Jim, wrote:

New Conservative wrote:
Hi all,

I haven't actually sailed a boat yet but plan to later this year. I am
therefore still a bit green when it comes to the intricacies of the
subject.
Say I'm keen to visit the West Indies and I'm leaving from say
Southampton, England. I'm on my own and will need to sleep every day,
even if only for a few hours. Is it safe to let a boat 'sail herself'
while I catch some shut-eye, or is this a no-no? Can it be done safely
or would I have to drop all sail and just bob around in the dark for a
while until I've awoken? Obviously it'd make for a shorter passage if
I could somehow keep going 24/7. And ideas? Thanks.

One of the many rules of the sea is to maintain a proper watch 24/7. I
don't know how the racer hotshots get away with it, but consider how far
a freighter can travel in an hour while you're napping. Yes their
supposed to maintain a proper watch also, but a little boat is hard to
see (assuming their looking) and a freighter is hard to turn, and has no
brakes.

Solo is Ok for day sailing, but that's about it.

The answer is: 1. set a radar watch within a prescribed distance, then
set the alarm; 2. crash.

--
Regards, Shane
"A closed mouth gathers no feet!"
Website: http://www.wonk.demon.co.uk/

Steve Firth wrote:

New Conservative wrote:

Is it safe to let a boat 'sail herself' while I catch some shut-eye,

No.

Depends where you are

or is this a no-no?

Yes

Depends where you are

Can it be done safely

N

Depends where you are.
This is getting boring!

or would I have to drop all sail and just bob around in the dark for a
while until I've awoken?

No, that's just as bad.

Depends... Yawn...

Obviously it'd make for a shorter passage if I could somehow keep going
24/7. And ideas? Thanks.

You need crew

I give up... Consider what the op asked?

--
Regards, Shane
"A closed mouth gathers no feet!"
Website: http://www.wonk.demon.co.uk/

Lauri Tarkkonen wrote:

In "FMac"
writes:

How about a windvane in place of an autopilot.

For a small boat a windvane that is not dependent of electricity and is
mure reliable than a autopilot is certainly to be recommended.

Of course a good windwane costs about 10 autopilots.

- Lauri Tarkkonen

"Falky foo" wrote in message
om...
You need crew.

That would make sailing solo around the world pretty tough.
Realistically,
if you don't have an autopilot I would recommend a drogue.



How about an an autopilot linked to GPS?
Depends... no, this time - where you are going!

--
Regards, Shane
"A closed mouth gathers no feet!"
Website: http://www.wonk.demon.co.uk/

Steve Firth wrote:

Falky foo wrote:

You need crew.

That would make sailing solo around the world pretty tough.

I'd say anyone who is thinking of having their first lesson shouldn't
really be thinking of solo around the world.

Yup!.. but we all dream...

--
Regards, Shane
"A closed mouth gathers no feet!"
Website: http://www.wonk.demon.co.uk/

I'd say anyone who is thinking of having their first lesson shouldn't
really be thinking of solo around the world.

Yup!.. but we all dream...

If I had a dollar for everyone who read the National Geographic articles
about Robin Lee Graham and thought about doing the same...

So let the fellow dream. Maybe someday he'll have learned enough to do
it.

otnmbrd wrote:
Armond,

Those are "high speed ferries", not ships. They involve a whole
different set of operating parameters than ships, including
stopping distance. In dealing with them and discussing them, you
need to realize and understand that comparing them to normal
commercial traffic is comparing "apples to oranges"....., same
applies to standard tugs and Z-drive or Voight Schneider.

Well, I won't defend a statement I never made. Still, I wonder how much
difference it makes to the target whether he or she is killed by a "ferry"
or a "ship" (ignoring for the moment that many folks cannot accurately
define "ship.")

I can tell you from my own experience that contacting and staying
out of the way of commercial vessels, no matter what their type or
classification, is not at all simple. What it boils down to, it seems to
me, is that the small boat operator should get out of the way and worry
later about the effectiveness of lights, communication devices, warning
systems, etc. In the interim, one should treat the rules as just what they
a rules.

--
Good luck and good sailing.
s/v Kerry Deare of Barnegat
http://kerrydeare.home.comcast.net/

None of the above would be possible were I below not keeping a watch.
"They can't see you" is my default assumption. COLREGS might help my
widow get a better settlement, but I will get out of the way of
shipping unless I have positive proof they've seen ME.

That sums up my view of the Colregs too.
TonyB

In article ,
renewontime dot com wrote:


Fascinating. I'd like to learn more - can you point me at any web
sites? I can't find anything much over 25kts.

Our site has a news section, or try
http://www.marinelink.com/main/main.asp but I did a quick search on the
net and didn't find much. Better to get a subscription to "Maritime
Reporter" and "MarineNews", in the current issues there are several
articles about "high speed" vessels.

The only ships around here that run 30+ knots are the ones that are painted
gray and have assorted pointy things sticking out from various parts of their
superstructure.

Oh yeah, if you approach at a closing rate which they determine to be
potentially hostile, they will use the pointy things.

That will definitely ruin your day.

When I'm offshore my radar is up and operating. That's the best visibility
enhancer that I've got.

I can see SHIPS out 8-10nm or so (visually) on a clear day/night, and on
radar quite a bit further. Land disappears 10ish nm around here, in no
small part due to the elevation of some of the buildings (which helps)

Small boats are usually not visible to the naked eye much beyond 4nm or so,
although I will often tag them on radar significantly before that.

All this from my flybridge.

--
--
Karl Denninger ) Internet Consultant & Kids Rights Activist
http://www.denninger.net My home on the net - links to everything I do!
http://scubaforum.org Your UNCENSORED place to talk about DIVING!
http://www.spamcuda.net SPAM FREE mailboxes - FREE FOR A LIMITED TIME!
http://genesis3.blogspot.com Musings Of A Sentient Mind

In article ,
Wayne.B wrote:


On Wed, 02 Mar 2005 21:58:42 +0000, Andy Champ
wrote:

Fascinating. I'd like to learn more - can you point me at any web
sites? I can't find anything much over 25kts.

==========================================

We have a ferry service running between here and Key West that uses
large, high speed catamarans. They can run at 40 kts or so and are
quite spectacular to watch at close range.

http://www.keywestshuttle.com/catgallery/default.htm

What's even more impressive is seeing one of those come over the horizon and
doing a double-take at their closing rate if you're on a recip course. :)

Been there, done that.

--
--
Karl Denninger ) Internet Consultant & Kids Rights Activist
http://www.denninger.net My home on the net - links to everything I do!
http://scubaforum.org Your UNCENSORED place to talk about DIVING!
http://www.spamcuda.net SPAM FREE mailboxes - FREE FOR A LIMITED TIME!
http://genesis3.blogspot.com Musings Of A Sentient Mind

We have had discussions here in the past about this type of thing. I call
it "improvisational lighting" and I don't see any difference between
making
up the lighting rules as one goes along, and making up the crossing or
overtaking rules as one goes along.

This kind of thing is largely why most commercial operators have such low
opinions of recreational sailors.

* Perhaps with some reason. But *my* first duty is to survive and if
breaking the rules means I do that rather than getting mown down by a big
ship who should be giving way to me under the same rules then that's fine.
There are many cases of yachts being mown down when completely innocent and
abiding by the rules which is why recreational sailors have such a low
opinion of commercial operators.

I know of no commercial ship that has been run down and sunk by a yacht,
whether or not it was in the right ( or wrong!)
TonyB

"Armond Perretta" wrote in message news:

Well, I won't defend a statement I never made. Still, I wonder how much
difference it makes to the target whether he or she is killed by a "ferry"
or a "ship" (ignoring for the moment that many folks cannot accurately
define "ship.")

Oops, did I get the wrong writer?


I can tell you from my own experience that contacting and staying
out of the way of commercial vessels, no matter what their type or
classification, is not at all simple. What it boils down to, it seems to
me, is that the small boat operator should get out of the way and worry
later about the effectiveness of lights, communication devices, warning
systems, etc. In the interim, one should treat the rules as just what
they
a rules.

It's not easy from either perspective.
The one bit of good news is that under most cases, a large ship or G
smaller ferry will tend to be on a set and predictable route (exceptions
noted) so that you will at least have a reasonable idea of where from, where
to, and possible points of intended course change when estimating how a
particular sighting may affect your course.
On the other hand, in coastal waters where you run into a good deal of small
boat traffic, from the ship point of view, it's all too frequently difficult
to tell from,to, course change points, for small vessels which adds a great
point of concern when calculating options.
G Personally, I liked the old submarine rule, that made them stay clear of
all ship traffic when surfaced, due to their visibility ....... might be
great for big ship, small boat meeting situations, though it'd open a "can
of worms" in other respects.

otn

Steve Firth wrote:

Sensayuma is not a small town in Arizona.

Steve, please forgive me. I was indeed being a **** and missing the
point, all at once.

DannyBoy wrote:
I was indeed being a ****

funny how some slang just doesn't translate well across the pond

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=****

On Thu, 03 Mar 2005 02:45:36 +0000, Pete Verdon
d wrote:


Required to have one *or* the other, as far as I know, as otherwise
you'd be showing the lights of some other type of vessel.

Correct. The hull lights are for boats like mine, or for entering
harbours because they are more visible, being low, than from out in
the lake against town lights.

In practice,
though, I'm sure anyone watching would be able to tell the difference
between you and a fishing boat/dredger/pilot boat or whatever.

It's primarily large lake freighters, power boats, other sailboats,
and jet skis around here. A small amount of police/Coasties, military
and the odd dredger or barge under tow, but not usually at night. My
main concern here in Toronto are charter "party boats" and lake
frieghters under way: the first are frequently driven by idiots and
have morons as passengers, and the second can't turn or react quickly
enough to give way to me if I don't make myself absolutely visible to
them. On an overnight lake crossing, it can be an issue, although the
middle of the lake is usually dark enough so that a good trilight
stands out well.

There is still commercial fishing on Erie and the Upper Lakes, but
not, I think, in Lake Ontario, although it's clean enough to swim in
off the boat in most places and at most times.

R.

On Thu, 3 Mar 2005 09:19:10 -0500, "Armond Perretta"
wrote:

I don't want to be a hard case on this, but the fact is that you are
required to have one _or_ the other, and there is no room for
experimentation.

I agree and in reviewing my post, I misspoke what I actually do.

Perhaps I should have said "running (hull) lights are always on at
dusk". I switch on the trilight when I see circumstances merit it
(i.e. away from the harbour and into the dark lake). Then I SWITCH OFF
the running lights, leaving the mast-top trilight alone if under sail,
and the steaming light plus trilight if motor-sailing.

If sails are down and I am under power only, I will typically use
running lights and steaming light, with the trilight OFF.

I trust this clears things up, as I have no desire to resemble a
Christmas tree in word or deed. My CPS membership would be revoked.

The rotating disco ball and lasers I save for the dock.

R.

On Thu, 03 Mar 2005 07:09:16 -1000, renewontime dot com
wrote:

And one last thing: NEVER leave port without a 406 EPIRB, and test it
monthly.

If you and your yacht are not prepared to do these, then you are not
ready or fit to go to sea.

I agree with everything you said (pretty easy as we're not talking
politics, guns or the mental state of some posters), but in my "inland
waters" case of Lake Ontario, I consider a 406 EPIRB overkill.

A Danbuoy-style MOB pole, a MOB button on an always-on GPS, a handheld
and a nav station VHF monitoring 9, 13 and 16 (as you've indicated),
wearing PFDs at helm and on deck, jacklines, lifelines, flares both
handheld and gun, a "crash box" with spare flares, GPS and handheld
and the fact I frequently tow a RIB while on passage is, I think,
enough.

And let's not forget that 50% of the time I can whip out the cell
phone and dial 911. G

Were I to go offshore or even out of sight of land in ocean water or
in fresh with few shore resources, like Lake Superior, I would sing a
different tune.

R.

On Thu, 03 Mar 2005 11:15:16 -0500, Jan
wrote:

Rhys,
Why on earth do you bother with all that?

It's good practice for me as I plan on sailing a lot more in the
future than I do now.

I too, sail Lake Ontario, out of Port
Credit. I merely follow two basic rules of my own, one is, "Might is right" and
the other is, "Don't play with the big boys." This applies both by day and
night.

True, but I also race sailboats, and we are sticklers for rules G.


Procedure is simple, identify lake freighter, not too difficult, determine
course of lake freighter, again, not too difficult, and, if necessary, adjust my
own course to take me astern of lake freighter. I don't really care whether or
not they see me, if I can see them, I'll stay out of their way.

They should stay used to looking for you. That's *their* job, as well.
What if you are becalmed, engine dead, and adrift? Maybe your
electrics are shorted out, maybe you've been hit by lightning or are
taking on water. If they aren't habitually keeping a watch for "small
stuff", you are in even greater danger. The responsibility cuts two
ways.

The crews of
the lake freighters are, after all, making their living by sailing that ship, I
on the other hand, am merely playing around. Also, my vessel is far more
maneuverable than theirs, so it's easier for me to take avoiding action.

True also. Lake frieghter don't tend toward "sudden moves". 150-foot
"disco boats" can and do, and they are making a living, too, and are
obliged to observe the same rules as me.

R.

On Thu, 03 Mar 2005 17:53:41 GMT, New Conservative
wrote:

Your New Conservative website isn't working well with the Firefox
browser, by the way. It just produces a bunch of source code.

R.

otnmbrd wrote:
"Armond Perretta" wrote in message news:

I can tell you from my own experience that contacting and staying
out of the way of commercial vessels, no matter what their type or
classification, is not at all simple. What it boils down to, it
seems to me, is that the small boat operator should get out of the
way and worry later about the effectiveness of lights,
communication devices, warning systems, etc ...

The one bit of good news is that under most cases, a large ship or
G smaller ferry will tend to be on a set and predictable route
(exceptions noted) so that you will at least have a reasonable idea
of where from, where to, and possible points of intended course
change when estimating how a particular sighting may affect your
course ...

There seem to be large numbers of small boat operators who actually believe
that commercial vessels will, in the general case, take action to avoid
small boats. Although few commercial vessels will intentionally neglect
taking appropriate action, it is indeed foolish to assume that the onus is
on the commercial vessel.

At the same time I have on several occasions encountered commercial vessels
inshore who "wandered" in the same way that pleasure boaters are wont to do
(as you mentioned above). Chief among these are commercial fishermen of
course, but I recall several cases where large cruise ships, evidently
engaged in casino-related activities, seemed to be chasing me all over the
place no matter how much I tried to pass by or avoid getting too close.
This is something one encounters quite a bit in south Florida, but the same
thing has happened to me in the Boston entrance lanes and off Halifax NS.

--
Good luck and good sailing.
s/v Kerry Deare of Barnegat
http://kerrydeare.home.comcast.net/

Sandy Morton wrote:

In article t,
otnmbrd wrote:

Wrong. SOME ferries have Voight Schneider, not most, and it's by NO
means a high speed drive, although it will increase maneuverability.

TTBOMK all CalMac RO-RO ferries have VS propulsion units and they
have a lot of ferries.

"The Earth belongs unto the Lord, and all that it contains,
except the Western Isles, for they are all MacBraynes"

rgds, Alan
--
99 Ducati 748BP, 95 Ducati 600SS, 81 Guzzi Monza, 74 MV Agusta 350
"Ride to Work, Work to Ride" SI# 7.067 DoD#1930 PGP Key 0xBDED56C5

In article ,
Alan Frame wrote:
TTBOMK all CalMac RO-RO ferries have VS propulsion units and they
have a lot of ferries.

"The Earth belongs unto the Lord, and all that it contains,
except the Western Isles, for they are all MacBraynes"

Hi Alan

Did you read it or write it :-))

--
T h e - e x t e n d e r ! ! ! !

"Karl Denninger" wrote in message
news:8vkWd.37539$755.36432@lakeread05...

In article ,
renewontime dot com wrote:


Fascinating. I'd like to learn more - can you point me at any web
sites? I can't find anything much over 25kts.

Our site has a news section, or try
http://www.marinelink.com/main/main.asp but I did a quick search on the
net and didn't find much. Better to get a subscription to "Maritime
Reporter" and "MarineNews", in the current issues there are several
articles about "high speed" vessels.

The only ships around here that run 30+ knots are the ones that are
painted
gray and have assorted pointy things sticking out from various parts of
their
superstructure.

Oh yeah, if you approach at a closing rate which they determine to be
potentially hostile, they will use the pointy things.

That will definitely ruin your day.

When I'm offshore my radar is up and operating. That's the best
visibility
enhancer that I've got.

I can see SHIPS out 8-10nm or so (visually) on a clear day/night, and on
radar quite a bit further. Land disappears 10ish nm around here, in no
small part due to the elevation of some of the buildings (which helps)

Small boats are usually not visible to the naked eye much beyond 4nm or
so,
although I will often tag them on radar significantly before that.

All this from my flybridge.

You want to try the Irish Sea for fast ferries, there are quite a few
running between Ireland/England/Isle of Man/Scotland/Wales. A couple of
years ago we were on passage from Dun Laoghaire to Holyhead, around 55
miles, and
saw the Stena Explorer 5 bloody times as she came past on the same route but
at 40 kts compared to our 6kts. Called her up on one pass and was glad to
hear their radar was picking us up at approx 8 miles each time.

Have a look at:-

http://www7.stenaline.co.uk/servlet/...t.presentation
..Main?data.node.id=1879&data.language.id=2

Graham.

Armond Perretta wrote:
otnmbrd wrote:

"Armond Perretta" wrote in message news:

I can tell you from my own experience that contacting and staying
out of the way of commercial vessels, no matter what their type or
classification, is not at all simple. What it boils down to, it
seems to me, is that the small boat operator should get out of the
way and worry later about the effectiveness of lights,
communication devices, warning systems, etc ...

The one bit of good news is that under most cases, a large ship or
G smaller ferry will tend to be on a set and predictable route
(exceptions noted) so that you will at least have a reasonable idea
of where from, where to, and possible points of intended course
change when estimating how a particular sighting may affect your
course ...


There seem to be large numbers of small boat operators who actually believe
that commercial vessels will, in the general case, take action to avoid
small boats. Although few commercial vessels will intentionally neglect
taking appropriate action, it is indeed foolish to assume that the onus is
on the commercial vessel.

BG The "onus" is on the commercial vessel to treat every size/type
vessel, the same, under the rules.
Now that we've got "that" bit of legal claptrap out of the way ..... In
the real world, most "ship" people have learned that when they run
across a bunch of weekend recreational boaters, their safest approach is
to maintain course and speed and save the "course change" for a point
after the whistle when in extremis.
Having said this, when offshore or meeting a lone "small boater" where
there are no immediate hazards to navigation for the ship, I'd say you
have a 50/50 chance the ship will gladly maneuver, as long as your
heading remains consistent and they indeed have seen you at a point
where they have sufficient time to assess and make a maneuver.
At any rate, as a small boater, if you always assume that big guy is
working under the "gross tonnage" rule, you shouldn't have too many
problems.

At the same time I have on several occasions encountered commercial vessels
inshore who "wandered" in the same way that pleasure boaters are wont to do
(as you mentioned above). Chief among these are commercial fishermen of
course, but I recall several cases where large cruise ships, evidently
engaged in casino-related activities, seemed to be chasing me all over the
place no matter how much I tried to pass by or avoid getting too close.
This is something one encounters quite a bit in south Florida, but the same
thing has happened to me in the Boston entrance lanes and off Halifax NS.


You'll note in my above I stated "exceptions noted". You will always be
apt to run across some large vessel that is "wandering". My best
advice..... stay well clear!
G Commercial fishermen. I forget at times that we all may have
different views as to what constitutes "commercial".
A commercial fisherman is indeed "commercial", but I treat them with
"small boats" except that I have far fewer concerns when dealing with
them, as I am generally comfortable with meeting them, especially when
it's a group, that they will stay clear of me .... but YOU should not
feel the same..... and if it's a one on one open ocean condition I treat
them under the "rules".
As always, trust no one but yourself, to maneuver to avoid, under any
conditions, and note that my comments are mainly meant to increase your
awareness of the possibilities .... not as gospel for all operators.

otn

On Sat, 05 Mar 2005 16:24:04 -0500, rhys wrote:

On Thu, 03 Mar 2005 17:53:41 GMT, New Conservative
wrote:

Your New Conservative website isn't working well with the Firefox
browser, by the way. It just produces a bunch of source code.

Thanks; we'll look into it.
--

"Suffer no one to tell you what to think."
Martin Smith, the New Conservative Party.

http://www.newconservativeparty.org

On Sat, 05 Mar 2005 16:19:40 -0500, rhys wrote:

On Thu, 03 Mar 2005 11:15:16 -0500, Jan
wrote:

Rhys,
Why on earth do you bother with all that?

It's good practice for me as I plan on sailing a lot more in the
future than I do now.

I can understand that. Fortunately, being retired, I can get out on the lake
most days during our too short summer, this may affect my thinking.G

I too, sail Lake Ontario, out of Port Credit. I merely follow two
basic rules of my own, one is, "Might is right" and the other is,
"Don't play with the big boys." This applies both by day and
night.

True, but I also race sailboats, and we are sticklers for rules G.

Ah, perhaps I should add rule number 3, "Rules are for the guidance of wise men
and the strict obedience of fools." VBG

Procedure is simple, identify lake freighter, not too difficult, determine
course of lake freighter, again, not too difficult, and, if necessary, adjust my
own course to take me astern of lake freighter. I don't really care whether or
not they see me, if I can see them, I'll stay out of their way.

They should stay used to looking for you. That's *their* job, as well.
What if you are becalmed, engine dead, and adrift? Maybe your
electrics are shorted out, maybe you've been hit by lightning or are
taking on water. If they aren't habitually keeping a watch for "small
stuff", you are in even greater danger. The responsibility cuts two
ways.

While I agree with you that it *should* be the duty of the large vessels to keep
an effective look-out, with the best will in the world, I can't imagine them
changing course every time they come across a sail-boat on Lake Ontario.
Especially if they are on course for one of their delivery points. Not only
that, I am all too well aware that merchant vessels of all shapes and sizes sail
with the minimum crew they can legally get away with on pure economic grounds.
Not that this excuses them for not keeping a good look out, but I really think
this is a case of where the pleasure sailor/boater should exercise some common
sense and just keep out of their way, not stick blindly to some rule that was
written years ago when real sailing ships were common. Just my opinion mind
you.
Regarding the second part of the paragraph. If any of those situations, or a
combination of same occurred, this presents a different ball-game and you would
see this ancient mariner making sure the dinghy was fully inflated, if the radio
was working, anyone in hearing would know there was trouble and flares would be
going off making the ex look like a side-show.BG There would be little doubt
that I would not only be seen, but heard very loudly also.

The crews of the lake freighters are, after all, making their living by sailing that ship, I
on the other hand, am merely playing around. Also, my vessel is far more
maneuverable than theirs, so it's easier for me to take avoiding action.

True also. Lake frieghter don't tend toward "sudden moves". 150-foot
"disco boats" can and do, and they are making a living, too, and are
obliged to observe the same rules as me.

R.
Agreed, the "party/disco boats" are a right royal PITA, but again, they usually
follow pretty well the same course over and over. I have spent many a night
alongside at Hanlan's Point and cursed them as they come by with the DJ blasting
away, however, they are usually all gone by 21:00 and, with a certain sadistic
pleasure I like to imagine the party-goers drooling with envy at us boaters tied
up and enjoying the peace and tranquility.G
My perception of all this may well be tinged by having spent 7 years in the
Royal Navy and being keenly aware of the fact that even destroyers and frigates
have a reaction time. Naval ships don't have a wheel-house as such in or on the
bridge, so the officer of the watch has to identify the object then pass
steering orders to the person at the helm who then has to react without being
able to see what's going on outside.

Jan
"If you can't take a joke,you shouldn't have joined"

I agree with everything you said (pretty easy as we're not talking
politics, guns or the mental state of some posters), but in my "inland
waters" case of Lake Ontario, I consider a 406 EPIRB overkill.

Hi R.,

I was not referring to the Great Lakes (or any other inland lake for
that matter), but rather offshore, bluewater cruising. I must profess
that I haven't sailed the Great Lakes since I was a kid, so I don't have
any recent experience to draw on.

Generally speaking though, a cell phone is better than nothing at all,
but has several shortcomings for emergency communications, in
particular: the CG cannot take RDF bearings of your signal, so no
position can be found from your signal alone. There have been several
cases of sailors and fishermen here (Hawaiian Islands) who have run into
trouble, had only enough power or signal for a brief call on their cell
phone to the USCG, but the CG was unable to assist. Because the CG
wasn't able to take bearings of the signal, no position or even rough
idea of the distress caller's position was known, so CG assets weren't
deployed.

A marine VHF would have probably been better, but is still limited to
line-of-sight distances (which because the CG antennas are on top of
mountains equates to about 24 - 30 miles). In these particular
situations a 406 EPRIB would have been many times more effective in
summoning help.

It may be overkill, but I'd still give it serious consideration on the
Great Lakes.

--

=-------------------------------------------------=
Renewontime
A FREE email reminder service for licensed mariners
http://www.renewontime.com
=-------------------------------------------------=

(Steve Firth) wrote:

Dan wrote:

It's about 100 feet long throws up spray & makes the noise of a
Squadron of Concordes. You can see and hear it the other side of the
bloody Solent!

Not to change the topic, but

Last fall we were sailing down the Chesapeake off Mobjack Bay

What we saw is the inset in the 3rd photo here.

http://members.virtualtourist.com/m/tt/58160/#TL

Suddenly I look over and say to Bob - Is that boat on fire? I half think of calling the Coast Guard on the radio to report it, but as we watch I see that it is water being sprayed up into a cloudlike mass. Bob asks retorically if the Navy is testing the hovercraft again. I remark that it is a good day for it - pretty much flat calm.

Eventually the hovercraft stops and just sits there in the water. When it is sitting still, you can see the big fans on the back that make it go.


grandma Rosalie

Sandy Morton wrote:

Alan Frame wrote:
TTBOMK all CalMac RO-RO ferries have VS propulsion units and they
have a lot of ferries.

"The Earth belongs unto the Lord, and all that it contains,
except the Western Isles, for they are all MacBraynes"

Hi Alan

Did you read it or write it :-))

It's one of those sayings that I remember my Father saying around 30
years ago - probably on the Largs-Cumbrae ferry... ;-)

rgds, Alan
--
99 Ducati 748BP, 95 Ducati 600SS, 81 Guzzi Monza, 74 MV Agusta 350
"Ride to Work, Work to Ride" SI# 7.067 DoD#1930 PGP Key 0xBDED56C5

prodigal1 wrote in message ...
DannyBoy wrote:
I was indeed being a ****

funny how some slang just doesn't translate well across the pond

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=****

Afganistan & Iraq, already. Iran next. Won't be long before we'll be
using the language you tell us to...

DannyBoy wrote:
prodigal1 wrote in message ...

DannyBoy wrote:

I was indeed being a ****

funny how some slang just doesn't translate well across the pond

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=****


Afganistan & Iraq, already. Iran next. Won't be long before we'll be
using the language you tell us to...

No need to be insulting. Yankees aren't the only English speakers on
this side of the Atlantic. Did I need to put a smiley at the end of the
post? Not trying to tell you how to talk but rather what you were
understood to say over here. Personally I thought it quite funny that
you were calling yourself a #@%* for not getting the point.

Graham Frankland wrote:

You want to try the Irish Sea for fast ferries, there are quite a few
running between Ireland/England/Isle of Man/Scotland/Wales. A couple of
years ago we were on passage from Dun Laoghaire to Holyhead, around 55
miles, and
saw the Stena Explorer 5 bloody times as she came past on the same route but
at 40 kts compared to our 6kts. Called her up on one pass and was glad to
hear their radar was picking us up at approx 8 miles each time.

Have a look at:-

http://www7.stenaline.co.uk/servlet/...t.presentation
.Main?data.node.id=1879&data.language.id=2

Graham.



I don't know about you lot, but if I was doing 40kts in the Irish Sea
24/7/365 *I'd* want some blody good radar too. Just think "Lost
Container"...

Andy.

On Sun, 6 Mar 2005 20:51:50 UTC, Andy Champ wrote:

: I don't know about you lot, but if I was doing 40kts in the Irish Sea
: 24/7/365 *I'd* want some blody good radar too. Just think "Lost
: Container"...

Are containers a real threat? They keep getting mentioned, but I
haven't yet seen any account of anyone actually hitting one ... and
I've seen claims that, not being airtight, they generally sink very
quickly. Anyone ever seen one washed up on the beach?

Ian

--

Ian Johnston wrote:
On Sun, 6 Mar 2005 20:51:50 UTC, Andy Champ wrote:

: I don't know about you lot, but if I was doing 40kts in the Irish Sea
: 24/7/365 *I'd* want some blody good radar too. Just think "Lost
: Container"...

Are containers a real threat? They keep getting mentioned, but I
haven't yet seen any account of anyone actually hitting one ... and
I've seen claims that, not being airtight, they generally sink very
quickly. Anyone ever seen one washed up on the beach?

Ian


They're a potential threat. How real a threat they are is still up for
grabs, though, if you should hit one some night, the threat will indeed
be real.

As for radar on these high speed ferries ...... you'll find many of them
are using a high speed scanner, so that their picture is more frequently
updated.

Are containers a real threat?

They can be. If you keep an eye on the marine news sites (like
marinelink.com and others) or even NOTAM's you'll see frequent reports
about ships loosing containers. I've heard more rumours of folks
hitting containers than actual reports though. We hit something about
mid-ocean on a trip from San Diego to Hilo back in 2000, damaging our
rudder. Not sure what it was, as we never saw it. Could have been a
container.

I doubt if your RADAR would help much with a floating container. Unless
it was empty and just hit the water, it'll probably be floating just
barely above (or below) the surface. Not a very good RADAR target.

--

=-------------------------------------------------=
Renewontime
A FREE email reminder service for licensed mariners
http://www.renewontime.com
=-------------------------------------------------=

On Mon, 7 Mar 2005 00:27:09 UTC, renewontime dot com
wrote:

: Are containers a real threat?
:
: They can be. If you keep an eye on the marine news sites (like
: marinelink.com and others) or even NOTAM's you'll see frequent reports
: about ships loosing containers.

Indeed. But I am not sure that they idea that they bob around for
ages, lurking just beneath the surface, is anything other than a scare
story.

: I've heard more rumours of folks
: hitting containers than actual reports though. We hit something about
: mid-ocean on a trip from San Diego to Hilo back in 2000, damaging our
: rudder. Not sure what it was, as we never saw it. Could have been a
: container.

Or, with all due respect, any number of other things. Of course it
doesn't really matter, after the event, what one hits ...

Ian

Armond Perretta wrote:
Well, I won't defend a statement I never made. Still, I wonder how much
difference it makes to the target whether he or she is killed by a "ferry"
or a "ship" (ignoring for the moment that many folks cannot accurately
define "ship.")

A ship has three square rigged masts. I thought everyone knew that!

--
Nikki Locke, Trumphurst Ltd. PC & Unix consultancy & programming
http://www.trumphurst.com/

Otnmbrd wrote:
G Commercial fishermen. I forget at times that we all may have
different views as to what constitutes "commercial".
A commercial fisherman is indeed "commercial", but I treat them with
"small boats" except that I have far fewer concerns when dealing with
them, as I am generally comfortable with meeting them, especially when
it's a group, that they will stay clear of me .... but YOU should not
feel the same..... and if it's a one on one open ocean condition I treat
them under the "rules".

Surely you should be keeping clear of them (assuming they are "engaged in
fishing")?

--
Nikki Locke, Trumphurst Ltd. PC & Unix consultancy & programming
http://www.trumphurst.com/

Rhys wrote:
Perhaps I should have said "running (hull) lights are always on at
dusk". I switch on the trilight when I see circumstances merit it
(i.e. away from the harbour and into the dark lake). Then I SWITCH OFF
the running lights, leaving the mast-top trilight alone if under sail,
and the steaming light plus trilight if motor-sailing.

Steaming light below tri light means...

From one direction you might be a trawler
From another direction you might be a fisherman
From another direction you might be a large ship
From any other direction you are a fool who is showing the wrong lights

--
Nikki Locke, Trumphurst Ltd. PC & Unix consultancy & programming
http://www.trumphurst.com/

Nikki Locke wrote:
Armond Perretta wrote:
... I wonder
how much difference it makes to the target whether he or she is
killed by a "ferry" or a "ship" (ignoring for the moment that many
folks cannot accurately define "ship.")

A ship has three square rigged masts. I thought everyone knew that!

I am afraid you are a bit overconfident about this.

--
Good luck and good sailing.
s/v Kerry Deare of Barnegat
http://kerrydeare.home.comcast.net/

"Nikki Locke" wrote in message
...
Otnmbrd wrote:
G Commercial fishermen. I forget at times that we all may have
different views as to what constitutes "commercial".
A commercial fisherman is indeed "commercial", but I treat them with
"small boats" except that I have far fewer concerns when dealing with
them, as I am generally comfortable with meeting them, especially when
it's a group, that they will stay clear of me .... but YOU should not
feel the same..... and if it's a one on one open ocean condition I treat
them under the "rules".

Surely you should be keeping clear of them (assuming they are "engaged in
fishing")?

G Surely.....
The problem is that frequently, as mentioned above, you run into them
fishing as a fleet or group.
If possible, and you've seen them soon enough, have sea room, can figure the
general movement of the "group", etc., then you can alter course out around
the "group".
In reality, what frequently happens is that you find yourself moving through
the group and at any one time you may be on a collision course with multiple
targets.
At times like this, if the ship holds it's course and speed, then all the
fishing boats know exactly what to expect from the ship and they can
maneuver in a way that best suits their needs ...... not exactly legal, but
it works.
The same applies to a ship running across a group of recreational boaters.

otn