I'm not sure exactly what Jeff is looking for, however, some comments on
Ellen/Neal response.....

"Ellen MacArthur" wrote in message
reenews.net...

"Jeff" wrote
| The definitions of NUC and RAM do not say they are unable to maneuver
| at all, only that they are unable to maneuver as required by the
| rules.

Almost right.....

3(g) The term "vessel restricted in her ability to maneuver" means a
vessel which from the
nature of her work is restricted in her ability to maneuver as required by
these Rules and
is therefore **unable to keep out of the way of another vessel.**

3(f) The term "vessel not under command" means a vessel which through some
exceptional
circumstance is unable to maneuver as required by these Rules and is
therefore
**unable to keep out of the way of another vessel. **

Nice basic quotes to build on, and I agree with Jeff (EG with reservations)


Do you see it now. NUC is unable to keep out of the way of another
vessel. RAM is
unable to keep out of the way of another vessel. Both are equal.

If both are equal, then the "pecking order" is useless.....i.e. if you read
the words without looking at the possible situations, there is no
difference.
However, look at the vessels. NUC is talking about a vessel which has lost
propulsion or steering, whereas RAM is talking about a vessel which has
propulsion and steering but is restricted due to it's work.
In some cases, but not all, Ram is equally unable to maneuver as is NUC
(I'll let all of you figure out the possibilities).

One shouldn't be above
the other on the list.

One of the reasons I consider this "pecking order" flawed, but incorrect, in
general, since, no engine, is far more restrictive, than a trailing suction
dredge

Even if one is unable to maneuver and the other restricted maneuverability,
the end result is the same. Both are uanble to keep out of the way.... Two
boats both unable to
keep out of the way of another boat are equally crippled.

Again, not necessarily.


| But also, a fishing vessel has restricted maneuverability,
| potentially much more restricted than a NUC or RAM.

Not really.....

G Depends on which fisherman you are talking to....potentially, not more
so than NUC, but potentially much more so than RAM (again you need to think
of the possibilities).


3(d) The term "vessel engaged in fishing" means any vessel fishing with
nets, lines, trawls or
other fishing apparatus which restrict maneuverability, but does not
include a vessel fishing
with trolling lines or other fishing apparatus which do not restrict
maneuverability.

It doesn't say anything about being unable to keep out of the way of
another vessel.
By definition, FISH has more maneuverability than NUC or RAM because it's
not unable
to keep out of the way.

Yes and no....take a purse seiner that's closed the loop....... he's not
going anywhere.....\


NUC = unable to maneuver/unable to keep out of the way
RAM = restricted to maneuver/unable to keep out of the way
FISH = restricted to maneuver/able to keep out of the way

| The question has little to do with logic or common sense, but is
| specifically about the way the rules are worded and thus must be
| answered in those terms. Also, the "flaws" are not in the rules, they
| are that the "pecking order" and the way it is normally explained
| does not match the wording of the rules. So what exactly are these
| discrepancies?

I gave you one discrepancy but you rejected it. So I proved it up
there. So now you have
to give me one point for having a valid point. But it sounds like your
looking for something
else besides NUC and RAM should have equal status in the pecking order
list.
I guess you'll have to give me a clue because I don't have a clue.....
I'm sorry but your
logic so far isn't so logical.

Cheers,
Ellen

G Your still just reading the words without any experience to back up your
assumptions.
I like the "pecking order" as a basic tool, but I also realize that the
Rules are written, knowing full well that not all situations can be
specifically handled......hence Rule 2......anyone see how much importance I
put to knowing/understanding this rule and it's implications?

otn