wrote:

No... "Most people interpret" bears no weight at all on this issue.

Ok. Well given you have offered nothing to support your view, I might
as well beleive any other random view with no support.

There is no "evidence" that a proper watch means you must be
physically looking around at all times from up on deck.

Ok, well without evidence I'm gonna assume that is exactly what it
means.

"JimH" wrote in message

*ploink* Another asshole joins Krause in the bozo bin.

If you can't take the heat Jimbo... don't cross post!

BTW - even your Plonk sounds Gay! You whiner!!

*Can some kind soul repost this so lil jimmy can read it.. thanx!*

CM

Capt. Neal® wrote:
Just what don't you little Ellen supporters understand
about the first part of the following COLREG Rule?

Rule 5
Look-out
Every vessel shall at all times maintain a proper
look-out by sight as well as by hearing . . .


Folks, even the most ignorant among you cannot
claim you do not know what the words "sight" and
"hearing" mean.

Check out what Merriam Webster has to say about
it.

sight \"sït\ n 1 : something seen or worth seeing
2 : the process or power of seeing; esp : the sense
of which the eye is the receptor and by which
qualities of appearance (as position, shape, and color)
are perceived 3 : inspection 4 : a device (as a small
bead on a gun barrel) that aids the eye in aiming
5 : view, glimpse 6 : the range of vision - sight.less adj

hear.ing n 1 : the process, function, or power of
perceiving sound; esp : the special sense by which
noises and tones are received as stimuli 2 : earshot
3 : opportunity to be heard 4 : a listening to arguments
(as in a court); also : a session of (as of a legislative
committee) in which testimony is taken from witnesses

© 1995 Zane Publishing, Inc. The Merriam-Webster
Dictionary © 1994 by Merriam-Webster, Incorporated

"At all times" means at all times. It means if Ellen is
sleeping she is failing to comply with Rule 5. In order
to be legal there needs to be a human being seeing
AND hearing at all times. This means Rule 5 states
ANY long-distance race where solo skipper sleeps
is in violation of the rule and an illegal enterprise.

Those of you who argue that it only becomes illegal
if Ellen has a collision argue falsely.

Legal and responsible racing cannot include long-distance
solo sailing racing by definition. Neither little Ellen nor
anybody else is capable of sight or hearing while they
are asleep, exhausted below in a speeding sailboat.

Ellen is a whore because she gets paid and has a whole
team pimping her engaging in an illegal activity. It's about
time real sailors stopped supporting this illegal activity
which is detrimental and dangerous to sailors everywhere.

I certainly will not identify with, worship or give kudos
to any law breaker. Until such time as little Ellen operates
legally, I will continue to call a spade a spade. The only
record she has broken, in my opinion, is 71 days in violation
of Rule 5. It does not matter how much or what kind of
electronic measures her boat employs. Unless she stays
awake and maintains a look-out by sight and hearing
twenty-four hours a day, she is operating illegally.

Ellen is a lawbreaker by law and by her own admission.

Those who support little Ellen support law breaking. You
cannot argue otherwise intelligently. Every argument you
attempt to employ will be shot down by the simplicity and
explicitness of Rule 5.


Captain Neal Warren
USCG Licensed U.S. Merchant Marine Officer
ser.# 1045941
--- Safety at sea is no accident.


You are an idiot & pretty typical of the nay sayers who have & will
never amount to anything.

Merchant Marine Officer??? a hoot; sad, jealous, little uneducated
coward more likely:-)

With your limited IQ you "need" rules to mindlessly obey for every
minute of your endless boring days, so you can feel safe & we can from
you. After all your misfortune is always "someone elses fault".


K

Speaking of idiots:-)

& the Krause lie of the day is........

from what we call the "father" series, this is a sad collection of lies
about the mythical father, much the same as immature school kids make
up. The sad part is that a man in his 50s would be so ashamed of his
father's real achievements that he besmirches his memory with such
infantile lies.


My father, who died in the 1970s, was a fairly well known boating
sportsman in
the New England-New York area. He was a boat dealer and marina
operator. For
grins, he raced hydroplanes and utility outboards in the late 40's
and early
50's, and won the Albany to New York race twice and a number of other
races.
For many years, he always had the *fastest* boat on Long Island
Sound. I don't
know whether that was true, but I don't recall anyone with a faster
boat, and
he drove all over looking for them. The boat, which changed from year
to year,
was always called "Bob's Hope." Later, he drove a twin 50-hp Evinrude
powered
Swedish boat across the North Atlantic in winter as a publicity stunt
for a
line of Swedish boats he was distributing in New England. Came over
the lee of
a tanker. He owned a *lot* of boats, including a PT boat for a while
and a
DUCK.
I don't know that I have more experience with boats than anyone in
here. I've
been boating since I was about 7 or so, and that was 50 years ago.
I've owned
a *lot* of different kinds of boats.
What *you* believe is your business. Frankly, I don't give a damn.


Also of course, note the "in winter":-)

My father and his chief mechanic once crossed the Atlantic in winter in
a 22'
boat powered by twin outboards. Yes, it is possible, even the fuel. Got a
"fireboat" welcome in NYC.

wrote:

I guess for some, ignorance is bliss, even if they have to work very
hard at it.

Trust, but verify.

Graham Frankland wrote:

Try being on the bridge of a sub whilst submerged.

I think the rule says something about all possible means. I presume
subs have their methods to keep watch otherwise they'd keep bumping
into things.

Capt. Mooron wrote:
"JimH" wrote in message


*ploink* Another asshole joins Krause in the bozo bin.


If you can't take the heat Jimbo... don't cross post!

BTW - even your Plonk sounds Gay! You whiner!!

*Can some kind soul repost this so lil jimmy can read it.. thanx!*

CM


I would but then he might "ploink" me.

"Jeff Morris" wrote in message

I would but then he might "ploink" me.

Somehow Jeff... I doubt that would be a great loss in sailing related
contributions. :-)

CM

wrote
You have run into the end of a dock on your starboard side. You
were
keeping a CONSTANT ear and eyeball watch , but not a "proper
watch at
all times". When you get to court, what portion of the blame do
you
suppose will be alloted to the dock?

Do you usually provide scenarios which defy logic to substantiate
logic??

CM


It's a true story, it actually happened to me.

BBob

wrote in message

The problem is that you don't understand the information, which is
right in front of you. You are looking for a concrete ruling, and
there isn't one for exactly the reasons I stated several times in
several ways. You either don't want to understand it, or you are
unable to understand it.

Bubba... you've been vague, evasive and trite in your miserable attempts at
an explanation of the subject matter you profess to be familiar with.....
deciphering the mumbo jumbo you've attempted to pass off as answering a
legitimate question seems to elicit an understanding that you have no idea
of the subject matter. You were asked for an example and have been unable to
provide one.... which of course only underlines your inability to grasp the
topic.

I believe that Dan has been very patient with you and has made every attempt
to guide you into providing an answer to his question. As usual you have
failed miserably.... let's face it Bubba.... outside of providing a target
to vent a spleen on ... you have no nautical value on this newsgroup. Stick
to being a miserable prick... it's what you know best.

CM

"Capt. Neal®" wrote in message
...

Duh! Go to the back of the class, Vito!

"Proper" is defined by the content of Rule 5.

Here's your lesson for today. Study it hard and
please forego the wanking.

Rule 5
Look-out
"Every vessel shall at all times maintain a proper
look-out by sight as well as by hearing as well
as by all available means appropriate in the
prevailing circumstances and conditions so
as to make a full appraisal of the situation
and of the risk of collision."

Hey, that says that if I look and listen and determine there is no
reasonable risk of collision then I can hit the hammock, right? It does not
say a continuos lookout. Since Ellen did not collide with anything her
lookout must have been adequate and proper.

Go to Naples (c: