Next message: (no email): "lv-ab: Re: What the heck is it? (was Sailboaters, er Fishermen, um,wakes...)"
> I seem to recall the official position of USCG is that if the
> propulsion engine is running it is a motor boat.
Is there some specific citation to this? So far none specified in this
thread has actually addressed this - except for sailboats over 20 meters
in length.
> Can you imagine a motorboat throwing the engine into nutreal just
> before impact and claiming it was not a motor boat but not under
> command?> ?
I see no evidence that an Admiralty Court would credibly affirm such a
claim. Nor do I think that avenue of consideration will lead us to a
conclusion of the essential question of this part of the thread.
In the case linked previously in the thread a sailboater claimed a
fishing boat he ran into was "under way" rather than "stationary" as the
fishing boat owners claimed. (And as "under way" as a "power boat" he
claimed it was responsible for violating his right-of-way). The Court
acknowledged that the fisher was not truly stationary as it was
drifting, but then stated that issue (considered either way) was not the
factor upon which they would assign responsibility for the collision.
The Court ruled against the sailor for failure to maintain watch (single
handed and self acknowledged may have been sleeping) and to make his
vessel visible (some lights and both radios and the radar out of
commission). A very reasonable ruling, IMO.
___________________________________________________________________________
|| The Live-Aboard List : send a "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" request ||
|| in body of message to: ||
