• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Breamerly

  1. 29 minutes ago, kent_island_sailor said:

    If I lived around there those buoys would move about 50 feet closer to the marina about once a week ;)

    All I'll say - since given my whole thread on this kind of thing, I'm pretty sure everyone knows my stance - is that a battery powered angle grinder will go through a 3/8" chain link in just over thirty seconds. 

    Don't ask how I know.

    • Like 1

  2. 1 hour ago, kent_island_sailor said:

    a sailboat pulls up to the fuel dock, takes on 300 gallons of water, dumps trash, and then buys 4 gallons of diesel while a bunch of powerboats trying to buy 500 gallons of fuel each circle around.

    It me


    (In reality I usually get 15-20 gallons of gas, which is a slightly bigger purchase, but still chump change compared to Smokey Belcher and his floating diesel pot, which might suck a couple hundred gallons in one go - that said, it obviously comes with the game of operating a public accommodation - serving cheapskates like me is the price you pay to serve the big spenders)

    • Like 1

  3. 4 hours ago, kent_island_sailor said:

    Almost no one "owns" a house in the sense they paid cash for it, I would assume most houses are bought with mortgages.

    It's such a tired old saw to waggle a finger at the rest of society this way, all balanced on some hair-splitting: you don't really own that house, you sap!

    Ownership is defined in most legal cases and also in common use as exclusive right to exclusively control the enjoyment, employment, and disposal of an asset. This is not the same as a legal interest in a property.

    Even if you're underwater on a zero-down ARM mortgage, you own the house. You get to use it, no one else does, and you can sell it or bulldoze it and build condominiums or a church to the god-emperor Zod or a giant stucco cock: the bank has no say. The bank manager can't come swim in your pool. They can't decide it would be better for them if you did AirBNB with the backyard cottage. They can't (unlike an HOA) so much as ask you to keep the lawn mowed.

    If you give a third party a legal interest in a property in exchange for a loan and then fail to make the payments, sure - they can ask a court to convert that legal interest to ownership, or to force a sale so that they can get their share of the value back. But until the judge's gavel goes bang they are not the owner.

    In fact, nothing could be a better example of this than an underwater loan: try giving the bank 'their' house back then.

    Interestingly, this is actually kind of a reciprocal of the standard that @Steam Flyer and others are applying here - that essentially someone's full-time personal use of a property should confer a different type of privilege in local communities. They are more truly 'owners' because they're actually the ones present on, and using, their properties, not to mention continuing to the life of the local community.

    I wonder: if you had two 'owners', one who rented his property and was never around, but had all but a single dollar of the mortgage paid off, and one who lives on his land full time, and is the third generation to do so, but through bad luck and a stupid art gallery his wife wanted to finance now has a lien on his house for all but a single dollar of its value.

    Who is more an 'owner'?

    Anyway, off to practice some knots or something.

  4. 5 hours ago, rockb said:
    9 hours ago, Breamerly said:

    They should be at least partly responsible to take reasonable steps to ensure the safe operation of their property. What's reasonable?

    What is reasonable

    I guess we'll find out.

    The one thing I would point to is that contracts and even basic statutes often make things seem more clear-cut than they actually are. After a few decades of case-law are taken into account, responsibility in many types of accidents rarely ends up invested absolutely in one person (the captain), and by the same token neither is blame. 

    (For just one example in a separate Marine situation, take anchoring: it would seem extremely clear cut that if someone comes into the harbor after you, anchors too close, and then swings into you, it's their fault. However, in reality the fault is often found to be shared: when you observe them anchoring too close, your choice not to act (move your own boat) brought some of the liability onto you. Obviously, these are not analogous situations - but it does demonstrate that even a situation that is apparently even more clear cut can often be legally ambiguous.)

  5. 23 hours ago, Baldur said:

    Now, where in the article, or anywhere else, is there evidence to indicate the owners staffed the vessel inadequately, failed to train the staff or were deficient in their responsibility to address "other material safety issues?" 

    Personally (and I'm obviously not the law, although that would be dope) I think the extension of culpability to the owners, if indirect and of a lesser degree than that born by the captain, makes sense. They should be at least partly responsible to take reasonable steps to ensure the safe operation of their property. What's reasonable? The captain's word that he'll follow the rules? Again, personally I think it's reasonable to expect they go beyond that, including some degree of active, ongoing oversight.

    If i hire you to operate my bus, and you gradually transition from an upstanding if washed-up Marine to a sad drunk who frequently takes power naps on the straight stretches of road, at some point I start to have responsibility for not discovering you've changed.

    I'll admit though that I don't know exactly where that point is, or how much responsibility I should share if I miss it.

    • Like 1

  6. 3 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

    If the captain gets charged, what about the owners?

    I think that boat must have been manifestly unsafe, for that service for that number of people, if a night watch would be necessary to make sure it didn't trap people below when it caught fire and sunk. A change of standards for licensing might be a good idea, too.

    FB- Doug

    Agreed the owners should get it, too.

    Have to potentially disagree about the boat/standards for safety, though. Safety without a watch in a fire/rapid-flood situation would require timing margins that I am not sure would be possible on a boat like that.

    Even if you revised standards to require an aviation-type completely redundant no-fail alarm system - and swallow the imagination pill that corners would never be cut on it - I'm still not sure that would be fast enough for the time margins available in marine emergencies.

    The physically constrained reality of ship quarters means that in a smoke* situation you have a much narrower time window to safely exit than from a land structure. People take a surprisingly long time to wake up.

    That same physical constraint also means that egress is inevitably slower - fewer, narrower routes (and with the floor potentially moving), with a higher potential for blockage. 

    Add the two together, and I think that even on a ship with modem alarms and lighting, and even with a trained, oriented crew member to rouse and guide guests, in the fastest-moving fire situations it still seems like a close thing to get everybody out in time from a relatively cramped below-deck berth.


    *All the Concepcion guests died of smoke inhalation, not fire. Hemce modern building codes specifying a minimum 7 ft ceiling in bedrooms - the four feet above a sleeping person is a built-in margin for smoke to build up, trigger an alarm, and for the occupant to wake and orient.

  7. 2 minutes ago, sledracr said:

    Kinda have that "there is no Santa Claus" feeling, now.

    Definitely felt this way myself the first couple times it happened.

    another place I have found it is at the north entrance to the channel from Stuart down to Friday harbor, and along the west coast of orcas. Tide change was an hour and a half off predicted last time I was going north from Jones.

    One thing you might try, if you don't already, is comparing what's in the atlas to the corrections listed in one of the better American tide books, which will typically have a list of time and current corrections for various spots including all over the islands. For fine scale predictions I find them to be more accurate.

  8. I've found the atlas to be off by as much as 2-2.5 hours in odd cases. I assume three things explain it:

    Broadly, it's a guide primarily intended to show the large scale movement of the currents.

    More specifically, the CHS predictions are based on modeling of only three magnitudes of tide - 3, 1.8, and 0.6 meters, if I recall. So tides that fall significantly between those ranges will have different characteristics, someone's by a significant margin. again, I assume this to be even more true for fine-grain predictions like a countercurrent along an island shore.

    Last, they do not account for the seasonal pattern of the tides, such as whether a tide is a neap tide.

    Additionally, the starts at the beginning and end of the tides are generally the least accurate, as CHS notes in their book. They note that the most accurate depiction of the currents just before or after the change is gained by looking comparing/combining the overlapping charts.


    *By 'the current atlas' I'm assuming you mean current charts based on the CHS data/models (aka the classic ring bound book in English/french w a picture of a sailboat on the front and the time sequence map).


  9. 7 hours ago, Marinatrix447 said:


    Takeaways? A PLB in strom wave troughs is limited in transmitting clen/clear signalling, EPIRB in the Grab Bag a must do, if there is time.

    There but for the grace of Sea Gods, go all of us...

    Thanks for posting this. Are you aware of a technical difference between EPIRB and PLB? The article references the PLB issue, but curious if an EPIRB would have performed better in that situation. Very interested in any into you may have on that.



  10. 9 hours ago, redboat said:

    You should try while you're young and have little to lose. You can then also look back without regret  and say you tried.

    Not an engineer but, this.

    Getting to be the guy who test drives the Ferraris has a lot to do with having things break your way fairly early. And after your first break, it tends to come a little easier. Conversely, if you miss getting an early break, it tends to be much, much harder to catch one later.

    So if you are thinking about something, try it now, while you're young. Your Opportunity costs are the lowest they'll ever be, and the potential for long-term compounded gain (catching another break, then another) will never be better. If it doesn't work out, you can always do something else.

  11. 1 minute ago, Autonomous said:

    It is my understanding that these conversions suffer badly without the polar inertia a mast provides.

    Ah yes. Just googled metacentric height* and it appears that, in laymen's terms (the only ones I understand), "masts help alot."

    *Good Wikipedia page

  12. 7 hours ago, kent_island_sailor said:

    AFAIK the chipsets that actually do the work are identical.  

    You are probably correct about the chips. However, with an electronic device in a marine environment ingress protection, corrosion resistance, and self-test ability are as important (if not more) than the reliability of the chipset, which I believe is rarely a failure point in simple electronics. 


    7 hours ago, kent_island_sailor said:

    I have never heard of even the slightest hint that one of those reasons is the PLB won't work.

    Anecdata isn't data. And I'm not saying PLB's "don't work". I'm saying they appear to be built according to different standards, and it's opaque exactly how their standards differ. And I'm saying that that makes me hesitant to trust them to the same degree as EPIRBs.

    I'm not saying you're wrong - but I'm also not going to believe you (or any of the numerous 'comparisons' out there which offer zero evidence) just on your say-so. I would really like to see at least a little bit more technical detail, be it firsthand like @sculpin provided or from someone who knows the regs/standards in abstract, or can provide a link. You haven't provided any of that detail, though - you've basically just said 'I'm sure it's fine, it's got to be, I've heard it is, and I'm pretty sure it is, AFAIK, it makes sense that it would be.'

    So, great. You're as comfortable with a PLB as an EPIRB. I'm not (yet). It's a moot point since I own neither! (although I've rented a few EPIRBs).

    If @sculpin or someone else with actual expertise weighs in, I'm more than open to having my mind changed! I'm not anti, just skeptical.

  13. 3 hours ago, sculpin said:

    Having built the electronics for ELTs, EPIRBS, and PLBs I can assure you that they are assembled the same way with the same care (at least by the folks I worked with).  IPC Class 3 assembly standards are IPC class 3 no matter what acronym is applied to the end product.

    This! This is what I was looking for!


    More please.

  14. 1 minute ago, kent_island_sailor said:

    I am a pilot. I will take a PLB any day.

    I mean, cool. I'm not arguing with you. Do you happen to know anything about the technical standards to which the two devices are built and/or tested, and how they compare?

  15. 20 hours ago, kent_island_sailor said:

    AOPA right now is lobbying for PLBs to replace installed beacons in airplanes.

    I should add that this is a definite mark in their favor, but since I'm at this point hearing it second-hand (in a forum no less), without any technical explanation to back it up, it still goes under 'Surmise' for me. I'd love to hear more about it though.

  16. 9 hours ago, kent_island_sailor said:

    This is the first time I ever heard it even suggested that PLBs will fail at a higher rate than an ELT/EPIRB. Where is that info coming from?

    I was using hypothetical numbers - I don't actually know what the standards are for epirbs vs plbs, just that one was originally an aviation product (typically designed with double/triple redundancy, more stringent QC, and a higher Factor of Safety) while the other was originally a consumer product.

    Both are federally regulated, but they have different regulations and technical standards - RTCM 11000.2 vs 11010.3, I guess. Again, I don't know what the difference is between those regs (they don't appear publicly available for free) but clearly there is some difference.

    If any of the actually smart people on here can enlighten me, I'd love to know.

    Maybe the only difference is the float-free/water-activated part. Or maybe it's the number of seals and how long it withstands the Salt Fog test. Maybe it's the difference between transmitting for 12 hours on 10% battery versus 6.

    Without knowing, I lean toward the one made for the sector with the (much) higher standards.

  17. 4 hours ago, kent_island_sailor said:

    If you read the article, he has somewhat of a fair point about innocent passage and the status of the waters there as international vs. Canadian. As long as he stays away from other people and stays on his boat he won't be a danger to others. Now if something goes wrong and Canada has to do a SAR mission, they will rightly be quite angry.

    Yeah it's a funny combination of a national government trying to enforce a prohibition that is arguably stupid and overbroad - and an individual responding to that in a way that is arguably arrogant and self-absorbed.

    Sometimes you encounter this with cruisers - this conflation of the individual right to move around on the Earth with some kind of important work or mission, which of course when viewed from the outside just translates to a kind of absurd self-importance:

    "STAND CLEAR! It is IMPERATIVE that I float my yacht into this harbor! I'm like Shackleton, don't you see?! I AM ON A CRITICAL PLEASURE-BOATING MISSION, people will perish and economies fail if I don't sip this beer in exactly the harbor of my choosing!"

    Freedom of movement is important and often ignored - but acting like it compares with the right (even if stupidly exercised) of a nation to close its borders in a time of emergency - that's a breath-taking level of self-regard.

    • Like 4

  18. In all seriousness though, I am learning a lot from this thread. Very interesting to hear about waterline, displacement, fore tri, etc - all stuff I wouldn't ever know standing outside the castle staring in

    Peasant 1: 'nice castle, that'

    Peasant 2: 'probably bloody cold though, and look - no windows!' The king's probably jealous of us, or at least he should be'

    King, fondling supermodel wife on bearskin in front of fire made of $100 bills: 'yes, cold, and so jealous'