I'm thinking of getting back into boating, and so I pick up that
ponderous old tome, Chapman's, and I open it up to the chapter on Rules
of the Road.

And as every educated boater knows, there are all kinds of rules
concerning signaling with blasts of the horn when you're overtaking,
changing course, and so on.

And this puzzles me, because I don't think I've ever seen these rules
obeyed, in all the time I've been on the water. I don't think I've
ever heard a boat horn blasted, except perhaps in anger.

Indeed, I would argue that if the rules were followed in an actual
harbour, people would go deaf hearing all the horn blasts!

Why is Chapman (or Mahoney, I guess) concerned with rules nobody
observes out in the real world?

Is it possible that learning about these ancient rules is actually
detrimental to safety out on the water, since nobody obeys them and
it's bad to teach people to expect that they will be obeyed?

Are there any books that talk about what actually happens out on the
water instead of the theory of what should happen?

D

I have been studying the State Boating Safety Handbook which is given
out on request to new boaters.

There is no information on horn or other signalling that I can find
other than the 'right of way' rules.

Maybe it only applies to commercial vessels.?

wrote in message
oups.com...
I have been studying the State Boating Safety Handbook which is given
out on request to new boaters.

There is no information on horn or other signalling that I can find
other than the 'right of way' rules.

Maybe it only applies to commercial vessels.?


Throw the "handbook" away and get the complete set of "rules" ..... you will
not find a mention of "commercial versus recreational", in there.

On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 14:24:01 -0400, gfretwell wrote:


I still think some form of hand signals might be more appropriate
for small vessels in close quarters. I doubt a guy on a 2 stroke ski could
hear most horns anyway.

Perhaps, but a horn works at night, and in fog. I wouldn't expect hand
signals to be much use then.

Well, yes ...

But what's the point of being a stickler on rules nobody obeys?

Or even learning them?

Just wondering.

D

wrote:

Well, yes ...

But what's the point of being a stickler on rules nobody obeys?

Or even learning them?

Just wondering.

D



For me, it's a question of liability. If I am obeying the rules
of the road, and there's an accident, I would be in a better
position than if I were not. It's a little like wearing a seatbelt.

-Raf


--
Misifus-
Rafael Seibert

http://www.ralphandsue.com

wrote:
On 15 Aug 2005 05:09:51 -0700, wrote:

And this puzzles me, because I don't think I've ever seen these rules
obeyed, in all the time I've been on the water. I don't think I've
ever heard a boat horn blasted, except perhaps in anger.

I notice the same thing. The only people I see who ever use the horn
properly are the licensed captains running boats for hire. This only
happens when there is a real risk of collision. I assume the lawyers
tell them to do it since the boaters in question seldom react in the
appropriate manner and I have never heard the proper response.

I do think we should evaluate the rules and update them to reflect
watercraft like jetskis that do not really have a usable signalling
device. I still think some form of hand signals might be more
appropriate for small vessels in close quarters. I doubt a guy on a 2
stroke ski could hear most horns anyway.


Hmmm....I thought there already were appropriate hand signals for
communicating with jet skis.....

wrote:
Well, yes ...

But what's the point of being a stickler on rules nobody obeys?

Or even learning them?

Just wondering.

D


Just one little detail, or so...

If you have a boo-boo, the fault will be assessed wrt the rules,
wether you know them or not.

Otherwise, if only 10% of those you encounter know the rules, and
obey them, you will improve he odds if you pretend they all do,
since it must be assumed that those who do not will err about 50-50
either way.

If you know them, you can quite rightly lecture those idiots who
don't, advancing your aspirations toward snobbery.

There is no better feeling than being snobbish about being right,
even in court, when you get damages, if you survive.

Terry K

Reading the Oregon fishing rules book, and they have a big safety notice in
their. "Who has the right of way? THE BIG GUY" Shows a sailboat saying
they will turn, we have the right of way. The deckhand of the tanker is
saying, did you feel a bump?

"Terry Spragg" wrote in message
...
wrote:
Well, yes ...

But what's the point of being a stickler on rules nobody obeys?

Or even learning them?

Just wondering.

D


Just one little detail, or so...

If you have a boo-boo, the fault will be assessed wrt the rules, wether
you know them or not.

Otherwise, if only 10% of those you encounter know the rules, and obey
them, you will improve he odds if you pretend they all do, since it must
be assumed that those who do not will err about 50-50 either way.

If you know them, you can quite rightly lecture those idiots who don't,
advancing your aspirations toward snobbery.

There is no better feeling than being snobbish about being right, even in
court, when you get damages, if you survive.

Terry K

Bill McKee wrote:
Reading the Oregon fishing rules book, and they have a big safety notice in
their. "Who has the right of way? THE BIG GUY" Shows a sailboat saying
they will turn, we have the right of way. The deckhand of the tanker is
saying, did you feel a bump?



Even if common sense didn't dictate that sailors (and others) need to
stay out of the way of commercial vessels, the rules specifically do.
No vessel under 20 meters and no vessel of any size under sail can
impede a power driven vessel following a VTS. Here's an interesting and
far out possibilty: Since a pleasure boat can voluntarily follow a VTS
and the rules say that sailors and small power boats cannot impede aany
vessel following a VTS, there might be a strong argument that a 40'
sailboat needs to give way to a 20' powerboat *if* the powerboat is
following the VTS. It would take a court case to sort this out, but
it's a technically correct appllication of the rules.