Jet Ski overheating problem
 

"Dr. Dr. Smithers" Ask Me about my Phd @ Diploma Mill .com wrote in
message . ..
JimC,
If there is a collision and both boats could have avoided the collision,
both boats can be held partially reasonable. If the sailboat in a passing
situation turns in front of another boat and it is not reasonable for the
other boater to avoid the collision, the powerboater will not be held
responsible.

Dr. Smithers, the first part of your statement is absolutely correct. The
second part of your statement is incorrect in as much as there is no such
thing as it being "not reasonable" for the powerboater to avoid the
collision in the way Bill has described the situation. In this case it
would have been the fault of Bill's judgement. He was too close and too
fast in the situation. He MUST stay clear in the overtaking situation.

Jim Carter
"The Boat"
Bayfield

Jet Ski overheating problem
 

"Dr. Dr. Smithers" Ask Me about my Phd @ Diploma Mill .com wrote in
JimC,
If there is a collision and both boats could have avoided the collision,
both boats can be held partially reasonable. If the sailboat in a passing
situation turns in front of another boat and it is not reasonable for the
other boater to avoid the collision, the powerboater will not be held
responsible.


Do you realize that your two statements are a direct contradiction of
each other?

Jim Carter wrote:
Dr. Smithers, the first part of your statement is absolutely correct. The
second part of your statement is incorrect in as much as there is no such
thing as it being "not reasonable" for the powerboater to avoid the
collision in the way Bill has described the situation. In this case it
would have been the fault of Bill's judgement. He was too close and too
fast in the situation. He MUST stay clear in the overtaking situation.


But to most motorboaters, it is unreasonable to slow down and give other
boats a wide berth. They have a RIGHT to go blasting right past any
sailboat, close aboard, and by golly that durn sailboat better just stay
outta their way!

We can only hope that a maritime court would, in the event of tragedy,
see things in a slightly more adult viewpoint.

And it's probably not going to do any good to review the ColRegs, even
with a motorboater who knows what they are, because obviously 1- he
can't read them clearly and 2- has no concept that they are applied in
order and 3- clings to the idea that he has no personal responsibility
or accountability.

DSK

Jet Ski overheating problem
 

"DSK" wrote in message
. ..
"Dr. Dr. Smithers" Ask Me about my Phd @ Diploma Mill .com wrote in
JimC,
If there is a collision and both boats could have avoided the collision,
both boats can be held partially reasonable. If the sailboat in a
passing
situation turns in front of another boat and it is not reasonable for
the
other boater to avoid the collision, the powerboater will not be held
responsible.


Do you realize that your two statements are a direct contradiction of
each other?

Jim Carter wrote:
Dr. Smithers, the first part of your statement is absolutely correct.
The
second part of your statement is incorrect in as much as there is no
such
thing as it being "not reasonable" for the powerboater to avoid the
collision in the way Bill has described the situation. In this case it
would have been the fault of Bill's judgement. He was too close and
too
fast in the situation. He MUST stay clear in the overtaking
situation.


But to most motorboaters, it is unreasonable to slow down and give other
boats a wide berth. They have a RIGHT to go blasting right past any
sailboat, close aboard, and by golly that durn sailboat better just stay
outta their way!

We can only hope that a maritime court would, in the event of tragedy,
see things in a slightly more adult viewpoint.

And it's probably not going to do any good to review the ColRegs, even
with a motorboater who knows what they are, because obviously 1- he
can't read them clearly and 2- has no concept that they are applied in
order and 3- clings to the idea that he has no personal responsibility
or accountability.

DSK

Again, Mr. DSK, you are correct. On my trips on Lake Huron, from
Bayfield to Tobermory, I travel off shore. There have been several
occasions when I have been passed by large cruisers who do not seem to want
to alter their course and they pass too close to me. I am not within
sight of land and there is the whole lake out there and they have to pass
close by. What are they thinking? I don't understand why they don't
alter their course to pass at a distance from me. They seem to delight in
how much they can rock my boat. "The Boat" is a 27 foot twin engine power
boat, which I sold this past summer.

Jim Carter
"The Boat"
Bayfield

Jet Ski overheating problem
 

Doug and JimC,

If ships were to maintain a speed and distance that would allow them to
avoid all collision, no ship would leave the dock.

In Bill's situation, he would have been held partially responsible due to
the speed and distance he maintained in the overtaking situation. My point
is, there are many situations that occur in narrow channels with strong
currents/tides and winds that would not have allowed a powerboater to avoid
a collision under all conditions. It is possible that any boater can cause
an accident that the powerboater could not have avoided. The courts can and
do assign partial blame for most accidents, but there are situations where a
boater is 100% responsible for an accident.


"DSK" wrote in message
. ..
"Dr. Dr. Smithers" Ask Me about my Phd @ Diploma Mill .com wrote in
JimC,
If there is a collision and both boats could have avoided the collision,
both boats can be held partially reasonable. If the sailboat in a
passing
situation turns in front of another boat and it is not reasonable for the
other boater to avoid the collision, the powerboater will not be held
responsible.


Do you realize that your two statements are a direct contradiction of each
other?

Jim Carter wrote:
Dr. Smithers, the first part of your statement is absolutely correct.
The
second part of your statement is incorrect in as much as there is no such
thing as it being "not reasonable" for the powerboater to avoid the
collision in the way Bill has described the situation. In this case it
would have been the fault of Bill's judgement. He was too close and too
fast in the situation. He MUST stay clear in the overtaking situation.


But to most motorboaters, it is unreasonable to slow down and give other
boats a wide berth. They have a RIGHT to go blasting right past any
sailboat, close aboard, and by golly that durn sailboat better just stay
outta their way!

We can only hope that a maritime court would, in the event of tragedy, see
things in a slightly more adult viewpoint.

And it's probably not going to do any good to review the ColRegs, even
with a motorboater who knows what they are, because obviously 1- he can't
read them clearly and 2- has no concept that they are applied in order and
3- clings to the idea that he has no personal responsibility or
accountability.

DSK

Jet Ski overheating problem
 

JimC,
Ignorance of ColRegs is not limited to either a sailboater or a powerboater,
sort of like ignorance in rec.boats is not limited to any political party.
; )


"Jim Carter" wrote in message
...

"DSK" wrote in message
. ..
"Dr. Dr. Smithers" Ask Me about my Phd @ Diploma Mill .com wrote in
JimC,
If there is a collision and both boats could have avoided the
collision,
both boats can be held partially reasonable. If the sailboat in a
passing
situation turns in front of another boat and it is not reasonable for
the
other boater to avoid the collision, the powerboater will not be held
responsible.


Do you realize that your two statements are a direct contradiction of
each other?

Jim Carter wrote:
Dr. Smithers, the first part of your statement is absolutely correct.
The
second part of your statement is incorrect in as much as there is no
such
thing as it being "not reasonable" for the powerboater to avoid the
collision in the way Bill has described the situation. In this case
it
would have been the fault of Bill's judgement. He was too close and
too
fast in the situation. He MUST stay clear in the overtaking
situation.


But to most motorboaters, it is unreasonable to slow down and give other
boats a wide berth. They have a RIGHT to go blasting right past any
sailboat, close aboard, and by golly that durn sailboat better just stay
outta their way!

We can only hope that a maritime court would, in the event of tragedy,
see things in a slightly more adult viewpoint.

And it's probably not going to do any good to review the ColRegs, even
with a motorboater who knows what they are, because obviously 1- he
can't read them clearly and 2- has no concept that they are applied in
order and 3- clings to the idea that he has no personal responsibility
or accountability.

DSK

Again, Mr. DSK, you are correct. On my trips on Lake Huron, from
Bayfield to Tobermory, I travel off shore. There have been several
occasions when I have been passed by large cruisers who do not seem to
want
to alter their course and they pass too close to me. I am not within
sight of land and there is the whole lake out there and they have to pass
close by. What are they thinking? I don't understand why they don't
alter their course to pass at a distance from me. They seem to delight
in
how much they can rock my boat. "The Boat" is a 27 foot twin engine
power
boat, which I sold this past summer.

Jim Carter
"The Boat"
Bayfield

Jet Ski overheating problem
 

DSK wrote:
Not when he is 15' from me and makes a 90 degree turn in front of a boat
moving 25 miles per hour. His responsibility requires him to avoid the
collision and has to keep in a continous direction when being overtaken.


???

There is NO obligation for any vessel to "keep in a continuous direction
when being overtaken."

The overtakING vessel is burdened to keep clear, which means that you
must slow down and be ready to take avoiding action.


RULE 17
Action by Stand-on Vessel
(a) (i) Where one of two vessels is to keep out of the way, the other
shall keep her course and speed.

....

I would not, however, want this to indicate support for Bill's
position. At 25 knots he's going over 42 ft/sec; or 422 feet in the
10 secs it took the sailboat to tack. It was reckless and in obvious
violation of various rules to even be within 15 feet of a sailboat
while going that fast. I would claim that the statement the sailboat
"turned 15 feet in front of boat doing 25 knots" is a clear indication
that the powerboater was not in full control of his faculties.

Jet Ski overheating problem
 

Dr. Dr. Smithers wrote:

Doug and JimC,

If ships were to maintain a speed and distance that would allow them to
avoid all collision, no ship would leave the dock.


???

Do you really have ANY concept of how big the oceans are?

DSK

Jet Ski overheating problem
 

Doug,
Do you have any idea how narrow many channels are?
Take a look at the majority of the St. Law. Seaway.

"DSK" wrote in message
.. .
Dr. Dr. Smithers wrote:

Doug and JimC,

If ships were to maintain a speed and distance that would allow them to
avoid all collision, no ship would leave the dock.


???

Do you really have ANY concept of how big the oceans are?

DSK

Jet Ski overheating problem
 

Bill McKee wrote:
....


If your gas engine is running, you are a power boat! If you are in neutral,
engine running, you are a power boat,

Wrong! The propulsion system must be "used" for it to be a sailboat.
It is clearly true that if you see a sailboat, with the sails up,
making way as a sailboat, and not showing the steaming light or cone,
you must treat it as a sailboat.

And similarly, if you are being treated as a sailboat, it would be
best to behave in a consistent manner.

On the other hand, if you had an engine available for immediate use,
and failed to use it to avoid a collision, you'd have some serious
explaining to do! But, that would also be true even if the engine
wasn't running.

This does not mean, of course, that a sailboat under power can slip
into neutral anytime and suddenly claim rights as a sailor. But, if
an engine is running it doesn't mean it is automatically a powerboat.
For example, some engines require several minutes of warmup before
they can be engaged.

Jet Ski overheating problem
 

Dr. Dr. Smithers wrote:

Doug,
Do you have any idea how narrow many channels are?
Take a look at the majority of the St. Law. Seaway.


Actually, that's VERY wide as channels go. Are you suggesting that you
cannot manage to drive your boat along a course and keep it within 100
yards or so of where it should be?

Are you also suggesting that going SLOW when close to other boat traffic
is not an option?

DSK

Jet Ski overheating problem
 

Jonathan Ganz wrote:
In article t,
Bill McKee bmckee=at-ix.netcom.com wrote:
He has to avoid the tanker in the channel. If he causes the tanker to run
aground or hit a bridge piling to avoid the collision, the sailboat is going
to be liable for all damages. The tanker, the bridge, all the damage.

Bzzzzt. The tanker will not hit a bridge piling to avoid the
collision.


probably true

Bzzzzt. The tanker will not be damanged.

probably true


Bzzzzt. The tanker will not leave the channel.
Maybe not at the Golden Gate, but the was such a case in the
Chesapeake a few years back where the woman in the 25 foot boat the
got becalmed in the channel was held liable when the freighter grounded.


Bill... who has stand-on status on the ocean?

Actually, the sailboat is still the stand-on vessel, even when
crossing the TSS. It is, however, required "not to impede" the
tanker. You should know this stuff, Jon. You just took the test.


Suggestion (not a hint): Stay away from tankers.


good advice.

Jet Ski overheating problem
 

Doug,
I am able to manage my boat and go slow enough to avoid boat traffic, no
matter what the other boats do, but many ships are not. The ColRegs are not
written to regulate my actions but for all boat/ship traffic. I was
highlighting the obvious error you made when you said if any boat/ship is
involved in an accident, they are at fault. This is not correct.


"DSK" wrote in message
.. .
Dr. Dr. Smithers wrote:

Doug,
Do you have any idea how narrow many channels are?
Take a look at the majority of the St. Law. Seaway.


Actually, that's VERY wide as channels go. Are you suggesting that you
cannot manage to drive your boat along a course and keep it within 100
yards or so of where it should be?

Are you also suggesting that going SLOW when close to other boat traffic
is not an option?

DSK

Jet Ski overheating problem
 

I am talking about singling out pwc's among boaters at large (not
sailboats)
as being uniquely predisposed to annoying, stupid, dangerous, illegal
behavior; and also

They are and I am. Sorry, but it's a fact. I know you don't want to
acknowledge that there is a huge problem, but there is. That's why
some places have banned them I suppose.

And the fact that a lot of the "problems" are in fact based on
prejudice, personal irrational dislike and outdated stereotypes or just
outdated information about these machines, might be the reason why,
after analytic studies are done, so many of the former bans have been
rolled back, reversed and eliminated.

Can't think of anything positive to say about pwc's? I'll help you out
by pointing this out again: since mandataory boating education and
licensing requirements have been instituted in many states over the
last decade or so, pwc-related accident and injury statistics have gone
down by the year in their states. These regulations have been
promoted and supported by the pwc industry and riding community. What
has any other segment of the power boat community done analogously over
that same period of time to reduce the amount of stupidity and
uninformed dangerous behavior on the water? Have power boaters at
large rallied in support of mandatory education and licensing
requirements for all boats, or do you/they think that this wouldn't be
a good idea for everyone? Are you even aware of any of this, or is it
just more proof that you just don't know anything about the topic at
hand (pwc's).

Nothing good to say about pwc's? Do some research and you'll find that
the ones being manufactured now (and I'm talking about at least the
last 6 model years) have shown to be among the QUIETEST and
CLEANEST-RUNNING and most FUEL-EFFICIENT power boats on the water, as
well as being probably the most affordable, easiest to store and
maintain?

In fact, do you have anything positive to say about boats in general?
Because if so you have something positive to say about pwc's because
THAT'S WHAT THEY ARE. THAT is what started me into this whole thread,
the idea that somehow pwc'ers are not boaters, that is the overall
point I started making so emphatically and repeatedly, that WE ARE.
NOt that we're perfect, not that there aren't plenty of idiots among us
just as there are across all segments of the boating world, not that we
don't have problems although we've made TREMENDOUS strides in the time
that I've been around, but simply that we ARE BOATERS, the SAME as
anyone else. Same rules to learn and follow, same things to worry
about, the same passion for being on the water, having outdoor fun with
our friends and families, travelling, cruising, enjoying the
exhiliration of a fast ride...that's it. I refuse to sit at the back
of the bus!

What is up with this drinkin and drivin thing? I just don't get that?
What point are you trying to make?

My point (I don't think it was that hard to discern) is that pwc
operators don't have any kind of lock on stupid, dangerous, illegal,
annoying boating behavior on the water, that all kinds of boats,
whatever their size or shape, are frequently operated by clueless
inconsiderate oblivious idiots....and similarly there are many
responsible, informed, thoughtful, careful, aware operators of both
pwc's and of power boats of other sizes and shapes. Neither of us
knows the exact percentage either way, there are way too many variables
to assign any kind of realistic number, but my position is that it is a
sign of ignorance, nastiness and hardened, long-held, inflexlible,
prejudiced judgements, to make broad sweeping generalizations about any
specific group of boaters based on the size and shape of the boat they
choose (or can afford). Like, I might be tempted to think that all or
most sailboaters are snobby, pretentious, effete, hoity-toit,
self-important blowhards (ha, good one!); or that everybody on a small
fishing boat is a drunken redneck; or that everyone who owns a yacht is
just a rich asshole who preferes to stay high and dry and show off
their wealth; but all of these opinions would actually be stupid and
unfair, and if I tried to pass them off as valid, intelligent
positions, I would expect people from those segments of the boating
world to maybe have their feathers ruffled a bit.

Do you get it now?

I'd say that the vast majority don't drink and drive, just
like the vast majority of car owners don't

Okay, now I know you're kidding. The ratio of boaters drinking on the
water is about the same as that of drivers on the road? I guess it's
obvious that conditions are obviously different between where you boat
and all the many places I've boated....in terms of boaters drinking,
and in terms of pwc'ers being obnoxious and annoying...I guess that
would have to explain the gulf between our respective impressions.

Well, you need to get out more... well, I take that back. You have a
PWC.
Oh no... here comes the missing sense of humor.....

I have a sharper, more developed sense of humor than you, I'm positive
of it; but you don't seem to have made that remark in any kind of
friendly good humor, more out of meanness, like I know you literally
don't want to welcome me onto the waterways where you boat, you have as
much as said so, just based on the size and shape of my boat's hull,
and that's just not right. Hey, once you see me, individually, do
something stupid and obnoxious or dangerous or blatantly inconsiderate
(I"m not sure I'm convinced that "annoying" is enough of a legit
complaint, anyone can be annoyed by anything), then feel free to have
me kicked out of there....but to form an opinion of me and want me out
of there as soon as you see me coming, just based on the fact that I'm
a pwc? It just ain't right.

richforman

Jet Ski overheating problem
 

"Dr. Dr. Smithers" Ask Me about my Phd @ Diploma Mill .com wrote in
message ...
Doug and JimC,

If ships were to maintain a speed and distance that would allow them to
avoid all collision, no ship would leave the dock.

What in the world are you talking about? That is nonsense! If I see a
boat on my way north on Lake Huron and I am going to pass him. I can alter
my course by two degrees and pass him with hundreds of meters to spare.


In Bill's situation, he would have been held partially responsible due to
the speed and distance he maintained in the overtaking situation.

No, Dr. Smithers. In Bill's situation, he would be 100% responsible.
He struck the sailboat in open waters. Nowhere did he say it was in a
narrow channel.


My point is, there are many situations that occur in narrow channels with
strong
currents/tides and winds that would not have allowed a powerboater to
avoid
a collision under all conditions.


Yes Dr. Smithers, but not in Bill's case.

It is possible that any boater can cause
an accident that the powerboater could not have avoided. The courts can
and
do assign partial blame for most accidents, but there are situations where
a
boater is 100% responsible for an accident.

Yes Dr. Smithers, you are correct in this instance.

Jim Carter
"The Boat"
Bayfield

Jet Ski overheating problem
 

"Dr. Dr. Smithers" Ask Me about my Phd @ Diploma Mill .com wrote in
message ...
JimC,
Ignorance of ColRegs is not limited to either a sailboater or a
powerboater,
sort of like ignorance in rec.boats is not limited to any political party.
; )


Dr. Smithers, you are correct.

Jim Carter
"The Boat"
Bayfield

Jet Ski overheating problem
 

"Dr. Dr. Smithers" Ask Me about my Phd @ Diploma Mill .com wrote in
message ...
Doug,
Do you have any idea how narrow many channels are?
Take a look at the majority of the St. Law. Seaway.

Dr. Smithers, have you ever boated on the St. Lawrence Seaway?

This Seaway has HUGE wide channels in it. Large Freighter pass one
another regularly. I have 1000's of hours boating the Great Lakes System.
There are some area's where there are channels so narrow that only one boat
is permitted to proceed at one time through them. These are mainly in the
30,000 Island area of Georgian Bay and in some areas of the North Channel of
Lake Huron. In these areas the rule of Up Bound and Down Bound are in
effect. The speed limit is also in effect.

Jim Carter
"The Boat"
Bayfield

Jet Ski overheating problem
 

Jim C,

I think we disagreed because you thought I was referring to Bill's example
and I was not.

In reference to my comment about If ships were to maintain a speed and
distance that would allow them to avoid all collision, no ship would leave
the dock.

If two ships are passing in a channel and one suddenly behaves in a
completely unexpected manner, the other ship will not be able to avoid the
collision. I mentioned the ship on the Mississippi who lost all power in a
bend in the river and slammed into a shopping mall. If another ship or
barge was coming up the river, it would have hit the other ship or barge.



"Jim Carter" wrote in message
...

"Dr. Dr. Smithers" Ask Me about my Phd @ Diploma Mill .com wrote in
message ...
Doug and JimC,

If ships were to maintain a speed and distance that would allow them to
avoid all collision, no ship would leave the dock.

What in the world are you talking about? That is nonsense! If I see a
boat on my way north on Lake Huron and I am going to pass him. I can
alter
my course by two degrees and pass him with hundreds of meters to spare.


In Bill's situation, he would have been held partially responsible due to
the speed and distance he maintained in the overtaking situation.

No, Dr. Smithers. In Bill's situation, he would be 100% responsible.
He struck the sailboat in open waters. Nowhere did he say it was in a
narrow channel.


My point is, there are many situations that occur in narrow channels
with
strong
currents/tides and winds that would not have allowed a powerboater to
avoid
a collision under all conditions.


Yes Dr. Smithers, but not in Bill's case.

It is possible that any boater can cause
an accident that the powerboater could not have avoided. The courts can
and
do assign partial blame for most accidents, but there are situations
where
a
boater is 100% responsible for an accident.

Yes Dr. Smithers, you are correct in this instance.

Jim Carter
"The Boat"
Bayfield

Jet Ski overheating problem
 

Yes I have and there are collisions between ships on the St. Lawrence Seaway
due to mechanical or human error. When this happens it is not necessary for
both ships to be at fault. One ship can assume 100% of the responsibility
even though the other ship was not avoid the collision.


"Jim Carter" wrote in message
...

"Dr. Dr. Smithers" Ask Me about my Phd @ Diploma Mill .com wrote in
message ...
Doug,
Do you have any idea how narrow many channels are?
Take a look at the majority of the St. Law. Seaway.

Dr. Smithers, have you ever boated on the St. Lawrence Seaway?

This Seaway has HUGE wide channels in it. Large Freighter pass one
another regularly. I have 1000's of hours boating the Great Lakes
System.
There are some area's where there are channels so narrow that only one
boat
is permitted to proceed at one time through them. These are mainly in
the
30,000 Island area of Georgian Bay and in some areas of the North Channel
of
Lake Huron. In these areas the rule of Up Bound and Down Bound are in
effect. The speed limit is also in effect.

Jim Carter
"The Boat"
Bayfield

Jet Ski overheating problem
 

"Dr. Dr. Smithers" Ask Me about my Phd @ Diploma Mill .com wrote in
message . ..
Yes I have and there are collisions between ships on the St. Lawrence
Seaway
due to mechanical or human error. When this happens it is not necessary
for
both ships to be at fault. One ship can assume 100% of the responsibility
even though the other ship was not avoid the collision.

"Jim Carter" wrote in message
...
Dr. Smithers, have you ever boated on the St. Lawrence Seaway?

Yes, there have been some ships involved in collisions in the Seaway. I
thought we were talking about problems with pleasure boats in this area.
There is no reason to have two pleasure boats collide in the St. Lawrence
Seaway and not have them both responsible.

Jet Ski overheating problem
 

"Dr. Dr. Smithers" Ask Me about my Phd @ Diploma Mill .com wrote in
message . ..
Jim C,

I think we disagreed because you thought I was referring to Bill's example
and I was not.

In reference to my comment about If ships were to maintain a speed and
distance that would allow them to avoid all collision, no ship would
leave
the dock.

If two ships are passing in a channel and one suddenly behaves in a
completely unexpected manner, the other ship will not be able to avoid the
collision. I mentioned the ship on the Mississippi who lost all power in
a
bend in the river and slammed into a shopping mall. If another ship or
barge was coming up the river, it would have hit the other ship or barge.

Dr. Smithers, are you only referring to ships not leaving the dock if there
shipping routes were only to be in River Systems or canals? or.....Are
you referring to ALL ships at sea not leaving their docks?

Just as a comment. The freighter that lost power in the Mississippi did
radio a warning to other traffic on the river which kept other shipping
away. They could not warn the pier to move out of the way. ;-) The
major factor in the ship hitting the pier was that it dropped it's anchor
and that caused the ship to swerve to the shore line. With that much mass
in motion, it takes some time to stop when the engine is not functioning.
It's rudder could not turn the ship due to the anchor that was dropped and
also it was moving with the current.

Jim Carter
"The Boat"
Bayfield

Jet Ski overheating problem
 

I'd support letting PWC back on the water if and only if they came
equipped with an explosive charge that detonated if the vehicle
exceeded the speed limits in mooring fields or other slow speed zones,
or within say 50m of the shoreline. Those who want to play chicken with
boats underway, I'd leave to the shotgun and rifle owning fraternity.

Then of course you'd support the same system for ANY power boats, that
they'd ALL explode and kill the operator if you exceeded the speed
limits or broke any rules? If so,
I'd go RIGHT along with you.

Or that should only apply to pwc operators, because they annoy you and
you don't like them?

richforman

Jet Ski overheating problem
 

It is quite possible for there to be a collision with neither vessel
at fault. A small number of cases (under 5%) are resolved this way.
Mechanical failure is a primary cause, but as equipment becomes more
reliable, this is accepted less as an excuse. A failure that could
have been detected, or avoided with proper maintenance does not qualify.


Dr. Dr. Smithers wrote:
Yes I have and there are collisions between ships on the St. Lawrence Seaway
due to mechanical or human error. When this happens it is not necessary for
both ships to be at fault. One ship can assume 100% of the responsibility
even though the other ship was not avoid the collision.


"Jim Carter" wrote in message
...
"Dr. Dr. Smithers" Ask Me about my Phd @ Diploma Mill .com wrote in
message ...
Doug,
Do you have any idea how narrow many channels are?
Take a look at the majority of the St. Law. Seaway.
Dr. Smithers, have you ever boated on the St. Lawrence Seaway?

This Seaway has HUGE wide channels in it. Large Freighter pass one
another regularly. I have 1000's of hours boating the Great Lakes
System.
There are some area's where there are channels so narrow that only one
boat
is permitted to proceed at one time through them. These are mainly in
the
30,000 Island area of Georgian Bay and in some areas of the North Channel
of
Lake Huron. In these areas the rule of Up Bound and Down Bound are in
effect. The speed limit is also in effect.

Jim Carter
"The Boat"
Bayfield

Jet Ski overheating problem
 

I was boating for a week there on my 4-stroke WaveRunner this summer,
it was pwc and boating paradise. I never saw such a huge number of
pwc's about before, or more harmoniously integrated with all the other
boaters. We and all the other hundreds of pwc's we saw every day
boating around the Thousand Islands area (and ranging pretty far out of
that area in both directions) were so clearly accepted and welcomed as
a non-special, non-different part of the boating environment, sharing
the channels, coves, public docks, and open water peacfeully and
non-problematically with all the other larger boats....a terrific
situation....and you really had to know what you're doing up there,
with all the rocks and shoals that come up out of nowhere all over the
place. But in four full days of boating, I didn't see anyone with any
kind of problem with anyone else, everybody seemed happy, no one
annoyed or threatening or suggesting to blow anyone up or shoot them or
ban them just because of what kind of boat they had. Only person I
encountered with a problem was a local on a small fishing boat who had
apparently bruised his hull on a marked shoal, just about run out of
gas, and putted up to me asking if I knew how to get back to the park
he had rented the boat from (I had a chart and a gps and was able to
show him where to go....he seemed like not the brightest bulb around,
but I didn't make any broader inferences about locals, boat renters,
fishermen, or any other category of boaters that he was a part of).
My silent-running, smokeless, shallow-draft, ultra-fuel-efficient pwc
was the perfect vehicle for the kind of exploration we loved doing,
cruising slowly past all the islands so my wife could take pictures of
all the fancy houses, beautiful landscapes, lighthouses and castles to
be gawked at; purring quietly up to the docks at all the local state
parks and up to the many beaches in the dozens of tempting peaceful
coves where just countless pwc'ers and other boaters were enjoying
nature, themselves and each other in friendship and more than peaceful
coexistence; idling happily through the beautiful International Rift
waterway where there's maybe an eighth of a mile separating the US from
Canada and stopping for lots of picnics and swim breaks; and also being
able to ride the waters pretty much from early morning 'til the sun
went down on less than a tank of gas each day....we went to Singer's
Castle on Dark Island, the very famous Boldt Castle on Hart Island
right across from the marina resort where we stayed (where we were
accomdated in a friendly manner by the dock staff in exactly the same
way as all the other boats docked there for the week), and to the
Antique Boating Museum in Clayton, all on my '05 FX HO....didn't buzz
or annoy anybody, go too close to anybody, bother anybody fishing or
saling, and didn't really get the impression that anyone else on the
millions of pwc's out there, were either. Any old prejudices against
the smaller machines seemed to have long ago dissolved in the reality
of modern boats, modern, educated, experienced riders, in an area where
boating and pwc's is so prevalent a part of life that people can't help
but have updated, informed, open-minded impressions about the boats and
their riders.

AND...just this last Sunday....I went out for another late-season ride
locally here in Long Island, and just a bit out into the harbor was a
small outboard with two fisherman whose engine had died on them, and
asked me for a tow back to the ramp which obviously I cheerfully gave
them. We had a few laughs as I towed them back...I don't think my
being there to help them out changed their view of pwc's or pwc'ers
because there was no problem with that to begin with - they saw me as a
fellow boater, out using the same ramp to go out enjoying the same
harbor on the same sunny fall day as them and a million other boaters
out there that beautiful day....pwc's are very prevalent here in Long
Island, too, and I think in general any stereotyped outdated
prejudicial notions about us in the minds of our fellow boats have long
since been dispelled, I get a sense of being welcomed and accepted as
a fellow, full-fledged boater the same as any other, at the docks, on
the ramps, on the beach coves, in the channels, in the salt
marshes....not judged on the basis of the size and shape of my boat, or
the irresponsible behavior of others in the past on similar
crafts...not like sometimes here on the newsgroup.

What about you, some of the guys I've been talking with on this
thread...would you accept a tow from a pwc'er if you needed it? Would
you be surprised if one was willng and able to help? If you don't like
pwc's or pwc'ers in general, would such an incident change your
feelings at all? Would it enable you to realize that maybe your ideas
about pwc's and their operators could be misperceptions? 'Coz I tell
you this happens all the time, I don't know a longtime pwc'er who
hasn't at some point been asked to help somebody on the water (and of
course who hasn't needed help from another boater)...in those instances
we're all in the same boat as it were, doesn't matter what kind of boat
you have, we are all boaters, have a great deal in common no matter
what kind of boat we have, and an inclination to like and relate to one
an other based on our shared values and interests.

I share these anecodtes in an ongoing effort to continue to try to
dispel and counteract the untrue, invalid, unfair, uninformed,
stereoptyped, outdated ideas about personal watercraft and their
operators, the things we do and the way we use our boats these days,
that are apparently being clung to and perpetrated by some posters here
and elsewhere. I don't know if it'll do any good, I don't know if some
of you guys have open-enough minds to admit that maybe you're wrong and
should give the issue an honest reconsideration, but it won't stop me
from trying.

richforman

Jet Ski overheating problem
 

Jet Ski overheating problem
 

Huh? I don't, if you think that's some kind of angle.

richforman

Jet Ski overheating problem
 

JimC,
My comment concerning the statement ", if "you" collided with them, "you"
would be at fault. It is your responsibility, under Rule 8, the
collision regulations, to avoid a collision.

I was pointing out there are situations where you can be involved in a
collision and not be held responsible, because there was nothing a
reasonable captain could have done to avoid the collision. If a boater is
traveling too fast for the situation, or too close for the speed, he can be
held responsible for the collision, if the sailboat turns directly in front
of the powerboater, even if the powerboater is traveling too fast and too
close to the sailboat, the sailboater can be found partially responsible for
the accident.

At this point, the horse has been beat to death, dragged through the fiedl
and left to rot, so it probably is a good time to end this thread.




gers.com wrote in message ...

"Dr. Dr. Smithers" Ask Me about my Phd @ Diploma Mill .com wrote in
message . ..
Jim C,

I think we disagreed because you thought I was referring to Bill's
example
and I was not.

In reference to my comment about If ships were to maintain a speed and
distance that would allow them to avoid all collision, no ship would
leave
the dock.

If two ships are passing in a channel and one suddenly behaves in a
completely unexpected manner, the other ship will not be able to avoid
the
collision. I mentioned the ship on the Mississippi who lost all power in
a
bend in the river and slammed into a shopping mall. If another ship or
barge was coming up the river, it would have hit the other ship or barge.

Dr. Smithers, are you only referring to ships not leaving the dock if
there
shipping routes were only to be in River Systems or canals? or.....Are
you referring to ALL ships at sea not leaving their docks?

Just as a comment. The freighter that lost power in the Mississippi did
radio a warning to other traffic on the river which kept other shipping
away. They could not warn the pier to move out of the way. ;-) The
major factor in the ship hitting the pier was that it dropped it's anchor
and that caused the ship to swerve to the shore line. With that much
mass
in motion, it takes some time to stop when the engine is not functioning.
It's rudder could not turn the ship due to the anchor that was dropped and
also it was moving with the current.

Jim Carter
"The Boat"
Bayfield

Jet Ski overheating problem
 

Jeff,
Hopefully your post is able to convey my message better than I was able.


"Jeff" wrote in message
...
It is quite possible for there to be a collision with neither vessel at
fault. A small number of cases (under 5%) are resolved this way.
Mechanical failure is a primary cause, but as equipment becomes more
reliable, this is accepted less as an excuse. A failure that could have
been detected, or avoided with proper maintenance does not qualify.


Dr. Dr. Smithers wrote:
Yes I have and there are collisions between ships on the St. Lawrence
Seaway due to mechanical or human error. When this happens it is not
necessary for both ships to be at fault. One ship can assume 100% of the
responsibility even though the other ship was not avoid the collision.


"Jim Carter" wrote in message
...
"Dr. Dr. Smithers" Ask Me about my Phd @ Diploma Mill .com wrote in
message ...
Doug,
Do you have any idea how narrow many channels are?
Take a look at the majority of the St. Law. Seaway.
Dr. Smithers, have you ever boated on the St. Lawrence Seaway?

This Seaway has HUGE wide channels in it. Large Freighter pass one
another regularly. I have 1000's of hours boating the Great Lakes
System.
There are some area's where there are channels so narrow that only one
boat
is permitted to proceed at one time through them. These are mainly in
the
30,000 Island area of Georgian Bay and in some areas of the North
Channel of
Lake Huron. In these areas the rule of Up Bound and Down Bound are in
effect. The speed limit is also in effect.

Jim Carter
"The Boat"
Bayfield

Jet Ski overheating problem
 

Again, to both of you, I guess you're being oh so humorous, but should
these same kind of penalties be applied towards other non-pwc boaters
who break the rules, speed or wake zones, overtaking or being overtaken
improperly, not having enough life jackets on board or not having
jackets on all children, drinking alcoholic beverages while
boating....or is it just those violators whose boat types annoy you
personally, who should be subject to this kind of thing? Just
wondering.

richforman

Jet Ski overheating problem
 

A couple of years ago a small craft stalled as it was crossing the shipping
channel south of Detroit, the was a lake freighter upbound, and crushed the
small craft........the freighter was not at fault.

"Dr. Dr. Smithers" Ask Me about my Phd @ Diploma Mill .com wrote in
message . ..
JimC,
My comment concerning the statement ", if "you" collided with them,
"you"
would be at fault. It is your responsibility, under Rule 8, the
collision regulations, to avoid a collision.

I was pointing out there are situations where you can be involved in a
collision and not be held responsible, because there was nothing a
reasonable captain could have done to avoid the collision. If a boater is
traveling too fast for the situation, or too close for the speed, he can
be
held responsible for the collision, if the sailboat turns directly in
front
of the powerboater, even if the powerboater is traveling too fast and too
close to the sailboat, the sailboater can be found partially responsible
for
the accident.

At this point, the horse has been beat to death, dragged through the fiedl
and left to rot, so it probably is a good time to end this thread.




gers.com wrote in message ...

"Dr. Dr. Smithers" Ask Me about my Phd @ Diploma Mill .com wrote in
message . ..
Jim C,

I think we disagreed because you thought I was referring to Bill's
example
and I was not.

In reference to my comment about If ships were to maintain a speed and
distance that would allow them to avoid all collision, no ship would
leave
the dock.

If two ships are passing in a channel and one suddenly behaves in a
completely unexpected manner, the other ship will not be able to avoid
the
collision. I mentioned the ship on the Mississippi who lost all power
in
a
bend in the river and slammed into a shopping mall. If another ship or
barge was coming up the river, it would have hit the other ship or
barge.

Dr. Smithers, are you only referring to ships not leaving the dock if
there
shipping routes were only to be in River Systems or canals?
or.....Are
you referring to ALL ships at sea not leaving their docks?

Just as a comment. The freighter that lost power in the Mississippi did
radio a warning to other traffic on the river which kept other shipping
away. They could not warn the pier to move out of the way. ;-)
The
major factor in the ship hitting the pier was that it dropped it's
anchor
and that caused the ship to swerve to the shore line. With that much
mass
in motion, it takes some time to stop when the engine is not
functioning.
It's rudder could not turn the ship due to the anchor that was dropped
and
also it was moving with the current.

Jim Carter
"The Boat"
Bayfield

Jet Ski overheating problem
 

Paul,
It is not as unusual as some might want to believe.


"P Fritz" wrote in message
...
A couple of years ago a small craft stalled as it was crossing the shipping
channel south of Detroit, the was a lake freighter upbound, and crushed
the
small craft........the freighter was not at fault.

"Dr. Dr. Smithers" Ask Me about my Phd @ Diploma Mill .com wrote in
message . ..
JimC,
My comment concerning the statement ", if "you" collided with them,
"you"
would be at fault. It is your responsibility, under Rule 8, the
collision regulations, to avoid a collision.

I was pointing out there are situations where you can be involved in a
collision and not be held responsible, because there was nothing a
reasonable captain could have done to avoid the collision. If a boater
is
traveling too fast for the situation, or too close for the speed, he can
be
held responsible for the collision, if the sailboat turns directly in
front
of the powerboater, even if the powerboater is traveling too fast and too
close to the sailboat, the sailboater can be found partially responsible
for
the accident.

At this point, the horse has been beat to death, dragged through the
fiedl
and left to rot, so it probably is a good time to end this thread.




gers.com wrote in message ...

"Dr. Dr. Smithers" Ask Me about my Phd @ Diploma Mill .com wrote in
message . ..
Jim C,

I think we disagreed because you thought I was referring to Bill's
example
and I was not.

In reference to my comment about If ships were to maintain a speed and
distance that would allow them to avoid all collision, no ship would
leave
the dock.

If two ships are passing in a channel and one suddenly behaves in a
completely unexpected manner, the other ship will not be able to avoid
the
collision. I mentioned the ship on the Mississippi who lost all power
in
a
bend in the river and slammed into a shopping mall. If another ship
or
barge was coming up the river, it would have hit the other ship or
barge.

Dr. Smithers, are you only referring to ships not leaving the dock if
there
shipping routes were only to be in River Systems or canals?
or.....Are
you referring to ALL ships at sea not leaving their docks?

Just as a comment. The freighter that lost power in the Mississippi
did
radio a warning to other traffic on the river which kept other shipping
away. They could not warn the pier to move out of the way. ;-)
The
major factor in the ship hitting the pier was that it dropped it's
anchor
and that caused the ship to swerve to the shore line. With that much
mass
in motion, it takes some time to stop when the engine is not
functioning.
It's rudder could not turn the ship due to the anchor that was dropped
and
also it was moving with the current.

Jim Carter
"The Boat"
Bayfield

Jet Ski overheating problem
 

wrote in message
oups.com...
Again, to both of you, I guess you're being oh so humorous, but should
these same kind of penalties be applied towards other non-pwc boaters
who break the rules, speed or wake zones, overtaking or being overtaken
improperly, not having enough life jackets on board or not having
jackets on all children, drinking alcoholic beverages while
boating....or is it just those violators whose boat types annoy you
personally, who should be subject to this kind of thing? Just
wondering.

richforman

If you were speaking to me, I believe that the rules apply to everyone
equally. I was the proud owner of several sailboats, several powerboats
and one Sea Doo. I loved them all. They each have had their place in my
boating life.

Jim Carter
"The Boat"
Bayfield

Jet Ski overheating problem
 

Jim Carter wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...
Again, to both of you, I guess you're being oh so humorous, but should
these same kind of penalties be applied towards other non-pwc boaters
who break the rules, speed or wake zones, overtaking or being overtaken
improperly, not having enough life jackets on board or not having
jackets on all children, drinking alcoholic beverages while
boating....or is it just those violators whose boat types annoy you
personally, who should be subject to this kind of thing? Just
wondering.

richforman

If you were speaking to me, I believe that the rules apply to everyone
equally. I was the proud owner of several sailboats, several powerboats
and one Sea Doo. I loved them all. They each have had their place in my
boating life.

Jim Carter
"The Boat"
Bayfield

Nope Jim, I wasn't speaking to you but to PDW and Ganz. You sound like
an open-minded friendly person with a good positive attitude towards
all kinds of boats and all kinds of boaters, unlike those two guys and
some of the others I"ve been exchanging posts with here.

richforman

Jet Ski overheating problem
 

Jonathan Ganz wrote:
In article et,
Bill McKee bmckee=at-ix.netcom.com wrote:

"DSK" wrote in message
...

Bill McKee wrote:

Probably like a lot if sailors, you turn when ever you want, and then
yell at a power boat for impeding you.

Probably like a lot of motorboaters, you have no clue what's involved in
sailing, and think that all boats can be driven like a car.

DSK


I know what is involved with sailing. Married a good sailors daughter and
used to windsurf. But too many "sailors" figure they have the right of way
as they have a sailboat. I have had "sailors" do a 90 degree in front of me
when lifting the sails and the iron sail is still running, and then yell at
me. They would yell even louder if I collided with them and when they had
to pay enormous sums of money to me.


What's your point? If you know the Rules of the Road, there's never
much doubt about who should give way.


Surely not the overtaking vessel? Must a vessel desiring to turn
from main channel to side route stand on past a harbour entrance
because a zoomer wants to pass between them and their port?

Could we invent turn signals for slow boats, to give those with
power, speed and a lack of courteous patience a more easily notable
legal signal of intentions to turn, given that noisy power vessels
make horn signals adequate for listening and watching sailors
inaudible aboard kilowatt stereo disco boats? Or would such
unauthorized lighting distract starlet eyed go boaters from their
fore deck ornaments?

Do these power mongers not understand the need of sailors to turn
into the wind to hoist their main sails?

Nor is there much doubt as to how hard it is to hit a planing power
boat with a sail boat, and vice versa.

Honest savvy power boaters well know the paranoid schizophrenia they
have forced on sailors and the bad reputation their wild mannered
birds of similar feathering have cultivated for them, well know the
secret rabid detestation that fires every sailor's killing passions
and undeniable mad obsession with reach ramming power boats who so
foolishly come so close as to make possible such sweet, aching
temptation to chisel yet another notch in their stems, and well know
to stay away, as they should from a starved tiger on a short chain.

Those who actually get rammed by sailboats have no one to blame but
themselves, (even the law of the sea agrees,) unless their canny X's
have topped the limit on their gas cards, and the grinning fates
deliver them to their well deserved, slow motion fates. Gradual
horror overtake them, woe by tides and drift the planing challenged
fume less speed boater who dallies wake less long enough for the
long plotting sailors' pack to organize, isolate, surround and
subsume their deserving victims, should Poseidon aid them and grant
conspiring seas, wind and grant calls for rights to starboard tack.

Like a wounded fawn in the teeth of crippled octogenarian wolves,
surely their vessels shall be dismembered and dispersed without
trace, like diseased baby seals in the toothless jaws of tired and
gallopless killer whales.

Aarrgghh! The longer takes the victory, the sweeter the vine of
triumph, the sweeter the smoke of the roasting. May they all overheat;^)

Terry K

Jet Ski overheating problem
 

Hi Terry
I guess from your post that you dont like power boaters :-)

Power boaters are like car drivers who crash into buses when they stop at
bus stops and then complain that the bus should not have stopped!
Sailboats are always unpredictable by their nature so I can never understand
why so many powerboaters have to overtake sooo close even when there is
plenty of searoom

Tony uk


"Terry Spragg" wrote in message
...
Jonathan Ganz wrote:
In article et,
Bill McKee bmckee=at-ix.netcom.com wrote:

"DSK" wrote in message
t...

Bill McKee wrote:

Probably like a lot if sailors, you turn when ever you want, and then
yell at a power boat for impeding you.

Probably like a lot of motorboaters, you have no clue what's involved in
sailing, and think that all boats can be driven like a car.

DSK


I know what is involved with sailing. Married a good sailors daughter
and used to windsurf. But too many "sailors" figure they have the right
of way as they have a sailboat. I have had "sailors" do a 90 degree in
front of me when lifting the sails and the iron sail is still running,
and then yell at me. They would yell even louder if I collided with them
and when they had to pay enormous sums of money to me.


What's your point? If you know the Rules of the Road, there's never
much doubt about who should give way.


Surely not the overtaking vessel? Must a vessel desiring to turn from
main channel to side route stand on past a harbour entrance because a
zoomer wants to pass between them and their port?

Could we invent turn signals for slow boats, to give those with power,
speed and a lack of courteous patience a more easily notable legal signal
of intentions to turn, given that noisy power vessels make horn signals
adequate for listening and watching sailors inaudible aboard kilowatt
stereo disco boats? Or would such unauthorized lighting distract starlet
eyed go boaters from their fore deck ornaments?

Do these power mongers not understand the need of sailors to turn into the
wind to hoist their main sails?

Nor is there much doubt as to how hard it is to hit a planing power boat
with a sail boat, and vice versa.

Honest savvy power boaters well know the paranoid schizophrenia they have
forced on sailors and the bad reputation their wild mannered birds of
similar feathering have cultivated for them, well know the secret rabid
detestation that fires every sailor's killing passions and undeniable mad
obsession with reach ramming power boats who so foolishly come so close as
to make possible such sweet, aching temptation to chisel yet another notch
in their stems, and well know to stay away, as they should from a starved
tiger on a short chain.

Those who actually get rammed by sailboats have no one to blame but
themselves, (even the law of the sea agrees,) unless their canny X's have
topped the limit on their gas cards, and the grinning fates deliver them
to their well deserved, slow motion fates. Gradual horror overtake them,
woe by tides and drift the planing challenged fume less speed boater who
dallies wake less long enough for the long plotting sailors' pack to
organize, isolate, surround and subsume their deserving victims, should
Poseidon aid them and grant conspiring seas, wind and grant calls for
rights to starboard tack.

Like a wounded fawn in the teeth of crippled octogenarian wolves, surely
their vessels shall be dismembered and dispersed without trace, like
diseased baby seals in the toothless jaws of tired and gallopless killer
whales.

Aarrgghh! The longer takes the victory, the sweeter the vine of triumph,
the sweeter the smoke of the roasting. May they all overheat;^)

Terry K

Jet Ski overheating problem
 

"Terry Spragg" wrote in message
...
Jonathan Ganz wrote:
In article et,
Bill McKee bmckee=at-ix.netcom.com wrote:

"DSK" wrote in message
t...

Bill McKee wrote:

Probably like a lot if sailors, you turn when ever you want, and then
yell at a power boat for impeding you.

Probably like a lot of motorboaters, you have no clue what's involved in
sailing, and think that all boats can be driven like a car.

DSK


I know what is involved with sailing. Married a good sailors daughter
and used to windsurf. But too many "sailors" figure they have the right
of way as they have a sailboat. I have had "sailors" do a 90 degree in
front of me when lifting the sails and the iron sail is still running,
and then yell at me. They would yell even louder if I collided with them
and when they had to pay enormous sums of money to me.


What's your point? If you know the Rules of the Road, there's never
much doubt about who should give way.


Surely not the overtaking vessel? Must a vessel desiring to turn from
main channel to side route stand on past a harbour entrance because a
zoomer wants to pass between them and their port?

Could we invent turn signals for slow boats, to give those with power,
speed and a lack of courteous patience a more easily notable legal signal
of intentions to turn, given that noisy power vessels make horn signals
adequate for listening and watching sailors inaudible aboard kilowatt
stereo disco boats? Or would such unauthorized lighting distract starlet
eyed go boaters from their fore deck ornaments?

Do these power mongers not understand the need of sailors to turn into the
wind to hoist their main sails?

Nor is there much doubt as to how hard it is to hit a planing power boat
with a sail boat, and vice versa.

Honest savvy power boaters well know the paranoid schizophrenia they have
forced on sailors and the bad reputation their wild mannered birds of
similar feathering have cultivated for them, well know the secret rabid
detestation that fires every sailor's killing passions and undeniable mad
obsession with reach ramming power boats who so foolishly come so close as
to make possible such sweet, aching temptation to chisel yet another notch
in their stems, and well know to stay away, as they should from a starved
tiger on a short chain.

Those who actually get rammed by sailboats have no one to blame but
themselves, (even the law of the sea agrees,) unless their canny X's have
topped the limit on their gas cards, and the grinning fates deliver them
to their well deserved, slow motion fates. Gradual horror overtake them,
woe by tides and drift the planing challenged fume less speed boater who
dallies wake less long enough for the long plotting sailors' pack to
organize, isolate, surround and subsume their deserving victims, should
Poseidon aid them and grant conspiring seas, wind and grant calls for
rights to starboard tack.

Like a wounded fawn in the teeth of crippled octogenarian wolves, surely
their vessels shall be dismembered and dispersed without trace, like
diseased baby seals in the toothless jaws of tired and gallopless killer
whales.

Aarrgghh! The longer takes the victory, the sweeter the vine of triumph,
the sweeter the smoke of the roasting. May they all overheat;^)

Terry K


And what about the power boater that will become a sailboat after he raises
his sails and turns off the motor. Just because he carries sails, he should
have all the right of way? I carry a paddle on my powerboat, should I not
have right of way over a sailboat?

Jet Ski overheating problem
 

In article et,
Bill McKee bmckee=at-ix.netcom.com wrote:

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Jonathan Ganz wrote:
The colregs do. Did you actually go to the link? I bet you didn't.

Well, have a great evening... I'm outta here until tomorrow
evening. Guess I'll go sailing and see if there are any jetskiers out
there who know the rules of the road.

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



Better not get in front of a tanker. Your posting will come back to haunt
you.

Which posting is that?

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

Jet Ski overheating problem
 

In article et,
Bill McKee bmckee=at-ix.netcom.com wrote:

And your "Rules of the Road" have legal validity. I did not go to the site.
AS YOU STATED BOTH Colregs and your "Rules of the Road" for legality. So
you "Rules of the Road" are nada as to concern. It may be a restatement or
interpretation of the Colregs, but other than that they are meaningless.


Bill, the Rules are *in* the colregs. Duhhh... sheesh.




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

Jet Ski overheating problem
 

In article .com,
wrote:

prejudice, personal irrational dislike and outdated stereotypes or just
outdated information about these machines, might be the reason why,
after analytic studies are done, so many of the former bans have been
rolled back, reversed and eliminated.

Perhaps, but just as much is based on fact and observation.

Can't think of anything positive to say about pwc's? I'll help you out

Typical PWCer... motor mouth. Give us all a break. We don't need 10
paragraphs with your ranting. It really is pretty boring.

Nothing good to say about pwc's? Do some research and you'll find that

See previous comment.

In fact, do you have anything positive to say about boats in general?

Yeah, I like sailboats.

What is up with this drinkin and drivin thing? I just don't get that?
What point are you trying to make?

My point (I don't think it was that hard to discern) is that pwc
operators don't have any kind of lock on stupid, dangerous, illegal,

Who said that have a lock on stupidity. I just said that the issue of
alcohol has nothing to do with the subject at hand. Noise, pollution,
and macho bs.

Do you get it now?

Sure do!

Well, you need to get out more... well, I take that back. You have a
PWC.
Oh no... here comes the missing sense of humor.....

I have a sharper, more developed sense of humor than you, I'm positive

Whoooo... well, ok.



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

Jet Ski overheating problem
 

In article .com,
wrote:
Again, to both of you, I guess you're being oh so humorous, but should
these same kind of penalties be applied towards other non-pwc boaters
who break the rules, speed or wake zones, overtaking or being overtaken
improperly, not having enough life jackets on board or not having
jackets on all children, drinking alcoholic beverages while
boating....or is it just those violators whose boat types annoy you
personally, who should be subject to this kind of thing? Just
wondering.

Still ranting? Who said the rules should be different?????

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

Jet Ski overheating problem
 

In article .com,
wrote:
Nope Jim, I wasn't speaking to you but to PDW and Ganz. You sound like
an open-minded friendly person with a good positive attitude towards
all kinds of boats and all kinds of boaters, unlike those two guys and
some of the others I"ve been exchanging posts with here.

Well Richy, you sure told us off... bwahahahaa...

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