"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
. ..
There is always argument with law regardless of whether there is
precedent
or "set law", whatever that means.

Too many times I have seen a "sailboat" with a sail kind of half assed up
but the motor is in the water and you can see the propellor's trail and
these idiots think they are "under sail." These are the people that give
the
rest of you rag merchants a bad name.

Good morning Bert. Yes, you are correct. A person can argue against the
laws that have been set by precedent. Almost 99.9% of the cases that are
argued against precedent are doomed to failure.

If a sailing vessel has it's sails raised and his propeller is functioning
and driving the boat, then this is a power boat. No argument with that
statement. That sailor actions, as a sailing vessel, would be almost as
stupid as Bill McKee's act of trying to pass a sailing vessel at 25 MPH and
15 feet distance.

Jim C.

Bill McKee wrote:
"Peter Wiley" wrote in message
. ..

Nobody but a complete idiot would get within less than one boat length
of another vessel while overtaking, unless it was a narrow channel
where there was no choice, and *then* you'd do it at slow speed. This



I guess most sailboaters are idiot then


If you believe that...sell your boat and stay off the water. It's not
safe out there!

"Jim Carter" wrote in message
...

"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
. ..
There is always argument with law regardless of whether there is
precedent
or "set law", whatever that means.

Too many times I have seen a "sailboat" with a sail kind of half assed up
but the motor is in the water and you can see the propellor's trail and
these idiots think they are "under sail." These are the people that give
the
rest of you rag merchants a bad name.

Good morning Bert. Yes, you are correct. A person can argue against
the
laws that have been set by precedent. Almost 99.9% of the cases that are
argued against precedent are doomed to failure.

If a sailing vessel has it's sails raised and his propeller is functioning
and driving the boat, then this is a power boat. No argument with that
statement. That sailor actions, as a sailing vessel, would be almost as
stupid as Bill McKee's act of trying to pass a sailing vessel at 25 MPH
and
15 feet distance.

15 feet might be a little close but...

....the wake that a power boat on plane produces is smaller and faster, the
sailboat gets a quick nudge when the wake hits the hull.
....the wake of a power boat pushes running a what most people assume to be
no-wake speed will bounce the sail boat around much harsher.

Which wake do you want to encounter?

"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
. ..

"Jim Carter" wrote in message
...

"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
. ..
There is always argument with law regardless of whether there is
precedent
or "set law", whatever that means.

Too many times I have seen a "sailboat" with a sail kind of half assed
up
but the motor is in the water and you can see the propellor's trail and
these idiots think they are "under sail." These are the people that
give
the
rest of you rag merchants a bad name.

Good morning Bert. Yes, you are correct. A person can argue against
the
laws that have been set by precedent. Almost 99.9% of the cases that
are
argued against precedent are doomed to failure.

If a sailing vessel has it's sails raised and his propeller is
functioning
and driving the boat, then this is a power boat. No argument with that
statement. That sailor actions, as a sailing vessel, would be almost
as
stupid as Bill McKee's act of trying to pass a sailing vessel at 25 MPH
and
15 feet distance.

15 feet might be a little close but...

...the wake that a power boat on plane produces is smaller and faster, the
sailboat gets a quick nudge when the wake hits the hull.
...the wake of a power boat pushes running a what most people assume to be
no-wake speed will bounce the sail boat around much harsher.

Which wake do you want to encounter?

It also depends on the size and displacement of the boat. A small ski type
boat is going to throw up little wake on plane compared to a 35 ft cruiser.

Jim,
I thought the sailboat was a power boat if the engine was running, even if
the propeller was not engaged.


"Jim Carter" wrote in message
...

"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
. ..
There is always argument with law regardless of whether there is
precedent
or "set law", whatever that means.

Too many times I have seen a "sailboat" with a sail kind of half assed up
but the motor is in the water and you can see the propellor's trail and
these idiots think they are "under sail." These are the people that give
the
rest of you rag merchants a bad name.

Good morning Bert. Yes, you are correct. A person can argue against
the
laws that have been set by precedent. Almost 99.9% of the cases that are
argued against precedent are doomed to failure.

If a sailing vessel has it's sails raised and his propeller is functioning
and driving the boat, then this is a power boat. No argument with that
statement. That sailor actions, as a sailing vessel, would be almost as
stupid as Bill McKee's act of trying to pass a sailing vessel at 25 MPH
and
15 feet distance.

Jim C.

Jim Carter wrote:


Bill, go back and read what is written in the Collision Regulations. I
have tried to make your feeble brain understand what is written, but you are
too dense to comprehend the regulations. Admiralty Law, in this
definition of "sailing vessel" has been set by precedence. Period! There
is no argument with set law! Did you get that Bill? If not, keep
rereading until you can comprehend.

Jim C.


Maybe we should take a collection and send Bill to a Power Squadron course.
I'm sure his fellow boaters would thank us.

Bert Robbins wrote:


Too many times I have seen a "sailboat" with a sail kind of half assed up
but the motor is in the water and you can see the propellor's trail and
these idiots think they are "under sail." These are the people that give the
rest of you rag merchants a bad name.


Nothing illegal about using the motor to assist when the wind is
low...or coming from an awkward direction and the sailor wants to make a
bit of time, as long as he realizes he is now acting as a motor boat.

"Dr. Dr. Smithers" Ask Me about my Phd @ Diploma Mill .com wrote in
message ...
Jim,
I thought the sailboat was a power boat if the engine was running, even if
the propeller was not engaged.

Good morning Dr. Smithers.

You would be incorrect in your thinking. According to Admiralty Law with
regards to the wording of the Collision Regulations, a sailing vessel
becomes a power vessel when the propulsion machinery is engaged. The
engine can be running for the vessel to be considered a sailing vessel, but
the running gear, ( shafts and props,) cannot be turning. If you will read
the sections of the Collision Regulations that I have pointed out to Bill
McKee, you will see, clearly, the definitions.

Jim C.

"P Fritz" not only made a boating post, but it actually makes some sense!


15 feet might be a little close but...

Oh really? Do you think that passing another boat only 15 feet away is
perfectly safe & normal? Especially when you have hundreds of yards, if
not miles, of open water to pass much further away?

...the wake that a power boat on plane produces is smaller and faster, the
sailboat gets a quick nudge when the wake hits the hull.
...the wake of a power boat pushes running a what most people assume to be
no-wake speed will bounce the sail boat around much harsher.

Which wake do you want to encounter?


That depends very much on the boat, the boater, and the surrounding
conditions. On open water I don't see any reason at all for a motorboat
to come with 15 feet of me. It's rude.


P Fritz wrote:
It also depends on the size and displacement of the boat. A small ski type
boat is going to throw up little wake on plane compared to a 35 ft cruiser.


You got that right. It doesn't even have to be 35 feet... many planing
cuddy boats, especially deep-vee hulls, leave a steep & ugly wake at
full throttle. Yet the drivers are convinced that they are doing you a
favor by passing close at full speed instead of slowing down.

ALL boaters should remember that they are responsible... and for a
motorboat, the wake is part of that responsibility. You are as much
responsible for the wake made by your boat as you would be for a bullet
you fired from a gun.

Fair Skies
Doug King

Harry Krause wrote:

I give all boats I encounter as wide a berth as possible, and I'm always
conscious of my wake. If I think I am close enough to rock some guy
anchored in a fishing boat or trolling, I slow down. I usually cut
across the stern of sailboats. It doesn't cost anything to be careful
and courteous out on the water.

If only you could practice that kind of courtesy in this NG, rather than
restricting it to your cyberboating.

--
Skipper