|
A tough question for Jeff and Shen44
You are an embarrassment to all sailors Neal. Read the rules before you engage in further
discussions about them. Your acting like you never read Rule 19 at all. Here, you're actually saying that you don't have to obey the rules, because everyone else must avoid you. What kind of idiot are you? "Simple Simon" wrote in message ... "Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message ... Simple Simon wrote: It just so happens that this sound signal is also that of a NUC, RAM, etc. This means that any motor vessel hearing the required signal knows that according to the Rules it shall take action early and adequately to avoid a close quarters situation. Rule 19 doesn't differentiate between signals - ALL vessels must respond to ALL signals! Did you ever even read the rules? Yes, and the way a motor vessel responds to the signal of a saiboat, NUC, RAM etc. in restricted visibility is to take action early and adequately to avoid a close quarters situation. That is the same way a sailboat responds to a powerboat. Wrong. A sailboat upon hearing the signal of a powerboat knows the powerboat is mandated by the Rules to avoid a close quarters situation. The sailboat knows the motor boat is either going to slow down and stop or change course. In either case the sailboat, if it does the same, will only worsen the situation because it might well be taking an action that will make matters worse and that is prohibited in the Rules. What if the sailboat decides to turn to the right and the motorboat has turned to the left then chances of a collision would be greatly increased. It is clear by the different sound signals that since the motor vessel must take action to avoid a close quarters situation that it is not necessary for the sailboat to do the same. In a fog how's the sailboat to know what the motorboat is doing if the sailboat is changing its course? The proper response of a sailboat upon hearing the fog signal of a motor vessel is to maintain course and heading and slow down or change course only if a danger of collision exists because the motor vessel fails to take the appropriate action stated above. In other words the sailboat stands on until it becomes clear that continuing to do so will result in a collision because the motor vessel did not follow the Rules that apply to motor vessels. You're doing a good job of stating how the rules apply for "vessels in sight of one another." This is how it works in a fog as well. |
A tough question for Jeff and Shen44
Now you're saying that a sailboat can never go fast enough to cause damage!! This is only
true for one boat I know of! You're even claiming that the rules don't apply to you because you're too incompetent to handle your boat? You've totally lost it, Neal! "Simple Simon" wrote in message ... "Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message ... However, in restricted visibility the rule is different. Your standin at the test probably knew this, but since you have never read it: "Except where it has been determined that a risk of collision does not exist, every vessel ... shall reduce her speed" I already told you about a billion times that a sailboat already is operating at a safe speed. Reducing speed to a safe speed when one is already operating at a safe speed is not possible. Thus the presumption is that there is a risk of collision. Since hearing one signal is not necessarily enough to determine the situation, it is generally appropriate for all vessels to reduce speed. There is no mention of different categories of boats. All vessels that are operating too fast for the condition of restricted visibility must reduce their speed to a safe speed. The only vessel that IS ABLE TO operate at an unsafe speed is the motor vessel. This reduces your argument to a pile of rubble. The only exception is if the motor vessel is higher in the pecking order than the sailboat, i.e. NUC, RAM, etc. According to your silly statement any motor vessel could stop in the path of a sailboat on purpose and it would be the sailboat's responsibility to keep clear. Rule 19 explicitly requires it: . What part of "She shall if necessary take all her way off" do you not understand? I understand it all and in the case of the sailboat it is not "necessary because any decent sailboat can turn faster than she can take all weigh off. How do you expect a sailboat to stop her foward progress? Does your sailboat have brakes or something? Again this rule is for motorboats that can reverse their propeller and take way off. A sailboat cannot do so so it cannot be expected to do so. |
A tough question for Jeff and Shen44
Finally we're getting to the heart of it You're admitting that I'm right, but claiming
that your interpretation of the rules makes more sense. I think you should forward your thoughts to the Coast Guard. The claim you're making is that when they say "all vessels" they really mean "all vessels that are moving too fast." However, they don't say "reduce to a safer speed," the say "shall reduce her speed to the minimum at which she can be held on course." They clearly say exactly what I've been saying; clearly refute exactly what you're claiming. You also make the bizarre claim that powerboats must avoid sailboats that the re unable to see. The sailboat must sound its signal every 2 minutes. At 8 knots, the sailboat travels 1600 feet. By what magical method does the powerboat avoid a sailboat that could be 1/4 mile away, or could be dead ahead at 50 feet? Your strongest argument is the absurd claim that they didn't really mean "All vessels ....shall reduce speed" because some vessels are already stopped. You know that's a stupid argument, but its the best you've got. You lost this one Neal, big time. I got my quarterly rules fix, and you come out looking like a total buffoon! Just hope the CG isn't reading this! "Simple Simon" wrote in message ... "Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message ... "Simple Simon" wrote in message ... "Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message ... What pecking order? There's no pecking order in Restricted Visibility. Anyone who actually passed the test would know this. You have tried to claim there is no pecking order in restricted vis. but there clearly is a pecking order because the motor vessel knows when it hears the sound signal of a sailboat, NUC, RAM etc. that a vessel is in the area with which the motor vessel must avoid a close quarters situation. The concept of "pecking order" implies a priority that the rules explicitly say does not exist. "ALL VESSELS ... MUST REDUCE SPEED" It is true that sounding the "other" signal You seem to ignore Rule 6 which talks about safe speed. RULE 6 Safe Speed Every vessel shall at all times proceed at a safe speed so that she can take proper and effective action to avoid collision and be stopped within a distance appropriate to the prevailing circumstances and conditions. Reducing speed to zero for a sailboat is not operating at a safe speed. It is clear that there is no speed safe for you. It is also clear that you have no answer for my arguments. All vessels must reduce speed applies only to those vessels having speed to reduce. A sailboat going along at two or three knots in a fog does not fit the definition. It it reduces speed any more than it will not be operating at a safe speed as required by Rule 6 There may be such a specific case - but you might have to justify your actions in court. Oh, I forgot, you souwl simply lie. That sure makes things easy for you, doesn't it? I don't need to lie. I need only to state the facts based on my superior understanding of the position of a sailboat with respect to the Rules. Never forget the Rules were written primarily to control motor boat irresponsibility. Sailboats hold a privileged position in most of the Rules. About the only case where a sailboat must kowtow to a motor boat is when a sailboat is overtaking and you and I know that rarely, if ever, happens. A Coast Guard vessel tied up to and repairing an aid to navigation is in the category of "all vessels" and you are trying to say it must reduce speed? It can't reduce speed because it has no speed to reduce. stupid. Not stupid. It is a case that refutes your insistence on 'all vessels' having to reduce speed. It show that what the Rule really says is all vessels that are speeding must reduce speed. The implication is so clear that it is not stated because it would be redundant. The same goes for a sailboat. There is no way a sailboat can reduce speed to zero. Even if it lets the sails shake, rattle and roll it still will be making some way either forwards, backwards or sideways, furthermore it will not be operating at a safe speed as required. equally stupid Not stupid. It shows how your insistence that a sailboat must reduce speed to zero is not possible and not safe and a violation of the requirement that it operate at a safe speed. Again you attempt to make a sailboat adhere to rules that are meant only for motor vessels that can use their powerful engines and thrusters to stop dead in the water. Start at the beginning: Rule 1(a) "These rules apply to all vessels" We have been through that already. 'All vessels' includes that Coast Guard vessel tied up to and doing work on an aid to navigation. The rule literally states that that Coast Guard vessel must reduce its speed to a safe speed and even stop if necessary. It simply does not apply. It follows that 'all vessels' clearly does not mean all vessels. There are exceptions. A sailboat is another such exception. I'm sorry if you are too stubborn to understand it but when a motor vessel is required by the Rules to take action early and adequately to avoid a close quarters situation with any vessel signaling it is a sailboat, NUC, RAM in restricted visibility then that means by definition that the motor vessel is the give-way vessel. There is absolutely nothing in the rules to this affect. On the contrary, the rules are quite explicit that there is no concept of "standon" in restricted visibility. There is no written rule to that affect. You are correct there. But, and it's a big but, the consequences of the Rules when followed in their spirit and letter makes any sailboat, NUC, RAM etc. a stand-on vessel by virtue of the fact that motor vessels must take action early and adequately to avoid a close quarters situation whenever it becomes aware that any vessel that sounds a fog signal saying "Here I am, you know my status. My status is you must avoid a close quarters situation with me because I may not be able to do so." This mandates the motor boat give way. Suddenly even if the Rules don't specifically state it, you have a give way vessel and once you have a give way vessel you have a pecking order. Believe it. I'm on a roll. I only wish Shen44 could read these posts and come to realize the limitations of his understanding of the Rules as well . Must I remind you I am STILL a Captain in good standing. Maybe you should check with your friend at the office again. Have a nice evening, friend. S.Simon |
A tough question for Jeff and Shen44
Subject: A tough question for Jeff and Shen44
From: "Simple Simon" Date: 07/28/2003 12:07 Pacific Standard Time snip It just so happens that this sound signal is also that of a NUC, RAM, etc. This means that any motor vessel hearing the required signal knows that according to the Rules it shall take action early and adequately to avoid a close quarters situation. In fog, how do you know there is a close quarters situation if you cannot see the other guy? Sound can be very deceptive in fog and should not be relied on as anything but "scanty" information ..... so....explain how you can take early action (other than putting the sound hopefully dead astern and praying that you are faster)? Rule 19 doesn't differentiate between signals - ALL vessels must respond to ALL signals! Did you ever even read the rules? Yes, and the way a motor vessel responds to the signal of a saiboat, NUC, RAM etc. in restricted visibility is to take action early and adequately to avoid a close quarters situation. Wrong The proper response of a sailboat upon hearing the fog signal of a motor vessel is to maintain course and heading and slow down or change course only if a danger of collision exists It's foggy... how would they know? because the motor vessel fails to take the appropriate action stated above. In other words the sailboat stands on until it becomes clear that continuing to do so will result in a collision because the motor vessel did not follow the Rules that apply to motor vessels. How do they know this? It's fog...they can't see..... If a close quarters situation eventuates it is solely the motor vessel's fault for not fulfilling its obligations under the Rules. Typically wrong The sailboat has not violated any Rule to cause the close quarters situation. The motor vessel has. Typically wrong If your point is that with the sail down the aux does not have to get out of the way of the powerboat, this is correct. However, if the situations were reversed, i.e. in the fog: a powerboat stopped, and a sailboat at full speed, it now becomes the sailboat's responsibility to avoid the powerboat. This is totally incorrect. A motor vessel underway but not making way is still obligated to stay clear of a sailboat and not cause a close quarters situation. It has a motor and it must use that motor to keep clear. The only exception is if the motor vessel is higher in the pecking order than the sailboat, i.e. NUC, RAM, etc. According to your silly statement any motor vessel could stop in the path of a sailboat on purpose and it would be the sailboat's responsibility to keep clear. Wrong. The sailboat is the stand-on vessel and must maintain course and speed. The whole of the above, typically wrong The motor vessel must take action early and adequately to avoid a close quarters situation. Based on what information...."Assumptions shall not be made based on scanty information" What pecking order? There's no pecking order in Restricted Visibility. Anyone who actually passed the test would know this. You have tried to claim there is no pecking order in restricted vis. but there clearly is a pecking order because the motor vessel knows when it hears the sound signal of a sailboat, NUC, RAM etc. that a vessel is in the area with which the motor vessel must avoid a close quarters situation. ROFL love the way you keep avoiding that towboat The concept of "pecking order" implies a priority that the rules explicitly say does not exist. "ALL VESSELS ... MUST REDUCE SPEED" It is true that sounding the "other" signal You seem to ignore Rule 6 which talks about safe speed. RULE 6 Safe Speed Every vessel shall at all times proceed at a safe speed so that she can take proper and effective action to avoid collision and be stopped within a distance appropriate to the prevailing circumstances and conditions. Reducing speed to zero for a sailboat is not operating at a safe speed. Wrong it's just as safe as reducing speed to zero on a powerdriven vessel All vessels must reduce speed applies only to those vessels having speed to reduce. A sailboat going along at two or three knots in a fog does not fit the definition. It it reduces speed any more than it will not be operating at a safe speed as required by Rule 6 LOL that's pathetic A Coast Guard vessel tied up to and repairing an aid to navigation is in the category of "all vessels" and you are trying to say it must reduce speed? It can't reduce speed because it has no speed to reduce. The same goes for a sailboat. There is no way a sailboat can reduce speed to zero. Even if it lets the sails shake, rattle and roll it still will be making some way either forwards, backwards or sideways, furthermore it will not be operating at a safe speed as required. ROFL Again you attempt to make a sailboat adhere to rules that are meant only for motor vessels that can use their powerful engines and thrusters to stop dead in the water. ROFL conveys additional information that indicates extra caution is needed; it does NOT give a vessel standon status. I'm sorry if you are too stubborn to understand it but when a motor vessel is required by the Rules to take action early and adequately to avoid a close quarters situation with any vessel signaling it is a sailboat, NUC, RAM in restricted visibility then that means by definition that the motor vessel is the give-way vessel. Taking action to avoid a close quarters situation is giving way. It doesn't get any simpler than that. ROFL There clearly IS a pecking order and hence there IS, by definition, a stand-on vessel and a give-way vessel in restricted vis. ROFL The fact that one vessel should exercise special caution doesn't make the other vessel "standon." I'm not talking about special caution. I am talking about a motor vessels obligation to avoid a close quarters situation with a sailboat, NUC, RAM, etc. in a fog How about that sailboat and tug pushing a dinky empty barge....you explained that yet? Yes, it does make a pecking order. Taking action early and adequately to avoid a close quarters situation is giving way. Giving way means the vessel giving way is the give way vessel. I achieved a higher score than you did because I understand the Rules. I know the expected answers but the expected answers don't cover the above situations with a sailboat in a fog. You should be ashamed for being so closed-minded that you refuse to believe what is so evident. I think you need a good flogging at the mast! ROFL so..... you admit it...you didn't (and still don't) know the subject but you knew the answers from one of those exam helper books and passed the test. Shen |
A tough question for Jeff and Shen44
Subject: A tough question for Jeff and Shen44
From: (CANDChelp) Date: 07/28/2003 12:13 Pacific Standard Time Message-id: You are required to some sort of legal lights to operate legally at night. Bobsprit does not need to have lower running lights in addition to the masthead tricolor as you stated in order for him to operate at night. He can sail at night his whole life with tricolor only and be legal. Thanks, neal. I checked on this and found you're right. Not surprising that Jeff got it wrong. I intend to install the masthed set, and keep the originals as a "spare." RB Just don't start or use your engine while using the "tricolor" |
A tough question for Jeff and Shen44
Subject: A tough question for Jeff and Shen44
From: "Simple Simon" Date: 07/28/2003 15:26 Pacific Standard Time Message-id: ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom Newsgroups: alt.sailing.asa Sent: Monday, July 28, 2003 16:05 Subject: A tough question for Jeff and Shen44 Is this is why the rule says: "She shall if necessary take all her way off" ? So just how much does a license cost nowadays? It does not say take all way off so you stop in the path of the sailboat. First, the motor vessel is required to take necessary action to avoid a close quarters situation. Wrong Taking all way off is only necessary if the motor vessel fails in its obligation to stay clear of the sailboat. To further compound its violation of the Rules only an idiot motor boat operator would come to a stop right in the path of a sailboat. If he's in fog and can't see the sailboat, how does he know he's stopped in the path of the sailboat? |
A tough question for Jeff and Shen44
Subject: A tough question for Jeff and Shen44
From: "Simple Simon" Date: 07/28/2003 15:58 Pacific Standard Time Message-id: "Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message ... "Simple Simon" wrote in message ... "Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message ... What pecking order? There's no pecking order in Restricted Visibility. Anyone who actually passed the test would know this. You have tried to claim there is no pecking order in restricted vis. but there clearly is a pecking order because the motor vessel knows when it hears the sound signal of a sailboat, NUC, RAM etc. that a vessel is in the area with which the motor vessel must avoid a close quarters situation. Semi right....mostly wrong The concept of "pecking order" implies a priority that the rules explicitly say does not exist. "ALL VESSELS ... MUST REDUCE SPEED" It is true that sounding the "other" signal You seem to ignore Rule 6 which talks about safe speed. RULE 6 Safe Speed Every vessel shall at all times proceed at a safe speed so that she can take proper and effective action to avoid collision and be stopped within a distance appropriate to the prevailing circumstances and conditions. Reducing speed to zero for a sailboat is not operating at a safe speed. It is clear that there is no speed safe for you. It is also clear that you have no answer for my arguments. You have no valid arguments All vessels must reduce speed applies only to those vessels having speed to reduce. A sailboat going along at two or three knots in a fog does not fit the definition. It it reduces speed any more than it will not be operating at a safe speed as required by Rule 6 Wrong There may be such a specific case - but you might have to justify your actions in court. Oh, I forgot, you souwl simply lie. That sure makes things easy for you, doesn't it? I don't need to lie. I need only to state the facts based on my superior understanding of the position of a sailboat with respect to the Rules. Never forget the Rules were written primarily to control motor boat irresponsibility. Wrong Sailboats hold a privileged position in most of the Rules. About the only case where a sailboat must kowtow to a motor boat is when a sailboat is overtaking and you and I know that rarely, if ever, happens. Never heard of narrow channels and safety fairways, I see A Coast Guard vessel tied up to and repairing an aid to navigation is in the category of "all vessels" and you are trying to say it must reduce speed? It can't reduce speed because it has no speed to reduce. stupid. Not stupid. It is a case that refutes your insistence on 'all vessels' having to reduce speed. It show that what the Rule really says is all vessels that are speeding must reduce speed. The implication is so clear that it is not stated because it would be redundant. As Jeff said....stupid The same goes for a sailboat. There is no way a sailboat can reduce speed to zero. not too good a sailor, are you? Even if it lets the sails shake, rattle and roll it still will be making some way either forwards, backwards or sideways, much like a motor vessel furthermore it will not be operating at a safe speed as required. wrong equally stupid Not stupid. It shows how your insistence that a sailboat must reduce speed to zero is not possible and not safe and a violation of the requirement that it operate at a safe speed. stupid AND wrong Again you attempt to make a sailboat adhere to rules that are meant only for motor vessels that can use their powerful engines and thrusters to stop dead in the water. Start at the beginning: Rule 1(a) "These rules apply to all vessels" We have been through that already. 'All vessels' includes that Coast Guard vessel tied up to and doing work on an aid to navigation. The rule literally states that that Coast Guard vessel must reduce its speed to a safe speed and even stop if necessary. It simply does not apply. It follows that 'all vessels' clearly does not mean all vessels. There are exceptions. A sailboat is another such exception. Show us where these exceptions are stated .... include legal precedence I'm sorry if you are too stubborn to understand it but when a motor vessel is required by the Rules to take action early and adequately to avoid a close quarters situation with any vessel signaling it is a sailboat, NUC, RAM in restricted visibility then that means by definition that the motor vessel is the give-way vessel. Wrong There is absolutely nothing in the rules to this affect. On the contrary, the rules are quite explicit that there is no concept of "standon" in restricted visibility. There is no written rule to that affect. You are correct there. But, and it's a big but, the consequences of the Rules when followed in their spirit and letter makes any sailboat, NUC, RAM etc. a stand-on vessel by virtue of the fact that motor vessels must take action early and adequately to avoid a close quarters situation whenever it becomes aware that any vessel that sounds a fog signal saying "Here I am, you know my status. My status is you must avoid a close quarters situation with me because I may not be able to do so." This mandates the motor boat give way. Suddenly even if the Rules don't specifically state it, you have a give way vessel and once you have a give way vessel you have a pecking order. Believe it. Wrong....typically I'm on a roll. I only wish Shen44 could read these posts and come to realize the limitations of his understanding of the Rules as well . EG Shen's reading and as you can see, having a good laugh Must I remind you I am STILL a Captain in good standing. ROFLMAO Maybe you should check with your friend at the office again. Have a nice evening, friend. S.Simon Shen |
A tough question for Jeff and Shen44
Booby just said that to troll you up from the depths
to which you have sunk recently. Booby acts dumb but he is dumb like a fox. Unlike Doug King, for example, Booby at least knows the difference between a sailboat and a motor boat. "Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message ... Whatever. But your job was well done. Booby now believes his tricolor is legal for powering. "Simple Simon" wrote in message ... "Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message ... Fact 4) An auxiliary sailboat does not need to have installed the lights for a motor vessel unless and until it turns on the motor. True. It also doesn't need lights during the day in good visibility. Running lights are not "required equipment," but their appropriate use is. What's the point? The point is your statement about Bobsprit's boat needing lower running lights in addition to any masthead tricolor he might install is totally wrong. Is that what this is all about? I was advising RB, taking into account the nature of his boat and his sailing. He has already told us that he frequently powers back to his slip at night; he clearly needs lower sidelights. To advise otherwise would be reprehensible. Your advice was incomplete and wrong. Your wording was wrong. The idea it conveyed was wrong. When you tell somebody he must have lower running lights in addition to the tricolor you need to include the qualifiers and you did not include them. You made a blanket generalization based on a motor boat bias. |
A tough question for Jeff and Shen44
"Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message ... S.Simon wrote: It does not say take all way off so you stop in the path of the sailboat. First, the motor vessel is required to take necessary action to avoid a close quarters situation. And just how is the powerboat supposed to do this in thick fog, Putz? The reason for vessels being required to sound fog signals that identify them is because fog signals enable vessels to plot a bearing of another vessel. Further, the reason certain vessels (sailboats, NUC, RAM, etc.) are required to sound a fog signal peculiar to them and different from a motor vessel is so motor vessels can not only become aware of bearing but of what class of vessel is on that bearing. So, a motor vessel upon hearing in a fog a signal of one prolonged and two short blasts knows that the vessel that made the signal bears whatever degrees and is a vessel that may not be able to take action to avoid a collision. The information that is lacking is range, speed and course of the vessel making the fog signal. What is known is that motor vessel must take action early and adequately to avoid a close quarters situation. Most often the best way to avoid a close quarters situation is to change the heading away from a possible close quarters situation with the vessel that may be unable to do the same by virtue of the signal it sounds. This means that the best course of action for a sailboat is to hold course and speed (which speed is already slow and already safe) until and unless a close quarters situation develops. This eliminates variables and allows the motorboat to make sure it is well clear before it gets back onto its intended course. This also means that the motor vessel gives way. It becomes the give-way vessel. Though not specifically stated in the restricted visibility rules this means there is a give way vessel created by the Rules for restricted visibility. This means there is a pecking order also created, though it is an abbreviated pecking order because sailboats, NUC, RAM etc, don't have individual different signals but the same signal identifying their grouping. The whole point, in fact the letter of the law is that both boats "shall reduce her speed to the minimum at which she can be kept on course. She shall if necessary take all her way off and, in any event, navigate with extreme caution until danger of collision is over." A sailboat navigating in a fog already is operating at slow and safe speed. She is operating with extreme caution because she knows by the signal heard that a motor vessel is on the prowl and probably going way too fast for the conditions and relying on her radar way too much so she can keep on schedule. A sailboat navigating in a fog cannot, like a motorboat, choose her speed. A sailboat is at the mercy of wind direction and wind speed which is most often low or non-existent in a fog. Any rule that requires a sailboat do take an action she cannot take is not a rule intended to apply to the sailboat. Please read the rules before commenting further. The Rules in and of themselves mean nothing. They only mean something when applied to real life situations on the water between vessels. One cannot make blanket statements based on the Rules alone. Every case is different. Your insistence on saying "all vessels" must slow to a safe speed does not apply to "all vessels". I proved that a couple of times with my example of a Coast Guard vessel tied up to and servicing a navigational aid. Another example would be an anchored vessel. Yet another would be a vessel being towed. It follows that the Rules are meant to be a guiding hand to prevent collisions and not a rigid set of laws to which there are no exceptions or no special circumstances that make them not appear to be what they seem. Your outlook is too stringent, rigorous and inflexible. You will get yourself into trouble because you fail to consider special circumstances such as sailboats already proceeding at slow and safe speeds somehow being required to go even slower to the point where they cannot maneuver with any kind of efficiency. You even want sailboats to stop when I have demonstrated this is often not even possible. Rules, as well-intentioned as they may be, cannot cover all contingencies. People, when writing rules that are primarily motor boat-oriented, cannot understand, let alone foresee, any and all circumstances for sailboats, which boats the operation of they are mostly ignorant. In fact, when collisions occur, it is hugely lopsided and the fault of motor boats the majority of the time. This alone should tell you that it's motorboaters who should listen to sailors and their unique perspective and their superior understanding of the actual, real life workings of the Rules and not vice versa. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:24 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com