John H. wrote:
On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 16:52:40 -0500, " JimH" ask wrote:

"Reginald P. Smithers III" wrote in message
...
JimH wrote:
"Reginald P. Smithers III" wrote in message
. ..
JimH wrote:
"Reginald P. Smithers III" wrote in message
. ..
HK wrote:
Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
HK wrote:
Jere Lull wrote:
On 2007-11-12 17:50:18 -0500, BAR said:

When was the last a container ship or tanker slowed down to
no-wake speed coming up the channel of the bay. It doesn't take
long for the wake from the bib behemoths to get to either side of
the bay and work the way into the exposed tributaries.
On the Chesapeake, they do slow as they approach the C&D canal....
Many times, we'd sail at about their speed through the Elk with
only moderate winds.

A few years back, one blew through and caused serious damage,
possibly a death. A friend who rides those things mentioned that
the word of the litigation blasted through their community.

Truth be told, few run at more than 10-15 knots in the upper
Chesapeake in the first place. That's not no-wake speed, but the
wake is manageable.

Still, I've tracked their wakes for easily more than a mile.

Wakes from large ship traffic in the mid-Bay has not been a problem
for me. In fact, most of the ships I see are leaving fairly flat
wakes. Even when fishing on the edges of the ship channel, it
usually isn't a significant problem, in my experience.
The large container ships I have seen leave a nice rolling wake.
While it was not a problem (we took them at 35-45 degrees) I have
never seen a trawler (or even a floating RV) leaving a wake as
large. I am trying to figure out what kind of boat, a rec.boater
would have that is leaving a wake larger than a container ship.
Gee, how many large container ships do you encounter on Lake Lanier?
None on Lake Lanier, as I have said before, I have gone boating from
the Great Lakes to Key West.
Hmmm.

A while back you said you regularly boat along the east coast,
including the Atlantic.

So which is it Jim Gallow, errr.........Reggie?


And how is that different than what I just said?

Welcome back Jim Gallow..................although you really never left.
;-)
I think you have crossed the line once you start calling me names, but I
really can't figure out what your point is.

The point is that your name is Jim Gallow.


And you are hilarious!
JimH's guessing what my real name is, isn't worth any comment what so
ever. I can remember when Harry used to use JimH's real name in
rec.boats and he was screaming about Harry stalking him and making
threats to his sick wife. When Chuck posted a link to JimH's ad where
he was selling his Vespa, he accussed Chuck of posting his telephone
number, even though he knew it did not include his number.

On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 13:26:45 -0500, Reginald Smithers III
wrote:

John H. wrote:
On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 16:52:40 -0500, " JimH" ask wrote:

"Reginald P. Smithers III" wrote in message
...
JimH wrote:
"Reginald P. Smithers III" wrote in message
. ..
JimH wrote:
"Reginald P. Smithers III" wrote in message
. ..
HK wrote:
Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
HK wrote:
Jere Lull wrote:
On 2007-11-12 17:50:18 -0500, BAR said:

When was the last a container ship or tanker slowed down to
no-wake speed coming up the channel of the bay. It doesn't take
long for the wake from the bib behemoths to get to either side of
the bay and work the way into the exposed tributaries.
On the Chesapeake, they do slow as they approach the C&D canal....
Many times, we'd sail at about their speed through the Elk with
only moderate winds.

A few years back, one blew through and caused serious damage,
possibly a death. A friend who rides those things mentioned that
the word of the litigation blasted through their community.

Truth be told, few run at more than 10-15 knots in the upper
Chesapeake in the first place. That's not no-wake speed, but the
wake is manageable.

Still, I've tracked their wakes for easily more than a mile.

Wakes from large ship traffic in the mid-Bay has not been a problem
for me. In fact, most of the ships I see are leaving fairly flat
wakes. Even when fishing on the edges of the ship channel, it
usually isn't a significant problem, in my experience.
The large container ships I have seen leave a nice rolling wake.
While it was not a problem (we took them at 35-45 degrees) I have
never seen a trawler (or even a floating RV) leaving a wake as
large. I am trying to figure out what kind of boat, a rec.boater
would have that is leaving a wake larger than a container ship.
Gee, how many large container ships do you encounter on Lake Lanier?
None on Lake Lanier, as I have said before, I have gone boating from
the Great Lakes to Key West.
Hmmm.

A while back you said you regularly boat along the east coast,
including the Atlantic.

So which is it Jim Gallow, errr.........Reggie?


And how is that different than what I just said?

Welcome back Jim Gallow..................although you really never left.
;-)
I think you have crossed the line once you start calling me names, but I
really can't figure out what your point is.

The point is that your name is Jim Gallow.


And you are hilarious!
JimH's guessing what my real name is, isn't worth any comment what so
ever. I can remember when Harry used to use JimH's real name in
rec.boats and he was screaming about Harry stalking him and making
threats to his sick wife. When Chuck posted a link to JimH's ad where
he was selling his Vespa, he accussed Chuck of posting his telephone
number, even though he knew it did not include his number.

'Gallows' humor?

The Vespa incident was humorous. I think that's when JimH first started
being 'anti-Chuck', as though Chuck gave a damn.

John H. wrote:


'Gallows' humor?

The Vespa incident was humorous. I think that's when JimH first started
being 'anti-Chuck', as though Chuck gave a damn.

I wonder if it would make JimH feel better if I changed my handle to
"Jim Gallows"? If I did, I would prefer to have the III, just because I
like the way it looks. While there are people in rec.boats who know my
name, you are the only one who actually saw my name on the credit info
when I charged my contribution to the "Run for Boobies" charity.

On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 15:23:41 -0500, Reginald Smithers III
wrote:

John H. wrote:


'Gallows' humor?

The Vespa incident was humorous. I think that's when JimH first started
being 'anti-Chuck', as though Chuck gave a damn.

I wonder if it would make JimH feel better if I changed my handle to
"Jim Gallows"? If I did, I would prefer to have the III, just because I
like the way it looks. While there are people in rec.boats who know my
name, you are the only one who actually saw my name on the credit info
when I charged my contribution to the "Run for Boobies" charity.




Well, if you check Google, you'll see that Reginald Smithers is much more
famous than Jim Gallows. I've vowed to myself never to reveal any 'real'
names to anyone in the group, but I can say that I don't recall any Greek
characters in your name, but...Roman? That's another question.

I think the 'III' is quite appropriate. I also think Jim's post was quite
funny.

Speaking of boobies...both my daughters had a boobygram done and came up
negative. The younger had what the doctor called a 'suspicious spot', but a
biopsy came up negative. Thank God.

On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 15:23:41 -0500, Reginald Smithers III
wrote:

John H. wrote:


'Gallows' humor?

The Vespa incident was humorous. I think that's when JimH first started
being 'anti-Chuck', as though Chuck gave a damn.

I wonder if it would make JimH feel better if I changed my handle to
"Jim Gallows"? If I did, I would prefer to have the III, just because I
like the way it looks. While there are people in rec.boats who know my
name, you are the only one who actually saw my name on the credit info
when I charged my contribution to the "Run for Boobies" charity.





Whoops. I spoke too soon. My younger hasn't had the biopsy yet. We'll find
out more about the end of the month.