaller then 25' it could've been a tricky situation !! Also once while fishing a Reservoir near where i live i saw a 2' wave transverse across the whole lake. Guess the water company must have opened the 6' pipe or whatever it was, cause within 15-20 min. of fishing there the level dropped well over a foot!
The technical definition of a rogue wave is one more than twice as high as the "significant wave height" at the time the wave occurs. The SWH is the average height of the 1/3 largest waves during a given period. So if the SWH is 6 meters, a rogue wave would have to be more than 12 meters high. The wave discussed in this video is not the largest wave or largest rogue wave recorded, but the largest rogue wave relative to the SWH. This 17.6 m wave was 2.91 times the 6-meter SWH. In feet, that's 20-foot waves with the sudden appearance of a 58-foot wave.
Correction: 2.93 X the SWH!
I’ve been solo sea kayaking off the west coast of Vancouver Island since 1980, recently selling my kayaks due to poor health. While some of my adventures were somewhat extreme in that I paddled off season (I was even asked to leave the southern portion of the West Coast Trail area out of Port Renfrew by a fisheries vessel in huge swell after a number of fishers died in the bay of South Brooks that morning) often waiting for poor weather to challenge conditions, I typically had confidence that these extreme freak waves were further off shore and not all that common. Nevertheless, I have been in a situation where my tied off kayak that was high up on the beach and was battered and bruised (gelcoat damage) by a wave or two that I heard breaking during the night when the sea state was rough but the swell was average. I’m sure this was a rogue wave off Brooks Peninsula but fortunately the shallow shelf, I assume, meant the wave initially broke far enough out with only a high surge by the time it reached the berm where I was camped. I was a little more cautions exploring sea caves and surge channels after that night. The ocean can provide a little more adventure sometimes that you want. There are waves out there with your name on it. It’s sad when it’s a whole crew.
Glad you are okay. Bet you had some great adventures.
Your handle made me think of a funny story my very dear Vietnam vet Navy SEAL friend told me a few times. He was in a miserable marriage and also missed the adrenaline inducing things he had regularly done before he was put in charge of the ball-bearings for all of the Trident subs and so mostly just spent his days in a climate controlled swanky office , bored. One Friday evening after work at Bangor, WA. he grabbed his gear and drove out to just south of Neah Bay and started to paddle in the pretty much absolute blackness due west. He paddled until he couldn’t see lights onshore and fell asleep with only his spray skirt around his waist. When he woke up he was just about right in the middle of the shipping lanes Admiralty Inlet and it was pea soup. He paddled by his compass north and aiming for Vancouver Island and came up alongside a small trawler of about 30’. He says “Hello!” and immediately hears a set of footsteps running around on the deck of this small fishing boat. He could hear the older man talking to himself and sounding pretty jangled. When he finally laid eyes on this 50+ yo man kneeling in his kayak , arm draped over the gunnels he just about fell over , saying “I thought you were the Devil!” . Don’t DO that to me! What in the hell are you doing out here ?! And so on. I remember there used to be a lot more fog than we get now. I miss the weather the way it was when I was a kid .
@@lisacolbert5987 great story! I came up with that “handle” precisely because I used to go paddling in convection and sea fog. I’d cross over thru the gulf islands and fog plus freighters were a challenge. One had to be smart in the fog, know currents, and sometimes stay in contact with vessel traffic services.
Well, they've actually found that some rogue waves get up to 30+ meters in the middle of the Indian ocean but there are no instruments to record them. This is the reason huge cargo ships mysteriously go missing and sink in storms.
There's actually a documentary I saw in Australia about six years ago called Rogue Wave.
In that documentary they did scientifically prove of what you're talking about in the Indian Ocean. A Force 5 Hurricane occurred. Satellites recorded huge rogue waves. In fact, 12 of these 30 metre plus waves were recorded in a two hour period.
When the Satellite data came back, scientists the world over were stunned.
The fact that about 50 cargo ships sink each year is a sobering statistic.
it's NOT happening more often. before they were rogue waves, they were sea monsters. now, there are more people living near the ocean and more measurement taking place, so there is more awareness.
A matter of timing. Two or more waves, traveling the same direction, @ different speeds, accumulating at some place then seperating again and going on. That is one way they happin. Points of land, shallow places and narrow inlets are others. that's all I can remember from Bowditch's American practable navigator.
I find it interesting that certain measurements are always excluded when they talk about the "biggest ever recorded" WRT rogue waves. When you read the reports of damage to ships they say how far above the waterline the damage was. I'd suggest that if the ship is damaged 95 feet above the waterline then the wave was at least 95 feet high.
And let's not forget that until 20 years ago "Rogue waves" were considered a myth used by sailors to excuse poor seamanship.
@@achievementsofthegloriousw5925 It's hard to respond to a comment that stupid but I'll give it a go.
The M.S. Queen Elizabeth is not a sailing ship. Nor was the S.S. Michelangelo.
I suggest you shut up until you understand the facts of the situation.
@@achievementsofthegloriousw5925 That's nice. But you apparently can't tell the difference between a sailing ship and an ocean liner. God be with whoever sails with you.
A myth, then once in 10000 years, now its proven there is probably one somewhere out there right as i write this
Most extreme rogue waver ever? Hardly
I was on the Viking Cruise in November 2022. We were hit by a 50’ wave which killed a passenger, injured several others and caused a lot of damage to a brand new ship. It was frightening, especially at night in the middle of the Drake passage. The noise, the ship dipping into the trough, stuff went flying (including me onto the floor). It sounded like the ship was hit by a massive aluminum bat. Anyone on deck would have been thrown off the ship and lost. I would liken them to the ocean version of wind shear. Ships need to be retrofitted both with instruments to detect/warn them and strength on their lower decks, especially passenger ships.
Must have been some wave, it didn`t even leave a mark on the beach or buildings around it, amazing.
Outdated research, this is based on the old 90s model which didnt account for rogue waves. There are waves larger than this every day since they form by smaller waves passing over each other (in opposite directions or where one moves at a faster pace than the one before it).
Omg!! Were all going to die..... Again!!
When talking about waves, the interval is as important as the height. Most of the time, across the Pacific, one experiences 2 to 3 meter waves at (something like) 13 second intervals. Even 4 meter waves at that interval is quite comfortable, as it is a gentle rolling motion. Conversely, that sort of wave height at 6 second intervals is uncomfortable, especially in a small boat. Cant imagine a 17 meter wave, especially if there is no time to climb up (or down) it and it would very likeky capsize a small boat.
Heard Scott Smith (Loverboy) fell off his sailboat off of San Francisco and drowned. Had no idea it was because of a 30-foot rogue wave.
That was the scariest graph I have ever seen
Is it happening more frequently, or has our technologies just gotten better
It probably happens every day, ever since. But given the sheer size of the water surface on this planet, our surveillance technology and its density only begins to catch up with these events.
@@Ganiscol They also seem to be quite localised - like are there other bouys 50 nautical miles away that are not reading the same waves?
They became much worse and more frequent since Trump became President...................
@@andybrown6981 Plus it was only 7km off the coast, so I assume it wasn't so big when it reached the shore.
I assume the 'rogue wave' isn't so much a wave travelling across the ocean, but a point specific peak of a wave interference pattern.
Might be the biggest, since it was recorded. Waves of Hurricane Grace, Florence and Ivan, were enormous(ninety feet). Understand that those giant waves are not rouge waves, and break apart as they reach shallows. And certainly this is a ripple, compared to waves in the universe.
I saw 50 feet waves crashing in the reef on Guam in 1969 as a typhoon crossed over Saipan. My father told me that he had seen 100 foot waves in the Pacific Ocean. He was a Mustang Lieutenant Commader line officer with 26 years in the Navy.
mariners have been saying for thousands of years that these waves exist. the largest open ocean waves were never witnessed by anyone who actually lived until reinforced steel hulls were developed. ships have survived 100+ foot waves. we have damage high on the bridge, sensors picking up giant waves, and even some 75-100+ foot waves on film. mariners have been taking waves that big for as long as men have gone out into the open sea. it's really pretty simple as far as i am concerned, as someone who grew up and has worked on the water and who fished every day in his adulthood: rogue waves are the phenomenon of many waves working together. in some cases they just create a giant peak, it appears and then disappears. sometimes they create extremely deep troths in the classic "three sister" pattern. big waves almost always come in threes when you are timing out sets in the surf. i'll never forget wheni was guiding in a kayak and we had a group of experienced but young paddlers out front after a big eastern blow. we were in long, rolling swells in deep water. totally harmless fun as long as you are deep enough. one kid was a just a little closer to shore than the others and off of a sudden the troth of a wave dropped out and you could see muscles, barnacles, starfish on the bottom. talking about 12-15 feet of water, and all of a sudden it is gone. if the kid had slid down the green side of the wave we probably would have gotten his body. i have never seen anything like it. totally silent and then boom, sounded like a freight train. 12-15 wave in 4-8 foot swells. might have even been bigger than that. we got the hell out of there but there was no present danger. it was just that one in 50,000 wave that happened to hit the beach that day which was 2x the size of all of the rest. probably hit some current, the shelf of the bottom, two waves peaked at once, all on top of being the largest set in the squall. that's how it works. no magic, just variation and chance.
One day, someone needs to work out how to harness the energy produced from rogue waves. Seems a shame to let all that massive renewable energy go to waste
The science is settled. Just make rogue waves illegal.
Newscaster: “once in a millenium”
Nature: Oh, I’ll see you MUCH SOONER than that.
It's so extreme, we're going to imagine we have a clue the actual statistics behind how often it happens based off our puny recent data pool.
The current world record wave height is 62.3 feet or 18.87 Meters measured by a buoy in the North Atlantic Ocean at 6am UTC on February 4, 2013 at 59 degrees north, 11 degrees west.
There should be a law against rogue waves.
We only started taking rogue waves seriously in the later half of the 20th century
"Apply policy" - a Canadian approach to uncontrollable factors.
I remember as a young kid sitting in the bathtub taking a bath. The waves were huge. My mother had to beat me up to save me.
"You can't control what you can't measure..."
Using the word 'control', in this context,
Is the first mistake.
You can’t control waves like that. What I want to know is how it dissipated before it made it to shore.
Seems small boats might be better at riding it out as long as the wave does not overturn. The Scott Smith incident highlights the importance of wearing a life jacket when the risks are higher.
Where did it come from and where did it go go?
Rogue waves are fascinating. However , I hardly see them as any kind of safety priority due to their very low probability and that they rarely produce lethal damages, in comparison with virtually any other meteo or geological event.
Not for every phenomenon is ok to invest public money on it. Public money also should be "sustainable ".
How do you know they are happening more. We might just be seeing increase do to modern measuring technology. Heck, it wasn't long ago that scientist totally discounted the eyewitness accounts of mariners, and proclaimed the rouge wave an impossibility.
I'm old enough to remember when they [checks notes] didn't exist - except [checks new notes] that they did.
Well 17+ meters is a good height but this video needs a an update because “once in a millennium” is a comical exaggeration in my opinion! I’ve seen a couple of documentaries on rogue waves where satellite data has measured wave heights and shows that huge waves regularly occur in certain places.
People used to say we were crazy "impossible, your exaggerating" well...
More common are the three sisters, three in a row much bigger than the average size. Easy to see how a rouge can form.
I have been in a storm off the south Sandwich Islands (Antarctic waters) where the swells ( breaking at top , so waves) were over 30m high, the wind recorded was over 150km/hr then the instruments destructed.....as mariners we have been reporting these storms forever but never believed.
Playing with words as ´recorded' since much bigger rogue waves happened and proved to be a lot bigger in the past.
I wonder if there was a rogue wave off Vancouver Island on June 20th 2023 just after noon. A float plane crashed in Tahsis inlet about 2:00 pm when it was hit by one, we believe, and then tried unsuccessfully to go around
For everyone thinking this is just a small blip compared to Nazare 80+ feet waves but you have got to realise that these are OPEN OCEAN waves which are very short most of the time and the highest storm waves usually get up to 30 feet.
Funny how these waves are occurring more frequently once we start studying them and looking for them
"The more we measure the more we LEARN." Not climate change, they didn't say it because they don't need to anymore.
Is it more frequent or just observed more often?
Years ago working on a salmon trawler off the Oregon coast we had shut down and while in our bunks a large wave hit us during our dead drift rolling the boat onto its side sending everything falling including me right out of my bunk. The boat rolled back right and was smooth the rest of the night. I’m assuming rogue wave but since neither of us saw it and no other boats out that evening reported it….. that was my last year of fishing. I miss the excitement but being on land has less worries.
Yeah, it's happening more frequently because the ocean level is slowly rising each year and at an accelerating rate as vast amounts of floating polar ice melt faster and faster. Coastal cities will be gone eventually. London, New York, LA, Shanghai etc etc are all going to have to relocate further inland at at least slightly higher altitudes as the original cities are swallowed by the ocean.
It’s so unique that it’s uniquer than unique.
Not even close to a once in a Millenium wave. More like once a decade, if that. And then they show footage of tsunami's, which is something very different than a rogue wave.
What's 17.6 meters? I was forced to learn the metric system in high school, but that was back in the 70s, haven't used it since.
The more data recording equipment distributed across the world, the more we find out that occurrences aren't as rare as thought. That goes for any and everything.
Frequency hasn't changed, the technology has improved to track and monitor the waves.
We don't even knows what causes rogue waves. It could be a number of things that we don't even know about like earthquake under water, landslide under water, volcano going off under water, etc etc.
Off the South West Coast of Tasmania ,Australia ,waves that size occur reasonably often
The swamped crowd at 1:16 is a great photo, but it is a tidal bore not a rogue wave.
NEVER underestimate the power of water folks.
Happens way more often than they tell you.
Didn’t know that about Loverboy. RIP sir!
I experienced a 30' near Santa Barbara in '83. I spotted it on my stbd beam at the last second due to phosphorus in the breaking crest and turned into it.
All waves are, to a large extent, the sum of many smaller waves travelling in different directions, and when they all arrive at the same point simultaneously, we get a 'rogue wave'. Surfers know this phenomenon as a 'bomb', which breaks further out, in deeper water, and the result is the infamous 'clean-up set'. Part of what makes surfing exciting...🌊
Rogue waves can get much larger than 4 stories in deep ocean. Its wild how fast they come and go. There are waves big enough to swallow oil rigs, rare, but they are out there.
Its mainly why sailors thought there were sea monsters. What else could throw a literal tower of water at you in a moments notice?
8 meter rogue wave off of San Francisco. Try 45 meters! I had an older Surfer Magazine with a picture of a freighter out punching through those waves in the early 1970s and the tanker was like over 100 ft. plus out of the water (the bow) as it went over them. They were like 150 ft. waves. Until you see a picture like that, you can never believe it.
Largest rogue waves has to be from ocean crust displacement
Who even knew Loverboy was still around? That's crazy.
what about the draupner wave? It was 26meters
Ummm do they want us to forget that the title of this video implies that they have footage of a large wave
They must have meant largest Rogue Wave ever recorded on an instrument. The Rogue Wave that broadsided the SS Queen Mary on Dec 11, 1942 was 28 metres or 92 feet high.
I wonder if they are caused by underwater land or mud slides that don't leave a seismic image.
How was a 7meter wave the “largest recorded” when the wave that took out the musician was known to be 8meters?