• Announcements

    • UnderDawg

      A Few Simple Rules   05/22/2017

      Sailing Anarchy is a very lightly moderated site. This is by design, to afford a more free atmosphere for discussion. There are plenty of sailing forums you can go to where swearing isn't allowed, confrontation is squelched and, and you can have a moderator finger-wag at you for your attitude. SA tries to avoid that and allow for more adult behavior without moderators editing your posts and whacking knuckles with rulers. We don't have a long list of published "thou shalt nots" either, and this is by design. Too many absolute rules paints us into too many corners. So check the Terms of Service - there IS language there about certain types of behavior that is not permitted. We interpret that lightly and permit a lot of latitude, but we DO reserve the right to take action when something is too extreme to tolerate (too racist, graphic, violent, misogynistic, etc.). Yes, that is subjective, but it allows us discretion. Avoiding a laundry list of rules allows for freedom; don't abuse it. However there ARE a few basic rules that will earn you a suspension, and apparently a brief refresher is in order. 1) Allegations of pedophilia - there is no tolerance for this. So if you make allegations, jokes, innuendo or suggestions about child molestation, child pornography, abuse or inappropriate behavior with minors etc. about someone on this board you will get a time out. This is pretty much automatic; this behavior can have real world effect and is not acceptable. Obviously the subject is not banned when discussion of it is apropos, e.g. talking about an item in the news for instance. But allegations or references directed at or about another poster is verboten. 2) Outing people - providing real world identifiable information about users on the forums who prefer to remain anonymous. Yes, some of us post with our real names - not a problem to use them. However many do NOT, and if you find out someone's name keep it to yourself, first or last. This also goes for other identifying information too - employer information etc. You don't need too many pieces of data to figure out who someone really is these days. Depending on severity you might get anything from a scolding to a suspension - so don't do it. I know it can be confusing sometimes for newcomers, as SA has been around almost twenty years and there are some people that throw their real names around and their current Display Name may not match the name they have out in the public. But if in doubt, you don't want to accidentally out some one so use caution, even if it's a personal friend of yours in real life. 3) Posting While Suspended - If you've earned a timeout (these are fairly rare and hard to get), please observe the suspension. If you create a new account (a "Sock Puppet") and return to the forums to post with it before your suspension is up you WILL get more time added to your original suspension and lose your Socks. This behavior may result a permanent ban, since it shows you have zero respect for the few rules we have and the moderating team that is tasked with supporting them. Check the Terms of Service you agreed to; they apply to the individual agreeing, not the account you created, so don't try to Sea Lawyer us if you get caught. Just don't do it. Those are the three that will almost certainly get you into some trouble. IF YOU SEE SOMEONE DO ONE OF THESE THINGS, please do the following: Refrain from quoting the offending text, it makes the thread cleanup a pain in the rear Press the Report button; it is by far the best way to notify Admins as we will get e-mails. Calling out for Admins in the middle of threads, sending us PM's, etc. - there is no guarantee we will get those in a timely fashion. There are multiple Moderators in multiple time zones around the world, and anyone one of us can handle the Report and all of us will be notified about it. But if you PM one Mod directly and he's off line, the problem will get dealt with much more slowly. Other behaviors that you might want to think twice before doing include: Intentionally disrupting threads and discussions repeatedly. Off topic/content free trolling in threads to disrupt dialog Stalking users around the forums with the intent to disrupt content and discussion Repeated posting of overly graphic or scatological porn content. There are plenty web sites for you to get your freak on, don't do it here. And a brief note to Newbies... No, we will not ban people or censor them for dropping F-bombs on you, using foul language, etc. so please don't report it when one of our members gives you a greeting you may find shocking. We do our best not to censor content here and playing swearword police is not in our job descriptions. Sailing Anarchy is more like a bar than a classroom, so handle it like you would meeting someone a little coarse - don't look for the teacher. Thanks.
    • B.J. Porter

      Moderation Team Change   06/16/2017

      After fifteen years of volunteer moderation at SA, I will no longer be part of the moderation team. The decision to step aside is mine, and has been some time in the works but we did not wish to announce it in advance for a number of reasons. It's been fun, but I need my time back for other purposes now. The Underdawg admin account will not be monitored until further notice, as I will be relinquishing control of it along with my administrative privileges. Zapata will continue on as a moderator, and any concerns or issues can be directed to that account or to the Editor until further notice. Anyone interested in helping moderate the forums should reach out to Scot by sending a PM to the Editor account. Please note that I am not leaving the community, I am merely stepping aside from Admin responsibilities and privileges on the site.


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About P_Wop

  • Rank
  • Birthday 05/27/1955

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Location
    Bay Area, CA

Recent Profile Visitors

9,009 profile views
  1. Is anyone aware of any logging of radio traffic at the time. Seems to me that there should have been an immediate pan-pan call from one or both vessels. Anyone know?
  2. For anyone who asks why the boxship took half an hour to turn round, well, have you ever been on one of these things? Situation assessment on the bridge. Call the skipper. Get the chief engineer and his team woken and dressed and to engine room to prepare to change revs. Call chippy, and his mate. Sound the wells. Get a deck watch with the second officer dressed and instructed. How long does it take for them to walk 600 feet forward? Then damage assessment in the bow spaces, in the dark, possibly with blown bulkheads, perhaps 20 minutes. Chippy is up there too, getting ready to anchor if needed. Second calls the bridge from the bow spaces to tell captain we're not sinking. Now captain can decide what to do next. A half hour? Easy. It's magic that it was so quick.
  3. And, with respect, you don't want to be doing end-for-ends in a blow on anything much bigger than 32 feet unless you and your crew are pretty hot.
  4. What happens is that the stand-on vessel turns hard to starboard to try to avoid a collision. Which looked to be the case here. Big ships take a long time to start to show turn, even with a big rudder order, and it was possibly "last second" stuff. Again, not all facts are in, but this seems likely.
  5. Errr.... sadly, no. This is just a silly and avoidable collision between two ships - neither of which were under adequate command at the time.
  6. Cut six or even nine inches off the pole, and rivet the end back on. You won't notice the difference. But you will be able to gybe. If the pole is the same length as the foredeck from front of mast to headstay, you're good. It sounds like it's a "penalty pole" to match an oversize spinnaker. Cut it down. Put a good mark on the topping lift, and paint a fat strip on deck to tell the cockpit man when the lift has been blown just enough to clear the headstay and pulpit. Put another mark on the lift to tell him when the pole's up and horizontal. Just the two. All you need.
  7. Ah, yes, indeed..... Now that's the question.
  8. We've got two threads running on this, one here, and one started much earlier on GA. How about we combine them? http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/index.php?/topic/185055-uss-fitzgerald-collision-with-container-ship/&do=findComment&comment=5806330
  9. OK, here's my assessment, based on limited facts..... * Container ship is proceeding at planned economical speed on a largely ENE course at night with normal watch set. * Crowded waters, lots of shore lights. * 1/3 moon, fairly low in sky to the south, i.e. the other direction. * Grey USN vessel running to SE, with no lights, pretty well invisible to container ship. * USN vessel is somewhat stealthy on radar too, so target appears small, if any. Clutter control is probably turned up a bit. * Boxship spots them visually at last moment, orders hard turn to starboard. * Collision at about 60° angle, boxship port bow to USN ship starboard bridge structure, with boxship bulb penetrating below waterline. * Boxship calls all hands, makes preliminary damage assessment, which takes at least 15 minutes to get men out of structure and forward. * Boxship radios sea traffic control and asks permission to reverse course to assist injured vessel. * Boxship arrives near USN vessel, slows to a near stop and establishes that the situation is under control. * Boxship resumes course to port at reduced speed. Did I miss anything?
  10. Another interesting question, and one that will be pertinent. Was USS Fitzgerald carrying standard running lights? 3 white, 1 red, 1 green. In my (lengthy) experience at sea, in many cases warships don't.
  11. With respect, that will prove out to be absolute bollocks.
  12. Had they corrected their bridge clocks for summer time? Something awry here. Track looks like collision at point 1, then rapid turn to stbd, and a loop back to check for casualties, which would be the seaman's way of doing it. But facts will out.
  13. Not surprising she's taking in water. The bulb must have made a bloody great big hole. I expect the missing are down in that flooded accommodation area. Damn....
  14. I'll go with that scenario. Headings and speeds seems to be congruent with prudent seamanship after a suspected collision. But the facts will out.
  15. Latest news from BBC is that there may be 60+ people unaccounted for. This is so wrong.