Pedantic Rules Quiz
 

Where does a submarine fit in?


"otnmbrd" wrote in message
nk.net...
I'm not sure exactly what Jeff is looking for, however,
some comments on
Ellen/Neal response.....

"Ellen MacArthur" wrote in
message

reenews.ne
t...

"Jeff" wrote
| The definitions of NUC and RAM do not say they are
unable to maneuver
| at all, only that they are unable to maneuver as
required by the
| rules.

Almost right.....

3(g) The term "vessel restricted in her ability to
maneuver" means a
vessel which from the
nature of her work is restricted in her ability to
maneuver as required by
these Rules and
is therefore **unable to keep out of the way of another
vessel.**

3(f) The term "vessel not under command" means a vessel
which through some
exceptional
circumstance is unable to maneuver as required by these
Rules and is
therefore
**unable to keep out of the way of another vessel. **

Nice basic quotes to build on, and I agree with Jeff (EG
with reservations)


Do you see it now. NUC is unable to keep out of the
way of another
vessel. RAM is
unable to keep out of the way of another vessel. Both
are equal.

If both are equal, then the "pecking order" is
useless.....i.e. if you read
the words without looking at the possible situations,
there is no
difference.
However, look at the vessels. NUC is talking about a
vessel which has lost
propulsion or steering, whereas RAM is talking about a
vessel which has
propulsion and steering but is restricted due to it's
work.
In some cases, but not all, Ram is equally unable to
maneuver as is NUC
(I'll let all of you figure out the possibilities).

One shouldn't be above
the other on the list.

One of the reasons I consider this "pecking order" flawed,
but incorrect, in
general, since, no engine, is far more restrictive, than a
trailing suction
dredge

Even if one is unable to maneuver and the other
restricted maneuverability,
the end result is the same. Both are uanble to keep out
of the way.... Two
boats both unable to
keep out of the way of another boat are equally
crippled.

Again, not necessarily.


| But also, a fishing vessel has restricted
maneuverability,
| potentially much more restricted than a NUC or RAM.

Not really.....

G Depends on which fisherman you are talking
to....potentially, not more
so than NUC, but potentially much more so than RAM (again
you need to think
of the possibilities).


3(d) The term "vessel engaged in fishing" means any
vessel fishing with
nets, lines, trawls or
other fishing apparatus which restrict maneuverability,
but does not
include a vessel fishing
with trolling lines or other fishing apparatus which do
not restrict
maneuverability.

It doesn't say anything about being unable to keep
out of the way of
another vessel.
By definition, FISH has more maneuverability than NUC or
RAM because it's
not unable
to keep out of the way.

Yes and no....take a purse seiner that's closed the
loop....... he's not
going anywhere.....\


NUC = unable to maneuver/unable to keep out of the
way
RAM = restricted to maneuver/unable to keep out of
the way
FISH = restricted to maneuver/able to keep out of
the way

| The question has little to do with logic or common
sense, but is
| specifically about the way the rules are worded and
thus must be
| answered in those terms. Also, the "flaws" are not in
the rules, they
| are that the "pecking order" and the way it is
normally explained
| does not match the wording of the rules. So what
exactly are these
| discrepancies?

I gave you one discrepancy but you rejected it. So I
proved it up
there. So now you have
to give me one point for having a valid point. But it
sounds like your
looking for something
else besides NUC and RAM should have equal status in the
pecking order
list.
I guess you'll have to give me a clue because I don't
have a clue.....
I'm sorry but your
logic so far isn't so logical.

Cheers,
Ellen

G Your still just reading the words without any
experience to back up your
assumptions.
I like the "pecking order" as a basic tool, but I also
realize that the
Rules are written, knowing full well that not all
situations can be
specifically handled......hence Rule 2......anyone see how
much importance I
put to knowing/understanding this rule and it's
implications?

otn

Pedantic Rules Quiz
 

"Jeff" wrote in message
. ..

For example, we're powering back from Marblehead and a
power
boat is approaching on our starboard beam. I turn to go
behind him,
he slows down. I turn more, he slows down more. We do
this dance for
a few minutes as we get closer, and finally I make an
abrupt turn to
go behind him and they start yelling, "Don't you know the
rules?
We're Fishing!" Only then do I notice one or two
unattended lines
trolling behind.


That just happened to me, only I was sailing. Boat sitting
still, I assume he's fishing, plenty of room to pass by,
then he decides to start trolling, I can't point up any
higher, but should pass well behind them. then hear yelling,
something about ''we have lines out''. Not my problem.
SNAP! lot's of cursing from the fishing boat. I just smile
and keep on sailing. I didn't know they trolled with *that*
much line out. ;)

SBV

Pedantic Rules Quiz
 

"Scotty"
| Ellen MacArthur wrote:
| NUC = unable to maneuver/unable to keep out of the
| way
| RAM = restricted to maneuver/unable to keep out of
| the way
| FISH = restricted to maneuver/able to keep out of
| the way
| "Jeff" wrote
|
| totally wrong. It quite possible that a fishing boat is
| unable to
| keep out of the way.
|
| How so?

Good thinking there, Scotty. ;-) I'm afraid Jeff is doing the same thing as otn's doing.
He says it is quite possible that a fishing boat is unable to keep out of the way. He's making
up his own rule. The colreg rule defines a fishing boat as *able* to keep out of the way.
So if the fishing boat Jeff's thinking about is unable to keep out of the way it meets the
definition of RAM. It does not meet the definition of FISH. People are ignoring my little
diagrams but they shouldn't. They tell you exactly what the rule says and they tell you it
so you have to use ALL the rule.
Otn says an aircraft carrier is RAM because it can maneuver to keep out of the way.
But the rule says RAM is unable to maneuver to keep out of the way. The only valid
conclusion is the aircraft carrier is not RAM. It can't be because it doesn't meet the
definition.
It's the same for the fishing boat above that Jeff says is unable to maneuver. It's
RAM if it's unable to maneuver to keep out of the way. Duh! And they say men are logical?
Double duh!

Cheers,
Ellen

Pedantic Rules Quiz
 

"Scotty" wrote
| That just happened to me, only I was sailing. Boat sitting
| still, I assume he's fishing, plenty of room to pass by,
| then he decides to start trolling, I can't point up any
| higher, but should pass well behind them. then hear yelling,
| something about ''we have lines out''. Not my problem.
| SNAP! lot's of cursing from the fishing boat. I just smile
| and keep on sailing. I didn't know they trolled with *that*
| much line out. ;)


Good on you. Scotty! I never met a fisherman who fished from boats that
wasn't a prick. They think they own the water. They think they own the fish.
They think they own the sky. One butthole in my area got caught cutting the
pouch open on a pelican (they slowly starve to death) that dived on his bait
and got caught on the hook. He said the bird was stealing *his* fish. He was
stealing the bird's fish. He got a huge fine and JAIL.

Cheers,
Ellen

Pedantic Rules Quiz
 

Scotty wrote:
"Jeff" wrote in message
. ..
Ellen MacArthur wrote:
...
NUC = unable to maneuver/unable to keep out of the
way
RAM = restricted to maneuver/unable to keep out of
the way
FISH = restricted to maneuver/able to keep out of
the way
totally wrong. It quite possible that a fishing boat is
unable to
keep out of the way.


How so?

Its quite possible that a fishing boat has nets or other gear out that
make it virtually impossible to maneuver. Each situation must be
considered on its own merit. However, if a collision were caused by a
fishing vessel's inability to stay clear of a RAM, it would have to
defend its position. If a cable layer had informed it that it was
coming through soon, it would be hard to defend, but if a ferry
suddenly lost steering control and hit a fishing boat, it might be
different.

My point here was that Ellen was trying to infer what the "pecking
order" should be from the definitions of the classes. Then she
over-simplifies the definitions.

There are three categories of vessels that are "restricted" and the
rules have little to say about which is more restricted. There is an
apparent implication that fishing vessels are less restricted because
they must stay clear of NUC's and RAM's, but I claim that is not
necessarily true. I tend to think of it more that fishing vessels
have more options about how, when, and where they deploy gear, RAM's
less options, and NUC's have few or no options. But again, this is
not supported in the rules either, its just a framework in my mind.

Pedantic Rules Quiz
 

Ellen MacArthur wrote:
"Scotty"
| Ellen MacArthur wrote:
| NUC = unable to maneuver/unable to keep out of the
| way
| RAM = restricted to maneuver/unable to keep out of
| the way
| FISH = restricted to maneuver/able to keep out of
| the way
| "Jeff" wrote
|
| totally wrong. It quite possible that a fishing boat is
| unable to
| keep out of the way.
|
| How so?

Good thinking there, Scotty. ;-) I'm afraid Jeff is doing the same thing as otn's doing.
He says it is quite possible that a fishing boat is unable to keep out of the way. He's making
up his own rule. The colreg rule defines a fishing boat as *able* to keep out of the way.

It never says that. You're the one making up rules. All it says is
that the gear restricts its maneuverability.

So if the fishing boat Jeff's thinking about is unable to keep out of the way it meets the
definition of RAM. It does not meet the definition of FISH.

Well, only significance to that would be if a fishing vessel were
unable to stay out of the way of a RAM or NUC. And its possible that
a judge could be convinced. Whether or not that means the fishing
boat has become a RAM, or an exception is made under Rule 2 is academic.

People are ignoring my little
diagrams but they shouldn't. They tell you exactly what the rule says and they tell you it
so you have to use ALL the rule.

Actually, your diagrams add little to the rules. Much detail is in
the words, which are left out of the diagrams.


Otn says an aircraft carrier is RAM because it can maneuver to keep out of the way.
But the rule says RAM is unable to maneuver to keep out of the way. The only valid
conclusion is the aircraft carrier is not RAM. It can't be because it doesn't meet the
definition.

Again I say, the definitions are not the "pecking order." There is
nothing in the definitions that creates an absolute hierarchy of
maneuverability.

It's the same for the fishing boat above that Jeff says is unable to maneuver. It's
RAM if it's unable to maneuver to keep out of the way. Duh! And they say men are logical?
Double duh!


Examples can be constructed to support any position.