Nat Dalton : 2016

940.9 m surveyed this year.

Other years:  | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2019 | 2022

Wallet status | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2019 | 2022

Table of all trips and surveys aligned by date

DateTripsSurveys
June 22, 2016 UNKNOWN
June 23, 2016 UNKNOWN
June 24, 2016 Balcony rigging - guide (start of 2016) Balcony rigging swingers 19.0 m
June 26, 2016 Tunnocks - Procrastination Tunnocks
June 27, 2016 Tunnocks UNKNOWN
June 28, 2016 Tunnocks - entrance rerig Tunnocks
June 30, 2016 Tunnocks (258)- Champagne on Ice (rigging) UNKNOWN
July 1, 2016 Tunnocks - Champagne on Ice Tunnocks
July 2, 2016 Balkonhöhle Rescue UNKNOWN
July 3, 2016 Balcony - Haydon's pitch near gear dump Balcony
July 4, 2016 Tunnocks, 2-night camp UNKNOWN
July 5, 2016 slackers 922.0 m
July 10, 2016 The Non Rescue - 1st Response Team The Non Rescue
July 11, 2016 Prospecting North of Balcony UNKNOWN
July 12, 2016 Tunnocks - Derigging and pushing Champagne on Ice Tunnocks

Horrible bug here but only when there is more than one survex block per day, or is there ?!

WHat we thought was the bug: e.g. see Wookey 1999 where there are 3 eiscream survex blocks on 5th August. it duplicates the entry but gets it wrong. The length from the first block is displayed twice but there should be 3 rows: eiscream, eiscream2, eiscream3.

The interaction of django database query idioms with django HTML templating language is a bit impenetrable here. I blame Aaron Curtis who was too fond of being clever with the Django templating system instead or writing it in python anyone could understand.
- The template is in troggle/templates/personexpedition.html
- The code is in function personexpedition() which calls get_person_chronology() in troggle/core/views/logbooks.py
- the connection between the two is made in the URL resolver in troggle/urls.py

To be fixed!

What we now know

The eiscream.svx file does indeed record 3 blocks: eiscream, eiscream2 & eiscream3. But (more) careful inspection shows that eiscream2 and eiscream3 are in the year 2000, not in 1999. So they absolutely should not be shown here. So maybe everything is correct after all. (Well, apart from the duplication.)