Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
posted to rec.boats.cruising
|
|||
|
|||
Dangerous Maga-yacht in Maine
On Wed, 02 Aug 2006 01:22:58 GMT, in message
S7Tzg.302723$iF6.256082@pd7tw2no Gary wrote: You would have to ask for clarification for two reasons, 1) it is jargon that relates to US Inland rules; and 2) this was water where the International rules apply. I admit I am weak on US Inland Rules, I am not American and rarely sail inside the demarcation line for Inland Rules. I don't suppose the average American sailor is very familiar with our inland rules (Canada) either. I'm far from expert, but the section of Rule 34 quoted below seems to have much the same thing to say about the situation as the US Inland Rules. Manoeuvring and Warning Signals-- Canadian Modifications (g) Notwithstanding paragraph (a), in the waters of the Great Lakes Basin, when power-driven vessels are in sight of one another and meeting or crossing at a distance within half a mile of each other, each vessel underway, when manoeuvring as authorized or required by these Rules (i) shall indicate that manoeuvre by the following signals on her whistle: --one short blast to mean "I intend to leave you on my port side", --two short blasts to mean "I intend to leave you on my starboard side", and --three short blasts to mean "I am operating astern propulsion", and (ii) shall, upon hearing the one or two blast signal, referred to in subparagraph (i), of the other vessel indicate her agreement by sounding the same whistle signal and taking the steps necessary to effect a safe passing. If, however, for any cause, a vessel on hearing a one or two blast signal referred to in subparagraph (i) doubts the safety of the proposed manoeuvre, she shall sound the signal specified in paragraph (d) and each vessel shall take appropriate precautionary action until a safe passing agreement is made. Ryk |
#2
posted to rec.boats.cruising
|
|||
|
|||
Dangerous Maga-yacht in Maine
Ryk wrote:
On Wed, 02 Aug 2006 01:22:58 GMT, in message S7Tzg.302723$iF6.256082@pd7tw2no Gary wrote: You would have to ask for clarification for two reasons, 1) it is jargon that relates to US Inland rules; and 2) this was water where the International rules apply. I admit I am weak on US Inland Rules, I am not American and rarely sail inside the demarcation line for Inland Rules. I don't suppose the average American sailor is very familiar with our inland rules (Canada) either. I'm far from expert, but the section of Rule 34 quoted below seems to have much the same thing to say about the situation as the US Inland Rules. Manoeuvring and Warning Signals-- Canadian Modifications (g) Notwithstanding paragraph (a), in the waters of the Great Lakes Basin, when power-driven vessels are in sight of one another and meeting or crossing at a distance within half a mile of each other, each vessel underway, when manoeuvring as authorized or required by these Rules (i) shall indicate that manoeuvre by the following signals on her whistle: --one short blast to mean "I intend to leave you on my port side", --two short blasts to mean "I intend to leave you on my starboard side", and --three short blasts to mean "I am operating astern propulsion", and (ii) shall, upon hearing the one or two blast signal, referred to in subparagraph (i), of the other vessel indicate her agreement by sounding the same whistle signal and taking the steps necessary to effect a safe passing. If, however, for any cause, a vessel on hearing a one or two blast signal referred to in subparagraph (i) doubts the safety of the proposed manoeuvre, she shall sound the signal specified in paragraph (d) and each vessel shall take appropriate precautionary action until a safe passing agreement is made. Ryk Not sure what your point is. The Canadian Mods to the rules for the Great Lakes would have to be the same as the American rules wouldn't they? It would sure make life difficult if the two coutries bordering on the Lakes had different passing rules. Note that these rules don't apply in any other Canadian inland waters. Gary |
#3
posted to rec.boats.cruising
|
|||
|
|||
Dangerous Maga-yacht in Maine
Question: I'm aware that the GL Canadian rules mirror US Inland, but what
about remaining "Inland" areas of Canada? I.e., are these different than International or do they basically mirror International ? otn "Gary" wrote in message news:eLNAg.314545$Mn5.10223@pd7tw3no... The Canadian Mods to the rules for the Great Lakes would have to be the same as the American rules wouldn't they? It would sure make life difficult if the two coutries bordering on the Lakes had different passing rules. Note that these rules don't apply in any other Canadian inland waters. Gary |
#4
posted to rec.boats.cruising
|
|||
|
|||
Dangerous Maga-yacht in Maine
otnmbrd wrote:
Question: I'm aware that the GL Canadian rules mirror US Inland, but what about remaining "Inland" areas of Canada? I.e., are these different than International or do they basically mirror International ? otn "Gary" wrote in message news:eLNAg.314545$Mn5.10223@pd7tw3no... The Canadian Mods to the rules for the Great Lakes would have to be the same as the American rules wouldn't they? It would sure make life difficult if the two coutries bordering on the Lakes had different passing rules. Note that these rules don't apply in any other Canadian inland waters. Gary They are very similar to International rules but some of the Canadian Mods are important to know, for example: Vessels Constrained by their Draught--Canadian Modification (b)Notwithstanding paragraph (a), in the Canadian waters of a roadstead, harbour, river, lake or inland waterway, no vessel shall exhibit three all-round red lights in a vertical line or a cylinder. Crossing Situation--Canadian Modification (b)Notwithstanding paragraph (a), in Canadian waters, a vessel crossing a river shall keep out of the way of a power-driven vessel ascending or descending the river, except on the St. Lawrence River northeast of Île Rouge. |
#5
posted to rec.boats.cruising
|
|||
|
|||
Dangerous Maga-yacht in Maine
On Fri, 04 Aug 2006 20:04:26 GMT, in message
eLNAg.314545$Mn5.10223@pd7tw3no Gary wrote: Ryk wrote: On Wed, 02 Aug 2006 01:22:58 GMT, in message S7Tzg.302723$iF6.256082@pd7tw2no Gary wrote: You would have to ask for clarification for two reasons, 1) it is jargon that relates to US Inland rules; and 2) this was water where the International rules apply. I admit I am weak on US Inland Rules, I am not American and rarely sail inside the demarcation line for Inland Rules. I don't suppose the average American sailor is very familiar with our inland rules (Canada) either. I'm far from expert, but the section of Rule 34 quoted below seems to have much the same thing to say about the situation as the US Inland Rules. Not sure what your point is. That knowing the Canadian Rules for the Great Lakes Basin is probably close enough to knowing the US Inland Rules for a discussion like this one. The Canadian Mods to the rules for the Great Lakes would have to be the same as the American rules wouldn't they? It would sure make life difficult if the two coutries bordering on the Lakes had different passing rules. As you say, so being qualified as a Canadian for the Great Lakes would give one knowledge of the rules, without knowledge of the local jargon which is separate from the rules. (For that matter, do the rules say anything about language of communication?) Note that these rules don't apply in any other Canadian inland waters. Noted. Ryk |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Yacht charter Croatia | Cruising | |||
Dangerous mega yacht warning for Maine | Cruising | |||
Deep Blue Yacht Supply, Inc. unveils online storefront | Cruising | |||
Yacht Charter Vancouver - Five Star Yacht Charters | Cruising | |||
Update on Marina Damage -- FL Coasts | Cruising |