otnmbrd wrote:
I've never asked the question:

If NUC and RAM were equal (i.e.,NUC had some ability to maneuver) don't you
think the "writers" would have simply described NUC as restricted in it's
ability to maneuver (like RAM) rather than uable to maneuver as required by
these rules, so that we wouldn't be having this discussion?


I never said they were completely equal (actually I did, but on
careful consideration, i.e. rereading, retracted that), only that they
could overlap. Both NUC and RAM cover situations that can't really be
predicted and/or anticipated, so the rules don't want to say which
might be less maneuverable and thus "privileged." In the case of NUC,
they really wanted to emphasize that minor problems did not qualify.
But still, it falls a bit short of saying totally disabled. Its only
"unable to maneuver as required ..."