The attachment of motive power is at the very core
of the issue.

S.Simon


"The_navigator©" wrote in message ...
So the question of attachment of motive power is not an issue either?

Cheers MC

Simple Simon wrote:

If the cable is attached to the ferry and the ferry
does not sink when a man stands on it then it's a vessel.

So a vessel always has to be a vessel? What about a vessel which is
initially incapable of transporting people and then is provided with
propulsion to enable it to plane and now capable of transporting persons?

I'll bet you can feel the hemp now! Are the turns pressing your ear capt'n?

Cheers MC

Simple Simon wrote:

Yes, because as you said yourself it is a vessel. Once a vessel
always a vessel until it is a wreck.

The difference is a kite board and a water ski is not a vessel
to begin with. The only hemp I feel is the odor of what you're
obviously smoking.

S.Simon


"The_navigator©" wrote in message ...

So a vessel that may be negatively buoyant without speed to provide
hydrodynamic lift is still is a vessel and must obey Colregs? (can ya
feel the hemp yet capt'n?)

Cheers MC

Simple Simon wrote:


I agree provided the submerging sub is not going down
for the count. If it's under control and has the ability
to re-surface it remains a vessel and must comply with
all applicable rules.

S.Simon


"The_navigator©" wrote in message ...


Someone should tell that to the NAVY! Of course I disagree, a submerging
sub is not exept from Colregs and to suggest otherwise is quite wrong.
perhaps a submariner here would like to comment?

Cheers MC

Simple Simon wrote:



As it is sinking it can no longer comply with the Rules.
That is obvious. It has become a wreck. Wrecks need
not comply with the Rules.

S.Simon


"The_navigator©" wrote in message ...



So as it's sinking it does not need to obey Colregs? (Pulling the noose
ever so gently)

Cheers MC

Simple Simon wrote:




If it is sinking it is, indeed, no longer a vessel. A sunken vessel is
a wreck. Funny but that is an awfully loose noose. Maybe you
need to work on your hangman's knot.

S.Simon



"The_navigator©" wrote in message ...




So the sub with negative buoyancy, sinking because she has flooded tanks
with people aboard is still a vessel? YOu can see the noose getting
closer can't you?

Cheers MC

Simple Simon wrote:





A submarine is ON water. What the hell do you think supports it?
Does the water upon which it floats not count? It matters not
if there is water above the hull as well.

No dilemma that I can see . . .

S.Simon

Capetanios Oz wrote in message ...





Ahh but Cappy, you who refers to the Merian W at every opportunity,
has failed to notice that your definition states that a vessel is one
that is used or capable of transportation ON water.
You see the dilema?

On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 18:31:39 -0500, "Simple Simon"
wrote:






A submarine does not sink to the bottom. It has ballast
tanks to keep it at the depths in which it chooses to
operate. It carries air so the crew can breathe and live.

There is a big difference between a vessel traveling under
water and a device that goes to the bottom with somebody
standing on it until the person runs out of air and dies.

Sooooooo stupid with your dumb attempts to refuse to
accept the obvious.

S.Simon

Capetanios Oz wrote in message ...





Interesting, a submarine is not a vessel when submerged?

On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 18:00:04 -0500, "Simple Simon"
wrote:






But, the colregs don't define displacement as not floating at all.
The word displacement means non-planing as in a displacement
sailboat vs. a planing motor boat.

Any craft or device that sinks out from under a person
unless the person is being pulled along at a good clip and
dragging the device along with him is clearly not a vessel.

Here is the definition again.

(a) The word "vessel" includes every description of watercraft, including non-displacement craft and seaplanes, used or

capable





of





being used as a means of transportation on water.

Note the word 'watercraft'. Here is the defintion of watercraft.

wa.ter.craft \-'kraft\ n : a craft for water transport : ship, boat

© 1995 Zane Publishing, Inc. The Merriam-Webster Dictionary © 1994 by Merriam-Webster, Incorporated

A board or a ski that has no way to be powered and sinks when one
stands on it cannot transport anything anywhere. These are not
watercraft. These are devices used by a person being pulled along
rapidly to stay on the surface.

S.Simon


S.Simon

"The_navigator©" wrote in message ...





The colregs clearly say the vessel need not be diplacement. In that
sense, a ski is simply overloaded and sinks when not planing. They also
float without people on them!

Cheers MC

Simple Simon wrote:






You are clearly wrong. A kite board sinks when the
operator stands on it. A water ski also sinks when
the operator stands on it. Clearly neither is a vessel.

A barge floats when cargo or people are on it. Even if
it has no power it can drift from place to place with
the winds and current. A barge clearly is a vessel.


Oz1...of the 3 twins.

I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you.



Oz1...of the 3 twins.

I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you.

Suppose the cable is helm by the ferryman? Is it not a vessel?

Cheers MC

Simple Simon wrote:

The attachment of motive power is at the very core
of the issue.

S.Simon


"The_navigator©" wrote in message ...

So the question of attachment of motive power is not an issue either?

Cheers MC

Simple Simon wrote:


If the cable is attached to the ferry and the ferry
does not sink when a man stands on it then it's a vessel.

Read down some more and you will see I did
mention 'rapid'.

S.Simon


"Jeff Morris" wrote in message ...
Actually the rule specifies "short and rapid blasts"

"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...
I did not say prolonged blasts did I? This leaves
short blast as there is no other type delineated
in the Rules.

S.Simon


"The_navigator©" wrote in message
...
Short blasts I hope.

Cheers MC

Simple Simon wrote:

Five or more blasts on the horn in rapid succession is the danger/
doubt signal. Read the COLREGS.

S.Simon


"The_navigator©" wrote in message
...

Blow the danger/doubt signal? What's that?

Cheers MC

Simple Simon wrote:


Oz is a jerk who won't ever answer because he likes to be
contrary.

I'll give you my answer.

I would hold course and speed. Then . . .

I would blow the danger/doubt signal on the horn and
prepare myself to take evasive action to avoid a collision
in case the kite boarder did not get out of the way.

Technically I am not the stand-on vessel because the
kite boarder has no status under the COLREGS but
the COLREGS to place a high priority on avoiding
collisions so I would take action to avoid a collision
if necessary.

S.Simon


"Donal" wrote in message
...


Capetanios Oz wrote in message
news

On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 23:18:43 -0000, "Donal"
wrote:



Capetanios Oz wrote in message
news:fqp7rv0ijfia3qvds797gnfk547d1rue0k@4ax. com...


On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 15:21:35 -0000, "Donal"
wrote:



Hey, I went to bed!

However, I *do* know the answer.

Now.


Well done!

So what tack is a sailboat on when head to wind?

Dear me!

I asked a simple question about "stand on status" and you have tried to use
it to demonstrate that I know nothing about the Coll Regs. Pathetic!!


Why were you unable to answer my simple question?

Let's face it, Oz. I don't pretend to be an expert on all matters related
to sailing.

So, what does it matter if there is something that I don't know??

OTOH, you present yourself as an expert. Unfortunately, you seem unable to
back up your arrogant attitude with any substance.

Now, you can prove me wrong by answering the original question.

What would *you* do if you were at the helm of a yacht, on starboard tack,
if you were on a collision course with a (port tack) kite surfer?


Regards


Donal
--

You won't get me that easily . . .

Is 'held', I think you meant? If the ferryman can pull on
the cable hard enough to convey the ferry across the
water and the ferry does not sink in the process then
the ferry is a vessel. In this case the ferryman provides
the motive force just like an oarsman in a rowboat provides
the motive force.

However if the force comes from an external source
like a kite that pulls a board that sinks unless it is
being dragged along rapidly by a man holding onto
the kite then the board is not a vessel. In other words
the kite pulls the man and the man drags the board along
for the ride in this instance while the ferryman pulls with
his own muscles while being supported by the ferry and
the man goes along for the ride in the above instance.

I think you've finally caught on.

S.Simon


"The_navigator©" wrote in message ...
Suppose the cable is helm by the ferryman? Is it not a vessel?

Cheers MC

Simple Simon wrote:

The attachment of motive power is at the very core
of the issue.

S.Simon


"The_navigator©" wrote in message ...

So the question of attachment of motive power is not an issue either?

Cheers MC

Simple Simon wrote:


If the cable is attached to the ferry and the ferry
does not sink when a man stands on it then it's a vessel.

The only thing I've caught is a big fish that just won't give up the fight!

;-P

Cheers MC

Simple Simon wrote:
You won't get me that easily . . .

Is 'held', I think you meant? If the ferryman can pull on
the cable hard enough to convey the ferry across the
water and the ferry does not sink in the process then
the ferry is a vessel. In this case the ferryman provides
the motive force just like an oarsman in a rowboat provides
the motive force.

However if the force comes from an external source
like a kite that pulls a board that sinks unless it is
being dragged along rapidly by a man holding onto
the kite then the board is not a vessel. In other words
the kite pulls the man and the man drags the board along
for the ride in this instance while the ferryman pulls with
his own muscles while being supported by the ferry and
the man goes along for the ride in the above instance.

I think you've finally caught on.

S.Simon


"The_navigator©" wrote in message ...

Suppose the cable is helm by the ferryman? Is it not a vessel?

Cheers MC

Simple Simon wrote:


The attachment of motive power is at the very core
of the issue.

S.Simon


"The_navigator©" wrote in message ...


So the question of attachment of motive power is not an issue either?

Cheers MC

Simple Simon wrote:



If the cable is attached to the ferry and the ferry
does not sink when a man stands on it then it's a vessel.

I never said a vessel always has to be a vessel.

I only said if it's a vessel to start out with then it remains
a vessel unless it becomes a wreck at which time it's no
longer a vessel.

Your question about a vessel incapable of human transport
does not mean it is not a vessel. If it floats when people
stand on it then it meets the definition of a vessel because
people are pretty smart and can ofttimes figure out a way
to make such a vessel move even if they have to call Sea Tow.

On the other hand a water ski or kite board will both sink
if any man attempts to stand on them in water. Surely a
sunken device is not a vessel. It did not even start out as
a vessel like the sunken submarine. It was never a vessel.
It does not even become a vessel when some bright individual
decides to strap it onto his body and holds onto something
that makes him go fast enough to get the device planing
along the surface because as soon as the individual lets
go he slows down and the device going along for the ride
sinks again. It didn't start out as a vessel, it did not
become a vessel. It will never be a vessel. It does not
meet the definition of a vessel.

S.Simon

"The_navigator©" wrote in message ...
So a vessel always has to be a vessel? What about a vessel which is
initially incapable of transporting people and then is provided with
propulsion to enable it to plane and now capable of transporting persons?

I'll bet you can feel the hemp now! Are the turns pressing your ear capt'n?

Cheers MC

Simple Simon wrote:

Yes, because as you said yourself it is a vessel. Once a vessel
always a vessel until it is a wreck.

The difference is a kite board and a water ski is not a vessel
to begin with. The only hemp I feel is the odor of what you're
obviously smoking.

S.Simon


"The_navigator©" wrote in message ...

So a vessel that may be negatively buoyant without speed to provide
hydrodynamic lift is still is a vessel and must obey Colregs? (can ya
feel the hemp yet capt'n?)

Cheers MC

Simple Simon wrote:


I agree provided the submerging sub is not going down
for the count. If it's under control and has the ability
to re-surface it remains a vessel and must comply with
all applicable rules.

S.Simon


"The_navigator©" wrote in message ...


Someone should tell that to the NAVY! Of course I disagree, a submerging
sub is not exept from Colregs and to suggest otherwise is quite wrong.
perhaps a submariner here would like to comment?

Cheers MC

Simple Simon wrote:



As it is sinking it can no longer comply with the Rules.
That is obvious. It has become a wreck. Wrecks need
not comply with the Rules.

S.Simon


"The_navigator©" wrote in message ...



So as it's sinking it does not need to obey Colregs? (Pulling the noose
ever so gently)

Cheers MC

Simple Simon wrote:




If it is sinking it is, indeed, no longer a vessel. A sunken vessel is
a wreck. Funny but that is an awfully loose noose. Maybe you
need to work on your hangman's knot.

S.Simon



"The_navigator©" wrote in message ...




So the sub with negative buoyancy, sinking because she has flooded tanks
with people aboard is still a vessel? YOu can see the noose getting
closer can't you?

Cheers MC

Simple Simon wrote:





A submarine is ON water. What the hell do you think supports it?
Does the water upon which it floats not count? It matters not
if there is water above the hull as well.

No dilemma that I can see . . .

S.Simon

Capetanios Oz wrote in message ...





Ahh but Cappy, you who refers to the Merian W at every opportunity,
has failed to notice that your definition states that a vessel is one
that is used or capable of transportation ON water.
You see the dilema?

On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 18:31:39 -0500, "Simple Simon"
wrote:






A submarine does not sink to the bottom. It has ballast
tanks to keep it at the depths in which it chooses to
operate. It carries air so the crew can breathe and live.

There is a big difference between a vessel traveling under
water and a device that goes to the bottom with somebody
standing on it until the person runs out of air and dies.

Sooooooo stupid with your dumb attempts to refuse to
accept the obvious.

S.Simon

Capetanios Oz wrote in message ...





Interesting, a submarine is not a vessel when submerged?

On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 18:00:04 -0500, "Simple Simon"
wrote:






But, the colregs don't define displacement as not floating at all.
The word displacement means non-planing as in a displacement
sailboat vs. a planing motor boat.

Any craft or device that sinks out from under a person
unless the person is being pulled along at a good clip and
dragging the device along with him is clearly not a vessel.

Here is the definition again.

(a) The word "vessel" includes every description of watercraft, including non-displacement craft and seaplanes, used
or

capable





of





being used as a means of transportation on water.

Note the word 'watercraft'. Here is the defintion of watercraft.

wa.ter.craft \-'kraft\ n : a craft for water transport : ship, boat

© 1995 Zane Publishing, Inc. The Merriam-Webster Dictionary © 1994 by Merriam-Webster, Incorporated

A board or a ski that has no way to be powered and sinks when one
stands on it cannot transport anything anywhere. These are not
watercraft. These are devices used by a person being pulled along
rapidly to stay on the surface.

S.Simon


S.Simon

"The_navigator©" wrote in message ...





The colregs clearly say the vessel need not be diplacement. In that
sense, a ski is simply overloaded and sinks when not planing. They also
float without people on them!

Cheers MC

Simple Simon wrote:






You are clearly wrong. A kite board sinks when the
operator stands on it. A water ski also sinks when
the operator stands on it. Clearly neither is a vessel.

A barge floats when cargo or people are on it. Even if
it has no power it can drift from place to place with
the winds and current. A barge clearly is a vessel.


Oz1...of the 3 twins.

I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you.



Oz1...of the 3 twins.

I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you.

What about barges, which have numerous references in the ColRegs. It is pretty clear they
are considered vessels in the rules.

"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...
You won't get me that easily . . .

Is 'held', I think you meant? If the ferryman can pull on
the cable hard enough to convey the ferry across the
water and the ferry does not sink in the process then
the ferry is a vessel. In this case the ferryman provides
the motive force just like an oarsman in a rowboat provides
the motive force.

However if the force comes from an external source
like a kite that pulls a board that sinks unless it is
being dragged along rapidly by a man holding onto
the kite then the board is not a vessel. In other words
the kite pulls the man and the man drags the board along
for the ride in this instance while the ferryman pulls with
his own muscles while being supported by the ferry and
the man goes along for the ride in the above instance.

I think you've finally caught on.

S.Simon


"The_navigator©" wrote in message
...
Suppose the cable is helm by the ferryman? Is it not a vessel?

Cheers MC

Simple Simon wrote:

The attachment of motive power is at the very core
of the issue.

S.Simon


"The_navigator©" wrote in message
...

So the question of attachment of motive power is not an issue either?

Cheers MC

Simple Simon wrote:


If the cable is attached to the ferry and the ferry
does not sink when a man stands on it then it's a vessel.

Dut the rule says it has to be capable of transport. The kite surfer can
carry a man from one place to another.

Cheers MC

Simple Simon wrote:

I never said a vessel always has to be a vessel.

I only said if it's a vessel to start out with then it remains
a vessel unless it becomes a wreck at which time it's no
longer a vessel.

Your question about a vessel incapable of human transport
does not mean it is not a vessel. If it floats when people
stand on it then it meets the definition of a vessel because
people are pretty smart and can ofttimes figure out a way
to make such a vessel move even if they have to call Sea Tow.

On the other hand a water ski or kite board will both sink
if any man attempts to stand on them in water. Surely a
sunken device is not a vessel. It did not even start out as
a vessel like the sunken submarine. It was never a vessel.
It does not even become a vessel when some bright individual
decides to strap it onto his body and holds onto something
that makes him go fast enough to get the device planing
along the surface because as soon as the individual lets
go he slows down and the device going along for the ride
sinks again. It didn't start out as a vessel, it did not
become a vessel. It will never be a vessel. It does not
meet the definition of a vessel.

S.Simon

"The_navigator©" wrote in message ...

So a vessel always has to be a vessel? What about a vessel which is
initially incapable of transporting people and then is provided with
propulsion to enable it to plane and now capable of transporting persons?

I'll bet you can feel the hemp now! Are the turns pressing your ear capt'n?

Cheers MC

Simple Simon wrote:


Yes, because as you said yourself it is a vessel. Once a vessel
always a vessel until it is a wreck.

The difference is a kite board and a water ski is not a vessel
to begin with. The only hemp I feel is the odor of what you're
obviously smoking.

S.Simon


"The_navigator©" wrote in message ...


So a vessel that may be negatively buoyant without speed to provide
hydrodynamic lift is still is a vessel and must obey Colregs? (can ya
feel the hemp yet capt'n?)

Cheers MC

Simple Simon wrote:



I agree provided the submerging sub is not going down
for the count. If it's under control and has the ability
to re-surface it remains a vessel and must comply with
all applicable rules.

S.Simon


"The_navigator©" wrote in message ...



Someone should tell that to the NAVY! Of course I disagree, a submerging
sub is not exept from Colregs and to suggest otherwise is quite wrong.
perhaps a submariner here would like to comment?

Cheers MC

Simple Simon wrote:




As it is sinking it can no longer comply with the Rules.
That is obvious. It has become a wreck. Wrecks need
not comply with the Rules.

S.Simon


"The_navigator©" wrote in message ...




So as it's sinking it does not need to obey Colregs? (Pulling the noose
ever so gently)

Cheers MC

Simple Simon wrote:





If it is sinking it is, indeed, no longer a vessel. A sunken vessel is
a wreck. Funny but that is an awfully loose noose. Maybe you
need to work on your hangman's knot.

S.Simon



"The_navigator©" wrote in message ...





So the sub with negative buoyancy, sinking because she has flooded tanks
with people aboard is still a vessel? YOu can see the noose getting
closer can't you?

Cheers MC

Simple Simon wrote:






A submarine is ON water. What the hell do you think supports it?
Does the water upon which it floats not count? It matters not
if there is water above the hull as well.

No dilemma that I can see . . .

S.Simon

Capetanios Oz wrote in message ...






Ahh but Cappy, you who refers to the Merian W at every opportunity,
has failed to notice that your definition states that a vessel is one
that is used or capable of transportation ON water.
You see the dilema?

On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 18:31:39 -0500, "Simple Simon"
wrote:







A submarine does not sink to the bottom. It has ballast
tanks to keep it at the depths in which it chooses to
operate. It carries air so the crew can breathe and live.

There is a big difference between a vessel traveling under
water and a device that goes to the bottom with somebody
standing on it until the person runs out of air and dies.

Sooooooo stupid with your dumb attempts to refuse to
accept the obvious.

S.Simon

Capetanios Oz wrote in message ...






Interesting, a submarine is not a vessel when submerged?

On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 18:00:04 -0500, "Simple Simon"
wrote:







But, the colregs don't define displacement as not floating at all.
The word displacement means non-planing as in a displacement
sailboat vs. a planing motor boat.

Any craft or device that sinks out from under a person
unless the person is being pulled along at a good clip and
dragging the device along with him is clearly not a vessel.

Here is the definition again.

(a) The word "vessel" includes every description of watercraft, including non-displacement craft and seaplanes, used

or

capable






of






being used as a means of transportation on water.

Note the word 'watercraft'. Here is the defintion of watercraft.

wa.ter.craft \-'kraft\ n : a craft for water transport : ship, boat

© 1995 Zane Publishing, Inc. The Merriam-Webster Dictionary © 1994 by Merriam-Webster, Incorporated

A board or a ski that has no way to be powered and sinks when one
stands on it cannot transport anything anywhere. These are not
watercraft. These are devices used by a person being pulled along
rapidly to stay on the surface.

S.Simon


S.Simon

"The_navigator©" wrote in message ...






The colregs clearly say the vessel need not be diplacement. In that
sense, a ski is simply overloaded and sinks when not planing. They also
float without people on them!

Cheers MC

Simple Simon wrote:







You are clearly wrong. A kite board sinks when the
operator stands on it. A water ski also sinks when
the operator stands on it. Clearly neither is a vessel.

A barge floats when cargo or people are on it. Even if
it has no power it can drift from place to place with
the winds and current. A barge clearly is a vessel.


Oz1...of the 3 twins.

I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you.



Oz1...of the 3 twins.

I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you.

It cannot. The man carries the kite board. That is the difference
you fail to see. If the board were not attached to the man's
feet it would be left behind while the kite dragged the man
along the surface of the water. Unless you are willing to tell me
that a man being dragged along the surface of the water by a
kite is a vessel then a board being dragged by a man who is
being dragged by a kite is not a vessel either.

S.Simon


"The_navigator©" wrote in message ...
Dut the rule says it has to be capable of transport. The kite surfer can
carry a man from one place to another.

Cheers MC

Simple Simon wrote:

I never said a vessel always has to be a vessel.

I only said if it's a vessel to start out with then it remains
a vessel unless it becomes a wreck at which time it's no
longer a vessel.

Your question about a vessel incapable of human transport
does not mean it is not a vessel. If it floats when people
stand on it then it meets the definition of a vessel because
people are pretty smart and can ofttimes figure out a way
to make such a vessel move even if they have to call Sea Tow.

On the other hand a water ski or kite board will both sink
if any man attempts to stand on them in water. Surely a
sunken device is not a vessel. It did not even start out as
a vessel like the sunken submarine. It was never a vessel.
It does not even become a vessel when some bright individual
decides to strap it onto his body and holds onto something
that makes him go fast enough to get the device planing
along the surface because as soon as the individual lets
go he slows down and the device going along for the ride
sinks again. It didn't start out as a vessel, it did not
become a vessel. It will never be a vessel. It does not
meet the definition of a vessel.

S.Simon

"The_navigator©" wrote in message ...

So a vessel always has to be a vessel? What about a vessel which is
initially incapable of transporting people and then is provided with
propulsion to enable it to plane and now capable of transporting persons?

I'll bet you can feel the hemp now! Are the turns pressing your ear capt'n?

Cheers MC

Simple Simon wrote:


Yes, because as you said yourself it is a vessel. Once a vessel
always a vessel until it is a wreck.

The difference is a kite board and a water ski is not a vessel
to begin with. The only hemp I feel is the odor of what you're
obviously smoking.

S.Simon


"The_navigator©" wrote in message ...


So a vessel that may be negatively buoyant without speed to provide
hydrodynamic lift is still is a vessel and must obey Colregs? (can ya
feel the hemp yet capt'n?)

Cheers MC

Simple Simon wrote:



I agree provided the submerging sub is not going down
for the count. If it's under control and has the ability
to re-surface it remains a vessel and must comply with
all applicable rules.

S.Simon


"The_navigator©" wrote in message ...



Someone should tell that to the NAVY! Of course I disagree, a submerging
sub is not exept from Colregs and to suggest otherwise is quite wrong.
perhaps a submariner here would like to comment?

Cheers MC

Simple Simon wrote:




As it is sinking it can no longer comply with the Rules.
That is obvious. It has become a wreck. Wrecks need
not comply with the Rules.

S.Simon


"The_navigator©" wrote in message ...




So as it's sinking it does not need to obey Colregs? (Pulling the noose
ever so gently)

Cheers MC

Simple Simon wrote:





If it is sinking it is, indeed, no longer a vessel. A sunken vessel is
a wreck. Funny but that is an awfully loose noose. Maybe you
need to work on your hangman's knot.

S.Simon



"The_navigator©" wrote in message ...





So the sub with negative buoyancy, sinking because she has flooded tanks
with people aboard is still a vessel? YOu can see the noose getting
closer can't you?

Cheers MC

Simple Simon wrote:






A submarine is ON water. What the hell do you think supports it?
Does the water upon which it floats not count? It matters not
if there is water above the hull as well.

No dilemma that I can see . . .

S.Simon

Capetanios Oz wrote in message ...






Ahh but Cappy, you who refers to the Merian W at every opportunity,
has failed to notice that your definition states that a vessel is one
that is used or capable of transportation ON water.
You see the dilema?

On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 18:31:39 -0500, "Simple Simon"
wrote:







A submarine does not sink to the bottom. It has ballast
tanks to keep it at the depths in which it chooses to
operate. It carries air so the crew can breathe and live.

There is a big difference between a vessel traveling under
water and a device that goes to the bottom with somebody
standing on it until the person runs out of air and dies.

Sooooooo stupid with your dumb attempts to refuse to
accept the obvious.

S.Simon

Capetanios Oz wrote in message ...






Interesting, a submarine is not a vessel when submerged?

On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 18:00:04 -0500, "Simple Simon"
wrote:







But, the colregs don't define displacement as not floating at all.
The word displacement means non-planing as in a displacement
sailboat vs. a planing motor boat.

Any craft or device that sinks out from under a person
unless the person is being pulled along at a good clip and
dragging the device along with him is clearly not a vessel.

Here is the definition again.

(a) The word "vessel" includes every description of watercraft, including non-displacement craft and seaplanes,
used

or

capable






of






being used as a means of transportation on water.

Note the word 'watercraft'. Here is the defintion of watercraft.

wa.ter.craft \-'kraft\ n : a craft for water transport : ship, boat

© 1995 Zane Publishing, Inc. The Merriam-Webster Dictionary © 1994 by Merriam-Webster, Incorporated

A board or a ski that has no way to be powered and sinks when one
stands on it cannot transport anything anywhere. These are not
watercraft. These are devices used by a person being pulled along
rapidly to stay on the surface.

S.Simon


S.Simon

"The_navigator©" wrote in message ...






The colregs clearly say the vessel need not be diplacement. In that
sense, a ski is simply overloaded and sinks when not planing. They also
float without people on them!

Cheers MC

Simple Simon wrote:







You are clearly wrong. A kite board sinks when the
operator stands on it. A water ski also sinks when
the operator stands on it. Clearly neither is a vessel.

A barge floats when cargo or people are on it. Even if
it has no power it can drift from place to place with
the winds and current. A barge clearly is a vessel.


Oz1...of the 3 twins.

I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you.



Oz1...of the 3 twins.

I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you.