Jeff wants to add "overtaking" to the classes of vessels in the pecking
order mnemonic.

One reason why this is just plain ignorant I have plainly stated elsewhere.
Adding an ACTION of a vessel to a list of CLASSES of vessels is to
*******ize the list. If you add "overtaking" then why not add "meeting" or
"crossing?"

The second reason why adding "overtaking" to the list of classes of vessels
is just plain ignorant is because it is just plain wrong. It is wrong by
virtue of the FACT that there is at least one situation where the overtaking
vessel is the STAND ON vessel.

Vessel A is tied to a pier with a vessel tied fore and aft of it. The
current is running strongly from the stern of vessel A. So vessel A decides
to back out of its berth because in doing so the stern of the vessel will
pull away from the pier and the bow of the vessel will follow and will not
strike the vessel berthed forward of it. The helmsman blows the horn using
one prolonged blast indicating he is exiting his berth and then three short
blasts of the horn to indicate operating in astern propulsion.

Vessel B is proceeding parallel to the dock and with the current - in other
words coming up from Vessel A's stern. Vessel B is overtaking Vessel A but
Vessel B is the stand on vessel because a vessel exiting a pier or berth is
the burdened vessel.

I hope this helps.

Wilbur Hubbard

"Wilbur Hubbard" wrote
I hope this helps.

How is "not under command" a class of vessel?

"Ernest Scribbler" wrote in message
...
"Wilbur Hubbard" wrote
I hope this helps.

How is "not under command" a class of vessel?


Yours is a common misunderstanding. Not under command has nothing to do with
a vessel not being under command as the layman thinks of command. Rather it
is a term used to describe a vessel that because of some unusual
circumstance is unable to maneuver according to the rules. Any vessel that
breaks a rudder or steering cable or hydraulic steering line, for example
can declare and identify itself as NUC.

So the NUC class of vessels includes all vessels that have some physical or
other unusual malady, breakdown, or snafu that makes them unable to
maneuver. The vessel is what it is. It is not in the ACT of doing one
particular thing such as overtaking, crossing or meeting.

Wilbur Hubbard

"Wilbur Hubbard" wrote
Yours is a common misunderstanding.

My misunderstandings are all totally unique and original, I'll have you
know.

Any vessel that breaks a rudder or steering
cable or hydraulic steering line, for example

Sounds like a condition that could befall any vessel. In fact, I think I see
the words "any vessel" in your description. So how does that make it a class
of vessel?

Wilbur Hubbard wrote:
Jeff wants to add "overtaking" to the classes of vessels in the pecking
order mnemonic.


Your silly arguments only serve to show how little you actually
understand the rules.

One reason why this is just plain ignorant I have plainly stated elsewhere.
Adding an ACTION of a vessel to a list of CLASSES of vessels is to
*******ize the list. If you add "overtaking" then why not add "meeting" or
"crossing?"

Why not indeed? Of course, the overtaking rule applies in almost all
such meetings between various boats. The crossing rule only applies
between power boats, so its hard to fit it to the general rules. And
head on meeting doesn't even have a stand on/give way relationship. No
where is it written that this mnemonic must correspond to "classes" as
you define them. If its useful for remembering rules, thats enough.
Since you don't have a boat, you have no need of remembering the rules.



The second reason why adding "overtaking" to the list of classes of vessels
is just plain ignorant is because it is just plain wrong. It is wrong by
virtue of the FACT that there is at least one situation where the overtaking
vessel is the STAND ON vessel.

Even if there were an exception, what difference would that make? If it
an "overtaking situation" the rule applies, otherwise it doesn't.
Actually, the Overtaking Rule is one that is the clearest. Although
there are some scenarios where its a challenge to determine if it
applies, in its basic form it doesn't matter what manner of vessel is
involved.


Vessel A is tied to a pier with a vessel tied fore and aft of it. The
current is running strongly from the stern of vessel A. So vessel A decides
to back out of its berth because in doing so the stern of the vessel will
pull away from the pier and the bow of the vessel will follow and will not
strike the vessel berthed forward of it. The helmsman blows the horn using
one prolonged blast indicating he is exiting his berth and then three short
blasts of the horn to indicate operating in astern propulsion.

Vessel B is proceeding parallel to the dock and with the current - in other
words coming up from Vessel A's stern. Vessel B is overtaking Vessel A but

In open water, a boat making sternway effectively has it bow and stern
reversed. However, in this situation the "Special Circumstances" rule
(Rule 2) would apply.

Vessel B is the stand on vessel because a vessel exiting a pier or berth is
the burdened vessel.

Oh really?? Please show us that rule! Why would a vessel leaving a
slip have a special signal if its always the Give Way vessel?

Actually this is a area where the courts have given more guidance than
the ColRegs do. The vessel leaving the slip must not impede vessels in
the channel; vessels in the channel must use moderate speed and be
prepared for vessel leaving.

I hope this helps.

It certainly helps to show your ignorance of the rules!

"Ernest Scribbler" wrote in message
. ..
"Wilbur Hubbard" wrote
Yours is a common misunderstanding.

My misunderstandings are all totally unique and original, I'll have you
know.

Any vessel that breaks a rudder or steering
cable or hydraulic steering line, for example

Sounds like a condition that could befall any vessel. In fact, I think I
see the words "any vessel" in your description. So how does that make it a
class of vessel?


You really can't be THAT stupid! Or can you?

Humans are a class. Humans with the flu are a class. Humans with flu remain
in their class as long as they have flu and don't die. If they die they
become a new class - that of Humans having died from flu. In other words a
class doesn't have to be a static entity. I know this might be hard for you
to understand as you probably spent about four years in your 8th grade class
before they moved you along. So, I guess I can understand where you might
get the idea that classes are a static entity.

The same holds true in the pecking order classes. Any vessel has the
potential to be included in the NUC class. The NUC class consists of vessels
that may or may not move in and out of the class. But, the class remains as
described in the Rules.

Now, you need to go the back of the class. And put on that pointy hat. You,
sir, are a dunce!

Wilbur Hubbard

"Wilbur Hubbard" wrote
The NUC class consists of vessels that may or may not move in and out of
the class.

Other than coming up with some stunningly insipid ad hominems, you're just
not doing a very good job here, Wilbur. With your characteristic dearth of
brevity, you've amply explained that a class, as you define it, is a
temporary condition that any vessel (or human) can enter or leave. The
problem isn't with your explanation, it's that there's just no sensible way
to square it with your earlier assertion that another temporary condition,
overtaking, doesn't fit your definition of a class. What you fail to
recognize, is that I haven't called into question your position on what
should or shouldn't be included in the mnemonic, I've only pointed out that
your argument against the inclusion in question is specious at best. Perhaps
if you spent a little less time pontificating, you could do a better job of
explaining yourself.

You, sir, are a dunce!

You, sir, have no class...

"Ernest Scribbler" wrote in message
...
"Wilbur Hubbard" wrote
The NUC class consists of vessels that may or may not move in and out of
the class.

Other than coming up with some stunningly insipid ad hominems, you're just
not doing a very good job here, Wilbur. With your characteristic dearth of
brevity, you've amply explained that a class, as you define it, is a
temporary condition that any vessel (or human) can enter or leave. The
problem isn't with your explanation, it's that there's just no sensible
way to square it with your earlier assertion that another temporary
condition,


Hold it! Stop right there! Cease, desist, arrêt, anschlag, arresto, batente,
????, parada ! I said nothing about overtaking being a "condition." I did
say that overtaking is an "action" and that is the crux of the matter.

It is not appropriate to add an action to a class of vessels being
delineated by their state of being. A NUC is a state of being. A RAM is a
state of being. A sailboat is a state of being. But not OVERTAKING.
Overtaking is an action. An action does not belong in a list of states of
being.

overtaking, doesn't fit your definition of a class. What you fail to
recognize, is that I haven't called into question your position on what
should or shouldn't be included in the mnemonic, I've only pointed out
that your argument against the inclusion in question is specious at best.

Simply not so. What's in question is your total failure to understand simple
concepts such as state of being versus action. Noun versus verb. Action is
described by a verb. Vessel A overtakes Vessel B as opposed to Vessel a is a
NUC and Vessel B is a RAM or vessel C is a SAILBOAT. Would you include a
verb in a list of nouns? Perhaps so since you appear to have little or no
concept of the structure of the English language. Here I am treating with a
functionally illiterate individual trying to make a point while the the very
language we use is not understood by you. Do you see why now I often feel a
sense of hopelessness when dealing with the dregs that most often post here?

Perhaps if you spent a little less time pontificating, you could do a
better job of explaining yourself.

In order to break through the brick wall that is your mind one needs
pontificate and pontificate plenty in order to just get your attention. Once
attention is gotten then comes the long process of attempting to impart the
education you obviously missed in school.


You, sir, are a dunce!

You, sir, have no class...

You might have a point there or why would I be bothering trying to educate
the classless?


Wilbur Hubbard

On Thu, 1 May 2008 14:38:13 -0400, "Gregory Hall"
wrote:




Wilbur Hubbard



Having a little trouble keeping your socks matched up there NW?

Frank

On May 1, 2:38*pm, "Gregory Hall" wrote:
"Ernest Scribbler" wrote in message

...



Other than coming up with some stunningly insipid ad
hominems, you're just not doing a very good job here,
Wilbur. With your characteristic dearth of
brevity, you've amply explained that a class, as you
define it, is a temporary condition that any vessel (or
human) can enter or leave. The problem isn't with your
explanation, it's that there's just no sensible
way to square it with your earlier assertion that another temporary condition,


Simply not so. What's in question is your total failure to understand simple concepts such as state of being versus
action. Noun versus verb. Action is described by a verb.
Vessel A overtakes Vessel B as opposed to Vessel a is a
NUC and Vessel B is a RAM or vessel C is a SAILBOAT. Would you include a verb in a list of nouns? Perhaps so since you appear to have little or no concept of the structure of the English language. Here I am treating with a functionally
literate individual trying to make a point while the the
very language we use is not understood by you.

This is very reminiscent of one of my favorites, the classic "Gossage-
Verbedian Papers," go look i tup and read it right now if you're not
familiar, you'll get some huge laughs and you'll see what I mean!

richforman