Your absolutely correct - its illegal to have lights on that could be confusing.

However, installing the extra lights if perfectly OK, as long as they're not used at the
same time - that is what I meant.

When RB ran done his list of lights, he didn't mention sidelights and thus would not be
legal for powering at night.

--
-jeff
"Assumptions shall not be made on the basis of scanty information" ColRegs, Rule 7(c)


"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...

"Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message
...
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.

Wrong! You blew it, Jeff.

Tricolor and lower running lights are NOT to be used at the same time.

Good job wiggling out of that faux pas, Jeff. Even your buddy
Shen44 was waiting to pounce on you. Maybe it's time you
reviewed the Rules.


"Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message ...
Your absolutely correct - its illegal to have lights on that could be confusing.

However, installing the extra lights if perfectly OK, as long as they're not used at the
same time - that is what I meant.

When RB ran done his list of lights, he didn't mention sidelights and thus would not be
legal for powering at night.

--
-jeff
"Assumptions shall not be made on the basis of scanty information" ColRegs, Rule 7(c)


"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...

"Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message
...
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.

Wrong! You blew it, Jeff.

Tricolor and lower running lights are NOT to be used at the same time.

My wording may have been a tad vague, though I never said they could be used at the same
time. The discussion was about what lights might be installed, in particular, the
addition of the tricolor.

I confess I can't find the phrase that led me to think the sidelights can't be higher than
2.5 meters, though is quite clear they must be lower than the "masthead" light. I wonder
if the Inland version of the Annex is being superceded by the new regulations on lights.
I think the new law defers to the ABYC standard on many aspects of the running lights.


"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...
Good job wiggling out of that faux pas, Jeff. Even your buddy
Shen44 was waiting to pounce on you. Maybe it's time you
reviewed the Rules.


"Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message
...
Your absolutely correct - its illegal to have lights on that could be confusing.

However, installing the extra lights if perfectly OK, as long as they're not used at
the
same time - that is what I meant.

When RB ran done his list of lights, he didn't mention sidelights and thus would not
be
legal for powering at night.

--
-jeff
"Assumptions shall not be made on the basis of scanty information" ColRegs, Rule
7(c)


"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...

"Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message
...
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.

Wrong! You blew it, Jeff.

Tricolor and lower running lights are NOT to be used at the same time.

Subject: Let there be Nav. Light
From: "Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom
Date: 07/26/2003 10:58 Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

My wording may have been a tad vague, though I never said they could be used
at the same
time. The discussion was about what lights might be installed, in
particular, the
addition of the tricolor.

I confess I can't find the phrase that led me to think the sidelights can't
be higher than
2.5 meters, though is quite clear they must be lower than the "masthead"
light. I wonder
if the Inland version of the Annex is being superceded by the new regulations
on lights.
I think the new law defers to the ABYC standard on many aspects of the
running lights.


Annex I, 2., (c),(d) ?

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!

"Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message ...
My wording may have been a tad vague, though I never said they could be used at the same
time. The discussion was about what lights might be installed, in particular, the
addition of the tricolor.

I confess I can't find the phrase that led me to think the sidelights can't be higher than
2.5 meters, though is quite clear they must be lower than the "masthead" light. I wonder
if the Inland version of the Annex is being superceded by the new regulations on lights.
I think the new law defers to the ABYC standard on many aspects of the running lights.


"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...
Good job wiggling out of that faux pas, Jeff. Even your buddy
Shen44 was waiting to pounce on you. Maybe it's time you
reviewed the Rules.


"Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message
...
Your absolutely correct - its illegal to have lights on that could be confusing.

However, installing the extra lights if perfectly OK, as long as they're not used at
the
same time - that is what I meant.

When RB ran done his list of lights, he didn't mention sidelights and thus would not
be
legal for powering at night.

--
-jeff
"Assumptions shall not be made on the basis of scanty information" ColRegs, Rule
7(c)


"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...

"Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message
...
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.

Wrong! You blew it, Jeff.

Tricolor and lower running lights are NOT to be used at the same time.

Jesus Frikkin KeeRist Neal - I already said that was not my intention and perhaps the
wording was vague. But the discussion was about which lights to install, not which lights
to use. Installing both is fine, using both is not.

Talk about your "glass houses" here - You maintained for 50 posts that its perfectly
legal for a sailboat to continue at hull speed in thick fog after hearing fog signals dead
ahead! Only a total idiot could believe something as stupid as that, and since we know
you're highly intelligent you were clearly only doing it for the sport. This wouldn't be
so bad f it were an innocuous matter, but there's probably some dumb schlub out there who
now thinks that sailboats still have right of way in the fog. Shame on you, Neal!
Shame!


"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...

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!

"Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message
...
My wording may have been a tad vague, though I never said they could be used at the
same
time. The discussion was about what lights might be installed, in particular, the
addition of the tricolor.

I confess I can't find the phrase that led me to think the sidelights can't be higher
than
2.5 meters, though is quite clear they must be lower than the "masthead" light. I
wonder
if the Inland version of the Annex is being superceded by the new regulations on
lights.
I think the new law defers to the ABYC standard on many aspects of the running lights.


"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...
Good job wiggling out of that faux pas, Jeff. Even your buddy
Shen44 was waiting to pounce on you. Maybe it's time you
reviewed the Rules.


"Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message
...
Your absolutely correct - its illegal to have lights on that could be confusing.

However, installing the extra lights if perfectly OK, as long as they're not used
at
the
same time - that is what I meant.

When RB ran done his list of lights, he didn't mention sidelights and thus would
not
be
legal for powering at night.

--
-jeff
"Assumptions shall not be made on the basis of scanty information" ColRegs, Rule
7(c)


"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...

"Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message
...
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.

Wrong! You blew it, Jeff.

Tricolor and lower running lights are NOT to be used at the same time.

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. 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 and even if the sailboat, mine for example, were
going hull speed it would still meet the definition of going slow.

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. These vessels
normally travel at speeds of twenty knots or greater which
is clearly a dangerous thing to do in a fog. They are required
to slow down to a safe speed. 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.

Vessels that sound other fog signals are higher up in the pecking
order so they are the stand-on vessel. The presence of fog
does not make them the give way vessel. Motor vessels
are required to stay clear the moment they hear a signal
of a vessel higher up in the pecking order. All you have to
do is ask yourself how a dredge, for example, is going to
slow down or take evasive action to see how foolish and
untenable your motorboat mentality stand is.


"Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message ...
Jesus Frikkin KeeRist Neal - I already said that was not my intention and perhaps the
wording was vague. But the discussion was about which lights to install, not which lights
to use. Installing both is fine, using both is not.

Talk about your "glass houses" here - You maintained for 50 posts that its perfectly
legal for a sailboat to continue at hull speed in thick fog after hearing fog signals dead
ahead! Only a total idiot could believe something as stupid as that, and since we know
you're highly intelligent you were clearly only doing it for the sport. This wouldn't be
so bad f it were an innocuous matter, but there's probably some dumb schlub out there who
now thinks that sailboats still have right of way in the fog. Shame on you, Neal!
Shame!


"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...

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!

"Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message
...
My wording may have been a tad vague, though I never said they could be used at the
same
time. The discussion was about what lights might be installed, in particular, the
addition of the tricolor.

I confess I can't find the phrase that led me to think the sidelights can't be higher
than
2.5 meters, though is quite clear they must be lower than the "masthead" light. I
wonder
if the Inland version of the Annex is being superceded by the new regulations on
lights.
I think the new law defers to the ABYC standard on many aspects of the running lights.


"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...
Good job wiggling out of that faux pas, Jeff. Even your buddy
Shen44 was waiting to pounce on you. Maybe it's time you
reviewed the Rules.


"Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message
...
Your absolutely correct - its illegal to have lights on that could be confusing.

However, installing the extra lights if perfectly OK, as long as they're not used
at
the
same time - that is what I meant.

When RB ran done his list of lights, he didn't mention sidelights and thus would
not
be
legal for powering at night.

--
-jeff
"Assumptions shall not be made on the basis of scanty information" ColRegs, Rule
7(c)


"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...

"Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message
...
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.

Wrong! You blew it, Jeff.

Tricolor and lower running lights are NOT to be used at the same time.

Subject: Let there be Nav. Light
From: "Simple Simon"
Date: 07/26/2003 15:15 Pacific Standard Time
Message-id: JMmdnZ4MQfMGYL-iRTvUrg@terranova.


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.

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)

and even if the sailboat, mine for example, were
going hull speed it would still meet the definition of going slow.

"Wrong" .... for obvious reasons


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

These vessels
normally travel at speeds of twenty knots or greater which
is clearly a dangerous thing to do in a fog.

G That would be a high average....anywhere from 12k to 30k is more accurate.

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)

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.


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"

The presence of fog
does not make them the give way vessel.

"Wrong" Every Vessel shall navigate with extreme caution .... that does not
mean "stand-on"

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.
A vessel engaged in towing sounds the same signal as a sailing vessel in fog (
and is not considered RAM simply because it's towing)...again no pecking order
because of sound signals.

All you have to
do is ask yourself how a dredge, for example, is going to
slow down or take evasive action to see how foolish and
untenable your motorboat mentality stand is.

"Wrong" ROFL HUH????? Dredges tend to be twin screw with all sorts of thrusters
and going at very slow speeds.... i.e. can stop and turn quickly.


Shen

I see that while I was composing this, and putting my kid to bed, Shen responded to most
of these issues, but for the record ...

"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...
Now you have to resort to putting false words in my mouth.

I think if we go over the history we can find you agreeing to this extreme position - but
we'll let this ride for the moment ...


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. 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

Perhaps in your very limited experiance. Here in the NorthEast its very common to have a
moderate breeze with a fog - sometimes even a strong breeze. I have sailed in 15-20 knots
of wind with visibility between 100 and 300 feet a number of times.

and even if the sailboat, mine for example, were
going hull speed it would still meet the definition of going slow.


No one would debate that - I think we'll have to save it for later use. However, most
cruising boats are quite capable of 8 knots, which is 13.5 feet per second.


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.

"Every vessel shall at all times proceed at a safe speed so that she
can take proper and effective action to avoid collision and be stopped
within a distance appropriate to the prevailing circumstances and
conditions."

There is absolutely nothing in the rules that says that sailboats are exempt from this
basic rule. This position is completely untenable.

These vessels
normally travel at speeds of twenty knots or greater which
is clearly a dangerous thing to do in a fog. They are required
to slow down to a safe speed.

I've never said that powerboats were not more likely to be a fault.

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.

If a powerboat were doing 2 knots and a sailboat doing 8 ran into them, the sailboat would
likely receive most, if not all the blame. In fact, this example is at the heart of our
difference.



Vessels that sound other fog signals are higher up in the pecking
order so they are the stand-on vessel.

There is no "pecking order." It is true that vessels sounding the "other" signal
(prolonged,short,short) can be considered "burdened" and that extra caution is indicated.
Upon hearing the "other" signal one must consider the possibility that the vessel could be
burdened in a variety of ways: it could be towing, fishing, a RAM or NUC, as well as a
sailboat. (Hopefully not all at the same time!) It would be wise to give such a vessel a
wide berth.

However, there is absolutely nothing in the rules that gives "burdened" vessels stand-on
status or right-of-way. If the vessels were in sight of one another, the "pecking" would
be in force and the burdened vessel would likely be the stand-on vessel, required to hold
speed and course. Since they are not in sight, it becomes the responsibility of both
vessels to avoid the risk of collision.

There is no qualification in 19e: When you hear a fog signal ahead and can't determine
there's no risk of collisions, "Every vessel ... shall reduce her speed to the minimum at
which she can be kept on course." That means ALL vessels must reduce speed to MINIMUM
steerageway. There is no qualification for sailboats; there's nothing that says you're
free to determine what a safe speed is. The words are very clear: "Every vessel ...
shall reduce her speed to the minimum." Perhaps I should repeat this again: "Every vessel
.... shall reduce her speed to the minimum." What part of this is unclear, Neal?


The presence of fog
does not make them the give way vessel.

The presence of fog means that neither vessel is "standon" or "giveway." These terms are
only used in the section "Conduct of vessels in sight of one another"

Motor vessels
are required to stay clear the moment they hear a signal
of a vessel higher up in the pecking order.

No, all vessels are required to stay clear of all others. There is no pecking order.

All you have to
do is ask yourself how a dredge, for example, is going to
slow down or take evasive action to see how foolish and
untenable your motorboat mentality stand is.


A meaningless example. If a dredge is stationary, then it is already complying with 19e.


"Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message
...
Jesus Frikkin KeeRist Neal - I already said that was not my intention and perhaps the
wording was vague. But the discussion was about which lights to install, not which
lights
to use. Installing both is fine, using both is not.

Talk about your "glass houses" here - You maintained for 50 posts that its perfectly
legal for a sailboat to continue at hull speed in thick fog after hearing fog signals
dead
ahead! Only a total idiot could believe something as stupid as that, and since we
know
you're highly intelligent you were clearly only doing it for the sport. This wouldn't
be
so bad f it were an innocuous matter, but there's probably some dumb schlub out there
who
now thinks that sailboats still have right of way in the fog. Shame on you, Neal!
Shame!


"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...

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!

"Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message
...
My wording may have been a tad vague, though I never said they could be used at
the
same
time. The discussion was about what lights might be installed, in particular, the
addition of the tricolor.

I confess I can't find the phrase that led me to think the sidelights can't be
higher
than
2.5 meters, though is quite clear they must be lower than the "masthead" light. I
wonder
if the Inland version of the Annex is being superceded by the new regulations on
lights.
I think the new law defers to the ABYC standard on many aspects of the running
lights.


"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...
Good job wiggling out of that faux pas, Jeff. Even your buddy
Shen44 was waiting to pounce on you. Maybe it's time you
reviewed the Rules.


"Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message
...
Your absolutely correct - its illegal to have lights on that could be
confusing.

However, installing the extra lights if perfectly OK, as long as they're not
used
at
the
same time - that is what I meant.

When RB ran done his list of lights, he didn't mention sidelights and thus
would
not
be
legal for powering at night.

--
-jeff
"Assumptions shall not be made on the basis of scanty information" ColRegs,
Rule
7(c)


"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...

"Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message
...
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.

Wrong! You blew it, Jeff.

Tricolor and lower running lights are NOT to be used at the same time.

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