| Page 2 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Let there be Nav. Light
I did not "infer" anything I simple repeated what you
stated in your original post which was wrong! You wrote: "Let me amplify that the masthead "tricolor" should only be in addition to the sidelights." I have just proven that a sailboat that has no motor installed does not need those sidelights and that steaming light because it is never a motor boat. You say the opposite for the whole world to see. You wrote that a tricolor "should ONLY be in addition to the sidelights". How can any light(s) be in addition to something that is not there in the first place as on a motorless sailboat with tricolor only which is a totally legal proposition according to the Rules? Here's the remainder of your erroneous post: "Let me amplify that the masthead "tricolor" should only be in addition to the sidelights. While the tricolor is legal for a sailboat, it is NOT for a powerboat. The "masthead light," commonly called the "steaming light" and mounted partway up the mast on a sailboat, must be at least one meter above the sidelights. The wording is a bit obtuse, but I believe that the sidelights can be no higher than 2.5 meters above the gunwale. "The tricolor on the mast is fine if you're offshore and want to be seen through the swells by a distant ship, but I think you'd be more concerned powering into you marina on a dark night." You are wrong and Shen44 is wrong and now along comes otnmbird again to chime in with his lame comments. You guys must be Siamese triplets or something. Maybe you should all get an operation to separate yourselves??? You repeatedly demonstrate a motorboat mentality and sincerely feel that every sailboat has an auxiliary so it is really a motor boat. This is not always the case so your misconception continue to cause dangerous situations on the water. S.Simon "Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message ... You may have inferred that I was talking about using both sets at the same time, but I never implied it. Your babbling doesn't make any sense - if the engine is not running and the sails are up, it makes no difference howmuch wind there is, its a sailboat and therefore can use the lights for sailboats. And a boat the has no engine, or never uses it, or is never underway when lights are required, does not need sidelights under the ColRegs. My advice was specifically to Bobsprit. Now if you're chastising me for inferring that RB would actually use his engine when making a night entrance to his marina, that's a different discussion. Your trying to claim that I said something I didn't - I don't think anyone is buying it and your opinion isn't anything I'm going to loose sleep over. "Simple Simon" wrote in message ... Tut, tut, tut! Semantics again. A sailboat is ONLY a sailboat when machinery is NOT in use and sails are in use. What lights could one use if the sailboat had her sails up but there was no wind and she was underway but not making way? One could use EITHER the tricolor OR the normal running lights and not both as Jeff stated (or at least implied). Now, what if the sailboat was using machinery? This cannot be because a sailboat is no longer a sailboat the moment it uses machinery even if the sails are up and drawing. Therefore it must use motorboat lights which are the lower running lights "in addition to" the steaming light (sometimes called a masthead light though it is lower down on the mast). Now we come to the $64,000 question. What if the sailboat was underway but not making way and had her sails up but there was no wind? Furthermore, she is a pure sailboat and had nomotor installed. Would she be required to have the lower set of running lights? No, she would not because she could never be a motor boat. Therefore both you and Jeff are wrong in your stupid insistence that sailboats must have lower running lights "in addition to" a tricolor. Gotcha!!!! "Shen44" wrote in message ... Subject: Let there be Nav. Light From: "Simple Simon" Date: 07/26/2003 11:22 Pacific Standard Time Message-id: Your wording was more than a "tad vague", it was clearly wrong. See my reply to your good buddy Shenn44 and then be man enough to admit that what you wrote is very misleading and clearly incorrect. I got you this time. I know you are loathe to admit it but I got you this time. He he! G What he wrote could be considered "misleading" to someone such as yourself, incapable of connecting two thoughts to create a whole. If you'd read all of his statement (looked before you leapt) you would have realized he was talking about powerdriven sailboats who used the tricolor light when not powerdriven...... a sailboat which uses a tricolor light will have, in addition, normal side lights when powerdriven and turn off the tricolor light and employ a masthead light. Shen |
Let there be Nav. Light
Wrong again, Shen44. As soon as the lookout relays
to the bridge that he has a vessel in sight, and he must do so immediately, then the vessels are in sight. Period, end of sentence. Any lookout is a legal and binding extension of the eyes and ears on the bridge. (Yes, and even if the bridge is asleep which is not a rare event.) "Shen44" wrote in message ... Subject: Let there be Nav. Light From: "Simple Simon" LOL Let's see how many errors we can find!!!! Now you have to resort to putting false words in my mouth. I never said a sailboat should not slow down or even stop if it heard fog signals dead ahead. What I said is a sailboat does not have to slow down in a fog according to the Rules when it does not hear a fog signal dead ahead on a collision course. "Wrong" EVERY VESSEL shall procede at a safe speed .... that means sailboats too .... if safe speed is only 1knot then you need to slow down if you are doing 6 knots. Like I stated. Sailboats like mine already travel at a safe speed. They cannot travel any faster than a safe speed. If they traveled any slower they would lose maneuverability and that would be, by definition, an unsafe speed. Safe speed cannot be one knot because that would mean loss of maneuverability. "Wrong" If you hit the side of a ship, traveling at "hull speed", then you were moving too fast for the conditions. The question of maneuverability as you state it, applies to powerdriven as well as sail....and is a bogus argument. G most sailboats can effectively steer at much slower speeds than can some ship. I said a sailboat is already meeting the definition of going slow because as we all know there is rarely very much wind in a fog Not always true, so you have to consider the "prevailing circumstances" (Been in zero visibility with 25k winds) Even in twenty five knots of wind a sailboat like mine is still constrained by her hull speed of around 6.7 knots and will probably be going slower because of the necessity to reef down sail area. So? The only vessels that are required to slow down in a fog even if they do not hear a fog signal on a collision course are motor vessels sounding the signal for motor vessels. "Wrong" .... G see above Right, by definition any vessel that is already proceeding at a safe speed is proceeding slowly enoug. Not necessarily.... but then again, you don't understand "safe speed" They are required to slow down to a safe speed. "Wrong" They are required to "Proceed at a Safe Speed" (here's an area open to debate) But, in order to proceed at a safe speed the must slow down, unlike a sailboat that is already proceeding at a safe speed because it is slow by definition. If it runs into the side of a ship, it was not proceeding at a safe speed ..... simply being a sailboat does not make your speed "safe"!!! Should they ever run into a sailboat even if they were going two knots they would be adjudicated to be going too fast for the conditions. As would the sailboat, if it was underway, making way. Not so because at some time the required lookout on the bow of the motorvessel will have the sailboat in sight and the minute that happens the motorboat is the give-way vessel by definition of the in sight rules. "Wrong" for many reasons. The person controlling the "bridge" must have the vessel in sight. What makes you think the sailboat will ever be seen by the bow watch? .... He may not come into view until a point well aft of that persons range of visibility, yet forward of the bridges view. Vessels that sound other fog signals are higher up in the pecking order so they are the stand-on vessel. "Wrong" There is NO pecking order in fog and NO vessel is "stand-on" You are wrong. Nope The reason you are wrong is as stated immediately above. Nope At some time in sight rules will apply and the motor vessel will be the give way vessel. Only if the guy/girl on the bridge see's you.....you can well have been run over before that occurs. It follows that if the motor vessel must give way at any time then the motor vessel is the give way vessel. "Wrong" as per usual.....I'm on a 900' ship in 600' of visibility. You are approaching my bow...... guess who will see who first (assuming my ship is a "stemwinder" - house aft) .... you will, and you'd best do something to avoid. Motor vessels are required to stay clear the moment they hear a signal of a vessel higher up in the pecking order. "Wrong"...." Every Vessel" shall do what is necessary to avoid every other vessel. Wrong by virtue of the fact that some vessels cannot take such action by definition. A NUC is a good example of this. That is the reason for the different signal that tells the motor vessel to stay clear because the NUC can not take action to do so herself. S. Simon How do I know it's a NUC? ..... maybe it's a sailboat.....maybe it's a tug, pushing a barge .... all I know is that it's NOT a powerdriven vessel, going it's merry way, and that I will need to keep that in mind as I maneuver to avoid...... or stop...... Shen |
Let there be Nav. Light
I did not "infer" anything I simple repeated what you
stated in your original post which was wrong! You wrote: "Let me amplify that the masthead "tricolor" should only be in addition to the sidelights." I have just proven that a sailboat that has no motor installed does not need those sidelights and that steaming light because it is never a motor boat. You say the opposite for the whole world to see. You wrote that a tricolor "should ONLY be in addition to the sidelights". How can any light(s) be in addition to something that is not there in the first place as on a motorless sailboat with tricolor only which is a totally legal proposition according to the Rules? Here's the remainder of your erroneous post: "Let me amplify that the masthead "tricolor" should only be in addition to the sidelights. While the tricolor is legal for a sailboat, it is NOT for a powerboat. The "masthead light," commonly called the "steaming light" and mounted partway up the mast on a sailboat, must be at least one meter above the sidelights. The wording is a bit obtuse, but I believe that the sidelights can be no higher than 2.5 meters above the gunwale. "The tricolor on the mast is fine if you're offshore and want to be seen through the swells by a distant ship, but I think you'd be more concerned powering into you marina on a dark night." You are wrong and Shen44 is wrong and now along comes otnmbird again to chime in with his lame comments. You guys must be Siamese triplets or something. Maybe you should all get an operation to separate yourselves??? You repeatedly demonstrate a motorboat mentality and sincerely feel that every sailboat has an auxiliary so it is really a motor boat. This is not always the case so your misconception continue to cause dangerous situations on the water. S.Simon "Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message ... You may have inferred that I was talking about using both sets at the same time, but I never implied it. Your babbling doesn't make any sense - if the engine is not running and the sails are up, it makes no difference howmuch wind there is, its a sailboat and therefore can use the lights for sailboats. And a boat the has no engine, or never uses it, or is never underway when lights are required, does not need sidelights under the ColRegs. My advice was specifically to Bobsprit. Now if you're chastising me for inferring that RB would actually use his engine when making a night entrance to his marina, that's a different discussion. Your trying to claim that I said something I didn't - I don't think anyone is buying it and your opinion isn't anything I'm going to loose sleep over. "Simple Simon" wrote in message ... Tut, tut, tut! Semantics again. A sailboat is ONLY a sailboat when machinery is NOT in use and sails are in use. What lights could one use if the sailboat had her sails up but there was no wind and she was underway but not making way? One could use EITHER the tricolor OR the normal running lights and not both as Jeff stated (or at least implied). Now, what if the sailboat was using machinery? This cannot be because a sailboat is no longer a sailboat the moment it uses machinery even if the sails are up and drawing. Therefore it must use motorboat lights which are the lower running lights "in addition to" the steaming light (sometimes called a masthead light though it is lower down on the mast). Now we come to the $64,000 question. What if the sailboat was underway but not making way and had her sails up but there was no wind? Furthermore, she is a pure sailboat and had nomotor installed. Would she be required to have the lower set of running lights? No, she would not because she could never be a motor boat. Therefore both you and Jeff are wrong in your stupid insistence that sailboats must have lower running lights "in addition to" a tricolor. Gotcha!!!! "Shen44" wrote in message ... Subject: Let there be Nav. Light From: "Simple Simon" Date: 07/26/2003 11:22 Pacific Standard Time Message-id: Your wording was more than a "tad vague", it was clearly wrong. See my reply to your good buddy Shenn44 and then be man enough to admit that what you wrote is very misleading and clearly incorrect. I got you this time. I know you are loathe to admit it but I got you this time. He he! G What he wrote could be considered "misleading" to someone such as yourself, incapable of connecting two thoughts to create a whole. If you'd read all of his statement (looked before you leapt) you would have realized he was talking about powerdriven sailboats who used the tricolor light when not powerdriven...... a sailboat which uses a tricolor light will have, in addition, normal side lights when powerdriven and turn off the tricolor light and employ a masthead light. Shen |
Let there be Nav. Light
My post was a direct response to RB's question. Are you claiming that RB's C&C is a
"motorless sailboat"? Nowhere to I say that the lights should be on at the same time. RB was asking about installing a tricolor, I was reminding him not to remove the sidelights. If you look at another post of his (which actually triggered mine) he doesn't say he has sidelights, clearly a problem in his case. Sorry, Neal. You're just not getting anywhere with this one - its pretty lame, even for you. "Simple Simon" wrote in message ... I did not "infer" anything I simple repeated what you stated in your original post which was wrong! You wrote: "Let me amplify that the masthead "tricolor" should only be in addition to the sidelights." I have just proven that a sailboat that has no motor installed does not need those sidelights and that steaming light because it is never a motor boat. You say the opposite for the whole world to see. You wrote that a tricolor "should ONLY be in addition to the sidelights". How can any light(s) be in addition to something that is not there in the first place as on a motorless sailboat with tricolor only which is a totally legal proposition according to the Rules? Here's the remainder of your erroneous post: "Let me amplify that the masthead "tricolor" should only be in addition to the sidelights. While the tricolor is legal for a sailboat, it is NOT for a powerboat. The "masthead light," commonly called the "steaming light" and mounted partway up the mast on a sailboat, must be at least one meter above the sidelights. The wording is a bit obtuse, but I believe that the sidelights can be no higher than 2.5 meters above the gunwale. "The tricolor on the mast is fine if you're offshore and want to be seen through the swells by a distant ship, but I think you'd be more concerned powering into you marina on a dark night." You are wrong and Shen44 is wrong and now along comes otnmbird again to chime in with his lame comments. You guys must be Siamese triplets or something. Maybe you should all get an operation to separate yourselves??? You repeatedly demonstrate a motorboat mentality and sincerely feel that every sailboat has an auxiliary so it is really a motor boat. This is not always the case so your misconception continue to cause dangerous situations on the water. S.Simon "Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message ... You may have inferred that I was talking about using both sets at the same time, but I never implied it. Your babbling doesn't make any sense - if the engine is not running and the sails are up, it makes no difference howmuch wind there is, its a sailboat and therefore can use the lights for sailboats. And a boat the has no engine, or never uses it, or is never underway when lights are required, does not need sidelights under the ColRegs. My advice was specifically to Bobsprit. Now if you're chastising me for inferring that RB would actually use his engine when making a night entrance to his marina, that's a different discussion. Your trying to claim that I said something I didn't - I don't think anyone is buying it and your opinion isn't anything I'm going to loose sleep over. "Simple Simon" wrote in message ... Tut, tut, tut! Semantics again. A sailboat is ONLY a sailboat when machinery is NOT in use and sails are in use. What lights could one use if the sailboat had her sails up but there was no wind and she was underway but not making way? One could use EITHER the tricolor OR the normal running lights and not both as Jeff stated (or at least implied). Now, what if the sailboat was using machinery? This cannot be because a sailboat is no longer a sailboat the moment it uses machinery even if the sails are up and drawing. Therefore it must use motorboat lights which are the lower running lights "in addition to" the steaming light (sometimes called a masthead light though it is lower down on the mast). Now we come to the $64,000 question. What if the sailboat was underway but not making way and had her sails up but there was no wind? Furthermore, she is a pure sailboat and had nomotor installed. Would she be required to have the lower set of running lights? No, she would not because she could never be a motor boat. Therefore both you and Jeff are wrong in your stupid insistence that sailboats must have lower running lights "in addition to" a tricolor. Gotcha!!!! "Shen44" wrote in message ... Subject: Let there be Nav. Light From: "Simple Simon" Date: 07/26/2003 11:22 Pacific Standard Time Message-id: Your wording was more than a "tad vague", it was clearly wrong. See my reply to your good buddy Shenn44 and then be man enough to admit that what you wrote is very misleading and clearly incorrect. I got you this time. I know you are loathe to admit it but I got you this time. He he! G What he wrote could be considered "misleading" to someone such as yourself, incapable of connecting two thoughts to create a whole. If you'd read all of his statement (looked before you leapt) you would have realized he was talking about powerdriven sailboats who used the tricolor light when not powerdriven...... a sailboat which uses a tricolor light will have, in addition, normal side lights when powerdriven and turn off the tricolor light and employ a masthead light. Shen |
Let there be Nav. Light
Tim,
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. My eyes must be truly jaded because what you see and what I see are tow different things. It is well and good, though, that you see what you do, since if you saw what I saw you would get rid of square boxes and start sailing things with at least one pointy end. -- katysails s/v Chanteuse Kirie Elite 32 http://katysails.tripod.com "Women and cats will do as they please, and men and dogs should relax and get used to the idea." - Robert A. Heinlein |
Let there be Nav. Light
http://www.ace.net.au/schooner/mg1996.jpg Oh crud....I was talking about the wrong boat...yes, that one is pretty...you can keep her...Lady Kate, though... -- katysails s/v Chanteuse Kirie Elite 32 http://katysails.tripod.com "Women and cats will do as they please, and men and dogs should relax and get used to the idea." - Robert A. Heinlein |
Let there be Nav. Light
Why 'stemwinder'?
G Sorry .... Back when I first started going to sea, most ships had their houses/enginerooms, amidships. As they started building ships as you see them today (majority with house/engineroom aft), someone came up with the term "stemwinder" to differentiate them. Exactly how the term relates, in all honesty, is beyond me. Shen |
Let there be Nav. Light
Subject: Let there be Nav. Light
From: "Simple Simon" Date: 07/27/2003 07:46 Pacific Standard Time Message-id: Wrong again, Shen44. As soon as the lookout relays to the bridge that he has a vessel in sight, and he must do so immediately, then the vessels are in sight. Period, end of sentence. Any lookout is a legal and binding extension of the eyes and ears on the bridge. (Yes, and even if the bridge is asleep which is not a rare event.) LOL You "might" be able to find some legal precedence to back this up .... please show it to me, in context. At any rate, if in the real world, by this time, who has the greatest ability to avoid? At your height of eye, normally (not always) you should have seen the ship first and all ready be maneuvering to avoid .... for many reasons. Shen |
Let there be Nav. Light
"Shen44" wrote in message ... Subject: Let there be Nav. Light From: "Simple Simon" Date: 07/27/2003 07:46 Pacific Standard Time Message-id: Wrong again, Shen44. As soon as the lookout relays to the bridge that he has a vessel in sight, and he must do so immediately, then the vessels are in sight. Period, end of sentence. Any lookout is a legal and binding extension of the eyes and ears on the bridge. (Yes, and even if the bridge is asleep which is not a rare event.) LOL You "might" be able to find some legal precedence to back this up .... please show it to me, in context. At any rate, if in the real world, by this time, who has the greatest ability to avoid? At your height of eye, normally (not always) you should have seen the ship first and all ready be maneuvering to avoid .... for many reasons. Negative sir! The Rules require me, as the stand-on vessel to hold my present speed and course. The Rules place the burden of giving way to the motor vessel. I am only required to do what is necessary to avoid a collision provided the give-way vessel is not taking the required action. If a wreck should occur it will be judged the motor vessel shares the greater share of the liability. Now, in your motor boat mentality arrogance you are blatantly misinterpreting the Rules by saying the stand-on vessel must give way for its own good. Sorry Mr. Shen44 that's not the way it works. |
Let there be Nav. Light
You are trying to use the same, old, tired argument as Jeff.
Both of you are not going to get out of it by saying "in context this and in context that". I don't give a hoot who Jeff was responding to. If he meant to say auxiliary sailboats must have 'in addition to' the tricolor, regular running and steaming lights he would be correct. However, that is not what he said. He said sailboat must have . . . He did not say Bobsprit's sailboat; he did not say auxiliary sailboats; he said sailboats and since he did he is wrong, wrong, wrong. Side with me on this one and you will have much more credibility. You used to have a fair share but the longer you persist in an untenable position the more it erodes away. S.Simon "Shen44" wrote in message ... Jeff was clearly saying that the running lights and the tricolor at the masthead should be lit at the same time. Jeff was clearly wrong. Hmmmm missed that. However, since the subject at hand was a particular sailboat that is also capable of running "under power", then .... a sailboat which is using the tricolor light when sailing, shall have "in addition to" this light, the normal running lights which will be used when the vessel is "additionally" under power, or "in addition to" that, under power alone. Shen |
Let there be Nav. Light
"Shen44" wrote in message | Hmmmm missed that. However, since the subject at hand was a particular sailboat | that is also capable of running "under power", then .... a sailboat which is | using the tricolor light when sailing, shall have "in addition to" this light, | the normal running lights which will be used when the vessel is "additionally" | under power, or "in addition to" that, under power alone. A masthead Tri Color and a steaming light are all that is required on a sailboat that is under power only. There is nothing I know about that states I need my Nav lights at any particular height. Many sailboats have their running lights mounted on the hull, some on the Cabin others on rails..... but most utilize masthead only. Not that it makes a difference to a container ship or tanker since nobody would be on the bridge any way but maybe someone would see it while fetching more ice to the lounge. ;-P CM |
Let there be Nav. Light
I'm afraid you blew it with this post, Capt. A white masthead
light showing under the red/green running lights is not a legal combination under the Rules. "Capt. Mooron" wrote in message ... "Shen44" wrote in message | Hmmmm missed that. However, since the subject at hand was a particular sailboat | that is also capable of running "under power", then .... a sailboat which is | using the tricolor light when sailing, shall have "in addition to" this light, | the normal running lights which will be used when the vessel is "additionally" | under power, or "in addition to" that, under power alone. A masthead Tri Color and a steaming light are all that is required on a sailboat that is under power only. There is nothing I know about that states I need my Nav lights at any particular height. Many sailboats have their running lights mounted on the hull, some on the Cabin others on rails..... but most utilize masthead only. Not that it makes a difference to a container ship or tanker since nobody would be on the bridge any way but maybe someone would see it while fetching more ice to the lounge. ;-P CM |
Let there be Nav. Light
katysails wrote: Tim, Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. My eyes must be truly jaded because what you see and what I see are tow different things. It is well and good, though, that you see what you do, since if you saw what I saw you would get rid of square boxes and start sailing things with at least one pointy end. But Katy, _I_ don't need a pointy end to know the firectionm I should be sailing in. -- (Dr) Tim Fatchen Director Fatchen Environmental Pty Ltd PO Box 462 Mt Barker SA 5251 Phone +61 8 8391 1164 Fax +61 8 8391 5156 ================================================== ===================== This email and any attached files are a private communication. If you have received this in error, please notify and flush it from your system without making a copy. Please note that if you are not the intended recipient, you should not peruse, use, distribute, copy or disclose any information within this message or any attached files. Doing so is an offence. ================================================== ===================== |
Let there be Nav. Light
I'm specifically exempt from Annex 1..... I've enacted the "Capt. Ron"
clause. CM "otnmbrd" wrote in message nk.net... | | | Capt. Mooron wrote: | | | A masthead Tri Color and a steaming light are all that is required on a | sailboat that is under power only. There is nothing I know about that states | I need my Nav lights at any particular height. Many sailboats have their | running lights mounted on the hull, some on the Cabin others on rails..... | but most utilize masthead only. | | Not that it makes a difference to a container ship or tanker since nobody | would be on the bridge any way but maybe someone would see it while fetching | more ice to the lounge. ;-P | | CM | | | Read Annex I of the Rules | A Masthead (steaming) light is always carried ABOVE the sidelights, | which makes the use of the "tricolor" light illegal .... unless of | course you've got a pole to hoist the masthead light to a position above | the tricolor, via some halyard. G | | otn | (awoken from a sound sleep by the "Cadet" doing some reading) | |
Let there be Nav. Light
You should be so ashamed of yourself. Letting a
motorboater get the best of you. Pathetic, Moroon. We sailboaters are better than them so I expect you to never screw up that badly again. You might give sailors a bad name. "Capt. Mooron" wrote in message ... I'm specifically exempt from Annex 1..... I've enacted the "Capt. Ron" clause. CM "otnmbrd" wrote in message nk.net... | | | Capt. Mooron wrote: | | | A masthead Tri Color and a steaming light are all that is required on a | sailboat that is under power only. There is nothing I know about that states | I need my Nav lights at any particular height. Many sailboats have their | running lights mounted on the hull, some on the Cabin others on rails..... | but most utilize masthead only. | | Not that it makes a difference to a container ship or tanker since nobody | would be on the bridge any way but maybe someone would see it while fetching | more ice to the lounge. ;-P | | CM | | | Read Annex I of the Rules | A Masthead (steaming) light is always carried ABOVE the sidelights, | which makes the use of the "tricolor" light illegal .... unless of | course you've got a pole to hoist the masthead light to a position above | the tricolor, via some halyard. G | | otn | (awoken from a sound sleep by the "Cadet" doing some reading) | |
Let there be Nav. Light
Capt. Mooron wrote: I'm specifically exempt from Annex 1..... I've enacted the "Capt. Ron" clause. CM ROFL .... excellent response ... otn .... said, as he fell back to sleep...... |
Let there be Nav. Light
!!!!!!!!!!!! Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo! Read the rules for the
lighting of a power vessel. Cheers MC Capt. Mooron wrote: "Shen44" wrote in message | Hmmmm missed that. However, since the subject at hand was a particular sailboat | that is also capable of running "under power", then .... a sailboat which is | using the tricolor light when sailing, shall have "in addition to" this light, | the normal running lights which will be used when the vessel is "additionally" | under power, or "in addition to" that, under power alone. A masthead Tri Color and a steaming light are all that is required on a sailboat that is under power only. There is nothing I know about that states I need my Nav lights at any particular height. Many sailboats have their running lights mounted on the hull, some on the Cabin others on rails..... but most utilize masthead only. Not that it makes a difference to a container ship or tanker since nobody would be on the bridge any way but maybe someone would see it while fetching more ice to the lounge. ;-P CM |
Let there be Nav. Light
Yeah.... that falls under the sub annex of annex 1b called the Capt. Ron
exemption.... it states that any sail vessel masquarading as a power vessel can use it's mast head tri colour to make it look taller and shorter than it really is. CM "The_navigator©" wrote in message ... | !!!!!!!!!!!! Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo! Read the rules for the | lighting of a power vessel. | | Cheers MC | | Capt. Mooron wrote: | "Shen44" wrote in message | | | Hmmmm missed that. However, since the subject at hand was a particular | sailboat | | that is also capable of running "under power", then .... a sailboat which | is | | using the tricolor light when sailing, shall have "in addition to" this | light, | | the normal running lights which will be used when the vessel is | "additionally" | | under power, or "in addition to" that, under power alone. | | A masthead Tri Color and a steaming light are all that is required on a | sailboat that is under power only. There is nothing I know about that states | I need my Nav lights at any particular height. Many sailboats have their | running lights mounted on the hull, some on the Cabin others on rails..... | but most utilize masthead only. | | Not that it makes a difference to a container ship or tanker since nobody | would be on the bridge any way but maybe someone would see it while fetching | more ice to the lounge. ;-P | | CM | | | |
Let there be Nav. Light
Did I ever say the lights should be used at the same time? I'm sorry, you keep saying I
did, but the words simply are not there. At no time do I mention using both at one time, and claiming I did is a blatant lie. The question that was asked was which should be installed. The proper answer for RB is clearly that if he installs a tricolor, it should be in addition to the sidelights. I left out the word "installed," it was implied in the discussion. It does not mean I said "use", because I never did. "Simple Simon" wrote in message ... You are trying to use the same, old, tired argument as Jeff. Both of you are not going to get out of it by saying "in context this and in context that". I don't give a hoot who Jeff was responding to. If he meant to say auxiliary sailboats must have 'in addition to' the tricolor, regular running and steaming lights he would be correct. However, that is not what he said. He said sailboat must have . . . He did not say Bobsprit's sailboat; he did not say auxiliary sailboats; he said sailboats and since he did he is wrong, wrong, wrong. Side with me on this one and you will have much more credibility. You used to have a fair share but the longer you persist in an untenable position the more it erodes away. S.Simon "Shen44" wrote in message ... Jeff was clearly saying that the running lights and the tricolor at the masthead should be lit at the same time. Jeff was clearly wrong. Hmmmm missed that. However, since the subject at hand was a particular sailboat that is also capable of running "under power", then .... a sailboat which is using the tricolor light when sailing, shall have "in addition to" this light, the normal running lights which will be used when the vessel is "additionally" under power, or "in addition to" that, under power alone. Shen |
Let there be Nav. Light
Overproof has no factory mounted "sidelights".... I have a set of oil
lamps on wood panels that I can use [ deployable but not afixed]... I have a set of "side lights" that amount to a port & starboard light under the bowsprit with a stern light on the back rail and a tricolour and anchor light at the masthead with a steaming light just above my mast mounted foredeck lights. CM "Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message ... | Did I ever say the lights should be used at the same time? I'm sorry, you keep saying I | did, but the words simply are not there. At no time do I mention using both at one time, | and claiming I did is a blatant lie. The question that was asked was which should be | installed. The proper answer for RB is clearly that if he installs a tricolor, it should | be in addition to the sidelights. I left out the word "installed," it was implied in the | discussion. It does not mean I said "use", because I never did. | | | | | | "Simple Simon" wrote in message | ... | You are trying to use the same, old, tired argument as Jeff. | | Both of you are not going to get out of it by saying "in context | this and in context that". I don't give a hoot who Jeff was responding | to. If he meant to say auxiliary sailboats must have 'in addition to' | the tricolor, regular running and steaming lights he would be correct. | | However, that is not what he said. He said sailboat must have . . . | | He did not say Bobsprit's sailboat; he did not say auxiliary sailboats; | he said sailboats and since he did he is wrong, wrong, wrong. | | Side with me on this one and you will have much more credibility. | You used to have a fair share but the longer you persist in an | untenable position the more it erodes away. | | S.Simon | | | "Shen44" wrote in message | ... | Jeff was clearly saying that the running lights and | the tricolor at the masthead should be lit at the same | time. Jeff was clearly wrong. | | | Hmmmm missed that. However, since the subject at hand was a particular sailboat | that is also capable of running "under power", then .... a sailboat which is | using the tricolor light when sailing, shall have "in addition to" this light, | the normal running lights which will be used when the vessel is "additionally" | under power, or "in addition to" that, under power alone. | | Shen | | | | |
Let there be Nav. Light
So tell me...how did you transfer th Katytype disease to me??
katysails wrote: the firectionm Do I dare ask what this is???? Maybe you really DO need a pointy end! -- katysails s/v Chanteuse Kirie Elite 32 http://katysails.tripod.com "Women and cats will do as they please, and men and dogs should relax and get used to the idea." - Robert A. Heinlein -- Flying Tadpole ------------------------- Learn what lies below the waves of cyberspace! http://www.internetopera.netfirms.com |
Let there be Nav. Light
The only "chunk" of me you'll have .... is when you're bent over being "my
bitch".... but I'm sure you're "comfortable" with that...... Bwahahahahahahaaaaaaa CM "JL Grasso" wrote in message | Why don't you go **** yourself, Mooron. I have chunks of guys like you | in my stool. |
Let there be Nav. Light
No problemo Grasso... I can do you with a drink in my hand and not spill a
drop despite your squeals of pain.... CM "Roger Huston.... and the Monkey Flips the Switch" "JL Grasso" wrote in message | Yeah hahahaha keep drinking, ****wit. |
Let there be Nav. Light
So tell me...how did you transfer th Katytype disease to me??
You don't remember???? sigh Life is so fleeting.... -- katysails s/v Chanteuse Kirie Elite 32 http://katysails.tripod.com "Women and cats will do as they please, and men and dogs should relax and get used to the idea." - Robert A. Heinlein |
Let there be Nav. Light
I am sincerely glad I missed the beginning of this tread.
"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message ... No problemo Grasso... I can do you with a drink in my hand and not spill a drop despite your squeals of pain.... CM "Roger Huston.... and the Monkey Flips the Switch" "JL Grasso" wrote in message | Yeah hahahaha keep drinking, ****wit. |
Let there be Nav. Light
Look Jon Look... see the Tuna flip! Flip Tuna Flip, Flop Tuna Flop!
Bwahahahahahahahaaaaa CM "JL Grasso" wrote in message | Oh, yes. I'm sure no one sees through this, ****wit. |
Let there be Nav. Light
Ah, thanks for the clarification oh perfect one.
"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message ... It's called a "lead in" Jon.... the only answer he can post is a gay lame. It works flawlessly on the clueless. CM "Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message ... | I am sincerely glad I missed the beginning of this tread. | | "Capt. Mooron" wrote in message | ... | No problemo Grasso... I can do you with a drink in my hand and not spill a | drop despite your squeals of pain.... | | CM | | "Roger Huston.... and the Monkey Flips the Switch" | | | "JL Grasso" wrote in message | | Yeah hahahaha keep drinking, ****wit. | | | | |
Let there be Nav. Light
Perfect. I am writing this done for future reference.
"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message ... Look Jon Look... see the Tuna flip! Flip Tuna Flip, Flop Tuna Flop! Bwahahahahahahahaaaaa CM "JL Grasso" wrote in message | Oh, yes. I'm sure no one sees through this, ****wit. |
Let there be Nav. Light
When you're right, you're right. I'm sure he'll respond a few
more times at least. "Capt. Mooron" wrote in message ... Well done Jon.... see how easy it is to jab a gay lame from this mental midget!! CM "Gary L. Burnore" wrote in message ... | On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 12:20:56 -0700, "Jonathan Ganz" | wrote: | | Ah, thanks for the clarification oh perfect one. | | | | You two should just get a room. | -- | gburnore at DataBasix dot Com | -------------------------------------------------------------------------- - | How you look depends on where you go. | -------------------------------------------------------------------------- - | Gary L. Burnore | ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³ | | ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³ | Official .sig, Accept no substitutes. | ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³ | | ÝÛ 0 1 7 2 3 / Ý³Þ 3 7 4 9 3 0 Û³ | Black Helicopter Repair Services, Ltd.| Official Proof of Purchase | ================================================== ========================= |
Let there be Nav. Light
"Gary L. Burnore" wrote in message ... On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 12:20:56 -0700, "Jonathan Ganz" wrote: Ah, thanks for the clarification oh perfect one. You two should just get a room. And you are the only one that can pull Bertie's account. How improper of you to observe the net abuse and do nothing about it except try to pull Ganz's account. You are pitiful, no doubt... LP |
Let there be Nav. Light
"Gary L. Burnore" wrote in message ... On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 13:02:22 -0700, "Jonathan Ganz" wrote: When you're right, you're right. Gonna netkkkop some more, Franz? Gonna molest your daughter again, Gary? |
Let there be Nav. Light
"JL Grasso" wrote in message ... On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 04:47:14 GMT, "Madam Vinyl" wrote in alt.disasters.aviation: "JL Grasso" wrote in message .. . On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 14:12:35 +0930, Flying Tadpole wrote in alt.sailing.asa: Madam Vinyl wrote: "JL Grasso" wrote in message ... On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 04:16:13 GMT, "Madam Vinyl" wrote in alt.sailing.asa: "JL Grasso" wrote in message .. . On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 03:39:04 GMT, "Madam Vinyl" wrote in alt.sailing.asa: "JL Grasso" wrote in message .. . Is "chunder" like where you make a complete ass of yourself on usenet? You are the authority on this kind of stuff, what do you say? Yes, I've seen you chundering along for a few years now! Jerry Say goodnight, Jerry.... Go **** yourself, stupid ****. Heheee. I wouldn't have expected any less from you, Jerry. Why do you continue to torment your opponent when he's clearly dead? You'd better batten down the hatches. So you are saying it's going to be a rough voyage? Gale-force stupidity from you is predicted. Blowing wind swells your sails. |
Let there be Nav. Light
Warrior Princess wrote: "JL Grasso" wrote in message ... On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 04:47:14 GMT, "Madam Vinyl" wrote in alt.disasters.aviation: "JL Grasso" wrote in message .. . On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 14:12:35 +0930, Flying Tadpole wrote in alt.sailing.asa: Madam Vinyl wrote: "JL Grasso" wrote in message ... On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 04:16:13 GMT, "Madam Vinyl" wrote in alt.sailing.asa: "JL Grasso" wrote in message .. . On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 03:39:04 GMT, "Madam Vinyl" wrote in alt.sailing.asa: "JL Grasso" wrote in message .. . Is "chunder" like where you make a complete ass of yourself on usenet? You are the authority on this kind of stuff, what do you say? Yes, I've seen you chundering along for a few years now! Jerry Say goodnight, Jerry.... Go **** yourself, stupid ****. Heheee. I wouldn't have expected any less from you, Jerry. Why do you continue to torment your opponent when he's clearly dead? You'd better batten down the hatches. So you are saying it's going to be a rough voyage? Gale-force stupidity from you is predicted. Blowing wind swells your sails. That's a sweet little grasso fire you and Mooron have going there. Did you train it to be self-stoking or was that its natural aptitude? -- Flying Tadpole ------------------------- Learn what lies below the waves of cyberspace! http://www.internetopera.netfirms.com |
Let there be Nav. Light
"Oz1" wrote in message ... On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 00:21:43 -0400, JL Grasso wrote: On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 00:01:03 -0400, JL Grasso wrote: email-a-****wit: Well, you lot are nothing if not original! Hmm original it is! Oz1...of the 3 twins. I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you. |
Let there be Nav. Light
JL Grasso wrote: On Tue, 29 Jul 2003 21:57:09 +0930, Tim Fatchen wrote in alt.sailing.asa: JL Grasso wrote: On Tue, 29 Jul 2003 10:59:43 +0930, Flying Tadpole wrote in alt.disasters.aviation: Warrior Princess wrote: "JL Grasso" wrote in message ... On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 04:47:14 GMT, "Madam Vinyl" wrote in alt.disasters.aviation: "JL Grasso" wrote in message .. . On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 14:12:35 +0930, Flying Tadpole wrote in alt.sailing.asa: Madam Vinyl wrote: "JL Grasso" wrote in message ... On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 04:16:13 GMT, "Madam Vinyl" wrote in alt.sailing.asa: "JL Grasso" wrote in message .. . On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 03:39:04 GMT, "Madam Vinyl" wrote in alt.sailing.asa: "JL Grasso" wrote in message .. . Is "chunder" like where you make a complete ass of yourself on usenet? You are the authority on this kind of stuff, what do you say? Yes, I've seen you chundering along for a few years now! Jerry Say goodnight, Jerry.... Go **** yourself, stupid ****. Heheee. I wouldn't have expected any less from you, Jerry. Why do you continue to torment your opponent when he's clearly dead? You'd better batten down the hatches. So you are saying it's going to be a rough voyage? Gale-force stupidity from you is predicted. Blowing wind swells your sails. That's a sweet little grasso fire you and Mooron have going there. Did you train it to be self-stoking or was that its natural aptitude? Ah, polliwog and his faithful skank where's-the-grog. I fear for my well-being now. Bwaahaaahwahwahwahwahwahwahwahwahwahwahw! Jerry Ah. Natural aptitude. Thank you. Please! UNCLE! Bwaaaaaahwahwahwahwahwahwahwahwahwahwahwahw!!! Don't cry, Jerry, it's just the flames of puberty starting to move through your body, nothing to abuse yourself over. -- Flying Tadpole ------------------------- Learn what lies below the waves of cyberspace! http://www.internetopera.netfirms.com |
Let there be Nav. Light
JL Grasso wrote: On Wed, 30 Jul 2003 09:22:07 +0930, Flying Tadpole wrote in alt.sailing.asa: JL Grasso wrote: On Tue, 29 Jul 2003 21:57:09 +0930, Tim Fatchen wrote in alt.sailing.asa: JL Grasso wrote: On Tue, 29 Jul 2003 10:59:43 +0930, Flying Tadpole wrote in alt.disasters.aviation: Warrior Princess wrote: "JL Grasso" wrote in message ... On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 04:47:14 GMT, "Madam Vinyl" wrote in alt.disasters.aviation: "JL Grasso" wrote in message .. . On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 14:12:35 +0930, Flying Tadpole wrote in alt.sailing.asa: Madam Vinyl wrote: "JL Grasso" wrote in message ... On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 04:16:13 GMT, "Madam Vinyl" wrote in alt.sailing.asa: "JL Grasso" wrote in message .. . On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 03:39:04 GMT, "Madam Vinyl" wrote in alt.sailing.asa: "JL Grasso" wrote in message .. . Is "chunder" like where you make a complete ass of yourself on usenet? You are the authority on this kind of stuff, what do you say? Yes, I've seen you chundering along for a few years now! Jerry Say goodnight, Jerry.... Go **** yourself, stupid ****. Heheee. I wouldn't have expected any less from you, Jerry. Why do you continue to torment your opponent when he's clearly dead? You'd better batten down the hatches. So you are saying it's going to be a rough voyage? Gale-force stupidity from you is predicted. Blowing wind swells your sails. That's a sweet little grasso fire you and Mooron have going there. Did you train it to be self-stoking or was that its natural aptitude? Ah, polliwog and his faithful skank where's-the-grog. I fear for my well-being now. Bwaahaaahwahwahwahwahwahwahwahwahwahwahw! Jerry Ah. Natural aptitude. Thank you. Please! UNCLE! Bwaaaaaahwahwahwahwahwahwahwahwahwahwahwahw!!! Don't cry, Jerry, it's just the flames of puberty starting to move through your body, nothing to abuse yourself over. Yes. You must keep 'em rollin' down at the grade school. See? You feel _so_ much better now you've admitted it, don't you? And yes, indeed, it's so rewarding when we as adults finally see you youngsters actually starting to learn. -- Flying Tadpole ------------------------- Learn what lies below the waves of cyberspace! http://www.internetopera.netfirms.com |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:19 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com