Would be interested in knowing how you came up with that statement based
on the pictures and story.
otn

Simple Simon wrote:

http://www.portjefferson.com/news/20...03_ferry.shtml

Beware the Grand Republic ferry. It seems according to the
news story that has very limited information that this ferry
does not give way to sailboats as required by the COLREGS.

http://www.ctnow.com/news/local/stat...nes-local-wire

When there is a collision between a motor boat and a sailboat
it is generally thought that the motor vessel bears the brunt
of the responsiblility because it is the motor vessel that
is the give way vessel while the stand-on vessel is the
sailboat. Of course there is the narrow channel rule but
there is no mention here that this was the case.

Even if the sailboat operator was drinking that does not
make drinking a contributing factor to the collision. If the
motor vessel would have kept clear as the Rules compel him
to keep clear then I don't see how the sailboat could have
caused the collision.

I would venture an educated guess that any decent lawyer
could get the sailboater a good settlement if only he were
not drinking. If he was legally drunk then everything goes
out the window. If he was not legally drunk then he can
sue the ferry for damages he may have incurred and a good
lawyer could easily get him a fat settlement.

S.Simon


"otnmbrd" wrote in message ink.net...
Would be interested in knowing how you came up with that statement based
on the pictures and story.
otn

Simple Simon wrote:

http://www.portjefferson.com/news/20...03_ferry.shtml

Beware the Grand Republic ferry. It seems according to the
news story that has very limited information that this ferry
does not give way to sailboats as required by the COLREGS.


http://www.ctnow.com/news/local/stat...nes-local-wire

Simple Simon wrote:

When there is a collision between a motor boat and a sailboat
it is generally thought that the motor vessel bears the brunt
of the responsiblility because it is the motor vessel that
is the give way vessel while the stand-on vessel is the
sailboat. Of course there is the narrow channel rule but
there is no mention here that this was the case.

No mention that it wasn't either and this post and picture showed a
narrow channel ....you've started mixing post and news stories in
babbling order.

Even if the sailboat operator was drinking that does not
make drinking a contributing factor to the collision. If the
motor vessel would have kept clear as the Rules compel him
to keep clear then I don't see how the sailboat could have
caused the collision.

LOL you inexperience is showing


I would venture an educated guess that any decent lawyer
could get the sailboater a good settlement if only he were
not drinking. If he was legally drunk then everything goes
out the window. If he was not legally drunk then he can
sue the ferry for damages he may have incurred and a good
lawyer could easily get him a fat settlement.

Except if it was a narrow channel. Ever been to Port Jeff? Didn't think
so. I have, but it's been years and I'm not sure where the collision
occurred, so I won't jump the gun as you so readily do.

otn

*IF* the 'sailboat' was sailing.

Scotty

"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...
When there is a collision between a motor boat and a sailboat
it is generally thought that the motor vessel bears the brunt
of the responsiblility because it is the motor vessel that
is the give way vessel while the stand-on vessel is the
sailboat. Of course there is the narrow channel rule but
there is no mention here that this was the case.

Even if the sailboat operator was drinking that does not
make drinking a contributing factor to the collision. If the
motor vessel would have kept clear as the Rules compel him
to keep clear then I don't see how the sailboat could have
caused the collision.

I would venture an educated guess that any decent lawyer
could get the sailboater a good settlement if only he were
not drinking. If he was legally drunk then everything goes
out the window. If he was not legally drunk then he can
sue the ferry for damages he may have incurred and a good
lawyer could easily get him a fat settlement.

S.Simon


"otnmbrd" wrote in message
ink.net...
Would be interested in knowing how you came up with that statement based
on the pictures and story.
otn

Simple Simon wrote:

http://www.portjefferson.com/news/20...03_ferry.shtml

Beware the Grand Republic ferry. It seems according to the
news story that has very limited information that this ferry
does not give way to sailboats as required by the COLREGS.



http://www.ctnow.com/news/local/stat...60.bc-ct--boat
aug04,0,864395.story?coll=hc-headlines-local-wire

That's what will get Booby in trouble one of these days.

He probably thinks Alien's a sailboat just because sails
are up. I don't think he ever turns the motor off. It would
be my guess in this collision that the sailboat was probably
motoring and the headlines should have stated "Motorboats
collide" which is the usual case in 99 percent of collisions.


"Scott Vernon" wrote in message ...
*IF* the 'sailboat' was sailing.

Scotty

"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...
When there is a collision between a motor boat and a sailboat
it is generally thought that the motor vessel bears the brunt
of the responsiblility because it is the motor vessel that
is the give way vessel while the stand-on vessel is the
sailboat. Of course there is the narrow channel rule but
there is no mention here that this was the case.

Even if the sailboat operator was drinking that does not
make drinking a contributing factor to the collision. If the
motor vessel would have kept clear as the Rules compel him
to keep clear then I don't see how the sailboat could have
caused the collision.

I would venture an educated guess that any decent lawyer
could get the sailboater a good settlement if only he were
not drinking. If he was legally drunk then everything goes
out the window. If he was not legally drunk then he can
sue the ferry for damages he may have incurred and a good
lawyer could easily get him a fat settlement.

S.Simon


"otnmbrd" wrote in message
ink.net...
Would be interested in knowing how you came up with that statement based
on the pictures and story.
otn

Simple Simon wrote:

http://www.portjefferson.com/news/20...03_ferry.shtml

Beware the Grand Republic ferry. It seems according to the
news story that has very limited information that this ferry
does not give way to sailboats as required by the COLREGS.



http://www.ctnow.com/news/local/stat...60.bc-ct--boat
aug04,0,864395.story?coll=hc-headlines-local-wire

Sounds like simple simon is the correct name for you or maybe simply wrong

...
http://www.portjefferson.com/news/20...03_ferry.shtml

Beware the Grand Republic ferry. It seems according to the
news story that has very limited information that this ferry
does not give way to sailboats as required by the COLREGS.

http://www.ctnow.com/news/local/stat...nes-local-wire

Can you say, "vessel constrained by draft"?

"me" wrote in message
.net...
Sounds like simple simon is the correct name for you or maybe simply wrong

...
http://www.portjefferson.com/news/20...03_ferry.shtml

Beware the Grand Republic ferry. It seems according to the
news story that has very limited information that this ferry
does not give way to sailboats as required by the COLREGS.

http://www.ctnow.com/news/local/stat...nes-local-wire