[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [Debconf-team] Day Trip - please comment



Hi

Didier 'OdyX' Raboud <odyx@debian.org> writes:

> Le samedi, 20 juillet 2013 14.38:13, Christian PERRIER a écrit :
>> Quoting Raphaël Walther (raphael.walther@gmail.com):
>> > I have check, there is one communal shower for 3 persons at Soliat.
>> > Of course you could go to the lake later when we are in Neuchâtel.
>> > For that day, my hiking proposal is that people will walk from Le
>> > Camp to Soliat. So everyone should be together for apéro (and
>> > picnic lunch).
>> 
>> Checking on the map : is what you call "Soliat", the "Ferme du
>> Soliat", altitude 1382m, at the end of an unpaved road, close to the
>> top of the Creux du Van cliffs, and close to the "Soliat" moutain
>> top
>> (alt. 1463)?
>
> Exactly. Swiss coordinates CH1903+: 2544654 198632, aka [0].
>
> As for the itinerary, I suggest to check wanderland.ch, which has all 
> hiking paths for Switzerland, which are in turn very-well indicated on-
> site. I've traced one possible itinerary for you, [1]. It counts 4h51 
> for normal hikers, 940m of positive altitude diff and 17km flat. Add 
> pauses to that and it makes a quite serious walk (but one I'd enjoy
> :-).

In my opinion this hike is too much for the "regular DebConf hiker". I
would not expect more than about 20 people to do this.

While I agree that it's indeed a very nice hike and expect some people
to actually do this hike, I think we should also offer a less strenuous
option like the "Gorges de l'Areuse" from Boudry to Champs du Moulin. 

Gaudenz

>
> Cheers,
>
> OdyX
>
> [0] http://map.geo.admin.ch/?crosshair=point&Y=544979&X=198632&zoom=6
> [1] http://map.wanderland.ch/?layers=Wanderwegnetz&trackId=1399453
> _______________________________________________
> Debconf-team mailing list
> Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org
> http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team

-- 
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter.
Try again. Fail again. Fail better.
~ Samuel Beckett ~

Reply to: