What An Idiot!

hazelnut · 09-13-2013, 03:48 PM

There are a lot of "If's" here. The way I see it the guy in the Formula DID keep a proper lookout. He saw the boat, decided to pass the boat and laserp came off plain and turned into the Formula's path. Now the "20 feet" mentioned has to be believed and it's probably an embellishment, however even if accurate the Formula may have been about to pass at 150 feet until laserp admittedly turned into the path of the Formula. The Formula seemed to have taken some evasive action according to the story, unless I missed something, to avoid the collision. Sorry, I still hold laserp accountable for the incident.

ITD · 09-13-2013, 04:55 PM

At the end of the day there was no collision and no one got hurt. What scares me is the number of people who feel it is perfectly reasonable to pass within 150 feet of another vessel that is traveling at 25 mph, to top it off, they think due to their interpretation of the law, that the vessel being passed will maintain its course so it reasonable to pass so closely. I will continue to vigilantly look for you as I travel on the lake, because honestly, you scare me.

Woodsy · 09-13-2013, 05:03 PM

ITD...

I think the Formula was originally 150' or so passing Laser on the starboard side. I say that because had the Formula been much closer given the speeds Laser posted in the story - 23MPH and 30MPH there would have been a collision. The Formula obviously knew Laser was there as he was able to slow his boat and turn to port across Laser's wake even as Laser tightened his turn to starboard.

I don't see where the Formula did anything wrong here. Laser didn't see the Formula... therein lies the mistake. If Laser was being vigilant, as you claim to be... this incident would not have happened.

Woodsy

ITD · 09-13-2013, 05:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Woodsy

ITD...

I think the Formula was originally 150' or so passing Laser on the starboard side. I say that because had the Formula been much closer given the speeds Laser posted in the story - 23MPH and 30MPH there would have been a collision. The Formula obviously knew Laser was there as he was able to slow his boat and turn to port across Laser's wake even as Laser tightened his turn to starboard.

I don't see where the Formula did anything wrong here. Laser didn't see the Formula... therein lies the mistake. If Laser was being vigilant, as you claim to be... this incident would not have happened.

Woodsy

Woodsy, without rehashing the ROW issues and who is responsible for what, nobody is 100 percent vigilant try as we might we are human and piloting a boat put you in an environment that makes vigilance even harder. Without going into the physics, 150 feet at 25mph is covered in a very short amount of time, why not double or triple that amount of time by increasing the passing distance between the boats and give yourself and the other boat more time to react to the unexpected?

Well, one little rehash, the Formula ended up much closer to the Laser than 150 feet, we are not going to agree as to whose fault that was, but it's a large lake, if the Formula had doubled his distance away from the Laser the close call probably would not have happened.

Finally, to APS's point, I sail often on the lake, and I am always amazed at the number of power boats who deviate their course to pass closely by. Half of those boats seem to have no clue that the sail boat is moving and some of those have to make some type of corrective adjustment to avoid an ultimate collision, all while there is another two miles of lake with no boats on it and more direct for their ultimate route.

hazelnut · 09-13-2013, 05:47 PM

ITD.

The MAJOR point being made here is the following. A good captain ALWAYS, checks his or her surroundings BEFORE making a change of course and or speed. While you are correct that we should never assume that all captains are "good" given the example laid out here laserp was NOT a good captain at the time. And to concede to your point the captain of the Formula was not being a "good" captain either. However, I along with Woodsy and a few others are taking issue with laserp pointing the finger at the Formula when in fact laserp was just as much if not slightly MORE at fault. Remember when you point a finger there are three pointing back at you.

Pricestavern · 09-14-2013, 06:31 PM

"IV. When vessels are running in the same direction and the vessel which is astern desires to pass the other, it shall do so only when sufficient distance between the vessels is available to avoid danger of collision"

It is unclear from the account given whether laserp looked behind him immediately before executing the manuever. Laserp did say that he had looked behind him "many times", though it does appear that there was a 5 minute gap. If that is so, then I agree that he is at fault here. But not soley at fault.

One cannot assume that they have been spotted, especially coming up from behind and at night. It appears that Laserp was traveling alone and thus placing a dedicated 'proper lookout' was not possible. Being at night, even if he did look behind him just before manuevering he could have missed spotting the boat. So too, may have the lookout. It is for this reason, as well as to cover faulty maneuvering by the leading vessel, that section 4 declares that the overtaking vessel must give sufficient distance when passing.

What is sufficient distance? At night and overtaking, a much larger space than what the Formula was giving. The Formula erred on not keeping enough distance to pass safely.

hazelnut · 09-15-2013, 11:35 AM

Ay yai yai.

Direct quote:

" I may have been cruising for 5 minutes when I was getting to my destination. Started to pull off plain and pull to the right. Turned around and this guy was 20ft from me doing at least 30."

He STARTED TO PULL OFF PLAIN AND PULL TO THE RIGHT. The next sentence, TURNED AROUND AND THIS GUY WAS... yada yada yada.

Admitted in his own words that he failed to keep a proper lookout.

My lord above. lol

gillygirl · 09-15-2013, 07:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hazelnut

Ay yai yai.

Direct quote:

" I may have been cruising for 5 minutes when I was getting to my destination. Started to pull off plain and pull to the right. Turned around and this guy was 20ft from me doing at least 30."

He STARTED TO PULL OFF PLAIN AND PULL TO THE RIGHT. The next sentence, TURNED AROUND AND THIS GUY WAS... yada yada yada.

Admitted in his own words that he failed to keep a proper lookout.

My lord above. lol

Oy vey...but he never said that he never looked behind in that 5 minutes. Many people are making a huge assumption there. And since he isn't responding because he realized there are a bunch of no-it-alls on here, we're not going to get the answer to that question.

hazelnut · 09-15-2013, 08:15 PM

gilly,

It has nothing to do with being a KNOW it all. The man said in his own words that DIRECT QUOTE:

He "..Looked behind me many times and there was no boat within 500 yards. I may have been cruising for 5 minutes when I was getting to my destination"

If you can't read that as, he waited 5 minutes before looking behind his vessel or the fact that he didn't state that he checked behind his vessel before making the maneuver then ummmm wow... is all I can say. I mean no big deal but the man said in his post that he

..had an ***hole in a 30 ft Formula almost run his boat over mine at night on a weekend.

All I am saying is that by his post it looks very much like he failed to keep a proper lookout. I am by no way excusing the operator of the Formula for his part. However the poster, laserp was NO BETTER an operator at the time. Therefore, as I said before, when you point the finger oftentimes there are three fingers pointing back at you. Nothing personal towards you or anyone else.

It seems as though many here aren't truly familiar with boating law. YIKES.

Chaselady · 09-15-2013, 08:20 PM

I agree with Gilly, he never said he didn't look behind in those 5 minutes. Can't blame a person for not responding when he gets chewed up by the the piranhas on this forum.

Woodsy · 09-15-2013, 09:30 PM

Chaselady/Gillygirl...

I take the boating laws and regulations VERY seriously. I was taught to give as much room as possible.... keep my head on a 360 degree swivel and when in doubt let the other guy go regardless of right of way rules. Its the really smart thing to do...

What you are not getting is very, very plain and simple. IF Laser had looked behind him and seen the Formula... HE WOULD NOT HAVE TURNED INTO THE PATH OF THE FORMULA. Who does that? Who would INTENTIONALLY turn into the path of another boat???

So based on the assumption that Laser is a normal sane educated boat driver...

The only obvious explanation is that Laser DID NOT SEE the Formula. IF Laser didn't see the Formula behind him... then Laser is guilty of FAILING TO KEEP A PROPER LOOKOUT. Its so simple!

We can debate if the Formula gave enough room all day long.... We weren't there. If the Formula went to Lasers port instead of starboard, we wouldn't have an issue. If the Formula wasn't there at all we wouldn't have an issue. But the reality is the Formula decided to pass Laser at the very instant Laser decided to slow down and turn. Just like every other accident or near miss there are usually several factors, one of the most important being operator error, the others being timing and environmental issues. In this case it was nighttime.

This whole debate is based on Laser's story... his words. Based on Laser's own words he was in the wrong plain and simple. We all have lapses, and we all make mistakes. Luckily this was a near miss. But the fault lies with Laser.... although some of the people on this forum would rather blame the big bad guy in the big bad Formula...

Woodsy

Chaselady · 09-15-2013, 09:49 PM

I am not saying who was wrong, I was not there. It's not what is being said here, but how it is being delivered. There is an element of cruelty in some messages that I find very disappointing.
This is not what I expected from "senior, experienced boaters" it doesn't promote a good learning experience to newer members...rather it becomes intimidating and demeaning.

Woodsy · 09-15-2013, 10:12 PM

Chaselady...

Did you read what Laser (who has 3-4 posts total) called the Formula operator? He called him an ***hole and insulted his manhood. I just pointed out that Laser was in the wrong. I have not been cruel at all just factual. Based on taking Laser at his words...

Sorry if I offended you. It bothers me that Laser was quick to point the finger at the Formula but his own words prove he was at fault... that's all.

Woodsy

Chaselady · 09-15-2013, 10:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Woodsy

Chaselady...

Did you read what Laser (who has 3-4 posts total) called the Formula operator? He called him an ***hole and insulted his manhood. I just pointed out that Laser was in the wrong. I have not been cruel at all just factual. Based on taking Laser at his words...

Sorry if I offended you. It bothers me that Laser was quick to point the finger at the Formula but his own words prove he was at fault... that's all.

Woodsy

It's not just you, but the remarks from hazelnut. Who in their right mind would want to write of their experience on the lake if they knew they were going to get jumped all over? Laser was vocal about his experience, but he wasn't pointing fingers at forum members...he seemed to be commiserating with Greens Basin Girl.
Unless, do you think it might have been a forum member driving the formula?!!

ApS · 09-16-2013, 02:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chaselady

It's not just you, but the remarks from hazelnut. Who in their right mind would want to write of their experience on the lake if they knew they were going to get jumped all over? Laser was vocal about his experience, but he wasn't pointing fingers at forum members...he seemed to be commiserating with Greens Basin Girl.
Unless, do you think it might have been a forum member driving the formula?!!

Checking this 1200-post thread, a small group of "experienced" boaters failed to address "Proper Lookout" as a criticism of a Formula 370 that struck an island—at night.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Woodsy

APS...

Both vessels are required to maintain a proper lookout. THE END.

The rules state that others can be assigned to the watch.

This rule is addressed to solo-sailing on wide expanses of water—where the skipper goes below to nap while on auto-pilot.

Quote:

"...Was speeding. Was within 150 (on my inside) of moored boats...

If laserp was turning into the aforementioned mooring field, his attention would be to that turn—but the Formula would be required to observe the burden to slow to headway speed. So why couldn't the Formula pass safely to port—instead?

Moreover, the rules require the Formula to advise the overtaken boat by VHF radio or approved signal. While this is seldom used on quiet waters—just like the required "lookout"—it is a requirement of the rules.

Certainly, "after dark" is a fully-appropriate use of this required signal.

From BoatUS.com:

Quote:

•Give-Way Vessel - If you are the Give-Way vessel, you must act as if the "stand-on" vessel has the right to keep going the way it is going. It is your responsibility to signal your intentions to the stand-on vessel, and it is your responsibility to maneuver your boat around the other in a safe manner. Also known as a "Burdened" vessel..."

The Formula has to meet the burden of safe passage—which on New Hampshire waters includes ten canoe-lengths between vessels—and headway speed when encountering land, island, and mooring field.

At night, a signal would have been a nice touch from the burdened Formula.

gillygirl · 09-16-2013, 05:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Woodsy

Chaselady...

Did you read what Laser (who has 3-4 posts total) called the Formula operator? He called him an ***hole and insulted his manhood. I just pointed out that Laser was in the wrong. I have not been cruel at all just factual. Based on taking Laser at his words...

Sorry if I offended you. It bothers me that Laser was quick to point the finger at the Formula but his own words prove he was at fault... that's all.

Woodsy

I have an issue with people putting 1 and 1 together and getting 3. I am not saying laserp was correct in either what he did or his delivery of the incident on this forum. But for people to state that he didn't look behind his boat for 5 minutes is a total misread of what was written. And now we're not going to get clarification because he's figured out that there is no point in responding because he'll just get piled on some more.

By the way, I got 100 on the boating exam. Guess I take it seriously, too.

Woodsy · 09-16-2013, 07:06 AM

I guess you guys just don't get it.....

The OP (GBG) was wrong in that he didn't see the other boat.... nobody on his boat warned him either. FAILURE TO KEEP A PROPER LOOKOUT. Her husband should have seen the Stingray closing on his boat.... plain and simple. The Stingray passing within 9' of GBG while perfectly acceptable on the ocean is not acceptable on the inland waterways of NH (150' rule). However, GBG did not slow down or change course.... Had he turned into the path of the Stingray, it would be the same as Laser... Laser by his own story unfortunately did.

APS...

I agree that the Formula could have passed to port... and if he did we wouldn't have this lively debate. But the Formula didn't and why he didn't I don't know. But either way it does not absolve Laser for FAILING TO KEEP A PROPER LOOKOUT.

Yes, the Formula was the GIVE WAY boat, and as such he acted accordingly. The collision was avoided and nobody got hurt. He slowed and passed safely behind and to port of Laser who had turned starboard into his path.

I maintain that HAD LASER SEEN THE FORMULA (You know KEPT A PROPER LOOKOUT) He being a reasonable guy would not have deliberately slowed and turned into the path of the Formula... He didn't "Check his 6" or if he did he did so quickly and carelessly.

Bottom line is HE DIDNT SEE THE FORMULA BEFORE HE SLOWED AND CHANGED HIS COURSE.

I don't know if the Formula driver is member of the forum. Maybe he is and is just keeping his mouth shut so to speak. I think that here is some real hatred towards people who own faster or bigger boats on this forum. Its easy to blame the bigger guy, or the faster guy when in fact sometimes its the little guys fault.

Woodsy

gillygirl · 09-16-2013, 08:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Woodsy

I guess you guys just don't get it.....

The OP (GBG) was wrong in that he didn't see the other boat.... nobody on his boat warned him either. FAILURE TO KEEP A PROPER LOOKOUT. Her husband should have seen the Stingray closing on his boat.... plain and simple. The Stingray passing within 9' of GBG while perfectly acceptable on the ocean is not acceptable on the inland waterways of NH (150' rule). However, GBG did not slow down or change course.... Had he turned into the path of the Stingray, it would be the same as Laser... Laser by his own story unfortunately did.

APS...

I agree that the Formula could have passed to port... and if he did we wouldn't have this lively debate. But the Formula didn't and why he didn't I don't know. But either way it does not absolve Laser for FAILING TO KEEP A PROPER LOOKOUT.

Yes, the Formula was the GIVE WAY boat, and as such he acted accordingly. The collision was avoided and nobody got hurt. He slowed and passed safely behind and to port of Laser who had turned starboard into his path.

I maintain that HAD LASER SEEN THE FORMULA (You know KEPT A PROPER LOOKOUT) He being a reasonable guy would not have deliberately slowed and turned into the path of the Formula... He didn't "Check his 6" or if he did he did so quickly and carelessly.

Bottom line is HE DIDNT SEE THE FORMULA BEFORE HE SLOWED AND CHANGED HIS COURSE.

I don't know if the Formula driver is member of the forum. Maybe he is and is just keeping his mouth shut so to speak. I think that here is some real hatred towards people who own faster or bigger boats on this forum. Its easy to blame the bigger guy, or the faster guy when in fact sometimes its the little guys fault.

Woodsy

I get your argument. Please try to understand mine.

There are a lot of assumptions being made here, so I'll throw in a few of my own. The Formula was behind laserp the whole time, but since it was dark and there was a lot of light pollution on shore behind the Formula, laserp missed him on several occasions. Then he looked and made his turn simultaneously, and that's when he finally saw the Formula.

So here's my argument. We don't know all of the facts, so let's stop assuming we do. And let's stop assuming we know the intent of people when they make a post. If I do that, then I'll assume you and hazelnut are stirring the pot because you both keep implying that other posters don't get it, when in reality, you both are not comprehending what people like chaselady and myself are saying.

Woodsy · 09-16-2013, 09:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gillygirl

I get your argument. Please try to understand mine.

There are a lot of assumptions being made here, so I'll throw in a few of my own. The Formula was behind laserp the whole time, but since it was dark and there was a lot of light pollution on shore behind the Formula, laserp missed him on several occasions. Then he looked and made his turn simultaneously, and that's when he finally saw the Formula.

So here's my argument. We don't know all of the facts, so let's stop assuming we do. And let's stop assuming we know the intent of people when they make a post. If I do that, then I'll assume you and hazelnut are stirring the pot because you both keep implying that other posters don't get it, when in reality, you both are not comprehending what people like chaselady and myself are saying.

I am not making any assumptions.... I am taking Laser's story as told as fact. In what was his second or third post he called somebody an ***hole and insulted their manhood while telling a story that by his own words put him at fault for bad seamanship. Its not personal. It bothers me that people are quick to blame the Formula when in fact Laser is the guilty party.

We don't have the story from the Formula. I am not harping on the 5 minutes part of Laser's story.. quite frankly I don't think it matters. What matters is that Laser did not see the Formula prior to making a course change (both speed and direction) that put him and the Formula both in danger. That is the definition of FAILURE TO KEEP A PROPER LOOKOUT! If your assumption is correct, and Laser looked quickly AS he was slowing and turning he is STILL guilty of FAILURE TO KEEP A PROPER LOOKOUT.

Woodsy

LIforrelaxin · 09-16-2013, 09:24 AM

You know, I was trying to give people of an idea of the distance covered in Five minutes... which should have been the end of all this... Because the bottom line is if LaserP truly waited five minutes after checking 360 degrees around him, then he traveled 1.9 miles... durring which time, a boat directly behind him travel only 7 mph faster would have traveled 2.5 miles to be in roughly the same location... that means that at the last 360 degree check the Formula was more then 1/2 a mile behind him... Also likely is that when laserP last did a 360 degree check, is that the formula was not right behind him, but vectoring in from another direction, approaching from the rear. And my have not been picked up in his scan.

Laserp made the conscious decision to post about his incident... yes maybe commiserating with GBG..... So in my mind, the feed back here is warranted. He of course slammed the Formula Driver pretty hard.

No one, who has posted in the thread has slammed LaserP..... we have all simply posted, in response to the information that was given. And noted on the situation that possibly LaserP needed to think through his actions a bit more, and that possibly he had some blame in the situation...

No one here is perfect, nor have I ever heard anyone claim to be perfect. However we all view things uniquely...... Those of us that understand the mathematics of the situation, have simply posted, that hey 5 minutes is a long time, and a lot of ground and situation changes did take place. And the bottom line is to keep a proper look out, you have to be aware of your situational surrounding more often then every five minutes...

Quite often I find people jumping to conclusions, and as is human nature, we don't want to think we are wrong. Part of whats wrong in today's society is that people don't want to take the time to self reflect, and re-think there actions, realizing that they may have had some blame....

Last what if laserp was just trying to stir the pot? he has very few posts, and hasn't bothered to chime back in........I guess he succeeded if that is what he was trying to do..

gillygirl · 09-16-2013, 04:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hazelnut

gilly,

It has nothing to do with being a KNOW it all. The man said in his own words that DIRECT QUOTE:

He "..Looked behind me many times and there was no boat within 500 yards. I may have been cruising for 5 minutes when I was getting to my destination"

If you can't read that as, he waited 5 minutes before looking behind his vessel or the fact that he didn't state that he checked behind his vessel before making the maneuver then ummmm wow... is all I can say. I mean no big deal but the man said in his post that he

..had an ***hole in a 30 ft Formula almost run his boat over mine at night on a weekend.

All I am saying is that by his post it looks very much like he failed to keep a proper lookout. I am by no way excusing the operator of the Formula for his part. However the poster, laserp was NO BETTER an operator at the time. Therefore, as I said before, when you point the finger oftentimes there are three fingers pointing back at you. Nothing personal towards you or anyone else.

It seems as though many here aren't truly familiar with boating law. YIKES.

How do you know he didn't mean he looked behind him many times in those 5 minutes? I'm not arguing boating laws here, I'm arguing reading comprehension! So I guess I should make an insulting comment about people who can't parse a couple of sentences not knowing the boating laws because they don't understand what they're reading!

And the OP stated her husband didn't even see the boat that passed them within 9 feet until it was happening. Where's the outrageous indignation about that? Oh, that's right, she's not a junior member.

hazelnut · 09-16-2013, 06:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gillygirl

How do you know he didn't mean he looked behind him many times in those 5 minutes? I'm not arguing boating laws here, I'm arguing reading comprehension! So I guess I should make an insulting comment about people who can't parse a couple of sentences not knowing the boating laws because they don't understand what they're reading!

And the OP stated her husband didn't even see the boat that passed them within 9 feet until it was happening. Where's the outrageous indignation about that? Oh, that's right, she's not a junior member.

So by your logic he intentionally turned into the path of the Formula??? And as to the OP, you are correct. Perhaps there was a bit of negligence on their part as well. I'd love to hear more on that story.

And Chaselady, I was not the person who called someone an ***hole. laserp came on to this forum calling someone a nasty name and insulting them. Now I am the big bad senior member?

There is no conspiracy theories at play here. I didn't appreciate laserp's tone in their post calling someone and offensive name and then describing a story where they were clearly in the wrong as much as the Formula. The resulting debate has been kind of silly. How can anyone think that laserp was keeping a proper watch when he deliberately turned into the path of the overtaking boat? Why would any sane captain do that?

Sorry if I have come off a bit harsh but the tone of the original message from lp was offensive.

hazelnut · 09-16-2013, 07:06 AM

..and gilly. Please tell me how we are supposed to interpret this?

"..Looked behind me many times and there was no boat within 500 yards. I may have been cruising for 5 minutes when I was getting to my destination"

Was the entire cruise 5 minutes?

I don't see how anyone could read this any other way than he was cruising for 5 minutes after he had been looking behind his vessel. He ASSUMED in that 5 minute period that nobody could have closed in on him as fast as the Formula did. Now we all know assumptions in boating can lead to disaster. Maybe the Formula was speeding? Who knows. Also I am not even calling out lp for taking a 5 minute break from checking his stern. No big deal at all. Where I and a few others are taking issue is the fact that lp turned his vessel and changed speed BEFORE looking astern to see if by chance there was a vessel approaching. Why is this an issue with a few here? I would be alarmed if people thought it was a good idea to make speed and course changes without doing a THOROUGH check of ones surroundings.

How is this still a discussion??

gillygirl · 09-16-2013, 07:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hazelnut

..and gilly. Please tell me how we are supposed to interpret this?

"..Looked behind me many times and there was no boat within 500 yards. I may have been cruising for 5 minutes when I was getting to my destination"

Was the entire cruise 5 minutes?

I don't see how anyone could read this any other way than he was cruising for 5 minutes after he had been looking behind his vessel. He ASSUMED in that 5 minute period that nobody could have closed in on him as fast as the Formula did. Now we all know assumptions in boating can lead to disaster. Maybe the Formula was speeding? Who knows. Also I am not even calling out lp for taking a 5 minute break from checking his stern. No big deal at all. Where I and a few others are taking issue is the fact that lp turned his vessel and changed speed BEFORE looking astern to see if by chance there was a vessel approaching. Why is this an issue with a few here? I would be alarmed if people thought it was a good idea to make speed and course changes without doing a THOROUGH check of ones surroundings.

How is this still a discussion??

Yeah, I read it that his cruise took 5 minutes and he was looking around during the journey. I don't understand how you can't acknowledge that possibility. YOU are doing a lot of assuming in your argument, including thinking that I don't hold laserp responsible at all. I jumped into the discussion BECAUSE of all the assumptions being made.

I've done a lot of technical writing in the past, so I know one of the biggest errors that can be made is assuming you know exactly what the original writer meant. You need to ask for clarification, which we won't get now due to the responses he received. And did you notice the title of this thread? Guess it's okay to call someone an idiot.

hazelnut · 09-16-2013, 08:12 AM

So then laserp deliberately turned into the path of the formula?

I am baffled here. Gilly and ITD. I am not addressing the op or anything else. My point all along has been that laserp came on to the forum calling someone else an a##hole and then illustrated a story that CLEARLY shows that he steered his vessel towards an overtaking vessel. No assumptions necessary here. That is a fact that lp himself stated. So NO BIG DEAL. I take issue with his attitude in his op. He blamed the other captain entirely. THEY WERE BOTH WRONG. What is your crusade on this one? Are you mad that I am not calling out Greens Basin Girl? When I read this thread and got involved in this discussion I was irritated by lp's story more than GBG's story. Would you like me to go back and pick her story apart? Would it then be ok and we could call a truce.

No matter how you read this, being a technical writer, or a Masters Degree holder (me), how can you not see the fact that lp made a navigational error and steered INTO the path of another vessel. The Formula could have been DEAD wrong in that they themselves did not leave enough room. All I know is that I have to assume that lp is a sane and maybe even a FANTASTIC captain with YEARS of experience. Heck he may be one of the better boaters on the lake. Unfortunately HE made an error in failing to keep proper lookout. (FACT NOT OPINION) unless we play the "sane" card lol, as I said. So he messed up. Whoops.... no biggie.

So he steered into the path of the overtaking vessel,

Started to pull off plain and pull to the right. Turned around and this guy was 20ft from me doing at least 30.

Then made a move to recover:

I hit the throttle and cut hard right and fortunately he cut hard left. Missed me by 20ft... AT NIGHT!!

lp came on this forum and called another boater an A##hole. His words not mine. He then illustrated a story that calls into question his skills as a captain. It's pretty plain and simple. I don't know either captain. The Formula captain is not held blameless in this scenario. And that is all this is, a scenario.

ITD to your point, there would have been an extensive investigation and honestly I do not know what the outcome would be. If alcohol was involved we all know what the outcome would be. However, if lp told the story to the police as he did here it would be quite interesting to say the least as to what the outcome would be. Can we all just say thank god that didn't happen.

gillygirl · 09-16-2013, 08:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hazelnut

So then laserp deliberately turned into the path of the formula?

I am baffled here. Gilly and ITD. I am not addressing the op or anything else. My point all along has been that laserp came on to the forum calling someone else an a##hole and then illustrated a story that CLEARLY shows that he steered his vessel towards an overtaking vessel. No assumptions necessary here. That is a fact that lp himself stated. So NO BIG DEAL. I take issue with his attitude in his op. He blamed the other captain entirely. THEY WERE BOTH WRONG. What is your crusade on this one? Are you mad that I am not calling out Greens Basin Girl? When I read this thread and got involved in this discussion I was irritated by lp's story more than GBG's story. Would you like me to go back and pick her story apart? Would it then be ok and we could call a truce.

No matter how you read this, being a technical writer, or a Masters Degree holder (me), how can you not see the fact that lp made a navigational error and steered INTO the path of another vessel. The Formula could have been DEAD wrong in that they themselves did not leave enough room. All I know is that I have to assume that lp is a sane and maybe even a FANTASTIC captain with YEARS of experience. Heck he may be one of the better boaters on the lake. Unfortunately HE made an error in failing to keep proper lookout. (FACT NOT OPINION) unless we play the "sane" card lol, as I said. So he messed up. Whoops.... no biggie.

So he steered into the path of the overtaking vessel,

Started to pull off plain and pull to the right. Turned around and this guy was 20ft from me doing at least 30.

Then made a move to recover:

I hit the throttle and cut hard right and fortunately he cut hard left. Missed me by 20ft... AT NIGHT!!

lp came on this forum and called another boater an A##hole. His words not mine. He then illustrated a story that calls into question his skills as a captain. It's pretty plain and simple. I don't know either captain. The Formula captain is not held blameless in this scenario. And that is all this is, a scenario.

ITD to your point, there would have been an extensive investigation and honestly I do not know what the outcome would be. If alcohol was involved we all know what the outcome would be. However, if lp told the story to the police as he did here it would be quite interesting to say the least as to what the outcome would be. Can we all just say thank god that didn't happen.

Holy cow, how can you still not see what I am saying when I have stated explicitly that I didn't hold laserp unaccountable in his actions. He probably is. But note how I said "probably. " The problem is you are making a lot of assumptions and then stating your conclusion as fact. You argue that laserp said it himself, giving snippets which can be interpreted a couple of ways, but stating your interpretation is the correct one. My biggest issue is with you stating AS A FACT that he didn't look behind his boat for 5 minutes. HE NEVER SAID THAT...THAT'S YOUR READ ON IT.

I brought up my tech writing past to illustrate the importance of looking at what you're reading from all angles so that if it is ambiguous in any way, you need to get clarification before coming to a conclusion. I am explaining my method of analysis, not getting into a pissing contest, if that's what you assume I was doing.

hazelnut · 09-16-2013, 08:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gillygirl

Holy cow, how can you still not see what I am saying when I have stated explicitly that I didn't hold laserp unaccountable in his actions. He probably is. But note how I said "probably. " The problem is you are making a lot of assumptions and then stating your conclusion as fact. You argue that laserp said it himself, giving snippets which can be interpreted a couple of ways, but stating your interpretation is the correct one. My biggest issue is with you stating AS A FACT that he didn't look behind his boat for 5 minutes. HE NEVER SAID THAT...THAT'S YOUR READ ON IT.

I brought up my tech writing past to illustrate the importance of looking at what you're reading from all angles so that if it is ambiguous in any way, you need to get clarification before coming to a conclusion. I am explaining my method of analysis, not getting into a pissing contest, if that's what you assume I was doing.

So holy cow yourself. My point is simple. A reasonable person can deduce from the statement that lp made a little mistake. NO BIG DEAL. Relax about it. My bigger point is that his post was OFFENSIVE when he himself was PROBABLY, and IMO based in MANY years of boating, ACTUALLY at fault himself. Formula was wrong lp was wrong.

He called the other boater an A##HOLE AND THEN:

The lake is full of morons on the weekend, with boats that they buy to compensate for their manhood. Can't handle them.

All extremely offensive. Where is the outrage?

gillygirl · 09-16-2013, 10:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hazelnut

So holy cow yourself. My point is simple. A reasonable person can deduce from the statement that lp made a little mistake. NO BIG DEAL. Relax about it. My bigger point is that his post was OFFENSIVE when he himself was PROBABLY, and IMO based in MANY years of boating, ACTUALLY at fault himself. Formula was wrong lp was wrong.

He called the other boater an A##HOLE AND THEN:

The lake is full of morons on the weekend, with boats that they buy to compensate for their manhood. Can't handle them.

All extremely offensive. Where is the outrage?

So it's not okay to call someone an %$^hole, but it is okay to call them unreasonable. Or to make this statement:

"gilly,

It has nothing to do with being a KNOW it all. The man said in his own words that DIRECT QUOTE:

He "..Looked behind me many times and there was no boat within 500 yards. I may have been cruising for 5 minutes when I was getting to my destination"

If you can't read that as, he waited 5 minutes before looking behind his vessel or the fact that he didn't state that he checked behind his vessel before making the maneuver then ummmm wow... is all I can say."

Okay, so you can't read that as, he looked behind his boat many times during the 5 minutes it took to reach his destination? Do you actually think he would come on here and say he didn't look behind for 5 minutes? Does that actually bolster his case? No, it doesn't.

I'm outraged that you won't admit you could be reading the whole 5 minute thing wrong. I'm outraged that when someone's opinion is different from yours, you make snide comments. Okay, I'm not really outraged, but one minute you say it's no big deal that he nearly caused a collision because he didn't keep a proper watch, and then you want me to be outraged by his language. Language doesn't outrage me unless it's not telling the truth. But the passive-aggressive stuff does tend to drive me nuts.

Happy Gourmand · 09-16-2013, 07:13 AM

"Why would any sane captain do that?"
So, now Laser is insane? LOL
C'mon, people, lighten up. We only have the "facts" from one side. And even those probably don't tell the whole story as he saw it.

hazelnut · 09-16-2013, 07:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Phantom Gourmand

"Why would any sane captain do that?"
So, now Laser is insane? LOL
C'mon, people, lighten up. We only have the "facts" from one side. And even those probably don't tell the whole story as he saw it.

Phantom, why are you stirring the pot? I am making a point to the contrary. I am sure lp is SANE. My point is that he was negligent in his failure to keep watch. He did not deliberately steer into the path of the Formula. Of course he wouldn't do that. He did it because he had a temporary lapse in judgement and assumed that there were no boats behind him because 5 minutes earlier there were not.

Please don't troll.

Happy Gourmand · 09-16-2013, 07:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hazelnut

Phantom, why are you stirring the pot? I am making a point to the contrary. I am sure lp is SANE. My point is that he was negligent in his failure to keep watch. He did not deliberately steer into the path of the Formula. Of course he wouldn't do that. He did it because he had a temporary lapse in judgement and assumed that there were no boats behind him because 5 minutes earlier there were not.

Please don't troll.

You do not have the facts to make the accusation that LP is negligent.
My post was not to stir the pot, but ask that everybody lighten up a bit.
And now you accuse me of being a troll?

hazelnut · 09-16-2013, 07:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Phantom Gourmand

You do not have the facts to make the accusation that LP is negligent.
My post was not to stir the pot, but ask that everybody lighten up a bit.
And now you accuse me of being a troll?

Ugh!

Phantom. Read the posts carefully. lp turned into the path of the Formula. He himself said that here:

I "Started to pull off plain and pull to the right. Turned around and this guy was 20ft from me doing at least 30. My guess is he was passing me on the right and wasn't looking."

I am sure lp is sane. He wouldn't have ever decided to make the move if he saw the boat correct? How much evidence do I need. Either he deliberately turned into the path of the boat or he accidentally did. I am going to assume that he accidentally did. Because to assume that he deliberately steered his vessel into the path of the formula then... well... then we would have to play the sanity card. lol So if we can ALL ASSUME that he accidentally steered into the path of the Formula then he is guilty of failure to keep a proper lookout. This is NO BIG DEAL here people. I am sure as &*%$ that I have done that and have committed many errors in my years of boating.

Phantom, it was a troll post. You sir are not a troll. I enjoy your restaurant reviews. The post itself twisted the meaning of my words in a troll like fashion. No hard feelings.

ITD · 09-16-2013, 07:52 AM

So let's suppose in this example there was a few witnesses nearby and God forbid boat A (being passed) was run over by boat B (the boat doing the passing). (I purposely did not use laser and formula to describe the boats because boat brands is the last thing I'm thinking about here and I'm a little disturbed it was even brought up.) So again, let's suppose the captain is alone in boat a and is killed in the crash, Boat b has minor injuries. A forensic team determines that Boat B was passing boat A, no one knows if Boat A was maintaining proper lookout or not, who do you think would be found responsible for the crash??

Woodsy · 09-16-2013, 08:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ITD

So let's suppose in this example there was a few witnesses nearby and God forbid boat A (being passed) was run over by boat B (the boat doing the passing). (I purposely did not use laser and formula to describe the boats because boat brands is the last thing I'm thinking about here and I'm a little disturbed it was even brought up.) So again, let's suppose the captain is alone in boat a and is killed in the crash, Boat b has minor injuries. A forensic team determines that Boat B was passing boat A, no one knows if Boat A was maintaining proper lookout or not, who do you think would be found responsible for the crash??

That's up to the Forensics team. We would only have Boat B's side of the story. Assuming Boat B was being truthful in his description of the incident, and the reconstruction team did their homework... (Boat B's story is plausible) my guess would be BOTH parties would be to blame. Perhaps with differing levels. Boat A would be partially to blame - Failing To Keep a Proper Lookout and turning into the path of the Boat B. Boat B would be partially to blame - Failure to Keep a Proper Distance not taking the appropriate evasive action.

The way the rules are written for the Sea, there usually requires a screw-up by BOTH vessels for a vessel on vessel accident to occur. In the instance we have been debating, Boat B did in fact have enough distance as there was no collision.

Here is a link to a video in which a USCG boat runs over a small runabout in broad daylight.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0lR5hPJkQc

Both are at fault here! The small speedboat has right of way and is the Stand On vessel. The USCG boat is the GIVE WAY vessel. In the video you can clearly hear there are no sirens or horns blaring on the USCG vessel. Just a loudhailer that you cannot hear in the video.

The small boat didn't see the USCG boat.. and the USCG boat didn't GIVE WAY.

Woodsy

NH_boater · 09-16-2013, 07:46 AM

Laser did show up here with an agenda and with a major attitude, as depicted by his/her choice of language. It is hard for me to be sympathetic when someone makes this grand booming entrance, third post, expecting support but appears to be in the wrong. I think many people had two reactions. (1) Why the language and tone? (2) Wait a minute, Laser seems to be in the wrong by his/her own description.

I expect that if laser posted with a civil tone and appropriate language, he/she would have been treated differently.

09-13-2013, 05:03 PM	#3
Woodsy Senior Member Join Date: May 2004 Location: Weirs Beach Posts: 1,966 Thanks: 80 Thanked 980 Times in 440 Posts	ITD... I think the Formula was originally 150' or so passing Laser on the starboard side. I say that because had the Formula been much closer given the speeds Laser posted in the story - 23MPH and 30MPH there would have been a collision. The Formula obviously knew Laser was there as he was able to slow his boat and turn to port across Laser's wake even as Laser tightened his turn to starboard. I don't see where the Formula did anything wrong here. Laser didn't see the Formula... therein lies the mistake. If Laser was being vigilant, as you claim to be... this incident would not have happened. Woodsy __________________ The only way to eliminate ignorant behavior is through education. You can't fix stupid.

09-14-2013, 06:31 PM	#6
Pricestavern Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Valencia, Spain (formerly Rattlesnake Isle) Posts: 389 Thanks: 135 Thanked 142 Times in 82 Posts	Section IV "IV. When vessels are running in the same direction and the vessel which is astern desires to pass the other, it shall do so only when sufficient distance between the vessels is available to avoid danger of collision" It is unclear from the account given whether laserp looked behind him immediately before executing the manuever. Laserp did say that he had looked behind him "many times", though it does appear that there was a 5 minute gap. If that is so, then I agree that he is at fault here. But not soley at fault. One cannot assume that they have been spotted, especially coming up from behind and at night. It appears that Laserp was traveling alone and thus placing a dedicated 'proper lookout' was not possible. Being at night, even if he did look behind him just before manuevering he could have missed spotting the boat. So too, may have the lookout. It is for this reason, as well as to cover faulty maneuvering by the leading vessel, that section 4 declares that the overtaking vessel must give sufficient distance when passing. What is sufficient distance? At night and overtaking, a much larger space than what the Formula was giving. The Formula erred on not keeping enough distance to pass safely. Last edited by Pricestavern; 09-14-2013 at 06:34 PM. Reason: Clarity

09-15-2013, 09:30 PM	#11
Woodsy Senior Member Join Date: May 2004 Location: Weirs Beach Posts: 1,966 Thanks: 80 Thanked 980 Times in 440 Posts	Chaselady/Gillygirl... I take the boating laws and regulations VERY seriously. I was taught to give as much room as possible.... keep my head on a 360 degree swivel and when in doubt let the other guy go regardless of right of way rules. Its the really smart thing to do... What you are not getting is very, very plain and simple. IF Laser had looked behind him and seen the Formula... HE WOULD NOT HAVE TURNED INTO THE PATH OF THE FORMULA. Who does that? Who would INTENTIONALLY turn into the path of another boat??? So based on the assumption that Laser is a normal sane educated boat driver... The only obvious explanation is that Laser DID NOT SEE the Formula. IF Laser didn't see the Formula behind him... then Laser is guilty of FAILING TO KEEP A PROPER LOOKOUT. Its so simple! We can debate if the Formula gave enough room all day long.... We weren't there. If the Formula went to Lasers port instead of starboard, we wouldn't have an issue. If the Formula wasn't there at all we wouldn't have an issue. But the reality is the Formula decided to pass Laser at the very instant Laser decided to slow down and turn. Just like every other accident or near miss there are usually several factors, one of the most important being operator error, the others being timing and environmental issues. In this case it was nighttime. This whole debate is based on Laser's story... his words. Based on Laser's own words he was in the wrong plain and simple. We all have lapses, and we all make mistakes. Luckily this was a near miss. But the fault lies with Laser.... although some of the people on this forum would rather blame the big bad guy in the big bad Formula... Woodsy __________________ The only way to eliminate ignorant behavior is through education. You can't fix stupid.

09-15-2013, 10:12 PM	#13
Woodsy Senior Member Join Date: May 2004 Location: Weirs Beach Posts: 1,966 Thanks: 80 Thanked 980 Times in 440 Posts	Chaselady... Did you read what Laser (who has 3-4 posts total) called the Formula operator? He called him an *hole and insulted his manhood. I just pointed out that Laser was in the wrong. I have not been cruel at all just factual. Based on taking Laser at his words... Sorry if I offended you. It bothers me that Laser was quick to point the finger at the Formula but his own words prove he was at fault... that's all. Woodsy __________________ The only way to eliminate ignorant behavior is through education. You can't fix stupid.**

09-16-2013, 07:06 AM	#17
Woodsy Senior Member Join Date: May 2004 Location: Weirs Beach Posts: 1,966 Thanks: 80 Thanked 980 Times in 440 Posts	I guess you guys just don't get it..... The OP (GBG) was wrong in that he didn't see the other boat.... nobody on his boat warned him either. FAILURE TO KEEP A PROPER LOOKOUT. Her husband should have seen the Stingray closing on his boat.... plain and simple. The Stingray passing within 9' of GBG while perfectly acceptable on the ocean is not acceptable on the inland waterways of NH (150' rule). However, GBG did not slow down or change course.... Had he turned into the path of the Stingray, it would be the same as Laser... Laser by his own story unfortunately did. APS... I agree that the Formula could have passed to port... and if he did we wouldn't have this lively debate. But the Formula didn't and why he didn't I don't know. But either way it does not absolve Laser for FAILING TO KEEP A PROPER LOOKOUT. Yes, the Formula was the GIVE WAY boat, and as such he acted accordingly. The collision was avoided and nobody got hurt. He slowed and passed safely behind and to port of Laser who had turned starboard into his path. I maintain that HAD LASER SEEN THE FORMULA (You know KEPT A PROPER LOOKOUT) He being a reasonable guy would not have deliberately slowed and turned into the path of the Formula... He didn't "Check his 6" or if he did he did so quickly and carelessly. Bottom line is HE DIDNT SEE THE FORMULA BEFORE HE SLOWED AND CHANGED HIS COURSE. I don't know if the Formula driver is member of the forum. Maybe he is and is just keeping his mouth shut so to speak. I think that here is some real hatred towards people who own faster or bigger boats on this forum. Its easy to blame the bigger guy, or the faster guy when in fact sometimes its the little guys fault. Woodsy __________________ The only way to eliminate ignorant behavior is through education. You can't fix stupid.

09-13-2013, 03:48 PM	#1
hazelnut Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 1,348 Blog Entries: 3 Thanks: 508 Thanked 462 Times in 162 Posts	There are a lot of "If's" here. The way I see it the guy in the Formula DID keep a proper lookout. He saw the boat, decided to pass the boat and laserp came off plain and turned into the Formula's path. Now the "20 feet" mentioned has to be believed and it's probably an embellishment, however even if accurate the Formula may have been about to pass at 150 feet until laserp admittedly turned into the path of the Formula. The Formula seemed to have taken some evasive action according to the story, unless I missed something, to avoid the collision. Sorry, I still hold laserp accountable for the incident.

The Following User Says Thank You to hazelnut For This Useful Post:
Woodsy (09-13-2013)

09-13-2013, 04:55 PM	#2
ITD Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Moultonboro, NH Posts: 2,931 Thanks: 478 Thanked 693 Times in 388 Posts	At the end of the day there was no collision and no one got hurt. What scares me is the number of people who feel it is perfectly reasonable to pass within 150 feet of another vessel that is traveling at 25 mph, to top it off, they think due to their interpretation of the law, that the vessel being passed will maintain its course so it reasonable to pass so closely. I will continue to vigilantly look for you as I travel on the lake, because honestly, you scare me.

09-13-2013, 05:47 PM	#5
hazelnut Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 1,348 Blog Entries: 3 Thanks: 508 Thanked 462 Times in 162 Posts	ITD. The MAJOR point being made here is the following. A good captain ALWAYS, checks his or her surroundings BEFORE making a change of course and or speed. While you are correct that we should never assume that all captains are "good" given the example laid out here laserp was NOT a good captain at the time. And to concede to your point the captain of the Formula was not being a "good" captain either. However, I along with Woodsy and a few others are taking issue with laserp pointing the finger at the Formula when in fact laserp was just as much if not slightly MORE at fault. Remember when you point a finger there are three pointing back at you.

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Pricestavern For This Useful Post:
Chaselady (09-14-2013), gillygirl (09-15-2013)

09-15-2013, 11:35 AM	#7
hazelnut Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 1,348 Blog Entries: 3 Thanks: 508 Thanked 462 Times in 162 Posts	Ay yai yai. Direct quote: " I may have been cruising for 5 minutes when I was getting to my destination. Started to pull off plain and pull to the right. Turned around and this guy was 20ft from me doing at least 30." He STARTED TO PULL OFF PLAIN AND PULL TO THE RIGHT. The next sentence, TURNED AROUND AND THIS GUY WAS... yada yada yada. Admitted in his own words that he failed to keep a proper lookout. My lord above. lol

The Following User Says Thank You to gillygirl For This Useful Post:
Chaselady (09-15-2013)

09-15-2013, 08:15 PM	#9
hazelnut Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 1,348 Blog Entries: 3 Thanks: 508 Thanked 462 Times in 162 Posts	gilly, It has nothing to do with being a KNOW it all. The man said in his own words that DIRECT QUOTE: He "..Looked behind me many times and there was no boat within 500 yards. I may have been cruising for 5 minutes when I was getting to my destination" If you can't read that as, he waited 5 minutes before looking behind his vessel or the fact that he didn't state that he checked behind his vessel before making the maneuver then ummmm wow... is all I can say. I mean no big deal but the man said in his post that he ..had an hole in a 30 ft Formula almost run his boat over mine at night on a weekend.* All I am saying is that by his post it looks very much like he failed to keep a proper lookout. I am by no way excusing the operator of the Formula for his part. However the poster, laserp was NO BETTER an operator at the time. Therefore, as I said before, when you point the finger oftentimes there are three fingers pointing back at you. Nothing personal towards you or anyone else. It seems as though many here aren't truly familiar with boating law. YIKES.

09-15-2013, 08:20 PM	#10
Chaselady Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2012 Location: Melvin Village Posts: 309 Thanks: 150 Thanked 105 Times in 73 Posts	I agree with Gilly, he never said he didn't look behind in those 5 minutes. Can't blame a person for not responding when he gets chewed up by the the piranhas on this forum.

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Woodsy For This Useful Post:
hazelnut (09-16-2013), LIforrelaxin (09-16-2013)

09-15-2013, 09:49 PM	#12
Chaselady Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2012 Location: Melvin Village Posts: 309 Thanks: 150 Thanked 105 Times in 73 Posts	I am not saying who was wrong, I was not there. It's not what is being said here, but how it is being delivered. There is an element of cruelty in some messages that I find very disappointing. This is not what I expected from "senior, experienced boaters" it doesn't promote a good learning experience to newer members...rather it becomes intimidating and demeaning.

The Following User Says Thank You to Woodsy For This Useful Post:
hazelnut (09-16-2013)

09-16-2013, 09:24 AM	#20
LIforrelaxin Senior Member Join Date: May 2006 Location: Texas, Lake Ray Hubbard and NH, Long Island Winnipesaukee Posts: 2,875 Thanks: 1,037 Thanked 892 Times in 524 Posts	You know, I was trying to give people of an idea of the distance covered in Five minutes... which should have been the end of all this... Because the bottom line is if LaserP truly waited five minutes after checking 360 degrees around him, then he traveled 1.9 miles... durring which time, a boat directly behind him travel only 7 mph faster would have traveled 2.5 miles to be in roughly the same location... that means that at the last 360 degree check the Formula was more then 1/2 a mile behind him... Also likely is that when laserP last did a 360 degree check, is that the formula was not right behind him, but vectoring in from another direction, approaching from the rear. And my have not been picked up in his scan. Laserp made the conscious decision to post about his incident... yes maybe commiserating with GBG..... So in my mind, the feed back here is warranted. He of course slammed the Formula Driver pretty hard. No one, who has posted in the thread has slammed LaserP..... we have all simply posted, in response to the information that was given. And noted on the situation that possibly LaserP needed to think through his actions a bit more, and that possibly he had some blame in the situation... No one here is perfect, nor have I ever heard anyone claim to be perfect. However we all view things uniquely...... Those of us that understand the mathematics of the situation, have simply posted, that hey 5 minutes is a long time, and a lot of ground and situation changes did take place. And the bottom line is to keep a proper look out, you have to be aware of your situational surrounding more often then every five minutes... Quite often I find people jumping to conclusions, and as is human nature, we don't want to think we are wrong. Part of whats wrong in today's society is that people don't want to take the time to self reflect, and re-think there actions, realizing that they may have had some blame.... Last what if laserp was just trying to stir the pot? he has very few posts, and hasn't bothered to chime back in........I guess he succeeded if that is what he was trying to do.. __________________ Life is about how much time you can spend relaxing... I do it on an island that isn't really an island.....

09-16-2013, 08:12 AM	#25
hazelnut Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 1,348 Blog Entries: 3 Thanks: 508 Thanked 462 Times in 162 Posts	So then laserp deliberately turned into the path of the formula? I am baffled here. Gilly and ITD. I am not addressing the op or anything else. My point all along has been that laserp came on to the forum calling someone else an a##hole and then illustrated a story that CLEARLY shows that he steered his vessel towards an overtaking vessel. No assumptions necessary here. That is a fact that lp himself stated. So NO BIG DEAL. I take issue with his attitude in his op. He blamed the other captain entirely. THEY WERE BOTH WRONG. What is your crusade on this one? Are you mad that I am not calling out Greens Basin Girl? When I read this thread and got involved in this discussion I was irritated by lp's story more than GBG's story. Would you like me to go back and pick her story apart? Would it then be ok and we could call a truce. No matter how you read this, being a technical writer, or a Masters Degree holder (me), how can you not see the fact that lp made a navigational error and steered INTO the path of another vessel. The Formula could have been DEAD wrong in that they themselves did not leave enough room. All I know is that I have to assume that lp is a sane and maybe even a FANTASTIC captain with YEARS of experience. Heck he may be one of the better boaters on the lake. Unfortunately HE made an error in failing to keep proper lookout. (FACT NOT OPINION) unless we play the "sane" card lol, as I said. So he messed up. Whoops.... no biggie. So he steered into the path of the overtaking vessel, Started to pull off plain and pull to the right. Turned around and this guy was 20ft from me doing at least 30. Then made a move to recover: I hit the throttle and cut hard right and fortunately he cut hard left. Missed me by 20ft... AT NIGHT!! lp came on this forum and called another boater an A##hole. His words not mine. He then illustrated a story that calls into question his skills as a captain. It's pretty plain and simple. I don't know either captain. The Formula captain is not held blameless in this scenario. And that is all this is, a scenario. ITD to your point, there would have been an extensive investigation and honestly I do not know what the outcome would be. If alcohol was involved we all know what the outcome would be. However, if lp told the story to the police as he did here it would be quite interesting to say the least as to what the outcome would be. Can we all just say thank god that didn't happen.

09-16-2013, 07:13 AM	#29
Happy Gourmand Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Ruskin FL Posts: 1,027 Thanks: 188 Thanked 322 Times in 179 Posts	"Why would any sane captain do that?" So, now Laser is insane? LOL C'mon, people, lighten up. We only have the "facts" from one side. And even those probably don't tell the whole story as he saw it.

09-16-2013, 07:52 AM	#33
ITD Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Moultonboro, NH Posts: 2,931 Thanks: 478 Thanked 693 Times in 388 Posts	So let's suppose in this example there was a few witnesses nearby and God forbid boat A (being passed) was run over by boat B (the boat doing the passing). (I purposely did not use laser and formula to describe the boats because boat brands is the last thing I'm thinking about here and I'm a little disturbed it was even brought up.) So again, let's suppose the captain is alone in boat a and is killed in the crash, Boat b has minor injuries. A forensic team determines that Boat B was passing boat A, no one knows if Boat A was maintaining proper lookout or not, who do you think would be found responsible for the crash??

09-16-2013, 07:46 AM	#35
NH_boater Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 298 Thanks: 14 Thanked 147 Times in 62 Posts	Laser did show up here with an agenda and with a major attitude, as depicted by his/her choice of language. It is hard for me to be sympathetic when someone makes this grand booming entrance, third post, expecting support but appears to be in the wrong. I think many people had two reactions. (1) Why the language and tone? (2) Wait a minute, Laser seems to be in the wrong by his/her own description. I expect that if laser posted with a civil tone and appropriate language, he/she would have been treated differently.