LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #13   Report Post  
Capt. Neal®
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Go get the Rube, Capt. Shen.

Be sure to cut and paste his very own words:
"e) A vessel or object being towed,"

OBJECT, OBJECT, OBJECT.

Bwahahahhahahahhahahahahahha!

CN



"Nav" wrote in message ...


Shen44 wrote:

Thanks to otn for showing me Nav's response to my last.
First off, the question regarding the dayshape on a partially submerged object
less than 200m in length.
Go back and read the question, Nav, YOU are concentrating on the dayshape for a
towing vessel. The question asks about the towed vessel/object. Again, read
rule 24 (g)(iv). Answer is B.



It really is a shame that you don't know the COLREGS even after I post
them. Here is the rule again:

"e) A vessel or object being towed, other than those mentioned in
paragraph (g) of this Rule, shall exhibit:

(i) sidelights;

(ii) a sternlight;

(iii) when the length of the tow exceeds 200 meters, a diamond
shape where it can best be seen."


Here, let me spell it out for you:

"Vessel BEING towed...shall exhibit... when the length of the two
EXCEEDS 200 m"

Now since the question was about a tow less than 200 m that makes your
answer wrong and me correct. OK?



As for a fishing vessel being RAM.
First off, Nav, I don't squirm, so shove your attitude up your ass.


Hate being wrong eh?

If you had read and understood my statements, you would know that I said the
fishing vessel "could" be a possibility because in truth, a fishing vessel when
engaged in fishing with nets, trawls IS considered to be a vessel with
"restricted maneuverability" Rule 3 (d).


RAM does not stand for "restricted maneuverability". Perhaps that is the
cause of your confusion?

The fact that this does not fall into your ordered understanding of the words
contained in the rules for RAM vessels, does not change this fact.
If you go back to my answer, you will note that for the question, I stated
"minesweeper" as the correct answer with the "could" additive. This is not an
error on my part, but instead, a further note as to the real world
possibilities.
My appologies, if you are incapable of understanding this.
G BTW Considering some of your responses, I'd say you need a refresher
course.


Not me, I got both right and would not ever confuse a fishing vessel
with a RAM!

Cheers

 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Rules of the Road Question #4 Bart Senior ASA 6 December 9th 04 12:43 AM
Bwahaha! Bye Bye Bushy! Bobsprit ASA 1 June 18th 04 10:37 PM
Kayaking Road Trip - Question on sharing the cost. . . . Bobo General 2 March 9th 04 05:28 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:53 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 BoatBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Boats"

 

Copyright © 2017