Subject: Shen44 is no Master!
From: "Simple Simon"
Date: 07/29/2003 14:14 Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

Shen44 to his great embarrassment wrote:

NUC means a vessel through some exceptional circumstance cannot maneuver as
required by these rules .... a becalmed sailboat with no mechanical power
seems
to fit this bill perfectly.

He wrote the above in response to my writing:

Not under command means some failure of mechanical systems
that means the vessel cannot maneuver. Lack of wind is not
such a circumstance. No, I think even Jeff and Shen44 would
agree with me that NUC is not applicable here.

You must ask yourself like I have asked myself, "How can
any man who claims to have been a master on a varitey of
very large ships be so ignorant of the facts?" Even a sailor
who has studied the Rules more for the sake of knowing
them and has gotten a Master's license more for the sake
of the knowledge such a license requires than a desire to
be paid for my skills knows why a NUC is a NUC.

Obviously, another of the lessons you missed. Hey ! Show me the legal
precedence and logic to back up your statement, and I'll concur.

Shen was correct when he wrote: NUC means a vessel
(which) through some exceptional circumstance cannot
maneuver as required by these rules.

Then he made some ignorant statement about a sailboat
becalmed fitting the definition of a NUC. What he did
not realize is that the generally accepted definition of
'exceptional circumstance' is understood to mean a
mechanical or operational breakdown or defect which
prevents a vessel from maneuvering or operating as
an approaching vessel might expect.

Says who? You? Not hardly an experienced or knowledgeable support structure for
your argument.

And this unacceptable lack of knowledge and breech
of trust is what is foisted off upon unsuspecting sailors
who are beginning to realize that even the masters
of huge ships that travel at speeds of thirty knots and
more haven't a clue. There are many dangers out there
when ship masters such as Shen44 believe and argue
that a sailboat becalmed is a NUC.

Can he maneuver as required by the rules and thusly keep out of the way of
another vessel, as required by the rules? Not hardly..... EG.... this was a
"trap" Neal, and you bought it .... a becalmed sailboat is listed in precedence
as being able to use the NUC lights....Sorry, I can't produce the exact
precedence, so you can believe me or not on this and do a search.

Shen44, if you are a man you will admit your mistake
and apologize to me for slandering me on the basis
of your misunderstanding of an obvious aspects of the
COLREGS.

S.Simon.

LOL Never slandered you .... don't have to..... you do an EXCELLENT job of that
on your own...... I just point out your many failings... EG that is, if Jeff
or otn don't beat me to it.

PS. I'll make it easy for you to eat some humble pie.
Just cut, paste and post the following.

I, Shen44, do wipe egg off my pimply face
and offer my apologies to S.Simon for casting
aspersions his way with respect to the definition
of a NUC because I lacked basic knowledge
any Master should be aware of - namely what
the term, "exceptional circumstanc" means.


ROFL Head for your "search engine" simple neal..... you done sclewed up again
!!!

Shen

As a side note: interesting...he didn't try to jump on me about "early and
substantial action to avoid a collision" in fog, when I said that was wrong.

I'd be curious about the precedent, just for the sake of completeness.

However, I'm not sure it makes any difference in the real world.

First off all, the only real difference is the "pecking order." If a sailboat were to
become a NUC, it would jump ahead of Fishing Vessels and CBDs. But does this change
anything? If a sailboat is fully becalmed, its doesn't actually gain anything by being
a NUC - the fishing boat has the same obligation to go around.

The only issue would be in the courts, to access liability, and for this we can only
speculate. It has been held the boats that falsely claimed to be a NUC where still
obligated to perform the action they sought to avoid. But that's not an issue with a
becalmed sailboat. On the other hand, the fishing vessel, upon seeing the NUC signals,
has been informed of the issue and would have to respond promptly.

So if displaying the NUC signal doesn't alter the desired proper resolution, and doesn't
increase the sailboat's liability, it would seem that e sailboat is "entitled" to do it.



"Shen44" wrote in message
...
Subject: Shen44 is no Master!
From: "Simple Simon"
Date: 07/29/2003 14:14 Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

Shen44 to his great embarrassment wrote:

NUC means a vessel through some exceptional circumstance cannot maneuver as
required by these rules .... a becalmed sailboat with no mechanical power
seems
to fit this bill perfectly.

He wrote the above in response to my writing:

Not under command means some failure of mechanical systems
that means the vessel cannot maneuver. Lack of wind is not
such a circumstance. No, I think even Jeff and Shen44 would
agree with me that NUC is not applicable here.

You must ask yourself like I have asked myself, "How can
any man who claims to have been a master on a varitey of
very large ships be so ignorant of the facts?" Even a sailor
who has studied the Rules more for the sake of knowing
them and has gotten a Master's license more for the sake
of the knowledge such a license requires than a desire to
be paid for my skills knows why a NUC is a NUC.

Obviously, another of the lessons you missed. Hey ! Show me the legal
precedence and logic to back up your statement, and I'll concur.

Shen was correct when he wrote: NUC means a vessel
(which) through some exceptional circumstance cannot
maneuver as required by these rules.

Then he made some ignorant statement about a sailboat
becalmed fitting the definition of a NUC. What he did
not realize is that the generally accepted definition of
'exceptional circumstance' is understood to mean a
mechanical or operational breakdown or defect which
prevents a vessel from maneuvering or operating as
an approaching vessel might expect.

Says who? You? Not hardly an experienced or knowledgeable support structure for
your argument.

And this unacceptable lack of knowledge and breech
of trust is what is foisted off upon unsuspecting sailors
who are beginning to realize that even the masters
of huge ships that travel at speeds of thirty knots and
more haven't a clue. There are many dangers out there
when ship masters such as Shen44 believe and argue
that a sailboat becalmed is a NUC.

Can he maneuver as required by the rules and thusly keep out of the way of
another vessel, as required by the rules? Not hardly..... EG.... this was a
"trap" Neal, and you bought it .... a becalmed sailboat is listed in precedence
as being able to use the NUC lights....Sorry, I can't produce the exact
precedence, so you can believe me or not on this and do a search.

Shen44, if you are a man you will admit your mistake
and apologize to me for slandering me on the basis
of your misunderstanding of an obvious aspects of the
COLREGS.

S.Simon.

LOL Never slandered you .... don't have to..... you do an EXCELLENT job of that
on your own...... I just point out your many failings... EG that is, if Jeff
or otn don't beat me to it.

PS. I'll make it easy for you to eat some humble pie.
Just cut, paste and post the following.

I, Shen44, do wipe egg off my pimply face
and offer my apologies to S.Simon for casting
aspersions his way with respect to the definition
of a NUC because I lacked basic knowledge
any Master should be aware of - namely what
the term, "exceptional circumstanc" means.


ROFL Head for your "search engine" simple neal..... you done sclewed up again
!!!

Shen

As a side note: interesting...he didn't try to jump on me about "early and
substantial action to avoid a collision" in fog, when I said that was wrong.

Subject: Shen44 is no Master!
From: "Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom
Date: 07/30/2003 04:33 Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

I'd be curious about the precedent, just for the sake of completeness.

Have never seen the "legal" precedent, but have read this in some "Rules of the
Road and what they mean" books ....most recently, one put out by Ocean
Navigator/Professional Mariner.


However, I'm not sure it makes any difference in the real world.

Yes and no .... It affirms their inability to maneuver, period.

First off all, the only real difference is the "pecking order." If a
sailboat were to
become a NUC, it would jump ahead of Fishing Vessels and CBDs. But does
this change
anything? If a sailboat is fully becalmed, its doesn't actually gain
anything by being
a NUC - the fishing boat has the same obligation to go around.


??? sailing vessel normally stays clear of a fishing vessel, or am I missing
something ....wait....read it again....yes, it will still have to go around
(because the boat is becalmed), but, it confirms to the fishing boat that the
sail has no auxillary and is incapable of maneuvering.

The only issue would be in the courts, to access liability, and for this we
can only
speculate. It has been held the boats that falsely claimed to be a NUC where
still
obligated to perform the action they sought to avoid. But that's not an
issue with a
becalmed sailboat. On the other hand, the fishing vessel, upon seeing the
NUC signals,
has been informed of the issue and would have to respond promptly.

So if displaying the NUC signal doesn't alter the desired proper resolution,
and doesn't
increase the sailboat's liability, it would seem that e sailboat is
"entitled" to do it.


I would say that logic is on the side of displaying, for many reasons.

Shen