Price and you are probably correct. I think many of us that have taken up issue with this is that lp came on and insulted the other boater and then insulted a class of boaters. lp himself made an error in navigation by his own admission. Although some seem to fail to grasp that concept. Anyway, you are most very likely correct that the captain of the Formula messed up and should have given much more space than he did. Especially at night.

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

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..

Umm, BS and MS in Physics here, so I get the mathematics. That's not my argument (and how insulting that you assume I don't get the math). My argument is with the assumption that laserp didn't look behind his boat for 5 minutes. Laserp never stated that; people are parsing two separate sentences to put words in his mouth. Yes, his writing is unclear, but why assume what you're assuming? Why not ask him for clarification? Why not try to see that he was doing all that looking around in the 5 minutes it took to reach his destination? I know I don't like it when people try to twist my words into something I didn't say. I'll stick around and call you on it. Perhaps laserp didn't feel like bothering.

I completely agree that by laserp's own description of slowing and turning, and then seeing the Formula that he did not maintain a proper watch. But you do assume the distance between the two was 150' or so, otherwise you assume there would have been a collision. You yourself state it's debatable. I guess the issue that I'm having with your point is that you seem to absolve the Formula of any wrongdoing. If I am incorrect I apologize.

gilly it really seems as though you are taking this all so personally. Answer this question. Do you think, based on lp's statement, that there is a higher than normal probability that laserp made an error and failed to keep a proper lookout? If you do not think that there is a higher than normal probability then explain laserp's statement to me... this one:

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

By his own admission he appears to be surprised that a boat was so close to him and by his own admission laserp then had to take evasive action:

I hit the throttle and cut hard right and fortunately he cut hard left.

Explain to me your theoretical probabilities on this one. laserp appear to be surprised to see a boat and then had to make an evasive maneuver to avoid a collision. Why are you taking this all so personally. LIFORRELAXIN wasn't calling you out specifically and neither am I. What is it that we are doing that is so offensive to you. I am not bashing lp. What I am doing is taking issue with his post that included name calling and derogatory statements towards a boater while he himself made an error in the situation. I am not saying lp is completely to blame. I am merely pointing out that lp has owns some blame in this situation. I am not PARSING sentences btw. I am a very well educated person myself. I have read the post with your theories in mind, do the same with my theories in your head. The probability that lp did NOT look behind him based on his statements is off the charts high. He posted as if he didn't consider that was the law. Regardless of how one reads his post it is very clear that lp made a little mistake. NO BIG DEAL. This isn't personal, stop making it personal.

GG,

If you get the math, then that is great... By no means was my post call you or anyone else out personally... now if you decided to take it personally then I can't do anything about that...

Now, I decided to re-read laserp post... and let me say this... His actions after discovering the formula coming up from behind, only made a bad situation worse. And Luckily didn't end up in an accident. He slowed down and turned right, then noticed a boat coming from the stern on the right, and chose to continue to turn right, and powered back up? hummmm

What if the formula saw him turn right and slow down, and headed further right to clear him? Figuring it was safer to continue on his course and avoid having to cut back over the wake. Or maybe powering back up saved Laserp's bacon... I don't know... maybe it wasn't as close as he tries to make it out.. I don't know.... Maybe Maybe Maybe, and what if could go on all day...

The bottom line is he failed to keep a constant look out, was caught by surprise, and then felt he had no blame in situation...


Me stands by my closing of my last post...

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..

There are a number of people with a mindset that performance boaters are the enemy..... and do anything to put undo blame on them...

Let me say this, I am not a performance boater, nor do I own one.... I can only go off of what was posted here... what was posted here, tells me that the poster, had blame in the situation... how much, is hard to tell with out being there... I have been boating all my life, and ended up in many bad situations... you can take two avenues after a bad situation:

1-- Assume you had no blame and the other guy was totally at fault.

2-- look at your actions, decide where you could have done things differently, and avoid the potential situation next time.

All anyone her has tried to do, was look at the situation constructively... and point out how things could have been done differently...

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.

time for a thread lockdown.
 

this thread has gotten way out of control. Time to end it with a padlock!!!!

I'm sorry gilly. I really think you need to step away from the keyboard. Somewhere along the way you took this way way too personally. I am not being passive aggressive nor am I being anything aggressive. You were the first one here to throw around your education and knowledge, not me. Now you're "outraged" oh wait now you're not? Relax, it's a debate about an issue. You see things one way, I see them another. IT IS NOT PERSONAL! Do you go on the internet to have a love fest and just agree with everything you read? I have to say in this instance, sorry no disrespect, that you are reaching for theories. I feel as though you are letting things cloud your judgement on this one. lp MADE A MISTAKE. That is the central issue. Not whether or not I am more educated than you or you are smarter than all of us. Forget about the 5 minutes, before the maneuver, he made a navigational move into the path of another boat. THAT IS ALL WE NEED TO KNOW!!! Yes I am really really perplexed that you can't see that simple fact that lp turned into another boats path and HE ADMITTED IT! lol I guess I give up on this one. Take a breath and relax. It's ok to debate people. You have your theory, I have mine. Enjoy the day.

Just explaining my math....

I am basing my assumption that the distance was approximately 150' or greater based on Lasers story...

1. That the Formula was 30 feet long. (That's the length Laser gave) So 150' is approximately 5 boat lengths. A 30' Formula depending on model weighs in somewhere between 9000 & 10000+ lbs.

2. The closing speeds.... Distance/Time. According to Laser the Formula was traveling at 30 MPH or 44 FPS (3.4 seconds to cover 150')
Initially Laser was traveling at 23 MPH or 33.7 FPS so we had a closure rate of only 7 MPH or 10.2 FPS.... no big deal.

BUT.... Laser slowed down and came off plane and turned to starboard crossing into the path of the Formula that he did not see. So now the closure rate jumps to whatever speed the Formula (that had already committed to overtaking Laser) was traveling. Per Laser's story 30 MPH or 44 FPS. This gives the Formula (an approximately 10,000lb boat) 3.4 seconds to avoid a collision. Most people have a reaction time of .3 seconds. At night I am sure its probably a little more especially when the Formula would not know of a course change by Laser until he saw his green bow light (Laser would have turned close to 22.5 degrees before the light would be shown). But using the easy math... the Formula had approximately 3.1 seconds to decide on a course of action, slow, change course to port and pass 20' to the rear of Laser's boat even as Laser tightened his turn to starboard into the path of the Formula.

3.1 seconds to miss by 20 feet.... In a 30' approximately 10,000lb boat. If there was less than 150' there probably would have been a collision.

Obviously we can debate hundreds of variables, but on the surface I stand by my calcs!

Woodsy

Well as you say, we can debate hundreds of variables. You're making assumptions which I'm uncomfortable with.

Pot, kettle, black. You're obviously not reading what I wrote for comprehension.

What is uncomfortable? Using Laser's story as a basic math problem, The Formula missed by 20'... The numbers are pretty clear. I mean sure there is +/- a few feet in there. I explained the distance/time problem pretty clearly.

If you are saying the Formula was closer than 150' then he had even LESS time than 3.1 seconds to react.... making the driver of the Formula pretty amazing that he avoided a collision.

Please feel free to refute my math!

Don't get me wrong, I get that missing by 20' is a little scary. BUT that doesn't mean that person who missed was in the wrong.

Woodsy
Woodsy

For the pot to be calling the kettle black you would be making the hugely wrong assumption that I am taking any of this personal, which I am not. I find this to be a fantastically fun debate on a subject that is very very interesting.

I believe that no matter what, the 5 minutes, the 20 feet the 150 feet the dark night sky, the size of the boats, whatever, laserp steered his vessel into the path of an overtaking vessel. That is the one irrefutable fact that nobody will ever convince me otherwise. Even if the Formula was doing 35, 40, 45 MPH and breaking a whole slew of laws, laserp didn't see the boat ( again assuming he is a sane captain ;) ) and he turned into the path of the Formula. So like I said, my one and only point in all of this is that laserp called another driver an a##hole and then proceeded to call his manhood into question, all while illustrating that he made a mistake himself.

It's been fun and interesting discussing this. VERY eye opening too. :eek:

That's where you and I differ greatly, when you consider the time delay to decide there is a problem, the time decide how to correct, the time it takes to turn the wheel to initiate a direction change and the latency time between a control input and boat reaction, the Formula was way to close for the speed and conditions. Had he maintained a greater distance during his pass all of your other points would be moot as he never would have gotten so close. The Formula driver had complete power to drive safer and pass in a way that this could have never happened. If he didn't learn his lesson this time then we may be reading about him someday. Ditto for lasep as there are many boat drivers like the Formula guy and his chance of one of them getting him is much higher if he turns before he looks.

ITD...

Had the Formula passed to port the point would be moot. Had Laser looked and seen the Formula the point would be moot. Had Laser not turned the point would be moot.

How much distance is required? The law says 150'...

Don't get me wrong I am a big fan of as much room as possible. But I still fail to see how the Formula acted improperly. There was enough (just enough) for the Formula to maneuver and avoid Laser. The math I did pointed to a separation distance right around 150'. It could have been greater or less. Either way it was definitely close. BUT without the Formula's side of the story and the numbers being what they are (From Laser) I have a hard time saying the guy in Formula did anything wrong when we have Laser admitting to violating 2 laws....

Woodsy

I'll settle this little tempest in a teapot for ya...
 

Y'all know me. Know how I earn a livin'. I'll settle this debate for you, but it ain't gonna be easy. Bad debate. Not like going down the pond chasin' bluegills and tommycods. This debate, swallow you whole. Little shakin', little tenderizin', an' down you go. And we gotta do it quick, that'll bring back your other forum readers, put all your businesses on a payin' basis. But it's not gonna be pleasant. I value my neck a lot more than three thousand bucks, chief.

I'll analyze it for three, but I'll answer it and settle it, for ten. But you've gotta make up your minds and ante up. If you want to play it cheap, you can go round and round the whole winter. I don't want no volunteers, I don't want no mates, there's just too many captains on this lake. $10,000 for me by myself. For that you get the head, the tail, the whole damn answer.

Two laws??? I don't think so, but it doesn't matter and we are not going to agree on these points, as I said, I'll be watching for those who think that the Formula guy had no fault in this. You have also ignored the fact the laserp said he was 150 feet from a mooring field and the Formula was going to pass between Laserp and the field, that is definitely not legal and breaks the 150 foot law twice....

So I don't agree with laserp making fun of formula owners' junk, and I think laserp probably was as irate as the formula guy in their confrontation after the near miss, but I get the feeling you are defending this guy because of the boat he drives.....

There once was a man named Quint,
To the heart of the argument he wint
He said for a price,
He’d settle it nice,
But the answer will cost you a mint.

WOW! Been away for 10 days over seas, missed all this. I can't read it all now, but get the gist. Yes I was irate! Yes I failed to look behind me at the time I made a maneuver. That won't happen again. Yes the other guy was speeding, maybe 40 plus. He passed me within 20ft like I was standing still. Yes he was going to pass me on the starboard side, while I was 150 feet away from moored boats in a marina. I was still on plain maybe doing 20 when I saw him. I probably started pulling back on my throttle and maybe traveled 20 ft off my heading, it may have been 5 seconds...that's about it, from my change in speed and course. He was on a course to blow by me within 50 ft...at night. NO QUESTION. Put away your calculator and trust me on this one woodsie. Nothing personal taken.

OK - I did one thing wrong. Being stupid, I did not look behind me before I made a maneuver. I did look behind me minutes before and there was no boat in site, so my brain told me I was OK, thinking there is no way anyone could be anywhere near me. Never again.

The guy in the Formula was at fault, no question. My guess is he was looking elsewhere within those 5 seconds and not at the boat in front of him. Maybe he just didn't see me, I don't know.

What if I was stopping and turning because of something in the water, at night, that I couldn't see? a small boat, a log, a swimmer? Would it be my fault then?

I love Formula's I want one. I just see a lot of Formulas out there with a lot of power and it seems there is a higher percentage of them with irresponsible boaters in them.

Barking up the wrong tree
 

Huh? I take serious issue with this statement. Performance boat operators are by far the MOST responsible operators on this lake. Every bonehead, "irresponsible" move I see is made by someone operating a vessel other than a performance boat. Better re-think your claim.

Yeah, this is where you are losing them laserp, better to say something like this: "I love Formulas and performance boat drivers in general, but this guy, he wasn't like those people, he must have just upgraded from a jet ski."


Ok, I'm kidding, just kidding I have 2 jet skis.

OK - just one guy. The rest are spotless..;)

I am so glad you came back on...although it was really uncomfortable. There are a lot of idiots driving boats on this lake. They drive small boats, sailboats, pontoons, Bajas, and god forbid, even Formulas. And believe it or not, there are many that THINK they know all the rules of the lake, even though by their actions they obviously aren't right. And guess what?! Most of us ( myself included) have called someone an ***hole for an infraction.

Who's 70% at Fault? The "Burdened" Vessel?
 

Les Hall of BoaterEd.com agrees with Woodsy.

http://www.boatered.com/forum/topic....06&whichpage=1

(Noted was that Florida uses the term, "Right of Way").

But Les Hall was the Concord, NH, skipper who asserted that "Lake Winnipesaukee was too small for 'performance boats'—go to the ocean, it's only an hour away."

Just ask them...

:rolleye2:

I did. :eek: Check the facts with Marine Patrol. I would put any amount of money on the fact that the "per-category" ratio of violations is far lower for performance boats that most if not all other classes of vessels on the lake. Probably the only class vessel with a lower rate of violations is the cabin cruiser class. You can put all the roll-eye icons in your reply that you want, but it won't change the facts.

Takes a big man to admit he made a mistake. Welcome back on the forum. And keep that head on a swivel, ya never know WHO you're almost gonna run into. ;)

That reminds me. Didn't someone post the stops made by MP in a summer? Where do you find that? Under MP? I was talking to some friends last night and we were wondering how many stops MP is making.

Huh?
 

I take serious issue with THIS statement. I thought I was the MOST responsible operator on this lake.....and I don't have a performance boat. ;)

Pintoon boats
 

Seems like a while ago pontoon skippers were the 'darlings' of the SL crowd. They could do no wrong. Just spend a weekend watching them come in and out of Thurston's on a busy day and you will beg to differ.

Two weekends ago, a pontoon was coming into the Weirs Channel at a pretty fast clip. I was going the opposite direction and the tritoon was practically traveling down the middle of the channel forcing traffic to move to the right. As I was next to the toon I wanted to say something and was shocked to see a kid about 12 years old at the helm! All the grownups on the toon weren't even paying attention?

Where are the marine patrol when you really need them????

You are the 2nd most responsible operator! :coolsm:

I'm new to this forum... seems like there are some very knowledgeable boaters here. I may have stepped out a little on the wrong foot, but was in a very bad mood at the time. I admit, I've learned a couple things already by reading here, so thanks. And apologies for my hull profiling comments, for those I may have flamed.
Laser

Laserp - welcome!
I have been boating all my life, my dad made me take a boaters safety course when I was 12...I can honestly say, that I am guilty of some bonehead moves and probably used the middle finger a few times.
Anyway...$%it happens, we are human and can't all be perfect.
Enjoy the Lake!

"Cant Be perfect"
 

We can try :) All 219 pages CC regs
Maybe Bone up over the winter ? ;) http://www.boatered.com/navrules.pdf :)
Interesting reading actually, Toot Toot ;)

Listing the Violations that Count...
 

Don't ask the Newbie MPs...

:rolleye2:

What follows is something seasoned MPs could tell you...

:eek2:

"Per-category ratio", recent Winnipesaukee history would argue against the previous assertion—not to mention that the "violations" to victims were mortal violations:

1. Wolfeboro —Donzi— 1 Victim
2. Diamond Is. —Formula— 1 Victim
3. Meredith —Baja— 1 Victim
4. Gilford —Cigarette— 3 Victims

How about you list the rest of the "categories".
Sailboats
Canoes
Kayaks
Pontoon boats
PWCs
etc

As Chip said, how about the rest of the categories/victims? Just as a start, how about this one? Laconia - wakeboarding (probably not a performance boat) 1 victim

http://www.laconiadailysun.com/index...d-boataccident

Or this one: Gilford - Chaparral (collided with a Formula) - 4 victims

http://www.lowellsun.com/news/ci_235...h-that-hurt?so

APS, you can try spinning this all you want to mold it "your way" but getting back on the point of the original statement: there are few violations incurred by performance boaters.

The truth of the mater is we can all find information to support our cause...

But if we look at the comprehensive statistic over the course of time is when we see the real picture.

I suggest reading some of these reports:

http://www.uscgboating.org/statistic...tatistics.aspx

These aren't some looking for support for their cause, but rather nation wide statistics provide by the coast guard... These are FACT....

Most importantly what I noted, after breezing through these is that smaller boats under 25' are the most prone to accidents... not the 25' to 35' high performance boats, that people seem to think don't have a place on the lake....

By the nature of economics bigger boats are more expensive... which means when you lay down the cash for a bigger boat, you are more likely to know what you are doing, as you don't want to make a foolish investment.

This summer I have had more issue, with bow riders and jet skis then I have any other type of boat... but I am not out trying to get them banned....

I agree with most of this...but not with the belief that people who buy the most expensive boats "know what they're doing"
I am amazed at the number of large, expensive boats that fly through the NWZ and on the wrong side of the markers in front of my house. How can you spend over 100 grand on a boat and not bother to either look at a chart or know what the rules are. Money does not equal brains.