more ROW questions....near misses Schooner Aurora
 

That's what the USSailing instructors teach re hove-to. Start on port, end
up on starboard.

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

"Scotty" wrote in message
...
What is ones status while hove-to? I guess you should
always try to hove-to on starboard tack?

What would your status be , while single handing, drifting,
up at the bow pulling down your jib?

Scotty



"Bart" wrote in message
oups.com..
.

Joe wrote:
Is there penalties for near misses?

can be if someone pushes the issue and gets the USCG
involved.

Joe

On starboard tack hove-to, with the helm lashed, I was
nearly run over
by the schooner Aurora in Newport Harbor. I yelled at the
skipper and
later when I was on port tack, altered course several
times to try and
run me down again--failing to maintain his stand-on
course. I wrote a
formal letter to the USCG and gave the names of witnesses.
The USCG
gave them a telephone call and a mild slap on the wrist.
The USCG
officer I spoke to told me they could not take action
unless there
was in fact a collision.

I still have a copy of the original letter. I should post
it here.

If you ever go to Newport. Don't patronize the Aurora.

more ROW questions....
 

Sort of the same philosophy in the marina here. Some guy sailed into his
slip... no problem there, but didn't bother to tie up the boat. Just went
below, the neighbors heard some cussing, then silence, the boat staying in
place as it was a downwind slip. Finally, his neighbors just tied up the
boat for him. They didn't drop his sails for him, however.

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

"Scotty" wrote in message
...
I was about to but thought maybe I better not, you never
know what some creep might do to your boat when you're away
and it's in the slip. This happened right near my marina.

I did however flip off some stupid jerks who were trolling
and cut right across my intended path and then yelled that
they had lines in the water. I heard some big time cussing,
then a loud SNAP! , and more cussing. I gave the finger and
kept on sailing :o

Scotty


"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
Sounds like you did the right thing. Giving them the
finger is about right
also.

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

"Scotty" wrote in message
. ..
it was JUST before, I think had I tried to gybe or tack,
,
in that light wind I would have ended up more in their
way.

SBV



"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
Seems like blowing a horn after the fact is a bit late,
but it's not clear
if they were sounding the horn before or during.

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

"otnmbrd" wrote in message


25.201...
"Scotty" wrote in
:

Last week while sailing up a river channel, about
200yds
wide, doing 3 kts in light. wind, I spotted , off my
starboard stern quarter,2 powerboats, 'sitting'
next
to
each other. I figured they were fishing, or just
talking to
each other. Then they seemed to be trolling, very
slowly up
river, as I was cutting across the channel at an
angle,
I
figured I had plenty of time to cross in front of
them,
rather than behind in case they WERE trolling
lines.
Then the lead PB starts honking his horn ( like a
NYer,
when
the light turns green) and yelling. I heard
something
about
my Mother, and towing and privilege. Since we were
both
going slow, and not real close, I continued on my
coarse. he
never got closer than 100 ft. Only after they passed
did I
see the small towing line between them.

Would a 'tow' like this have 'privilege?

Not necessarily

Would he be
considered a RAM?

Possibly....if he cannot deviate from his
course/speed
up/slow down

Wouldn't he need to be displaying a day
shape?

Can't remember where I read this, but no. If a vessel
is
not normally
engaged in this type operation and would not normally
carry these type
day shapes because of their size then they need not
be
displayed but they
should make every effort to inform (blowing a horn
like
a NY taxi driver)

Given that I had ample time to cross, was I still
wrong to do so?

If you could do so safely with ample clearance,
no....
ample clearance is
the key phrase.


Even if it had been a properly marked 'real'
towboat,
and
someone crossed in front, causing the tow to turn,
but
no
collision happened, what if anything could/should be
done to
the crossing boat?

First off, a "real" towboat is still obligated to
obey
the normal
steering and sailing rules unless they are RAM (and
RAM
is not an
automatic designation for a towboat), so there can be
any number of
possibilities as to right or wrong in your maneuver.
In answer to your question..... no harm no foul....
expect a tongue
lashing. Naturally if your maneuver was "illegal" and
the turn the
towboat had to make to avoid a collision endangered
or
caused injury to
the tug,it's tow,or crew then you should expect a
report
to the various
authorities and possible actions, collision or not.

Is there penalties for near misses?

To date, not generally.


otn

more ROW questions....
 

"otnmbrd" wrote in message link.net...
| G Interesting....somehow because it's a "pleasure boat" towing, it can't
| be *severely* limited in it's ability to deviate from it's course.
|
| otn


I'm not saying *can't*. But in Scotty's case. The way he described it the
tow boat wasn't severely limited in maneuverability. It was going along just
fine towing the other guy. Even hollering and cursing (probably half drunk).
He wouldn't be doing that if he was severely limited in maneuverability. Pleasure
boat's got to do with work. Pleasure boats by definition don't engage in work.
If they did they'd be work boats. Duh!

Cheers,
Ellen

more ROW questions....
 

Sounds like he had to pee real bad, then the seat dropped on
him?

Scotty


"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
Sort of the same philosophy in the marina here. Some guy
sailed into his
slip... no problem there, but didn't bother to tie up the
boat. Just went
below, the neighbors heard some cussing, then silence, the
boat staying in
place as it was a downwind slip. Finally, his neighbors
just tied up the
boat for him. They didn't drop his sails for him, however.

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

"Scotty" wrote in message
...
I was about to but thought maybe I better not, you never
know what some creep might do to your boat when you're
away
and it's in the slip. This happened right near my
marina.

I did however flip off some stupid jerks who were
trolling
and cut right across my intended path and then yelled
that
they had lines in the water. I heard some big time
cussing,
then a loud SNAP! , and more cussing. I gave the finger
and
kept on sailing :o

Scotty


"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
Sounds like you did the right thing. Giving them the
finger is about right
also.

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

"Scotty" wrote in message
. ..
it was JUST before, I think had I tried to gybe or
tack,
,
in that light wind I would have ended up more in
their
way.

SBV



"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
Seems like blowing a horn after the fact is a bit
late,
but it's not clear
if they were sounding the horn before or during.

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

"otnmbrd" wrote in message



25.201...
"Scotty" wrote in
:

Last week while sailing up a river channel, about
200yds
wide, doing 3 kts in light. wind, I spotted , off
my
starboard stern quarter,2 powerboats, 'sitting'
next
to
each other. I figured they were fishing, or just
talking to
each other. Then they seemed to be trolling, very
slowly up
river, as I was cutting across the channel at an
angle,
I
figured I had plenty of time to cross in front of
them,
rather than behind in case they WERE trolling
lines.
Then the lead PB starts honking his horn ( like a
NYer,
when
the light turns green) and yelling. I heard
something
about
my Mother, and towing and privilege. Since we
were
both
going slow, and not real close, I continued on my
coarse. he
never got closer than 100 ft. Only after they
passed
did I
see the small towing line between them.

Would a 'tow' like this have 'privilege?

Not necessarily

Would he be
considered a RAM?

Possibly....if he cannot deviate from his
course/speed
up/slow down

Wouldn't he need to be displaying a day
shape?

Can't remember where I read this, but no. If a
vessel
is
not normally
engaged in this type operation and would not
normally
carry these type
day shapes because of their size then they need
not
be
displayed but they
should make every effort to inform (blowing a horn
like
a NY taxi driver)

Given that I had ample time to cross, was I
still
wrong to do so?

If you could do so safely with ample clearance,
no....
ample clearance is
the key phrase.


Even if it had been a properly marked 'real'
towboat,
and
someone crossed in front, causing the tow to
turn,
but
no
collision happened, what if anything could/should
be
done to
the crossing boat?

First off, a "real" towboat is still obligated to
obey
the normal
steering and sailing rules unless they are RAM
(and
RAM
is not an
automatic designation for a towboat), so there can
be
any number of
possibilities as to right or wrong in your
maneuver.
In answer to your question..... no harm no
foul....
expect a tongue
lashing. Naturally if your maneuver was "illegal"
and
the turn the
towboat had to make to avoid a collision
endangered
or
caused injury to
the tug,it's tow,or crew then you should expect a
report
to the various
authorities and possible actions, collision or
not.

Is there penalties for near misses?

To date, not generally.


otn

more ROW questions....
 

The little blonde does have some good points!

Scotty


"Ellen MacArthur" wrote in
message
reenews.ne
t...

"otnmbrd" wrote
| Excuse me, but the "little powerboat" *nature of her
work* was towing the
| other vessel.


That's a hoot. You say *I* have a narrow
interpretation. Instead your the one.
You only use half the rule. The whole rule says nature of
her work that *severely *
limits her maneuverability. 1) pleasure boat towing isn't
*work* . The examples in the
rule make that clear. 2) You can't take one part of the
rule and ignore the other. It's
doing that that's narrow... You keep ignoring the severely
limited maneuverability part.

| As long as
| the powerboat that's towing can maneuver OK then it's
not RAM.
|
| True, but even you have enough reading comprehension to
realize I said
| that.

I said you were part right and part wrong. Again,
it's because your
using half the rule and half doesn't get the job done....

| All it
| had to do to keep outta the way of Scotty was to
throttle down or take
| it out of gear or turn the steering wheel. Duh! It
had no rule on
| it's side to expect a sailboat to give way.
|
| I wasn't there;I don't know what the channel is like; I
don't know the
| state of the tide; direction and/or strength of current;
wind; handling
| characteristics of the vessels in question; abilities of
the towing
| vessel and operator; etc.....

But you do know the rule (or claim you do). It's
plain and black and white.
Why do you insist on making something out of it that's not
there? Why do you
only use half of it? Why do you ignore the *severely*
limits maneuverability part?
The little pleasure boat is not severely limited. It has
all it's controls. It has all
the maneuverability it ever has. Tide, current, wind make
no difference. The only
thing that's different is a rope over the transom. It
might take a little extra time
to turn or stop but that's not *severe.* So stop ignoring
the severe part of the rule,
please.

| Another thing. You can see from (i) thru (vi)
that work means
| serious work. It doesn't mean playing around
| on a pleasure boat or helping out somebody whose motor
broke.
|
| Show me where it says that.

Duh, the examples say that. All of them are serious
work. None of them are
pleasure craft out playing. If the rule was for pleasure
craft one would have been
put in the examples. If you go to a dinner party that's
"formal attire required" you don't
show up in sneaker and a t-shirt and expect to get in. If
you read a rule that's all about
serious work you don't expect playing to be part of it.
Your trouble is your trying to hedge your bets. You
won't say the rule says X. Instead
you say the rules says X, Y, Z and sometimes A,B,C. Duh!
Read the rule and understand
what it says. Stop adding your own stuff so you can have
an *out* every time.
Maybe you should argue with my instructor Captain
Donna Kirby, She's been teaching
the rules for years and years. She knows them better than
you and she says two little
recreational boats towing each other are not RAM. How does
she know? Because it's
consensus. Your wrong.

| G It pleases me to know you are off the water, and
your above first
| sentence is one of the reasons why.....no, I don't agree
that this is
| always the case.

Too much wiggle room makes a fact a fiction....

|| The fact that you've asked this series of stupid
questions just adds to
| my ongoing confirmation that you are a highly
inexperienced amateur with
| limited powers of intelligent reasoning/thought.

And, your a typical man who wouldn't admit he was
wrong to stick his ass out
of the fox hole even when the bullet make him a second
asshole.... Or, in your case
a third. :-)

Cheers,
Ellen

more ROW questions....
 

You're running in circles. OK, now you say a pleasure boat towing can be
RAM.
Whether or not the one in Scotty's case was or wasn't would be up to him
and/or the other boater to decide since we weren't there and can't know
all the variables.
As for them showing signals.... I seriously doubt many if any small
pleasure boats are equipped with extra ball and diamond shapes or the
necessary lights to signal this so it will generally end up as being
necessary for them to use other means to convey their situation which
will also include your own evaluation which sends us to my favorite
rule....Rule 2.

otn


"Ellen MacArthur" wrote in
reenews.net:


"otnmbrd" wrote in message
link.net...
| G Interesting....somehow because it's a "pleasure boat" towing, it
| can't be *severely* limited in it's ability to deviate from it's
| course.
|
| otn


I'm not saying *can't*. But in Scotty's case. The way he
described it the
tow boat wasn't severely limited in maneuverability. It was going
along just fine towing the other guy. Even hollering and cursing
(probably half drunk). He wouldn't be doing that if he was severely
limited in maneuverability. Pleasure boat's got to do with work.
Pleasure boats by definition don't engage in work. If they did they'd
be work boats. Duh!

Cheers,
Ellen

more ROW questions....
 

You mean Neal?

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

"Scotty" wrote in message
. ..
The little blonde does have some good points!

Scotty


"Ellen MacArthur" wrote in
message
reenews.ne
t...

"otnmbrd" wrote
| Excuse me, but the "little powerboat" *nature of her
work* was towing the
| other vessel.


That's a hoot. You say *I* have a narrow
interpretation. Instead your the one.
You only use half the rule. The whole rule says nature of
her work that *severely *
limits her maneuverability. 1) pleasure boat towing isn't
*work* . The examples in the
rule make that clear. 2) You can't take one part of the
rule and ignore the other. It's
doing that that's narrow... You keep ignoring the severely
limited maneuverability part.

| As long as
| the powerboat that's towing can maneuver OK then it's
not RAM.
|
| True, but even you have enough reading comprehension to
realize I said
| that.

I said you were part right and part wrong. Again,
it's because your
using half the rule and half doesn't get the job done....

| All it
| had to do to keep outta the way of Scotty was to
throttle down or take
| it out of gear or turn the steering wheel. Duh! It
had no rule on
| it's side to expect a sailboat to give way.
|
| I wasn't there;I don't know what the channel is like; I
don't know the
| state of the tide; direction and/or strength of current;
wind; handling
| characteristics of the vessels in question; abilities of
the towing
| vessel and operator; etc.....

But you do know the rule (or claim you do). It's
plain and black and white.
Why do you insist on making something out of it that's not
there? Why do you
only use half of it? Why do you ignore the *severely*
limits maneuverability part?
The little pleasure boat is not severely limited. It has
all it's controls. It has all
the maneuverability it ever has. Tide, current, wind make
no difference. The only
thing that's different is a rope over the transom. It
might take a little extra time
to turn or stop but that's not *severe.* So stop ignoring
the severe part of the rule,
please.

| Another thing. You can see from (i) thru (vi)
that work means
| serious work. It doesn't mean playing around
| on a pleasure boat or helping out somebody whose motor
broke.
|
| Show me where it says that.

Duh, the examples say that. All of them are serious
work. None of them are
pleasure craft out playing. If the rule was for pleasure
craft one would have been
put in the examples. If you go to a dinner party that's
"formal attire required" you don't
show up in sneaker and a t-shirt and expect to get in. If
you read a rule that's all about
serious work you don't expect playing to be part of it.
Your trouble is your trying to hedge your bets. You
won't say the rule says X. Instead
you say the rules says X, Y, Z and sometimes A,B,C. Duh!
Read the rule and understand
what it says. Stop adding your own stuff so you can have
an *out* every time.
Maybe you should argue with my instructor Captain
Donna Kirby, She's been teaching
the rules for years and years. She knows them better than
you and she says two little
recreational boats towing each other are not RAM. How does
she know? Because it's
consensus. Your wrong.

| G It pleases me to know you are off the water, and
your above first
| sentence is one of the reasons why.....no, I don't agree
that this is
| always the case.

Too much wiggle room makes a fact a fiction....

|| The fact that you've asked this series of stupid
questions just adds to
| my ongoing confirmation that you are a highly
inexperienced amateur with
| limited powers of intelligent reasoning/thought.

And, your a typical man who wouldn't admit he was
wrong to stick his ass out
of the fox hole even when the bullet make him a second
asshole.... Or, in your case
a third. :-)

Cheers,
Ellen

more ROW questions....near misses Schooner Aurora
 

Capt. JG wrote:

That's what the USSailing instructors teach re hove-to. Start on port, end
up on starboard.


Really? They teach you to tack as part of heaving to? Why is this
necessary?

//Walt

more ROW questions....near misses Schooner Aurora
 

"Walt" wrote in message
...
Capt. JG wrote:

That's what the USSailing instructors teach re hove-to.
Start on port, end
up on starboard.


Really? They teach you to tack as part of heaving to?
Why is this
necessary?


You don't?

SBV

more ROW questions....
 

No, Ellen. http://www.badongo.com/pic/291317

SBV


"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
You mean Neal?

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

"Scotty" wrote in message
. ..
The little blonde does have some good points!

Scotty


"Ellen MacArthur" wrote in
message

reenews.ne
t...

"otnmbrd" wrote
| Excuse me, but the "little powerboat" *nature of her
work* was towing the
| other vessel.


That's a hoot. You say *I* have a narrow
interpretation. Instead your the one.
You only use half the rule. The whole rule says nature
of
her work that *severely *
limits her maneuverability. 1) pleasure boat towing
isn't
*work* . The examples in the
rule make that clear. 2) You can't take one part of the
rule and ignore the other. It's
doing that that's narrow... You keep ignoring the
severely
limited maneuverability part.

| As long as
| the powerboat that's towing can maneuver OK then
it's
not RAM.
|
| True, but even you have enough reading comprehension
to
realize I said
| that.

I said you were part right and part wrong. Again,
it's because your
using half the rule and half doesn't get the job
done....

| All it
| had to do to keep outta the way of Scotty was to
throttle down or take
| it out of gear or turn the steering wheel. Duh! It
had no rule on
| it's side to expect a sailboat to give way.
|
| I wasn't there;I don't know what the channel is like;
I
don't know the
| state of the tide; direction and/or strength of
current;
wind; handling
| characteristics of the vessels in question; abilities
of
the towing
| vessel and operator; etc.....

But you do know the rule (or claim you do). It's
plain and black and white.
Why do you insist on making something out of it that's
not
there? Why do you
only use half of it? Why do you ignore the *severely*
limits maneuverability part?
The little pleasure boat is not severely limited. It
has
all it's controls. It has all
the maneuverability it ever has. Tide, current, wind
make
no difference. The only
thing that's different is a rope over the transom. It
might take a little extra time
to turn or stop but that's not *severe.* So stop
ignoring
the severe part of the rule,
please.

| Another thing. You can see from (i) thru (vi)
that work means
| serious work. It doesn't mean playing around
| on a pleasure boat or helping out somebody whose
motor
broke.
|
| Show me where it says that.

Duh, the examples say that. All of them are
serious
work. None of them are
pleasure craft out playing. If the rule was for
pleasure
craft one would have been
put in the examples. If you go to a dinner party that's
"formal attire required" you don't
show up in sneaker and a t-shirt and expect to get in.
If
you read a rule that's all about
serious work you don't expect playing to be part of it.
Your trouble is your trying to hedge your bets. You
won't say the rule says X. Instead
you say the rules says X, Y, Z and sometimes A,B,C.
Duh!
Read the rule and understand
what it says. Stop adding your own stuff so you can
have
an *out* every time.
Maybe you should argue with my instructor Captain
Donna Kirby, She's been teaching
the rules for years and years. She knows them better
than
you and she says two little
recreational boats towing each other are not RAM. How
does
she know? Because it's
consensus. Your wrong.

| G It pleases me to know you are off the water, and
your above first
| sentence is one of the reasons why.....no, I don't
agree
that this is
| always the case.

Too much wiggle room makes a fact a fiction....

|| The fact that you've asked this series of stupid
questions just adds to
| my ongoing confirmation that you are a highly
inexperienced amateur with
| limited powers of intelligent reasoning/thought.

And, your a typical man who wouldn't admit he was
wrong to stick his ass out
of the fox hole even when the bullet make him a second
asshole.... Or, in your case
a third. :-)

Cheers,
Ellen