View Single Post
  #76   Report Post  
Simple Simon
 
Posts: n/a
Default Ellen MacArthur, Tthe Reluctant Heroine

As usual, that idiot Shen44 is saying I 'disappeared'. Hey, can't
a fellow go sailing without the peanut gallery engaging in wishful
thinking? Of course Shen44 wishes his nemesis would just go
away but that is not to be his fate, and yours either, Jeff Morris!

But, it is you, Jeff , whom I am addressing here.


Fact: there is no such classification in the pecking order of
a towboat. A towboat has no status in and of itself. A vessel
towing is just another motor vessel until and unless it is
restricted in its ability to maneuver. Need I remind you of
the pecking order which represents ALL classifications
of vessels.

New NUC
Reels RAM
Catch CBD
Fish Fishing
So Sailing
Purchase Power
Some Sailplane

Now, tell me, Mr. Morris, which of the above does a towboat
fit into?

Huh? I CAN'T HEAR YOU!

Oh! You admit that a towboat fits nowhere in the pecking order?

Well, good! Because that's a fact. A towboat has no special status
in the pecking order.

Until and unless a towboat is restricted in its ability to maneuver it
remains just another motorboat. Once it becomes restricted in its
ability to maneuver it then becomes a RAM.

I have to wonder just what about the pecking order do you, Shen44
and otnmbrd not understand?


"Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message ...
OMIGOD! Neal, What A HORRENDOUS BLUNDER!!!

I come back from a day of dodging t'storms and find that you committed your biggest
screw-up yet! What happened, did you get your first three stupid responses out before
you even glanced at rules? My God, how embarrassing for you!!!

Now of course, you can't resist making a complete fool of yourself by claiming that a
"vessel engaged in towing" is not a "towboat," and that its really a RAM instead and
therefore the rules don't mean what they say, they mean what you would like them to say.
Are you actually claiming that because towboats are not listed in the "pecking order" that
no rule that mentions them is valid? Is that your point? Are you totally daft?

Have you no pride whatsoever?? You claim to have a PhD in English, but you show the
logic skills of a fourth grade dropout. (I apologize to any 4th grade dropouts who may be
insulted by this.)

pathetic ... truly pathetic ...




"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...

"Shen44" wrote in message

...

Read rule 35 (c) and explain to me why they (tugboats) are included in there if
they are RAM .... i.e. there would be no need.



Here is Rule 35 (c)

(c) A vessel not under command, a vessel restricted in her ability to
maneuver, a vessel constrained by her draft, a sailing vessel, a vessel
engaged in fishing and a vessel engaged in towing or pushing
another vessel shall, instead of the signals prescribed in paragraphs
(a) or (b) of this Rule, sound at intervals of not more than 2 minutes
three blasts in succession, namely one prolonged followed by two
short blasts.

The key phrase is "engage is pushing or towing ANOTHER VESSEL"

If the rule stated just plain pushing or towing I might agree with you
but if there is another vessel involved it is assumed that the combination
is Restricted in its Ability to Maneuver. That this rule clarifies a point
about differences in some tow boats that are RAMs and some that
are not has no bearing on our discussion of motorboats who give
one signal taking action to avoid a close quarters situation with those
vessels that sound the signal delineated in the above Rule.

The Rule that names the classes of vessels does not include a
class of vessels called towboats.

New NUC
Reels Ram
Catch CBD
Fish Fishing
So Sailing
Purchase Power
Some Seaplane

This Rule is the Rule that describes pecking order and not
Rule 35. 35 is a specific rule that talks about fog signals.

It does not change the fact that a towboat does not sound
the fog signal of or show the lights and shapes of a RAM
unless it is a RAM. The only thing Rule 35 does is says
a towboat pushing or towing another vessel may sound
the same sound as a RAM, sailboat, NUC. etc.

Another argument won.

S.Simon