Capt. NealŪ wrote:
However, I'll give you a case where Rule 12 does not cover two
sailboats: Two sailboats A and B are on a beam reach. B is directly
behind A and overtaking. Both are on the same tack, neither is
windward or leeward or the other. Nothing in Rule 12 covers this
situation. In fact, this is the simplest case of where Rule 13
would supersede Rule 12. How could Neal be so stupid as to not see it?
Wrong! By definition, the lead vessel is to weather of the following
vessel when both are on a beam reach. Don't you know ANYTHING
about sailing?
CN
Correction, I spoke in haste. By definition, the following vessel is
to weather of the lead vessel when both are on a beam reach.
So which is it Neal? You're making a real fool of yourself here! I
can see the smoke coming out of your ears, just like an overloaded
android on Star Trek!
This is because the apparent wind is all the vessels 'see' and
the sailing rules do not address apparent wind. They address
actual wind. Because two vessels on a beam reach are bringing
the wind forward, the wind as seen from a stationery observer
would be slightly aft of abeam. This means the following vessel
is the windward vessel and according to the sailing rules, this
vessel is the give-way vessel. Since he is already the give way
vessel Rule 13 is superfluous.
So you're saying that windward/leeward depends on the exact direction of
the wind? That must mean that there is a point exactly in the middle
neither is windward or leeward. Which applies then?
|