Capt. Neal® wrote:
You are being purposely closed-minded. I still am asking you to
describe one situation where if both sailboats are following the
sailing rules why would Rule 13 ever come into play.

As stated elsewhere, approaching from directly astern is not covered
under Rule 12.


Since you have not and cannot, I stick by my statement that
given the three sailing rules and given they are being followed,
Rule 13 is superfluous.

Superfluous or not, it still exists. Or are you claiming that the rules
are optional?



CN


"Jeff Morris" wrote in message
...

Capt. Neal® wrote:


"Wally" wrote in message
...

"Capt. Neal®" wrote in message

Good point but it is physically impossible for a sailboat to
windward to
stay out of the way of another to leeward if the leeward vessel is
more
weatherly. The windward vessel cannot point higher to avoid the
leeward vessel. He cannot fall off without creating a close quarters
situation, and he cannot speed up or slow down because those things
depend on the speed of the wind. These facts alone negate rule 13
which works well for motor vessels but not for sailing vessels. It is


plain

to me if one follows the sailing rules then rule 13 is superfluous.



The vessel to windward is not neccessarily close-hauled, it's merely
the
vessel which is upwind of the other. The reason he is the give-way
vessel is
because he has a better chance of maintaining full control because the
downwind boat may be in his wind shadow - the downwind boat may not
be able
to maneuvre out of trouble.



I disagree with you. I say the reason the windward vessel in an
overtaking
situation is the give way vessel is precisely because he has more
options.


Total nonsense. There are many cases where the rule are arbitrary.
You can't change them because you think they make more sense another way!


He has more options up until the time the overtaking vessel is
abreast of him,
that is. Therefore it's incumbent on the windward vessel to take
action to
avoid a close quarters situation.


Once again, demonstrating why its obvious you never passed the test!


This all begs the question of at what point does an overtaking situation
actually start? Where does the sailing rule end and the overtaking rule
take over.


The sailing rule doesn't take affect at all. The windward/leeward
rule doesn't apply if one of the vessels is overtaking. You might be
able to create an ambiguous condition where two vessels are converging
and it isn't clear if the windward vessel is overtaking, but Rule 13
resolves that with:

(c) When a vessel is in any doubt as to whether she if overtaking
another, she shall assume that this is the case and act accordingly.

I say it never does unless the windward vessel fails to follow
the sailing rules and creates a close quarters situation. The entire
point
is rule 13 is superfluous if the sailing rules are followed.


That's why you never could have passed the test!

Capt. Neal® wrote:

Rule 13 cannot take priority over the sailing rules. It has no standing
to do so.

What do you mean by this? "No standing"??? Are you claiming that your
boat does not qualify as "all vessels"?

When one follows the sailing rules then Rule 13 never has a chance to
even come into play. It is not needed so how can it take priority?

What do you mean by this? These is nothing in the rules that say that
they are randomly applied.



In order to follow rule 13 one would have to abandon the sailing rules.

Well sort of. In the sense that Rule 13 starts with "Notwithstanding
anything contained in the Rules of Part B, Sections I and II". This
means that Rule 13 has priority over Rule 12. Why is this a problem?

One would be put in the uncomfortable situation of having to choose at
what point to abandon one rule in order to follow another.

Why is this a problem? The rules are very explicit and precise. They
even give guidance as to what to do when in doubt.

You know as well as I do that that's bullcrap!

What? That the rules are optional? So how much did you pay someone to
take the test for you? Its clear you never could have passed it on your
own.

As long as one follows the sailing
rules one is operating entirely legally. As soon as one deviates from
the sailing rules one is acting entirely illegally.

Negatory pseudo-Cap. The rule apply in their entirety, not selectively.
Rule 1 says "These Rules shall apply to all vessels" not "Some of
these rules..."

Rule 2 says "Nothing in these Rules shall exonerate any vessel, or the
owner, master or crew thereof, from the consequences of any neglect to
comply with these Rules". It is clear that all of the rules must be
followed, not selectively applied.

Rule 13 specifically take priority over rule 12. They could have
written "except for rule 12," but they didn't. Sorry Neal - are you
sure you want this blunder on the permanent record?




CN

Capt. Neal® wrote in message
...
Wrong, bozo, like Jeff and Wally said, he could always tack. At any rate,
if both boats are complying with the sailing rules overtaking situations
are covered. The need for Rule 13 is nil.

I find it hard to believe some of the posts in this thread, especially when
one poster admits he does not know what is in the colregs! In a non-racing
situation why should anyone seriously suggest that a boat which is being
overtaken by another should 'tack away'? The overtaken boat needs to do
nothing except stand on, keeping an eye on the overtaking boat in case the
skipper is drunk or stupid. The overtaking boat has a duty to keep clear
until clear ahead and a further duty not to create a situation where risk of
collision exists. This implies the necessity to bear away, easing sheets if
necessary, to keep well clear of the boat being overtaken until he is clear
ahead.
Some of the posts are obviously from people who are thinking in racing
terms. In racing it often happens that the overtaking boat is going to come
quite close and try to lee-bow the other boat and leave it wallowing in his
wind shadow, in which case the boat being overtaken should anticipate what
is coming and then perhaps 'tack away' if he does not like what's coming to
him and has room to do so..

"Jeff Morris" wrote in message ...
Capt. Neal® wrote:

OzOne wrote in message news
On Sat, 29 Jan 2005 21:27:54 -0500, Capt. Neal®
scribbled thusly:


Please indicate where anything is mentioned about overtaking?


Rule 12
(a) When two sailing vessels are approaching one another. . .

Does that statement not include overtaking?

CN


Not when there is another rule to cover overtaking!

You need to read and understand ALL the rules Cappy, it's the same old
story,



And perhaps you need to go sailing once in a while and try following
the sailing rules and then you will see you will never even have a
chance to use Rule 13.

All you need to do to prove me wrong is describe one situation where,
if two sailboats are both following the sailing rules, rule 13 would
even come into play. You cannot do it and neither can Jeff because the
three sailing rules, if followed, cover it all.

First of all, the issue is not whether Rule 13 is "needed," by some measure; the rule exists and therefore mus be followed.

However, I'll give you a case where Rule 12 does not cover two sailboats: Two sailboats A and B are on a beam reach. B is
directly behind A and overtaking. Both are on the same tack, neither is windward or leeward or the other. Nothing in Rule 12
covers this situation. In fact, this is the simplest case of where Rule 13 would supersede Rule 12. How could Neal be so stupid
as to not see it?

Wrong! By definition, the lead vessel is to weather of the following
vessel when both are on a beam reach. Don't you know ANYTHING
about sailing?

CN

"Jeff Morris" wrote in message ...
Capt. Neal® wrote:
You are being purposely closed-minded. I still am asking you to
describe one situation where if both sailboats are following the
sailing rules why would Rule 13 ever come into play.

As stated elsewhere, approaching from directly astern is not covered under Rule 12.


As stated wrongly elsewhere, that is. By virtue of the concept of apparent
wind, two vessels on a beam reach one of which is directly on the other's
bow, the following vessel is to leeward. There is NEVER a time when neither
vessel is to windward of the other.

The three sailing rules cover all sailing situations.
Consequently, Rule 13 is superfluous.

CN

Edgar wrote:
Capt. Neal® wrote in message
...

Wrong, bozo, like Jeff and Wally said, he could always tack. At any rate,
if both boats are complying with the sailing rules overtaking situations
are covered. The need for Rule 13 is nil.


I find it hard to believe some of the posts in this thread, especially when
one poster admits he does not know what is in the colregs! In a non-racing
situation why should anyone seriously suggest that a boat which is being
overtaken by another should 'tack away'? The overtaken boat needs to do
nothing except stand on, keeping an eye on the overtaking boat in case the
skipper is drunk or stupid. The overtaking boat has a duty to keep clear
until clear ahead and a further duty not to create a situation where risk of
collision exists. This implies the necessity to bear away, easing sheets if
necessary, to keep well clear of the boat being overtaken until he is clear
ahead.
Some of the posts are obviously from people who are thinking in racing
terms. In racing it often happens that the overtaking boat is going to come
quite close and try to lee-bow the other boat and leave it wallowing in his
wind shadow, in which case the boat being overtaken should anticipate what
is coming and then perhaps 'tack away' if he does not like what's coming to
him and has room to do so..


You have to be more specific Edgar, are you supporting Neal? Everyone
else has said that the overtaking vessel is giveway, regardless of Rule 12.

And what's wrong with not knowing every detail in the Colregs? Everyone
here seems to have a proper understanding except for Neal, who has the
rules in front of him but doesn't understand the words. I didn't see
anyone applying racing rules; did I miss something?

"Capt. Neal®" wrote in message ...

"Jeff Morris" wrote in message ...
Capt. Neal® wrote:

OzOne wrote in message news
On Sat, 29 Jan 2005 21:27:54 -0500, Capt. Neal®
scribbled thusly:


Please indicate where anything is mentioned about overtaking?


Rule 12
(a) When two sailing vessels are approaching one another. . .

Does that statement not include overtaking?

CN


Not when there is another rule to cover overtaking!

You need to read and understand ALL the rules Cappy, it's the same old
story,



And perhaps you need to go sailing once in a while and try following
the sailing rules and then you will see you will never even have a
chance to use Rule 13.

All you need to do to prove me wrong is describe one situation where,
if two sailboats are both following the sailing rules, rule 13 would
even come into play. You cannot do it and neither can Jeff because the
three sailing rules, if followed, cover it all.

First of all, the issue is not whether Rule 13 is "needed," by some measure; the rule exists and therefore mus be followed.

However, I'll give you a case where Rule 12 does not cover two sailboats: Two sailboats A and B are on a beam reach. B is
directly behind A and overtaking. Both are on the same tack, neither is windward or leeward or the other. Nothing in Rule 12
covers this situation. In fact, this is the simplest case of where Rule 13 would supersede Rule 12. How could Neal be so
stupid as to not see it?

Wrong! By definition, the lead vessel is to weather of the following
vessel when both are on a beam reach. Don't you know ANYTHING
about sailing?

CN


Correction, I spoke in haste. By definition, the following vessel is
to weather of the lead vessel when both are on a beam reach.

This is because the apparent wind is all the vessels 'see' and
the sailing rules do not address apparent wind. They address
actual wind. Because two vessels on a beam reach are bringing
the wind forward, the wind as seen from a stationery observer
would be slightly aft of abeam. This means the following vessel
is the windward vessel and according to the sailing rules, this
vessel is the give-way vessel. Since he is already the give way
vessel Rule 13 is superfluous.

CN

"Capt. Neal®" wrote in message ...

"Jeff Morris" wrote in message ...
Capt. Neal® wrote:
You are being purposely closed-minded. I still am asking you to
describe one situation where if both sailboats are following the
sailing rules why would Rule 13 ever come into play.

As stated elsewhere, approaching from directly astern is not covered under Rule 12.


As stated wrongly elsewhere, that is. By virtue of the concept of apparent
wind, two vessels on a beam reach one of which is directly on the other's
bow, the following vessel is to leeward. There is NEVER a time when neither
vessel is to windward of the other.

The three sailing rules cover all sailing situations.
Consequently, Rule 13 is superfluous.

CN

Correction: the following vessel is to *windward* by virtue of the apparent
wind not being the real wind the sailing rules are based on the real wind.

CN

"Edgar" wrote in message news:C_7Ld.6675

I find it hard to believe some of the posts in this thread, especially
when
one poster admits he does not know what is in the colregs!

Get a clue, dummy - I said I didn't know what the colregs had for defining
'overtaking'.


In a non-racing
situation why should anyone seriously suggest that a boat which is being
overtaken by another should 'tack away'?

Get another clue, dummy - I was referring to the overtakING boat. If he's
upwind and can't point any higher, he can tack away to avoid a collision.

"Capt. Neal®" wrote in message

Correction, I spoke in haste. By definition, the following vessel is
to weather of the lead vessel when both are on a beam reach.

This is because the apparent wind is all the vessels 'see' and
the sailing rules do not address apparent wind. They address
actual wind. Because two vessels on a beam reach are bringing
the wind forward, the wind as seen from a stationery observer
would be slightly aft of abeam. This means the following vessel
is the windward vessel and according to the sailing rules, this
vessel is the give-way vessel. Since he is already the give way
vessel Rule 13 is superfluous.

What if they're both on a slightly close reach? Ie, such that the apparent
wind is forward of the beam but, to a stationary observer, the real wind is
precisely on their beams? In this situation, would one or other be the
windward boat?