just a little testy? Did my post offend you? sorry...ya right, stuff your
self
"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...
Go stuff yourself you walking talking bag of whining crap. You offer
nothing
here but idiotic blubbering on a plethora of topics. Your input is absent
and your opinions are worthless.

CM



"The Carrolls" wrote in message
...
| This is not a forum to ask questions about sailing for any purpose other
| than entertainment. I certianly would not preface any purchase or use of
any
| equipment with information supplied here. Many try, but a few are here
only
| to confuse and inflate their own ego's. The latter tend to throw enough
| disinformation around your time is better spent any where else, if true
| useable information is required.
| wrote in message
| ...
| On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 17:09:13 -0500, "Jeff Morris"
| wrote:
|
| wrote in message
| So, I'm wondering... For coastal sailing in LIS and very occasional
| forays to
| open ocean points north of there, do I need anything more than
Furuno's
| model
| 1623?
|
| Why do you think you need any Radar? Do you often travel in fog?
Are
| you headed Down
| East?
|
| A small radar will help a lot if you get caught in Vineyard Sound and
| want to stay clear
| of the ferry, but it sounds like this would only happen once a year,
if
| that.
|
| You can make a case for more powerful radar if you cruise the Maine
Coast
| all summer, but
| not for LIS.
|
| I was hoping for some input from people with actual experience and
| knowledge.
| You and that Mooron guy (Who can't even spell moron correctly) seem
more
| interested in trying to inflate your own weak and faltering egos more
than
| adding anything of value.
|
| Yes, I frequently encounter fog in the LIS, as well as moderate
darkness
| most
| nights. If you had a boat and sailed it, you would be more familiar
with
| these
| concepts.
|
| Thanks anyway, jackass.
|
| Joey
|
|

Speaking for yourself, of course.

--
Oz1...evil twin of the 3 twins

I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you.

Capetanios Oz wrote in message
...
On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 05:19:45 GMT, "The Carrolls"
wrote:

just a little testy?

Nah, little testes!


Oz1...of the 3 twins.

I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you.

wrote in message ...
Bobsprit's sailing

And you, far less.

Joey



Bwahahahahhahahahhahah! Even a newbie to the group
sizes up Bobsprit in less than two posts. Attaboy Joey!

S.Simon

Bwahahahahhahahahhahah! Even a newbie to the group
sizes up Bobsprit in less than two posts. Attaboy Joey!

Spelled...SOCKPUPPET
Poor Neal thinks Joey's a newbie, but he read my Port Jeff post from 5 months
ago!
Neal, how can you be SO dumb?

RB

On 17 Nov 2003, (Bobsprit) wrote:

Do ferries and barges just wander all over
the LIS? No, they operate in lanes that can
easily be avoided with GPS.

Totally incorrect as any real sailor could tell you.
I guess by your resoning there is no reason for
ferries and barges to have radar or even keep a
wath, since they are so predictable.

Yes, they stay in deep channel's and in the last 8
years I have yet to see a ferry or tug off it's lane.

There was, of course, the collision-related death earlier this summer
after a large (moving at abt. 7 kts) N.Y.C.-based cruise boat crashed
into a J-105 on its way from Larchmont to Block Island which then sank
off the coast of Connecticut. Though reports of that incident suggest
that the collision resulted mostly from the respective crews'
inattention aggravated by the sailing crew's failure to turn off their
boat's autopilot when they saw the motor vessel approaching, one
legitimately might wonder what may have occurred if both (or, for that
matter, either) of the crews were using radar on that dark night.

[Most of] LIS has very little in the way
of visibility issues [on most days].

As Mr. Morris and others, too, have noted, this is almost always
correct.

wrote in message
...
| There was, of course, the collision-related death earlier this summer
| after a large (moving at abt. 7 kts) N.Y.C.-based cruise boat crashed
| into a J-105 on its way from Larchmont to Block Island which then sank
| off the coast of Connecticut. Though reports of that incident suggest
| that the collision resulted mostly from the respective crews'
| inattention aggravated by the sailing crew's failure to turn off their
| boat's autopilot when they saw the motor vessel approaching, one
| legitimately might wonder what may have occurred if both (or, for that
| matter, either) of the crews were using radar on that dark night.

Interesting. You'd have to know the bearings and sighting distances
involved. Let's face it. Radar is a big advantage if used correctly. It
opens the way to safe night sailing and offers another fix for confirmation
to chart. I'm not willing to go digital chart/plotter. I do like being able
to track unseen vessels in limited visibility and confirm my location in
relation to objects about me.

Would you consider that if the sailboat crew had a 6 nautical mile warning
time they may have had more reaction time?

CM

Though reports of that incident suggest
that the collision resulted mostly from the respective crews'
inattention aggravated by the sailing crew's failure to turn off their
boat's autopilot when they saw the motor vessel approaching,

A poor example in this case, since they saw the boat coming and STILL couldn't
get out of the way. Perhaps they had radar. Didn't matter.
The way this clown talks, he probably thinks the radar will blow away the fog,
which he might see once a season.

RB

I believe that the large ship, the 122 foot Mariner, had functioning radar. The J boat,
Hilaria, didn't have radar, and I don't think they had a radar reflector. I haven't seen
the final report, but failure to alter course or slow down after seeing the ship is the
cause I heard cited. I'm skeptical that they would have been able to use the radar if the
autopilot was beyond their skills, but if they had a minimal radar, and knew how to use
it, they would have seen the large ship earlier.

I don't agree with RB that its easy to avoid ferries because their course is predictable.
Boston Harbor, for instance, has "booze cruises" that meander randomly. And many of the
ports have cruise ships, commuters, or head boats, that use different routes depending on
the tides. And, of course, it always seems that the ferries are going to the same places
I headed toward. My claim is not the radar isn't useful, but that a basic radar should do
a reasonable job of ferry avoidance.




wrote in message ...
On 17 Nov 2003, (Bobsprit) wrote:

Do ferries and barges just wander all over
the LIS? No, they operate in lanes that can
easily be avoided with GPS.

Totally incorrect as any real sailor could tell you.
I guess by your resoning there is no reason for
ferries and barges to have radar or even keep a
wath, since they are so predictable.

Yes, they stay in deep channel's and in the last 8
years I have yet to see a ferry or tug off it's lane.

There was, of course, the collision-related death earlier this summer
after a large (moving at abt. 7 kts) N.Y.C.-based cruise boat crashed
into a J-105 on its way from Larchmont to Block Island which then sank
off the coast of Connecticut. Though reports of that incident suggest
that the collision resulted mostly from the respective crews'
inattention aggravated by the sailing crew's failure to turn off their
boat's autopilot when they saw the motor vessel approaching, one
legitimately might wonder what may have occurred if both (or, for that
matter, either) of the crews were using radar on that dark night.

[Most of] LIS has very little in the way
of visibility issues [on most days].

As Mr. Morris and others, too, have noted, this is almost always
correct.

So, I'm wondering... For coastal sailing in LIS and very occasional forays to
open ocean points north of there, do I need anything more than Furuno's model
1623?

Joey

Need: If you're sailing in areas where you are doing night time or occasional
sailing in fog, you could make points for and against radar.
Certainly, radar can make things easier.

Afford: You need to look at many things here, not the least of which, is your
wallet, but you also need to know what you can afford to put on your boat,
considering space for components and power requirements, coupled with your own
comfort level of viewing and using the unit .... you may end up being able to
go high end, or have to settle for low end .... only you can say.
Once you decide on a set (if you're thinking about it, you'll probably end up
getting it), keep in mind that the installation, to suit your needs or
financial requirements, is only the beginning ..... now you need to learn how
to use it.
My quess? 90% of those with small boat radar, get a maximum of 50% of the
capabilities/ advantages, that a radar can give.
Between not knowing how to tune for conditions, not being able to interpret the
display, not understanding relative motion and plotting, and thinking that
since they have radar, they are now safe, a high percentage of those with
radar, are more dangerous, now, than when they didn't have radar.
It's a great tool, but you need to understand it and know how to use it .... if
you don't, it's a waste of money.

Shen

"Bobsprit" wrote in message
...

Bwahahahahhahahahhahah! Even a newbie to the group
sizes up Bobsprit in less than two posts. Attaboy Joey!

Spelled...SOCKPUPPET
Poor Neal thinks Joey's a newbie, but he read my Port Jeff post from 5
months
ago!

So you admit that anybody who reads your posts for five months will conclude
that you are an idiot who cannot sail???

Bob, how can you be SO dumb?



Regards


Donal
--