An amusing marine inspection...
 

Took the Ranger out for a ride to burn off some of the old gas. At
the launch ramp, DEP Inspector asked if he could look the boat over
for safety.

Sure- why not.

Pulled the cover off the engine and promptly told me that the
"backfire arrestor cover" wasn't correct.

Er...what?

So he launches into a whole deal about how the backfire arrestor has
to be a different design and how the carburetors blah, blah, blah.

I let him go on, nodding my head in agreement, then he says "I'd get
that changed as soon as I can".

To which I replied "I'm very sorry - I honestly don't understand -
there aren't any carburetors on that engine".

I swear this is true - he says - "let me show you" and took off the
air baffle for the air intake manifold. He points to the intake bells
and says - "There - those are your carburetors".

So, being the natural wise ass, I said "Could you show me where the
fuel lines attach to the ~carburetors~"?

So, being a nice guy, he traced out the fuel lines and when they led
to the injectors, he said - absolutely true - "I've never seen a four
stroke like this before".

To which I replied "Neither have I. And I suspect that's because it's
not a four stroke - it's a two stroke direct injected engine - no
carburetors."

~~ continued in Part Deaux ~~

An amusing marine inspection...
 

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
Took the Ranger out for a ride to burn off some of the old gas. At
the launch ramp, DEP Inspector asked if he could look the boat over
for safety.

Sure- why not.

Pulled the cover off the engine and promptly told me that the
"backfire arrestor cover" wasn't correct.

Er...what?

So he launches into a whole deal about how the backfire arrestor has
to be a different design and how the carburetors blah, blah, blah.

I let him go on, nodding my head in agreement, then he says "I'd get
that changed as soon as I can".

To which I replied "I'm very sorry - I honestly don't understand -
there aren't any carburetors on that engine".

I swear this is true - he says - "let me show you" and took off the
air baffle for the air intake manifold. He points to the intake bells
and says - "There - those are your carburetors".

So, being the natural wise ass, I said "Could you show me where the
fuel lines attach to the ~carburetors~"?

So, being a nice guy, he traced out the fuel lines and when they led
to the injectors, he said - absolutely true - "I've never seen a four
stroke like this before".

To which I replied "Neither have I. And I suspect that's because it's
not a four stroke - it's a two stroke direct injected engine - no
carburetors."

~~ continued in Part Deaux ~~

He argues even when he's wrong. He'd be a great addition to this newsgroup.
:-)

An amusing marine inspection...
 

On Wed, 11 Apr 2007 20:50:39 +0000, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:


~~ continued in Part Deaux ~~

Is that the part where he cuffs you and reads you your rights? ;-)

An amusing marine inspection...
 

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:

He argues even when he's wrong. He'd be a great addition to this newsgroup.

One of you is enough.

Killed any dogs lately?

Tick Tock, Tick Tock.

-- Charlie

An amusing marine inspection...
 

"Charlie" wrote in message
...
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:

He argues even when he's wrong. He'd be a great addition to this
newsgroup.

One of you is enough.

Killed any dogs lately?

Tick Tock, Tick Tock.

-- Charlie

I'm scoping out YOUR doggy. Failing that, your family.

TICK TOCK TICK TOCK....

An amusing marine inspection...
 

On Apr 11, 1:54?pm, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:


He argues even when he's wrong. He'd be a great addition to this newsgroup.
:-)- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Only at an apprentice level. If he can work up to where he calls names
in the process (with the number of names called and personal attacks
corresponding to the degree of his technical inaccuracy), he'll be
ready for prime time.

Sounds a bit like a USCG boarding I endured a couple of years ago. I
was also written up for an insufficient horn, but everything else was
OK. (He thought he had me when he asked to see Chart #1- but I had it
aboard as required).

When the boarding officer was filling out his inspection form and
giving me a warning about the horn, he asked "I forget- what's the
name of the body of water we're on?" To be fair, he was very young
and probably just transfered in from some other part of the country-
but he really ought to know the name of the area he is patrolling. (It
was Port Madison. I have to assume that he could have declared the
general location; Puget Sound).

An amusing marine inspection...
 

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Charlie" wrote in message
...
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:

He argues even when he's wrong. He'd be a great addition to this
newsgroup.
One of you is enough.

Killed any dogs lately?

Tick Tock, Tick Tock.

-- Charlie

I'm scoping out YOUR doggy. Failing that, your family.

TICK TOCK TICK TOCK....



You probably don't want to get close to that particular ball of slime...

An amusing marine inspection...
 

On 11 Apr 2007 17:27:16 -0700, "Chuck Gould"
wrote:

Sounds a bit like a USCG boarding I endured a couple of years ago. I
was also written up for an insufficient horn, but everything else was
OK. (He thought he had me when he asked to see Chart #1- but I had it
aboard as required).

Huh?

An amusing marine inspection...
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
. ..
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Charlie" wrote in message
...
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:

He argues even when he's wrong. He'd be a great addition to this
newsgroup.
One of you is enough.

Killed any dogs lately?

Tick Tock, Tick Tock.

-- Charlie

I'm scoping out YOUR doggy. Failing that, your family.

TICK TOCK TICK TOCK....

You probably don't want to get close to that particular ball of slime...

Formerly "Larry", last time he popped his head out of the toilet.

An amusing marine inspection...
 

"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
oups.com...

Sounds a bit like a USCG boarding I endured a couple of years ago. I
was also written up for an insufficient horn, but everything else was
OK. (He thought he had me when he asked to see Chart #1- but I had it
aboard as required).


Are you talking about navigational charts? If so, since when is it
"required" to carry them on a recreational boat? I am not saying you
shouldn't have charts, I am questioning the "requirement" to have them.

Eisboch

An amusing marine inspection...
 

On Apr 11, 6:24?pm, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On 11 Apr 2007 17:27:16 -0700, "Chuck Gould"

wrote:
Sounds a bit like a USCG boarding I endured a couple of years ago. I
was also written up for an insufficient horn, but everything else was
OK. (He thought he had me when he asked to see Chart #1- but I had it
aboard as required).

Huh?

Chart #1 is the booklet that lists and decodes all of the symbols,
etc, that are found on NOAA charts. Everybody should carry one, and a
thumb-through once every so often is a good refresher.

An amusing marine inspection...
 

On Apr 11, 8:50�pm, "Eisboch" wrote:
"Chuck Gould" wrote in message

oups.com...

Sounds a bit like a USCG boarding I endured a couple of years ago. I
was also written up for an insufficient horn, but everything else was
OK. (He thought he had me when he asked to see Chart #1- but I had it
aboard as required).

Are you talking about navigational charts? *If so, since when is it
"required" to carry them on a recreational boat? * I am not saying you
shouldn't have charts, I am questioning the "requirement" to have them.

Eisboch

See the last item on this list:

http://www.uscgboating.org/safety/fe...u_refchart.htm


I beleive that's the authority upon which the USCG relies when they
ask for Chart #1 in inland waters. Trailer boats are generally not
included in the requirement. The law reads 39 feet and up, (my boat is
39 LOA) and the check list reads 26 feet and up.

An amusing marine inspection...
 

On Apr 11, 8:50�pm, "Eisboch" wrote:
"Chuck Gould" wrote in message

oups.com...

Sounds a bit like a USCG boarding I endured a couple of years ago. I
was also written up for an insufficient horn, but everything else was
OK. (He thought he had me when he asked to see Chart #1- but I had it
aboard as required).

Are you talking about navigational charts? *If so, since when is it
"required" to carry them on a recreational boat? * I am not saying you
shouldn't have charts, I am questioning the "requirement" to have them.

Eisboch


Also, for larger private yachts, Title 33, Volume 2 of the Code of
Federal Regulations.........

Sec. 164.30 Charts, publications, and equipment: General.

No person may operate or cause the operation of a vessel unless
the
vessel has the marine charts, publications, and equipment as required
by
Sec. Sec. 164.33 through 164.41 of this part.

[CGD 82-055, 48 FR 44535, Sept. 29, 1983]

Sec. 164.33 Charts and publications.

(a) Each vessel must have the following:
(1) Marine charts of the area to be transited, published by the
National Ocean Service, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, or a river
authority that--
(i) Are of a large enough scale and have enough detail to make
safe
navigation of the area possible; and
(ii) Are currently corrected.
(2) For the area to be transited, a currently corrected copy of,
or
applicable currently corrected extract from, each of the following
publications:
(i) U.S. Coast Pilot.
(ii) Coast Guard Light List.
(3) For the area to be transited, the current edition of, or
applicable current extract from:
(i) Tide tables published by private entities using data provided
by
the National Ocean Service.
(ii) Tidal current tables published by private entities using
data
provided by the National Ocean Service, or river current publication
issued by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, or a river authority.
(b) As an alternative to the requirements for paragraph (a) of
this
section, a marine chart or publication, or applicable extract,
published
by a foreign government may be substituted for a U.S. chart and
publication required by this section. The chart must be of large
enough
scale and have enough detail to make safe navigation of the area
possible, and must be currently corrected. The publication, or
applicable extract, must singly or in combination contain similar
information to the U.S. Government publication to make safe
navigation
of the area possible. The publication, or applicable extract must be
currently corrected, with the exceptions of tide and tidal current
tables, which must be the current editions.
(c) As used in this section, ``currently corrected'' means
corrected
with changes contained in all Notices to Mariners published by the
National Imagery and Mapping Agency, or an equivalent foreign
government
publication, reasonably available to the vessel, and that is
applicable
to the vessel's transit.



That section applies only to pleasure boats larger than those that
most people will own, but not in all cases. 1600 tons, (with ton used
in this sense as a unit of volume, not displacement). Angelina and
Brad will definitely have to comply. :-)

See what a pain in the butt it would be to own a monster boat?

An amusing marine inspection...
 

"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Apr 11, 8:50?pm, "Eisboch" wrote:
"Chuck Gould" wrote in message

oups.com...

Sounds a bit like a USCG boarding I endured a couple of years ago. I
was also written up for an insufficient horn, but everything else was
OK. (He thought he had me when he asked to see Chart #1- but I had it
aboard as required).

Are you talking about navigational charts? If so, since when is it
"required" to carry them on a recreational boat? I am not saying you
shouldn't have charts, I am questioning the "requirement" to have them.

Eisboch

See the last item on this list:

http://www.uscgboating.org/safety/fe...u_refchart.htm


I beleive that's the authority upon which the USCG relies when they
ask for Chart #1 in inland waters. Trailer boats are generally not
included in the requirement. The law reads 39 feet and up, (my boat is
39 LOA) and the check list reads 26 feet and up.


Ah .... I didn't recognize the reference to "Chart 1". You are referring
to the booklet called "Navigation Rules" and yes, it is required to have the
current edition on board on boats 39' or larger. I know several people with
boats in this size who were unaware of the requirement for this publication.
Which reminds me ... the one I have is outdated.

http://www.starpath.com/catalog/books/1832.htm

Eisboch

An amusing marine inspection...
 

On 11 Apr 2007 22:05:33 -0700, "Chuck Gould"
wrote:

On Apr 11, 6:24?pm, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On 11 Apr 2007 17:27:16 -0700, "Chuck Gould"

wrote:
Sounds a bit like a USCG boarding I endured a couple of years ago. I
was also written up for an insufficient horn, but everything else was
OK. (He thought he had me when he asked to see Chart #1- but I had it
aboard as required).

Huh?

Chart #1 is the booklet that lists and decodes all of the symbols,
etc, that are found on NOAA charts. Everybody should carry one, and a
thumb-through once every so often is a good refresher.

I know what it is - I have one on my boat.

I didn't know it was "required" for an inspection.

An amusing marine inspection...
 

On 11 Apr 2007 22:14:16 -0700, "Chuck Gould"
wrote:

On Apr 11, 8:50?pm, "Eisboch" wrote:
"Chuck Gould" wrote in message

oups.com...

Sounds a bit like a USCG boarding I endured a couple of years ago. I
was also written up for an insufficient horn, but everything else was
OK. (He thought he had me when he asked to see Chart #1- but I had it
aboard as required).

Are you talking about navigational charts? f so, since when is it
"required" to carry them on a recreational boat? I am not saying you
shouldn't have charts, I am questioning the "requirement" to have them.

Eisboch

See the last item on this list:

http://www.uscgboating.org/safety/fe...u_refchart.htm


I beleive that's the authority upon which the USCG relies when they
ask for Chart #1 in inland waters. Trailer boats are generally not
included in the requirement. The law reads 39 feet and up, (my boat is
39 LOA) and the check list reads 26 feet and up.

I've never heard of the Nav Rules being called Chart #1.

Hey, learn something new everyday.

An amusing marine inspection...
 

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
. ..
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Charlie" wrote in message
...
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:

He argues even when he's wrong. He'd be a great addition to this
newsgroup.
One of you is enough.

Killed any dogs lately?

Tick Tock, Tick Tock.

-- Charlie
I'm scoping out YOUR doggy. Failing that, your family.

TICK TOCK TICK TOCK....
You probably don't want to get close to that particular ball of slime...

Formerly "Larry", last time he popped his head out of the toilet.



Crazy Larry from Charleston, SC?

An amusing marine inspection...
 

The Navigation Rules is one book, Chart #1 is something completely
different, and not required. Nice to have though... you can download
one for free at: http://www.nga.mil/portal/site/maritime/ Click on
"publications" then select from the drop down box.

An amusing marine inspection...
 

"Keith" wrote in message
ps.com...

The Navigation Rules is one book, Chart #1 is something completely
different, and not required. Nice to have though... you can download
one for free at: http://www.nga.mil/portal/site/maritime/ Click on
"publications" then select from the drop down box.


That makes sense. Thanks for clearing it up. Frankly, I've had never heard
of "Chart #1".

Eisboch

An amusing marine inspection...
 

"Eisboch" wrote in message
. ..

"Keith" wrote in message
ps.com...

The Navigation Rules is one book, Chart #1 is something completely
different, and not required. Nice to have though... you can download
one for free at: http://www.nga.mil/portal/site/maritime/ Click on
"publications" then select from the drop down box.


That makes sense. Thanks for clearing it up. Frankly, I've had never
heard of "Chart #1".

Eisboch

We were supplied with one when taking our first Power & Sail Squadron
course.
I see it as a big 'legend' which explains all the symbols in navigational
charts.
http://www.charts.gc.ca/pub/en/produ...rt1/chart1.asp

An amusing marine inspection...
 

On 11 Apr 2007 22:14:16 -0700, "Chuck Gould"
wrote:

See the last item on this list:

http://www.uscgboating.org/safety/fe...u_refchart.htm


I beleive that's the authority upon which the USCG relies when they
ask for Chart #1 in inland waters. Trailer boats are generally not
included in the requirement. The law reads 39 feet and up, (my boat is
39 LOA) and the check list reads 26 feet and up.

Chart #1 contains a copy of the navigation rules ?

An amusing marine inspection...
 

On Apr 12, 7:09?am, Wayne.B wrote:
On 11 Apr 2007 22:14:16 -0700, "Chuck Gould"

wrote:
See the last item on this list:

http://www.uscgboating.org/safety/fe...u_refchart.htm

I beleive that's the authority upon which the USCG relies when they
ask for Chart #1 in inland waters. Trailer boats are generally not
included in the requirement. The law reads 39 feet and up, (my boat is
39 LOA) and the check list reads 26 feet and up.

Chart #1 contains a copy of the navigation rules ?

No, it doesn't. However, I was asked to produce a copy of it during
the inspection. The only thing I can figure is that the reference to
rules is very liberally interpreted by the USCG boarding parties.
Nothing else in the list of requirements even comes close.

An amusing marine inspection...
 

Harry Krause wrote:
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:

"Charlie" wrote in message
...

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:

He argues even when he's wrong. He'd be a great addition to this
newsgroup.

One of you is enough.

Killed any dogs lately?

Tick Tock, Tick Tock.

-- Charlie


I'm scoping out YOUR doggy. Failing that, your family.

TICK TOCK TICK TOCK....


You probably don't want to get close to that particular ball of slime...


This from the guy who just advertised in a boating newsgroup that a 2500
gallon tank of his **** was just pumped out.

Good Lord, how self-centered do you have to be to do something like
that, and believe people are interested?

-- Charlie

An amusing marine inspection...
 

On Apr 11, 4:50 pm, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
Took the Ranger out for a ride to burn off some of the old gas. At
the launch ramp, DEP Inspector asked if he could look the boat over
for safety.

Sure- why not.

Pulled the cover off the engine and promptly told me that the
"backfire arrestor cover" wasn't correct.

Er...what?

So he launches into a whole deal about how the backfire arrestor has
to be a different design and how the carburetors blah, blah, blah.

I let him go on, nodding my head in agreement, then he says "I'd get
that changed as soon as I can".

To which I replied "I'm very sorry - I honestly don't understand -
there aren't any carburetors on that engine".

I swear this is true - he says - "let me show you" and took off the
air baffle for the air intake manifold. He points to the intake bells
and says - "There - those are your carburetors".

So, being the natural wise ass, I said "Could you show me where the
fuel lines attach to the ~carburetors~"?

So, being a nice guy, he traced out the fuel lines and when they led
to the injectors, he said - absolutely true - "I've never seen a four
stroke like this before".

To which I replied "Neither have I. And I suspect that's because it's
not a four stroke - it's a two stroke direct injected engine - no
carburetors."

~~ continued in Part Deaux ~~

Hey Sport, where did you put in, Baldwin?
Thanks

An amusing marine inspection...
 

On 12 Apr 2007 18:46:05 -0700, wrote:

Hey Sport, where did you put in, Baldwin?

Stonington.

An amusing marine inspection...
 

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On 12 Apr 2007 18:46:05 -0700, wrote:

Hey Sport, where did you put in, Baldwin?

Stonington.


Sport???

An amusing marine inspection...
 

On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 02:15:43 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
.. .
On 12 Apr 2007 18:46:05 -0700, wrote:

Hey Sport, where did you put in, Baldwin?

Stonington.

Sport???

Bedroom?

An amusing marine inspection...
 

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 02:15:43 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
. ..
On 12 Apr 2007 18:46:05 -0700, wrote:

Hey Sport, where did you put in, Baldwin?

Stonington.

Sport???

Bedroom?


I was responding to the thing that addressed you as "sport". Obnoxious.

An amusing marine inspection...
 

Hey Sport, where did you put in, Baldwin?

Stonington.

Sport???

Bedroom?


I was responding to the thing that addressed you as "sport". Obnoxious.


Perhaps it was just a truncation of Sportfishing, rather than the usage that
you're thinking of and which you've found so offensive. Ya' think maybe it
might be as simple as that, Sparky?

An amusing marine inspection...
 

"RG" wrote in message
m...

Hey Sport, where did you put in, Baldwin?

Stonington.

Sport???

Bedroom?


I was responding to the thing that addressed you as "sport". Obnoxious.


Perhaps it was just a truncation of Sportfishing, rather than the usage
that you're thinking of and which you've found so offensive. Ya' think
maybe it might be as simple as that, Sparky?


Could be, sport.