Again, you miss the point. One is only bound by Rule 13 if one is in an
overtaking situation. This is the only situation where Rule 13 applies.
When two sailing vessels are following Rule 12, overtaking situations
do not occur because if the two vessels follow Rule 12 and avoid a
close quarters situation there is never any need to overtake. Any passing
can and should be done a distance. Mind you, the two vessels I am
talking about are sailing in open water. I think you, being a lubber,
are always thinking narrow channels, etc. where Rule 13 can and does
apply.
The reason Rule 13 does not apply between two sailing vessels in open
water is because if the two sailing vessels are following the dictates
of Rule 12 (and other applicable rules depending on the situation) Rule
13 does not come into play.
For example, I am sailing my fast, blue water, Coronado 27 of the starboard
tack, close-hauled. I am approaching another vessel such as a C&C 32 which
is a very slow boat, also sailing close-hauled on the starboard tack.
Rule 12 tells me that the C&C is the stand-on vessel because he is to weather.
Therefore, I follow Rule 12 and fall off and pass him at over a half mile of
distance. This does not meet the definition of overtaking in any way shape
or form. By adhering to the sailing rules, I avoid "overtaking" the C&C but
I still end up ahead of him. I am still downwind of him so he is still the
stand-on vessel. By virtue of the fact that I followed the dictates of Rule
12, Rule 13 was superfluous.
Try to understand these simple truths.
CN
"Jeff Morris" wrote in message ...
Neal, you're just making an ass of yourself. But what else is new?
You've actually claimed that you're not bound by all of the rules, you
feel free to pick and choose which you want to follow. In your words:
"I'll make the choice of which rules
I will follow and since I sail, I will follow the sailing rules which
make Rule 13 unnecessary and superfluous. I will not be put in a
position to be liable for a poor set of rules that contradict each other
by embracing the contradictions."
Lest anyone thing that Neal might be correct, here's what the acknowledged standard reference has to to say:
"It should be noted that International Rule 13 ... takes precedence over all other rules in Part B, Section II, ... Therefore
sailing vessels and all other vessels given priority in Rule 18, even those hampered in some way..., must consider themselves
bound by Rule 13 and keep out of the way of a vessel they are overtaking." Falwell's Rules of the Nautical Road.
Sad, Neal, sad. You probably even have the delusion that people believe that you really have a license.
Capt. NealŪ wrote:
You just don't understand how stupid and impossible your stance
is, do you?
It is not possible to follow all the Rules all the time. One must
decide which Rules apply to one's vessel and when they apply.
Once one does this one must ignore all the others that do not apply
or contradict.
To maintain that all Rules apply all the time is one of the most asinine
things I've ever heard. You've got a serious problem.
CN
"Jeff Morris" wrote in message ...
Sorry Neal, all of the rules must be followed. Obviously, some imply no action for some boats, but they all must be considered.
You've claimed that Rule 13 shouldn't even be considered because Rule 12 sometimes might be used. What other Rules need not be
considered? Rule 1? Rule 2? Are lookouts needed in your world?
You're claiming that a sailboat should ignore the rules for RAMs and NUCs. Tell us Neal, just what rules are those? In fact,
just about the only rule that applies to NUCs and RAMs is Rule 13. The only rule that mentions them by name says the sailboats
must stay clear of them.
And what if a sailboat is also a NUC? Do we ignore Rule 18 because Neal claims Rule 12 covers "all eventualities"? Nonsense!
One of the fundamental principles of marine law is that the rules are mandatory. As Farwell puts it: "It will be recognized
that a disregard of any rule on the basis of convenience, courtesy, good nature, or disbelief in its efficacy places the
navigator under a burden of proof that is almost impossible for him to carry."
Capt. NealŪ wrote:
Most of these putzes are too confused by now to know of which they speak.
Jeff is the worst. He makes the ludicrous statement that boats must follow
ALL the rules.
Let's see now, Jeff thinks he has to follow the rules for a sailboat, a fishing boat,
a Not Under Command boat, a boat aground, a boat in a fog, a boat Restricted
in its Ability to Navigate and he has to follow all these rules at the same time.
How warped is that kind of thinking, anyway?
The fact is, one follows the rules that concern certain boats in certain circumstances.
Rule 12 deals with how two sailboats interact. Rule 12 covers all eventualities. One
need not concern oneself with ALL the rules in order to operate legally. This includes
Rule 13 because it does not apply just like Rule 9 does not apply in open water.
CN
"Thom Stewart" wrote in message ...
Neal,
I'm beginning to wonder about this group a little myself on this one.
There are enough racing people that must know "LUFFING RIGHTS" and the
rest should have seen it used in the America's Cup Races on Downwind
Legs.
I didn't think you were that tricky in your wording, but I guess you
were.
Ole Thom
|