Sign in to follow this  
nolatom

Don't impede the regatta (rowers)

Recommended Posts

Never claimed a canoe was a RAM. I was suggesting that a 20 meter long rowing eight in a narrow channel, with an effective beam of about 6 meters, about the same free board as a wok and the turning circle of the USS Ronald Reagan could conceivably claim RAM.  And before you start cutting and pasting, yes we all know that would require something that is sadly lacking among many posting here. A diamond and a pair of balls. You answered your own question. You are the over taking vessel and as always rule 2 should be considered. And BTW You were already the overtaking vessel before you caught up with him. 

What is a canoe under rule 18? Well it ain't a sailing, fishing, seaplane or wig. And that paddle looks like a simple machine. However the halyard tension on the leeward boat's jib indicates a certain lack of command...  

 

LB, you seem unhappy... I don't know who you are and my post was not directed at anything you've said, so I'm not sure why you think I was disputing anything you've said about 8's.

However, since you're taking such interest in what you think I'm saying maybe read what I am saying... I think clarification would be nice so that prior to entering the zone where one would reasonably be considered overtaking, you could get an inkling of who should be expected to do what... this would be to the benefit and safety of both the human powered vessel and the sail powered one since if they both think they're the stand on vessel then we are forced into last minute maneuvers. My issue is with the glaring oversight in the ColRegs, not anything you're saying.

I was trying out a new system of tensioning my jib halyard that day. It didn't work and I've since changed it. But good for you for making yourself feel better by throwing stones at others...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps a more productive, though less humorous, discussion would be:  What changes would you recommend to COLREGS or other local rules w.r.t. human powered craft?

Rowing in the fog this morning with only one sea lion monitoring my progress, both hands busy, thinking about safety, signaling, visibility (200 feet).  My biggest concern is our public servants.  Mostly inexperienced boaters, inside steering, usually running at high speed, on some mission to somewhere.

I'd really like a voice activated flash bang grenade on a short mast that would go off when I yell "OH SHIT", which I've always thought would be my dying words...

Maybe a signal / light that indicates "small manual powered craft with <5 knot speed capability".  Green over Green, Human machine?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, in the fog you are required to blow one long, two short if you are a sailing vessel [rule 35c] or various other not-too maneuverable vessels.  Rowboats not mentioned (surprise, surprise..)    Since rowers "may" carry the lights of a sailing vessel, they would give the sailboat fog signal?  You could use a bosun's whistle on your aerobic exhales?  You did mention you were signaling.

And in good viz, at night you'd still have the flare-up light, yes?  Supplemented by an "oh shit!" for vessels so equipped? ;-)

And a radar-reflector hat?  We knew those tinfoil hats would come in handy some day..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm kind of surprised about this debate when the answer is so obvious.

The colregs don't mention rowing boats, kayaks et al because nobody actually gives a damn about their status. They're like logs or other detritus, as long as it's not going to damage your boat if you hit them, no problem.

FKT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One change I would like to see regards jet skies. They should sit below wigs under rule 18, their speed should be limited to 4 knots within 200 miles of the coast line and they should display a day shape consisting of a ball above a cylinder above two horizontal balls. This should be displayed on top of the owners head. 

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you ride a jet ski you know you can be 100m away in seconds. When you are in a slow yacht & you see a jet ski driving erratically you think fuck this guys going to cause an accident.

I think the bigger threat is wankers in heavy 30-40' fibreglass cruisers who drive everywhere at 25knots digging a hole & throwing huge wake & even though they draw .5m they drive down the middle of the channel playing chicken with 30 foot yachts you need to be in the middle because they draw 2m. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With the wetted surface of the Pogo we should run the lights for a partially submerged object. Sadly in under 10 knots we are always the stand on vessel. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, nolatom said:

Well, in the fog you are required to blow one long, two short if you are a sailing vessel [rule 35c] or various other not-too maneuverable vessels.  Rowboats not mentioned (surprise, surprise..)    Since rowers "may" carry the lights of a sailing vessel, they would give the sailboat fog signal?  You could use a bosun's whistle on your aerobic exhales?  You did mention you were signaling.

And in good viz, at night you'd still have the flare-up light, yes?  Supplemented by an "oh shit!" for vessels so equipped? ;-)

And a radar-reflector hat?  We knew those tinfoil hats would come in handy some day..

I thought you were supposed to fire a gun every 2 minutes in fog, and at the quarterdeck of any large vessel not noticing you.   

9FC49151-45C2-4539-91BE-1FC658559BB7.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to line my hat with foil and see how good the radar signature is.  Thinking orthogonal flat brim hat is better than tarted up Dwight Yoakam for best reflection?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Kenny Dumas said:

I'm going to line my hat with foil and see how good the radar signature is.  Thinking orthogonal flat brim hat is better than tarted up Dwight Yoakam for best reflection?

I think a stovepipe hat would give the best reflected return. Or a topper

FB- Doug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Lark said:

I thought you were supposed to fire a gun every 2 minutes in fog, and at the quarterdeck of any large vessel not noticing you.   

9FC49151-45C2-4539-91BE-1FC658559BB7.jpeg

Warships often sound a bugle when at anchor in fog. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 22/12/2017 at 5:51 AM, nolatom said:

Well, in the fog you are required to blow one long, two short if you are a sailing vessel [rule 35c] or various other not-too maneuverable vessels.  Rowboats not mentioned (surprise, surprise..)   

No need for them to be specifically mentioned as they are power driven vessels. 

'Propelled by machinery.'

machine (n.)

1540s, "structure of any kind," from Middle French machine "device, contrivance," from Latin machina"machine, engine, military machine; device, trick; instrument" (source also of Spanish maquina, Italian macchina), from Greek makhana, Doric variant of Attic mekhane "device," from PIE *magh-ana- "that which enables," from root *magh- "to be able, have power." Main modern sense of "device made of moving parts for applying mechanical power" (1670s) probably grew out of mid-17c. senses of "apparatus, appliance" and "military siege-tower." In late 19c. slang the word was used for both "penis" and "vagina," one of the few so honored. 

 

Thus a person waving their Dick around on a foggy thread should also make one long blast. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given the increasing popularity of manual powered craft and the available technology of good batteries and LEDs, it sure would be nice to generate a new light signal for these craft to distinguish them from more able, faster craft.  They CAN be lit as a sailboat, or white all around, or flashlight, but it seems we could do better.  We really would like to communicate:  "I'm slow and probably not as seaworthy as you, but can stop on a dime.  Please hold your course but don't come to close or run me down.  My most likely evasive action is to stop or backup but I can't avoid you at any significant speed."

-SUPs are challenged by not having a good place to put a light, other than on top of your head.  That makes it impossible to have multiple lights with sectors to show travel direction.  

-Kayaks aren't much better

-Rowboats could light as sailboats, but have the additional issue that watch keeping forward is not as proficient as other craft.  And a white all-around is likely to hurt our night vision.  And wiring dinghys is a reliability challenge.

Preferable solution would be a single light not already allocated.  Maybe a single, solid blue, all-around, on top of your hat / helmet would work?  LEOs use blue flashing so might not be too confusing.  

I'm thinking about proposing this to our local rules.  Comments?  Better ideas?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Amber? Means ‘Caution’ to most...’ I’d say you’d want to exercise caution if there was flotsam in the area :) 

 But we’re still left with no clarity around sailboats converging with human powered  vessels

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

before you apply the IRPC at Sea, you need to check you are not in inland water I would think?

Passing a Gondola in Venice stb stb as per the IRPCS will get you fine quick smart

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, overdraft said:

Amber? Means ‘Caution’ to most...’ I’d say you’d want to exercise caution if there was flotsam in the area :) 

 But we’re still left with no clarity around sailboats converging with human powered  vessels

There is clarity in rule 2 as there is in every collision avoidance situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Coast Guard response relies on good seamanship.  Given the complexities of a bunch of human powered craft, I think writing a better rule(s) may not be possible. Just use good judgement.  So I'm in favor of more information, to enhance good judgement, hence the light proposition.  

We have flashing amber on the bow of barges under tow, but no solid amber, so might work.  But there's lots of shore lights that are pretty yellow so I'd be concerned about visibility when backlit by the city.  Maybe purple in honor of the diversity of the kayak community??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The coast guard response is to just refer to rule 2 of the IRPCS. Their 'ruleing' doesn't offer anything that isn't in the Col regs.Like someone else wanting narrow channels defined by some kind of size, the success of the Col regs is its simplicity. An additional light for paddle craft is however a good idea if it is a big enough issue where you are. We have flashing yellow strobes on our fast ferries in the river. These were chosen due to the amount of background lights. Same with the 'passive craft' rules. If there is enough of an issue in a local area then by all means make a relevant local rule, but the IMO don't need to review or make new rules just because a few ignorant sailors don't understand the IRPCS. Many don't understand the RRS either. Or the definition of a power driven vessel. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, By the lee said:

Image result for nude women rowers

Looks like a couple of 'oars. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Sailabout said:

before you apply the IRPC at Sea, you need to check you are not in inland water I would think?

Passing a Gondola in Venice stb stb as per the IRPCS will get you fine quick smart

In my experience it doesn't matter what an Italian male is driving- they hate being overtaken.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2017-12-22 at 9:20 PM, LB 15 said:

There is clarity in rule 2 as there is in every collision avoidance situation.

so by your reasoning the sections of the colregs which prescribe differing obligations to differing types of craft are redundant... Rule 2 is so beautifully drafted that it doesn't matter what type of craft it is, and the burden of powered craft to keep clear of sailing vessels is an irrelevant nicety that doesn't help us avoid collisions and therefore doesn't need to be extended to human powered craft... have i got that right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you post Craigslist you can list any craft as human powered.I haven’t seen any swimmers for sale yet, but I never look in services..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, overdraft said:

so by your reasoning the sections of the colregs which prescribe differing obligations to differing types of craft are redundant... Rule 2 is so beautifully drafted that it doesn't matter what type of craft it is, and the burden of powered craft to keep clear of sailing vessels is an irrelevant nicety that doesn't help us avoid collisions and therefore doesn't need to be extended to human powered craft... have i got that right?

No you have nothing right. But thanks for playing anyway.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, LB 15 said:

No you have nothing right. But thanks for playing anyway.

Remarkable.  That's the most succinct autobiography I have ever read.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, monsoon said:

Remarkable.  That's the most succinct autobiography I have ever read.

Have you tried sitting on a soft pillow cup cake?  Butthurt must be so hard to have at Christmas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so basically eveyone posting here would prefer it if the colregs gave some international clarity around human powered vessels particularly as they are such a fast growing segment and are now a likelihood on most waterways, but stating this is interpreted by LB 15 as some kind of personal attack which he must rebutt by saying that the colregs need no enhancement for modern times and everyone but him is a douche bag... meh, time to watch the SH start!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/21/2017 at 5:34 PM, overdraft said:

LB, you seem unhappy... I don't know who you are and my post was not directed at anything you've said, so I'm not sure why you think I was disputing anything you've said about 8's.

However, since you're taking such interest in what you think I'm saying maybe read what I am saying... I think clarification would be nice so that prior to entering the zone where one would reasonably be considered overtaking, you could get an inkling of who should be expected to do what... this would be to the benefit and safety of both the human powered vessel and the sail powered one since if they both think they're the stand on vessel then we are forced into last minute maneuvers. My issue is with the glaring oversight in the ColRegs, not anything you're saying.

I was trying out a new system of tensioning my jib halyard that day. It didn't work and I've since changed it. But good for you for making yourself feel better by throwing stones at others...

LB 15 is an institution around here.  Some love him, some hate him. 

LB 15 uses ribbed condoms inside out, so he gets the pleasure. 

MacGyver can build an airplane out of gum and paper clips. LB 15 can kill him and take it. 

LB 15 doesn't read books. He stares them down until he gets the information he wants. 

If you ask LB 15 what time it is, he always answers "Two seconds till". After you ask "Two seconds to what?", he roundhouse kicks you in the face. 

LB 15 lost his virginity before his dad did. 

Since 1940, the year LB 15 was born, roundhouse kick related deaths have increased 13,000 percent. 

LB 15 sheds his skin twice a year. 

LB 15 once challenged Lance Armstrong in a "Who has more testicles?" contest. LB 15 won by 5. 

There are no steroids in baseball. Just players LB 15 has breathed on. 

When LB 15 goes to donate blood, he declines the syringe, and instead requests a hand gun and a bucket. 

Pluto is actually an orbiting group of British soldiers from the American Revolution who entered space after the Chuck gave them a roundhouse kick to the face. 

LB 15 does not teabag the ladies. He potato-sacks them. 

According to the Encyclopedia Brittanica, the Native American "Trail of Tears" has been redefined as anywhere that LB 15 walks. 

In an average living room there are 1,242 objects LB 15 could use to kill you, including the room itself. 

The LB 15 military unit was not used in the game Civilization 4, because a single LB 15 could defeat the entire combined nations of the world in one turn. 

LB 15 doesn't shower, he only takes blood baths. 

Time waits for no man. Unless that man is LB 15. 

LB 15 can hit you so hard that he can actually alter your DNA. Decades from now your descendants will occasionally clutch their heads and yell "What The Hell was That?". 

In the Bible, Jesus turned water into wine. But then LB 15 turned that wine into beer. 

LB 15 is the only human being to display the Heisenberg uncertainty principle - you can never know both exactly where and how quickly he will roundhouse-kick you in the face. 

Faster than a speeding bullet... More powerful than a locomotive... Able to leap tall buildings in a single bound... These are some of LB 15's warm-up exercises. 

LB 15 is not hung like a horse. Horses are hung like LB 15. 

Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles is based on a true story: LB 15 once swallowed a turtle whole, and when he crapped it out, the turtle was six feet tall and had learned karate. 

Someone once tried to tell LB 15 that roundhouse kicks aren't the best way to kick someone. This has been recorded by historians as the worst mistake anyone has ever made. 

LB 15 has two speeds: Walk and Kill. 

LB 15 once shot down a German fighter plane with his finger. By yelling "Bang!" 

The opening scene of the movie "Saving Private Ryan" is loosely based on games of dodgeball LB 15 played in second grade. 

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool LB 15 once and he will roundhouse kick you in the face. 

LB 15 originally appeared in the "Street Fighter II" video game, but was removed by Beta Testers because every button caused him to do a roundhouse kick. When asked about this glitch, Norris replied "That's no glitch." 

If you spell LB 15 in Scrabble, you win. Forever. 

Someone once videotaped LB 15 getting pissed off. It was called Walker: Texas Chain Saw Masacre. 

LB 15 will attain statehood in 2009. His state flower will be the Magnolia. 

A handicapped parking sign does not signify that this spot is for handicapped people. It is actually in fact a warning, that the spot belongs to LB 15 and that you will be handicapped if you park there. 

LB 15 doesn't wash his clothes. He disembowels them. 

LB 15 doesn't churn butter. He roundhouse kicks the cows and the butter comes straight out. 

Police label anyone attacking LB 15 as a Code 45-11.... A suicide. 

LB 15 is the only man to ever defeat a brick wall in a game of tennis. 

What was going through the minds of all of LB 15' victims before they died? His shoe. 

LB 15 once ate three 72 oz. steaks in one hour. He spent the first 45 minutes having sex with his waitress. 

 

But nobody has him on ignore.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding this debate on the right-of-way rules for oar-powered vessels, I'd like to note that there are right-of-way rules for rowing shells engaged in a head race where each boat does not have its own lane  The rules are not consistent with COLREGS.  It is the boat that is being overtaken that must give way.  This is likely because rowing shell classes that have no coxswain have nobody looking forward.  The following is an excerpt from the rules for the Head of the Charles.

"When a passing crew (The Passer) closes to within one length of open water on the boat being overtaken, it is the responsibility of the slower crew to yield the line chosen by the Passer in a timely manner. The Yield should be completed by the time the overtaking boat has closed within ½ boat length."

http://www.hocr.org/the-regatta/competitors/rules-and-regulations/general-responsibilities-rules-of-racing/

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, LB 15 said:

Have you tried sitting on a soft pillow cup cake?  Butthurt must be so hard to have at Christmas.

Don't be silly, why would I sit on a cup cake? I've never tried 'butthurt'. Why is it so hard to have at Xmas? Some Ozzie specialty that you all savor at Xmas dinner? Is it like duck but from downunder?

Sorry for all the questions, but there is much of your culture that I'm in the dark about!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/25/2017 at 5:49 PM, captain_crunch said:

Regarding this debate on the right-of-way rules for oar-powered vessels, I'd like to note that there are right-of-way rules for rowing shells engaged in a head race where each boat does not have its own lane  The rules are not consistent with COLREGS.  It is the boat that is being overtaken that must give way.  This is likely because rowing shell classes that have no coxswain have nobody looking forward.  The following is an excerpt from the rules for the Head of the Charles.

"When a passing crew (The Passer) closes to within one length of open water on the boat being overtaken, it is the responsibility of the slower crew to yield the line chosen by the Passer in a timely manner. The Yield should be completed by the time the overtaking boat has closed within ½ boat length."

http://www.hocr.org/the-regatta/competitors/rules-and-regulations/general-responsibilities-rules-of-racing/

 

 

No, it would be a poor steerer who was not aware of boats that are ahead of them. The issue here is a racing issue, if a boat has caught you, they have already beaten you, and you should be getting out of their way. Maybe a novice sculler gets some latitude, but if you steering a light 4 or pair, your awareness of traffic makes a difference, and steering a head race is a load easier that steering in regular river traffic.

I've never raced on the Charles but on the tideway if you are steering, current is king,  and you had better know where the boat should be positioned for maximum advantage. I used to have all the main position marks on the tideway memorised for flood and ebb, and for some critical points in between. You also need to be willing to fight for your lane, coxes will push you around given half a chance, and your crew needs to know if you are having to push back.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎12‎/‎22‎/‎2017 at 3:11 PM, LB 15 said:

No need for them to be specifically mentioned as they are power driven vessels. 

'Propelled by machinery.'

machine (n.)

1540s, "structure of any kind," from Middle French machine "device, contrivance," from Latin machina"machine, engine, military machine; device, trick; instrument" (source also of Spanish maquina, Italian macchina), from Greek makhana, Doric variant of Attic mekhane "device," from PIE *magh-ana- "that which enables," from root *magh- "to be able, have power." Main modern sense of "device made of moving parts for applying mechanical power" (1670s) probably grew out of mid-17c. senses of "apparatus, appliance" and "military siege-tower." In late 19c. slang the word was used for both "penis" and "vagina," one of the few so honored. 

 

Thus a person waving their Dick around on a foggy thread should also make one long blast. 

 

Yet they are specifically mentioned in the lighting rule, as "vessel under oars", and given the same light display as a.......

 

sailboat.   No "steaming light" showing forward. 

You're giving the drafters too much credit.  In terms or steering and sailing rules, they likely just didn't think "rowboats" rated a ranking in the "responsibilities between vessels" rule, at least in daylight.  Or just didn't think about it at all, except to specify that they shall be lighted at night, though not as a power-driven vessel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, JohnMB said:

No, it would be a poor steerer who was not aware of boats that are ahead of them. The issue here is a racing issue, if a boat has caught you, they have already beaten you, and you should be getting out of their way. Maybe a novice sculler gets some latitude, but if you steering a light 4 or pair, your awareness of traffic makes a difference, and steering a head race is a load easier that steering in regular river traffic.

I've never raced on the Charles but on the tideway if you are steering, current is king,  and you had better know where the boat should be positioned for maximum advantage. I used to have all the main position marks on the tideway memorised for flood and ebb, and for some critical points in between. You also need to be willing to fight for your lane, coxes will push you around given half a chance, and your crew needs to know if you are having to push back.

Thank you for the explanation.  It makes sense in a rowing race that the boat being overtaken has to yield the right of way.  If the boat ahead were allowed to block, he could easily make it impossible to pass.

Regarding being a poor steerer, that's me.  Despite using two mirrors attached to my rowing cap, I have trouble avoiding bridge abutments.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, captain_crunch said:

Thank you for the explanation.  It makes sense in a rowing race that the boat being overtaken has to yield the right of way.  If the boat ahead were allowed to block, he could easily make it impossible to pass.

Regarding being a poor steerer, that's me.  Despite using two mirrors attached to my rowing cap, I have trouble avoiding bridge abutments.

 

I understand your name here now.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 28/12/2017 at 12:58 AM, nolatom said:

Yet they are specifically mentioned in the lighting rule, as "vessel under oars", and given the same light display as a.......

 

sailboat.   No "steaming light" showing forward. 

You're giving the drafters too much credit.  In terms or steering and sailing rules, they likely just didn't think "rowboats" rated a ranking in the "responsibilities between vessels" rule, at least in daylight.  Or just didn't think about it at all, except to specify that they shall be lighted at night, though not as a power-driven vessel.

Seriously? Care to name another type of vessel that doesn't fit into one of the existing definitions for the purposes of rule 18? Or are you now claiming a vessel under oars is a sailing vessel? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎12‎/‎29‎/‎2017 at 5:18 PM, LB 15 said:

Seriously? Care to name another type of vessel that doesn't fit into one of the existing definitions for the purposes of rule 18? Or are you now claiming a vessel under oars is a sailing vessel? 

Seriously.  

Others?  Surfboards? rafts?  Basically nondescript "no-account" craft, low-speed, little or no commercial involvement, forgettable to the drafters.

Not claiming it's a sailing vessel since no sail, but being allowed to carry sail lights militates against it being a power-driven vessel.  If the drafters had thought as you contend, they'd have prescribed/allowed that lighting configuration, instead of sailing-vessel lights. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, nolatom said:

Seriously.  

Others?  Surfboards? rafts?  Basically nondescript "no-account" craft, low-speed, little or no commercial involvement, forgettable to the drafters.

Not claiming it's a sailing vessel since no sail, but being allowed to carry sail lights militates against it being a power-driven vessel.  If the drafters had thought as you contend, they'd have prescribed/allowed that lighting configuration, instead of sailing-vessel lights. 

When the earliest form of 'rules' began to be formed by the admiralty 400 years ago there were only two kinds of vessels- oar and sail power. Unlikely that they were 'overlooked' read the definitions again. If they were 'overlooked' why would they be refered to in the lights section? The lights is just a question of practicality. No structure to hang a mast head light off. In fact you are partially correct - at night a vessel under oars could only be interpreted as a sailing vessel and treated us such under rule 18. By day however they are clearly to the observer being propelled by machinery.  Surfboards are arguably being used for transportation on water and would be treated under rule two (as ever situation requires).  

Fail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A surfboard is powered vessel when propelled by human arms. When you fall off the board and swim back to it, you are human powered. At least I think that’s the way to interpret the rule. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, LB 15 said:

When the earliest form of 'rules' began to be formed by the admiralty 400 years ago there were only two kinds of vessels- oar and sail power. Unlikely that they were 'overlooked' read the definitions again. If they were 'overlooked' why would they be refered to in the lights section? The lights is just a question of practicality. No structure to hang a mast head light off. In fact you are partially correct - at night a vessel under oars could only be interpreted as a sailing vessel and treated us such under rule 18. By day however they are clearly to the observer being propelled by machinery.  Surfboards are arguably being used for transportation on water and would be treated under rule two (as ever situation requires).  

Fail.

You had three questions, hombre. 

1)  Was I serious?    yes.

2  Name other vessels that aren't included in the rule 18 rankings, aside from rowboats? Done.  You may not have liked it, but they exist.  And aren't mentioned by type or name in the Rules.

3)  Was I "now claiming" rowboats are sailing vessels?   No, and reason given.

 

I shall leave the grading of both of us to others.  You might consider that as well.

 

Since you brought up the rules of 400 years ago (or 300 or 250 for that matter, before external or internal combustion engine machinery), what did those rules say about sail versus oars, since those were the only two choices back then?  Which stood-on and which give-way?

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, nolatom said:

I shall leave the grading of both of us to others.  You might consider that as well.

You may care deeply how you are 'graded' by a bunch of armchair experts on here but I couldn't give a fuck. But I have given you a like anyway cupcake. Feel better now? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To close the loop on this . . . .
The USCG, RYA and DMA (3 maritime authorities I have contacts with) have gotten back to me.


TL:DR They all three agreed that:
(1)    Oar driven vessels are neither power vessels nor RAM.
(2)    It would be a mistake to assume that rule 18 is an exhaustive listing of all possible crossings. It is nowhere stated that is intended to be an exhaustive list and there are both part C specified light configurations, and fundamental vessel types, not mentioned/listed in 18.
(3)    The simple language general practical advice suggested, for general recreational vessels, when encountering an oar driven vessel, is that you should assume that (a) you should avoid (both vessels are technically give way) and (b) that the oar driven vessel is “less able than most other vessels”. 


Local regulations, specific colreg situations (like overtaking) and specific vessel interactions (very fast and able oar vessels crossing very slow and unable sail just for instance) would affect #3. As the USCG wrote “Ultimately, the issue would fall to what would be required by the ordinary practice of seamen, or by the special circumstances of the case (Rule 2), and, the notion that they are less able than most other vessels.”

I asked about court cases, and there have ofc been several related to collisions involving oar vessels. In all cases (that anyone I spoke to was aware of) the court took the direct language of the colregs and applied it directly . . . . and did not try or have to make 'ungrounded assumptions' (like oars must be power because they have to be somewhere on the 18 list). 


It was mentioned to me that the above situation is not an ‘accident’, nor were ‘oars forgotten’. Instead it was actively arrived at as the best solution.  Apparently, prior to 1972, oars were specifically mentioned (separate from power driven – eg just for example “any boat designed to be propelled by machinery, oars, paddles or wind action upon a sail for navigation on the water”. 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, estarzinger said:

To close the loop on this . . . .
The USCG, RYA and DMA (3 maritime authorities I have contacts with) have gotten back to me.


TL:DR They all three agreed that:
(1)    Oar driven vessels are neither power vessels nor RAM.
(2)    It would be a mistake to assume that rule 18 is an exhaustive listing of all possible crossings. It is nowhere stated that is intended to be an exhaustive list and there are both part C specified light configurations, and fundamental vessel types, not mentioned/listed in 18.
(3)    The simple language general practical advice suggested, for general recreational vessels, when encountering an oar driven vessel, is that you should assume that (a) you should avoid (both vessels are technically give way) and (b) that the oar driven vessel is “less able than most other vessels”. 


Local regulations, specific colreg situations (like overtaking) and specific vessel interactions (very fast and able oar vessels crossing very slow and unable sail just for instance) would affect #3. As the USCG wrote “Ultimately, the issue would fall to what would be required by the ordinary practice of seamen, or by the special circumstances of the case (Rule 2), and, the notion that they are less able than most other vessels.”

I asked about court cases, and there have ofc been several related to collisions involving oar vessels. In all cases (that anyone I spoke to was aware of) the court took the direct language of the colregs and applied it directly . . . . and did not try or have to make 'ungrounded assumptions' (like oars must be power because they have to be somewhere on the 18 list). 


It was mentioned to me that the above situation is not an ‘accident’, nor were ‘oars forgotten’. Instead it was actively arrived at as the best solution.  Apparently, prior to 1972, oars were specifically mentioned (separate from power driven – eg just for example “any boat designed to be propelled by machinery, oars, paddles or wind action upon a sail for navigation on the water”. 
 

Care to name your source at the RYA?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Crickets? Still waiting for the source proporting to represent the RYA. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, estarzinger said:

To close the loop on this . . . .

Close the loop? Clearly as your towering, porcelain ego can't stand being questioned, just for fun lets examine your little holiday project in some detail..
The USCG, RYA and DMA (3 maritime authorities I have contacts with) have gotten back to me.

Well so you claim, but of course a claim that 'Closes the loop'  requires proof. Regardless  any USCG opinion is hardly definitive. It has no jurisdiction outside of your territories and any organisation that quantifies an entry level near coastal qualification by the number of people on board indicates a certain lack of real world understanding of the skill set required.

The RYA I will cover shortly. 

 DMA? Danish Music Awards? Dance Masters of America? Maybe Dietary Managers Association? Of course you might mean the Danish Martime Authority in which case it might carry some credibility (if true), but if you mean Myanmar Department of Marine Administration then Bwaahahahahahahahaha.

Didn't the North Korean maritime authority get back to you? What about the Iranians? Surly they were open over the Christmas holiday period?


TL:DR (Too long; didn't read?)

They all three agreed that:
(1)    Oar driven vessels are neither power vessels nor RAM.

So to be crystal clear, you are claiming that an unnamed source, purporting to represent the RYA, categorically stated that, in the RYA's opinion, a vessel under oars is NOT a power driven vessel? As I asked before, name your 'contact'. As I have everyone who would be in a position to speak about this topic on behalf of the RYA's number in my phone it will take one call to verify your claim. So who was it? You have chosen to bring the RYA into this so now you need to put up, sunshine. Name your contact.


(2)    It would be a mistake to assume that rule 18 is an exhaustive listing of all possible crossings. It is nowhere stated that is intended to be an exhaustive list and there are both part C specified light configurations, and fundamental vessel types, not mentioned/listed in 18.

They all agreed that rule 18 is not (as the name of the rule states) a definitive guide to vessels responsibilities towards each other? Hmmm. Sure they did. Did the name another example mentioned in the lights annex that doesn't fall under rule 18?


(3)    The simple language general practical advice suggested, for general recreational vessels, when encountering an oar driven vessel, is that you should assume that (a) you should avoid (both vessels are technically give way) and (b) that the oar driven vessel is “less able than most other vessels”. 

WTF does 'simple language' have to do with this discussion? I have stated that, IMEO, under the IRPCS definitions a vessel under oars is a power driven vessel, and you have claimed I am wrong. Not asking for 'simple language general practical advice', just facts. The 'simple language general practical advice' they have allegedly offered is already covered under rule 2.


Local regulations, specific colreg situations (like overtaking) and specific vessel interactions (very fast and able oar vessels crossing very slow and unable sail just for instance) would affect #3.

'unable sail'? Do you mean a sailing vessel that, due to some exceptional circumstance is unable to manoeuvre as required by these Rules and is therefore unable to keep out of the way of another vessel? Now I wonder what that might be?

As the USCG wrote “Ultimately, the issue would fall to what would be required by the ordinary practice of seamen, or by the special circumstances of the case (Rule 2), and, the notion that they are less able than most other vessels.”

Yes we both understand rule 2, but that doesn't specifically prevent them, or any other power driven vessel, from being a power driven vessel. (The term “power-driven vessel” means any vessel propelled by machinery.)  Rule 2 should be applied in every potential collision situation.

I asked about court cases, and there have ofc been several related to collisions involving oar vessels. In all cases (that anyone I spoke to was aware of) the court took the direct language of the colregs and applied it directly . . . . and did not try or have to make 'ungrounded assumptions' (like oars must be power because they have to be somewhere on the 18 list).

I would suggest that would be because rule 2 'Trumps' (your word) rule 18 in each case and the definition was probably never even raised. Ungrounded assumptions? Like 'Propelled by machinery'? Nice bit of cherry picking there old mate but it won't work with me. I would love to have heard how you posed your question.


It was mentioned to me that the above situation is not an ‘accident’, nor were ‘oars forgotten’.

I never said they were, in fact I argued that they were not. They are clearly addressed in the definitions section.

Instead it was actively arrived at as the best solution.  Apparently, prior to 1972, oars were specifically mentioned (separate from power driven – eg just for example “any boat designed to be propelled by machinery, oars, paddles or wind action upon a sail for navigation on the water”. 

And after 1972 (or in reality 1977 when the Colregs were actually adopted)  a vessel under oars no longer required its own definition because it is 'propelled by machinery'. (again-The term “power-driven vessel” means ANY vessel propelled by machinery.)  .There are many other forms of this that aren't specifically mentioned. Props, jets, nozzles, paddle wheels,  and, yes oars. BTW how does a rule that has been replaced give credibility to your argument about the current rules?

Want to try again? Now about your contact at the RYA...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's the USCG opinion, see item 13. Basically says what Evans says

https://www.navcen.uscg.gov/?pageName=navRulesFAQ

You seem to think rowing boats are either RIAM or power vessels. Since the COLREGs don't seem to address them except for lights, where is your citation or rule that you seem to think everybody owes you? 

Simple answer: don't run over the row boats. Keep out of the way of each other.

Troll.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Zonker said:

Here's the USCG opinion, see item 13. Basically says what Evans says

https://www.navcen.uscg.gov/?pageName=navRulesFAQ

You seem to think rowing boats are either RIAM or power vessels. Since the COLREGs don't seem to address them except for lights, where is your citation or rule that you seem to think everybody owes you? 

Simple answer: don't run over the row boats. Keep out of the way of each other.

Troll.

 

 Your cite, nor anything your hero has posted have shown me to be wrong. How is this for a rule? The term “power-driven vessel” means ANY vessel propelled by machinery.

You not being able to understand that doesn't make me a troll. This is a discussion. Trust me cup cake, you will know when I am trolling. 

And why do you 'mericans think the USCG is the font of all knowledge? Anyway where does it say that a vessel under oars is not a power driven vessel?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Very interesting.
 
 
Although a vessel under oars may be lit as a sailing vessel, one should not infer that they are considered to be a sailing vessel for other Rules (i.e. Rule 9, 10, 12, 18 or 35). Ultimately, the issue of whether a vessel under oars is the give way or stand-on vessel would fall to what would be required by the ordinary practice of seamen, or by the special circumstances of the case (Rule 2), and, the notion that they are less able than most other vessels.
 
Rule 2 states the following.
 
(a) Nothing in these Rules shall exonerate any vessel, or the owner, master, or crew thereof, from the consequences of any neglect to comply with these Rules or of the neglect of any precaution which may be required by the ordinary practice of seamen, or by the special circumstances of the case.
(b) In construing and complying with these Rules due regard shall be had to all dangers of navigation and collision and to any special circumstances, including the limitations of the vessels involved, which may make a departure from these Rules necessary to avoid immediate danger.
 
This leaves open for interpretation what "the ordinary practice of seamen" would require.
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why'd you guys have to hit the hornets nest after things had finally quieted down?   It was a closed enough loop....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well if you keep the hornets busy over here they don't F-up other good threads!  :)

This bunch of hornets does seem to enjoy a tempest in a teapot.  Kinda funny when you think about who they are in real life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, LB 15 said:

 Your cite, nor anything your hero has posted have shown me to be wrong. How is this for a rule? The term “power-driven vessel” means ANY vessel propelled by machinery.

You not being able to understand that doesn't make me a troll. This is a discussion. Trust me cup cake, you will know when I am trolling. 

And why do you 'mericans think the USCG is the font of all knowledge? Anyway where does it say that a vessel under oars is not a power driven vessel?

LB is still right on this one from what I’m reading through all of the info. I raced shells and coxed my share of varsity 8 races in the day...on the Schuylkill River in Philadelphia during the early 80’s. It was extremely hard to keep the shell from veering to starboard when all the seat meat were right handed. No amount of rudder could negate the extra energy and I had to yell “Port!” to them during a race to keep them in balance so we could go in a straight line. Two or three shells over rowing and it was an absolute pileup in the lanes. 

Rowing boats are truly machine powered powered and shells are most likely to be considered RAIM under any circumstance. 

He rest of this is like pulling teeth...

Depends on which dentist needs the mortgage paid...

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, captain_crunch said:
 
This leaves open for interpretation what "the ordinary practice of seamen" would require.

My interpretation would be common sense,  Avoid the other vessel. But I am waiting to hear back from my contacts at the IMO,  WOXI and the LMA. (Libyan Maritime Authority.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, nolatom said:

Why'd you guys have to hit the hornets nest after things had finally quieted down?   It was a closed enough loop....

I paid for a $10 argument...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, overlay said:

More importantly what lights do I require for this?

father-and-son-in-paddle-boat-picture-id

Bwaahahahahahah

That would be Keystone Lights

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If anyone here holds a 'different opinion' from what I posted above - then they should take it up and argue/debate it with the maritime authorities (because that is what I posted, NOT my opinion but the consensus judgement of 3 authorities). . . . . or take a (large fast agile) sail boat on a near miss of a row boat and take them to court claiming they should have given way because they are a power boat and see how you do. The USCG is easy to contact.  The RYA said they would be happy to discuss it with any member, but not with a non-member. And DMA will discuss it with either a citizen or someone 'known' (that was their language - meaning someone they know is serious and involved).  I see no reason to either defend or debate the maritime authorities judgement - it is what it is, which is a clear and straight forward reading of the colregs without making assumptions or reading 'between the lines'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any "authority" attempting to persuade me that a rowed boat is a 'power boat' will cease to have my respect. I might be a rookie - but I'm not stupid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, captain_crunch said:

This leaves open for interpretation what "the ordinary practice of seamen" would require.

Avoid a collision at all costs

Take all necessary steps to avoid a collision

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given that "kayaks and canoes are classified as vessels under oars", unless a paddle is machinery, it seems conflicted to assert that vessels under oars are power driven.  How do you reconcile that LB?  Specifically, is a paddle a machine?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, estarzinger said:

If anyone here holds a 'different opinion' from what I posted above - then they should take it up and argue/debate it with the maritime authorities (because that is what I posted, NOT my opinion but the consensus judgement of 3 authorities). . . . . or take a (large fast agile) sail boat on a near miss of a row boat and take them to court claiming they should have given way because they are a power boat and see how you do. The USCG is easy to contact.  The RYA said they would be happy to discuss it with any member, but not with a non-member. And DMA will discuss it with either a citizen or someone 'known' (that was their language - meaning someone they know is serious and involved).  I see no reason to either defend or debate the maritime authorities judgement - it is what it is, which is a clear and straight forward reading of the colregs without making assumptions or reading 'between the lines'.

Exactly. Like the definition of a power driven vessel. No reading between the lines required. So did the RYA give you an opinion or not? Your post indicates clearly that they did and I am happy to, and intend to, discuss it with them. Been a member since 1995. Just waiting for the name of your 'contact' that gave you this 'judgment'. PM it to me if you like. Or are you pretending to have me on ignore again? Oh course taking 3 (well 3 according to you anyway - you appear to be a  reluctant to substantiate your claims) opinions (as you should know, a judgement is something only a court can give) and blending them into one is an opinion. Even the most inexperienced Barrister would tear you a new arsehole with a statement like that.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, seabell said:

Any "authority" attempting to persuade me that a rowed boat is a 'power boat' will cease to have my respect, - but I'm stupid.

By the Authority vested in me by the Administration of Sailing Anarchy, I have relinquished you of all respect for me in regards to the the fact that a rowed boat is not a power boat, but , is in fact, a powered vessel. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Kenny Dumas said:

Given that "kayaks and canoes are classified as vessels under oars", unless a paddle is machinery, it seems conflicted to assert that vessels under oars are power driven.  How do you reconcile that LB?  Specifically, is a paddle a machine?

Yes, for the same reason a wheel barrow is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, seabell said:

Any "authority" attempting to persuade me that a rowed boat is a 'power boat' will cease to have my respect. I might be a rookie - but I'm not stupid.

Gosh how will I ever recover? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sail4beer said:

By the Authority vested in me by my own arsehole, I have relinquished you of all respect for me in regards to the the fact that a rowed boat is not a power boat, but , is in fact, a powered vessel. 

Huh? Sorry, does not compute. Your rather strange assumption that you are held in any respect is fallacious.

1 hour ago, LB 15 said:

Gosh how will I ever recover? 

Oh dear, snowdrop, your vanity seems to have propelled an assumption that I was referring to you.  Get this, sugarplum: I don''t have the faintest idea who you are or what you pretend to be. If you choose to believe that oars are capable of 'powering' a boat, that's just lovely. And pedals 'power' a bicycle - right, Skip?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Much Kruger/Dunning on display here!

Just sayin'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You choose to believe in a God if you want. That is a definition of choice.

If the oars aren’t powering the boat, then what is?

My mind sends a signal to muscles to pull an oar or swing a paddle. Therefore, my vessel is under mental power? Cool!!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Ukuri said:

Much Kruger/Dunning on display here!

Just sayin'.

Isn't that a law firm?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, seabell said:

Oh dear, snowdrop, your vanity seems to have propelled an assumption that I was referring to you.  Get this, sugarplum: I don''t have the faintest idea who you are or what you pretend to be. If you choose to believe that oars are capable of 'powering' a boat, that's just lovely. And pedals 'power' a bicycle - right, Skip?

Sugarplum? That is great- ok if I use it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Captain Gigi said:

@LB 15: Happy New Year, sweetums.

Gigi! And to you to. Where ya been? How was the leg on Scallywag?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Ukuri said:

Much Kruger/Dunning on display here!

Just sayin'.

Bit harsh mate. He is doing his best.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Captain Gigi said:

There you go again, darlin', saying things I know nothing about. But I had a good vacation over the last four weeks, if that's what you're asking.

#metoo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Captain Gigi said:

@LB 15: You know how I love to document, screenshoot everything in social media, don't you (rhetorical question)? 

Yes we all remember in your previous incarnation as a 'World renowned yachting photographer' you were always claiming you were being sexually harassed and threatening to sue people. How is victim hood working out for you this time? Had any takers?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Captain Gigi said:

Got me mixed up with someone else, sweetie. Never claimed anything you did or didn't do. It was you, who claimed I was harassing you, if I recall correctly. Slow night for you, bunky?

Its the middle of the afternoon here my little fruit cake. You do struggle to recall things correctly, like which sock you are logged on as and who you are arguing with. So what your opinion on this topic? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Classic Nicole. threaten, delete, repeat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, LB 15 said:

Isn't that a law firm?

Really? Well bugger me, metaphorically of course. Haven't they done well for a couple of old tightheads.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Screw powered vessel and another dreamer. The guy that invented the outboard motor started with one of those 100+ years ago and it’s pretty much identical to this one below, technologically speaking. 

 

5D3769EB-536C-47A0-9B11-4F9FBDCE4813.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, nolatom said:

No you didn't......

Yes I did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/10/2018 at 9:15 AM, estarzinger said:

 DMA will discuss it with either a citizen 

With their Human rights record I don't think a citizen of the Republic of the Union of Myanmar questioning a government official will end well...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, overlay said:

So how does this fit into the scheme of things ?

 

To quote him 'It has mechanics but no engine' Power driven vessel. A stupid one but one nevertheless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, seabell said:

 And pedals 'power' a bicycle - right, Skip?

In areas classified as Wilderness in the US bicycles are not allowed because they are considered mechanized vehicles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, ride2live said:

In areas classified as Wilderness in the US bicycles are not allowed because they are considered mechanized vehicles.

We have a bird sanctuary near by that we are banned from riding our bikes through, yet walking your dog is fine. 'Tiss an odd world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, LB 15 said:

We have a bird sanctuary near by that we are banned from riding our bikes through, yet walking your dog is fine. 'Tiss an odd world.

Ask them if it's OK to ride the dog then. I like ridiculous rules, you get to ask such innocent questions and watch the reactions of officialdom.

FKT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

Ask them if it's OK to ride the dog then. I like ridiculous rules, you get to ask such innocent questions and watch the reactions of officialdom.

FKT

black_newfoundland_dog_carting.jpg??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this