Capt. Neal® wrote:
....

Most interesting to me is this part:

"when both have the wind on the same side, the vessel which is to
windward shall keep out of the way of the vessel which is to leeward;"

This says if one sailboat is overtaking another and both have the wind
on the same side, then the sailboat to weather is the give way vessel.

This tells me that the overtaking rule where the overtaken vessel is always
the stand-on vessel does not apply to sailboats.


Why didn't you continue with the beginning of Rule 13:

(a) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Rules of Part B,
Sections I and II, any vessel overtaking any other shall keep out of
the way of the vessel being overtaken.

What part of "Notwithstanding anything contained" do you interpret as
meaning Rule 12 takes priority over Rule 13?

How do you expect anyone to believe that you passed the Master's exam,
when you seem confused by this simple point?

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

Most interesting to me is this part:

"when both have the wind on the same side, the vessel which is to windward shall keep out of the way of the vessel which is to
leeward;"

This says if one sailboat is overtaking another and both have the wind
on the same side, then the sailboat to weather is the give way vessel.

This tells me that the overtaking rule where the overtaken vessel is always
the stand-on vessel does not apply to sailboats.


Why didn't you continue with the beginning of Rule 13:

(a) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Rules of Part B,
Sections I and II, any vessel overtaking any other shall keep out of
the way of the vessel being overtaken.

What part of "Notwithstanding anything contained" do you interpret as meaning Rule 12 takes priority over Rule 13?

How do you expect anyone to believe that you passed the Master's exam, when you seem confused by this simple point?

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.

Prove me wrong. Give me one situation where the sailing rules don't
cover all eventualities even those in all overtaking situations.

CN

"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.

Even if the windward boat was close-hauled, he can always tack away if he
can't point higher to avoid the stand-on vessel. If you'd ever been racing,
you'd see this happen a dozen or more times in every race.

"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.

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.

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. 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.

CN

"Capt. Neal®" wrote in message

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. I say it never does unless the windward vessel fails to follow
the sailing rules and creates a close quarters situation.

Ah, I see what you're saying - the leeward boat could be overtaking, at
which point he becomes the give-way, rather than the stand-on vessel. I
don't know what it says in the colregs, but the RRS has stuff about overlaps
which could be used to define precisely when the overtaking maneuvre is
happening.

I believe the rule on overtaking takes precedence over the windward/leeward
rules. else it would be toggling between the two rules if the overtaking
boat is to the leeward.

"Wally" wrote in message
...
"Capt. Neal®" wrote in message

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. I say it never does unless the windward vessel fails to
follow
the sailing rules and creates a close quarters situation.

Ah, I see what you're saying - the leeward boat could be overtaking, at
which point he becomes the give-way, rather than the stand-on vessel. I
don't know what it says in the colregs, but the RRS has stuff about
overlaps
which could be used to define precisely when the overtaking maneuvre is
happening.

When two sailboats are interacting, Rule 12 covers all eventualities.

Abandoning them in favor of Rule 13 is the only thing that would
cause this toggling you refer to. My point is toggling is not necessary
if the sailing rules are followed.

If one decides to abandon one set of rules in favor of a contradictory
rule then one is adding confusion to the mix and increasing the chances
of a collision. This is not the intent of the Rules.

CN


"Trantor" wrote in message ...
I believe the rule on overtaking takes precedence over the windward/leeward
rules. else it would be toggling between the two rules if the overtaking
boat is to the leeward.

"Wally" wrote in message
...
"Capt. Neal®" wrote in message

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. I say it never does unless the windward vessel fails to
follow
the sailing rules and creates a close quarters situation.

Ah, I see what you're saying - the leeward boat could be overtaking, at
which point he becomes the give-way, rather than the stand-on vessel. I
don't know what it says in the colregs, but the RRS has stuff about
overlaps
which could be used to define precisely when the overtaking maneuvre is
happening.

In Neal's case, the only thing he's able to overtake is his beer bottle.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Trantor" wrote in message
...
I believe the rule on overtaking takes precedence over the windward/leeward
rules. else it would be toggling between the two rules if the overtaking
boat is to the leeward.

"Wally" wrote in message
...
"Capt. Neal®" wrote in message

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. I say it never does unless the windward vessel fails to
follow
the sailing rules and creates a close quarters situation.

Ah, I see what you're saying - the leeward boat could be overtaking, at
which point he becomes the give-way, rather than the stand-on vessel. I
don't know what it says in the colregs, but the RRS has stuff about
overlaps
which could be used to define precisely when the overtaking maneuvre is
happening.

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!

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.

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.

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!