Finally... a sense of humor! I don't care who you are thats funny!

Bear Islander... Don't you think turn about should be fair play? I figure if you want to use boating accidents that occurred all over the country and apply them to laws that you think we should have here in NH, even though here in NH we have only had 1 fatal accident in the last 5 years. I figure I should be able to use that same argument to ban you from enjoying a personal liberty!

I am not going to say your lying, but to be truthful, while you may meet Sir Richard Branson's Virgin Galactic definition of Astronaut, your flight does NOT meet the definition of Astronaut according to the NASA website.

The pilots of the rocket may meet the definition of astronaut, (see my paragraph below) however, you as $200,000 passenger/cargo do not.

http://www.nasa.gov/worldbook/astronaut_worldbook.html

"The term astronaut also has a meaning that is not connected with NASA activities. In the 1960's, the United States Department of Defense AWARDED the rating of astronaut to military and civilian pilots who FLEW aircraft higher than 50 miles (80 kilometers). Seven test pilots received this rating for flights in the X-15 rocket plane. Flights of the X-15 ended in 1968."

To think that because you can afford to to pay $200,000 you should be able to have the same title as Neil Armstrong, Buzz Aldrin, Alan Shepard, etc is absolutely absurd! It is an absolute insult to those who EARNED thier right to call themselves ASTRONAUT by being the best of the best!

Woodsy

According to Websters I am an astronaut already.

http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/astronaut

I wonder what Neil, Buzz and Alan think of Lisa Nowak being called an Astronaut.

Anyway it's just a name. Doing it is what's important.

BI,
If you want your $200,000 thrill to last a lot longer , go buy a nice performance boat and see what it's all about;)

Zoom,Zoom,Zoom
 

Amen, Brother....Amen

The Breeze:D

Wrong!Pedestrians are not allowed on interstate highways.They are allowed any other highway.

I love that one,suicide is illegal everywhere.Guess what,going over headway within 150 ft is a violation already too!!!

So what about you risking other peoples lives with your risky behavior?It looks like we should set limits on your activities so in the unlikely chance you get stranded,someone might die trying to rescue you.This big brother crap has to stop.

If a mountain climber in Antarctica needs rescue, it can only come from the other climbers that have already accepted that same risk. Part of that risk is that you may die rescuing others.

That has nothing whatsoever to do with enacting a boating speed limit on Winnipesaukee. I can understand you are frustrated by recent events, but equating apples and oranges is not the solution. And your example is more like apples and penguins.

Not to split hairs.... You claimed to meet NASA's definition. Webster's Dictionary is not NASA.

Woodsy

Sorry, you took me to seriously. I was contrasting NHRBA and NASA. The first human in space, Yuri Gagarin, is not an astronaut by NASA's bureaucratic definition. However people like Ed Givens are, despite the fact they never flew to space.

I spent some time with a couple of your "real astronauts" last week during training and they were very gracious in using the term with reference to Virgin Galactic clients.

Yuri Gagarin was not an American, but Russian and as such he would be called a Cosmonaut. I am not sure what the Russian definition translates to as I need to bone up on my Cyrillic. Gagarin also didn't pay for his trip... He was the best of thier best... Not some rich guy with $200K to burn.

Those Astronauts had better gracious in using the term used by Virgin Galactic.... they are being paid by Virgin Galactic! The reality is you are doing nothing more than buying a very expensive plane ticket to just beyond the edge of the atmosphere. I think its great that you means and the opportunity to do that, but to call yourself an Astronaut tarnishes the term.

Woodsy

That's low
 

From the Wiki entry for Lisa Nowak

"...received a BS degree in aerospace engineering from the U.S. Naval Academy in 1985. Nowak received a Master of Science degree in aeronautical engineering, and a degree in aeronautical and astronautical engineering in 1992 from the U.S. Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, California."

"Nowak received her commission from the U.S. Navy in 1985, and became a naval flight officer in 1987. After her postgraduate studies, Nowak entered Aerospace Engineering Duty and the U.S. Naval Test Pilot School. She logged over 1,500 hours of flight in over 30 different aircraft during her career in the Navy, and obtained the rank of captain."

"Nowak was selected to be an astronaut in 1996 and entered the NASA Astronaut Corps at Johnson Space Center in August of that year. She qualified as a mission specialist in robotics, and was assigned to mission STS-118. After schedule changes, she instead went into space on July 4, 2006 as a member of the STS-121 crew to the International Space Station. Nowak served as mission flight engineer, operated the shuttle's robotic arm during several spacewalks, and logged almost 13 days in space."

It's highly likely that Neil, Buzz and Alan take no issue with her being called an astronaut based on her credentials...I doubt anyone here knows how her personal problems may have affected their opinion of what kind of astronaut she was or what kind of person she is.

The term you should be trying to keep untarnished is "NASA Astronaut". As far as the general term astronaut goes the ship has already sailed. The FAA regulates commercial spaceflight and they have determined that anyone flying higher than 92.6 kilometers is an astronaut. We will be receiving FAA Astronaut Wings.

None of this has anything to do with speed limits.

Bear Islander...

I can't believe you don't research before you post....

You are wrong yet again... well at least your wrong according to the Virgin Galactic website.

http://www.virgingalactic.com/htmlsite/index.php

http://www.virgingalactic.com/htmlsi...Picture&src=26

"Will I officially become an Astronaut?
Yes. The term Astronaut is a derived from Greek words Ajstron ("star") and nautes ("sailor"). The criteria for determining who has achieved human spaceflight vary. In the United States, people who travel above an altitude of 50 miles (80 km) are designated as astronauts. The FAI defines spaceflight as over 100 km (62 miles).Virgin Galactic passengers will receive their Virgin Galactic astronaut wings and may recieve FAA astronaut wings as well."

The key there is "may recieve". The FAA has only awarded 2 people with Commercial Astronaut Wings, and they were the pilots in command of the spacecraft. I highly doubt the FAA is going to award wings to hundreds of people just because they were wealthy enough to afford a $200,000 space ticket. Of course for $200K Virgin Galactic should give you a little gold trinket!

Have fun with those Virgin Galactic Wings!

Woodsy

You can check the FAA site.

But I think yesterdays vote has more to do with your posts than anything else.

The Bad 1%
 

You two sound like the 1% of the boaters that are causing 98% of the animosity toward the GFBL crowd. I hope you will be the first to be targeted once the speed limit goes into effect!

You may be right. I should not have allowed myself to be pulled into this silly argument.

Woodsy- You are correct! Declare victory if you like.

D' oh too soon to gloat Bear. Not sure I'd want to be a passenger in that craft's first, or even second or third mission.

Bear Islander

Even though I'm not real happy with anyone associated with WinnFabs at the moment, I, for one, commend (and envy) your upcoming adventure on Virgin Galactic!:)

IMHO, if mankind is ever going to spread beyond this planet, space travel will need to transition into the realm of a commercial venture. You and others like you with the bucks and guts to support the earliest steps in that direction will play an important role in that transition!

Silver Duck

Guns don't kill people - people kill people! And it's not the boat - it's the operator, plain and simple. Be it a 38' boat that can go 100mph or a 20' that can go 60mph, or a 13' Whaler that can go 25mph. All can be dangerous in the wrong hands - I am 100% opposed to the speed limit and 100% in favor of boater education and the use of COMMON SENSE! Come on people - think about it, rules in place or not - you shouldn't pass another boat (of any kind) at speed inside a safe distance - currently stated at a resonable 150'. As PM203 said - coming out of the channel I do the same thing as he does, get WELL clear of the NWZ and other boats and then get up and going. HeII - we are boating, where's the fire - what's the hurry - enjoy the lake, enjoy your boat and the people you are with and relax. And, at the end of the day - if I want to head out to the broads and rip it up for a quick blast at speed - so-be-it! I see FAR MORE bone-head moves over the course of a summer by people in "family" boats - bow-riders and cruisers - than I do in "performance boats". You can't judge a whole group (or a "cult" as APS referred to us as... :rolleye2:) by one individual who made a poor choice one night! (operator error - not the boats fault). Water on the water, beer on the pier - be smart, use your head and we'll all be better off for it.

common sense what a concept
 

Would'nt it be nice if we could teach COMMON SENSE. If everyone had common sense would we need any laws at all? I'am sorry but bone heads come in every size boat out there. But I would be more afraid of one going 100 mph than one going 25 mph. Can you tell me why anyone has to go that fast? I don't need a law to tell me not to drive drunk that is "COMMON SENSE" but hello lots of people drive drunk. So until everyone passes the common sense test i think we need some laws to help keep the bone heads in check. How can it hurt?

You need to reread your own post.You just said we you don't need a law to tell you not to drive drunk but lots do anyway and then imply that speed limits will stop fast boats.You just countered your own argument.

Sorry - but by "boneheads" - whom would you be referring to!? The guy in the 40' cruiser plowing along at 15 mph and letting up a HUGE wake resulting in all kinds of near-by vessel and / or shore-line damage!? (yep, see it all the time). Or the person out in the kayak or row boat at night, paddling along at 3 mph, with no lights thinking this is safe and ok!? Oh, wait - maybe you mean the woman driving the 23' bowrider leaving the channel and mashing the throttle forward when there are 2 or 3 other boats within 50' of her!? Yep, I have seen all of this stuff - live and in person - and it just blows my mind. I agree - common sense can't be taught, but I still don't see how a speed limit will cure anything, esp. a "problem" that doesn't exist! Last time I checked - the most recent "bone head" move on the lake with catastrophic results occurred at 28 mph!?!? Let's enforce the laws we have that will really make a difference - not institute new ones that will just tax the current system and fix nothing! :rolleye2:

Nimby...
 

So, we get to re-visit this thread again... remember the original post?

1) Whenever I see ineligible people using the handicapped parking spaces, SUVs parking in malls' fire lanes, and the occasional shooting of Bald Eagles, I am reminded of this post.

2) Another thought: some very vocal opponents to Winnipesaukee speed limits admit to living on different lakes! :eek:

Yup. Let's keep the speedsters on The Big Lake—that'll work. :rolleye1:

Yup, and plenty of people supporting the speed limit live on other lakes as well. Many of the businesses on the list of supporters have nothing to do with it either.

Then the scare tactics get spread, striking fear on the voters and representatives who have never been to or know nothing about the lake...

How do explain the fact that most of the legislators that ARE familiar with the lake, also support speed limits?

The point is you can't teach common sense. So we do need laws. Of course laws are not 100 %. But something is better than nothing. Also no one has explained to me why anyone has to go 100mph on a small body of water. And yes at 100mph Winnipesaukee is very small. One great thing about N.H. is we have a coast line with a huge ocean GO FOR IT.

I don't believe you. Please provide proof.

There are 419 legislators in the list I just downloaded from the state website. Can you list the names of the ones familiar with the lake? The names of the "most" of that set that support speed limits?

For what's its worth, 9 of the 13 legislators in a Winnipesaukee town did vote for the speed limit. But surely living in a Winnipesaukee town is not the same as being familiar with the lake. That definition leaves out Rep. Pilliod.

So I guess you want to win this argument by inventing an extremely limited definition of "familiar with the lake". In you opinion what is required? Must they own a boat? How many hours of operation? How much horsepower?

Any legislator that lives in a Winnipesaukee town meets my definition. Your 9 out of 13 is the proof you are asking me for. If you listened to the debate in the house you should know that quite a few legislators from around the state stood up and related there Winnipesaukee experience and their support of speed limits. One was an ex Marine Patrol Officer. The debates are on the internet, go listen to them and hear the "proof" with your own ears.

I know a Senator that lives on Bear Island, does that count?

I don't want to win any argument. You stated something as fact that really is just your opinion or at best a guess.

Yes, I know that you know a Senator that has a summer house on Bear Island. Surely you didn't base your "fact" only on input from this one person.

Your 9 out of 13 and the recordings of the debate are facts.

You are claiming the legislature didn't know what it was doing when it passed HB847 because they are not familiar with the lake. The truth is the legislature spent a great deal of time on this legislation including many public hearings and debates. Just because you don't like what they did, does not mean they didn't know what they were doing.

You are confusing me with another poster and/or misunderstanding my posts. All in all, it really doesn't matter, I'm sorry I bored the group.

Sorry, it was codeman that made that claim. However you took up his argument so I don't see what difference it makes.

SS-194, just out of curiosity, do you have any (real) experience with "high-performance" boats!? How about anyone on this thread that is in favor of a speed limit!? Real experience, not from watching them on TV - maybe, have you ever piloted a boat above, say... 60 mph? How about 80mph? And how about that magic number of 100mph you keep referring to? Do you know anything about how they work, how they operate - what it takes to make them run... in a safe manner? Most people (99%) I have spoken with about this topic - that are in favor of a speed limit - have NO clue what a boat that will run at higher speeds is all about, aside from what they may have seen on TV one Saturday. They have never even been in a boat that will run anywhere near 80mph, let-alone 100mph. But they think they know what it's all about, "ohh - that boat looks really fast, it must be dangerous!". How about people discuss the FACTS from first-hand experience only! There are car accidents every day, there was a 16 yr old kid killed down here in Lexington the other night - he was in a MINI VAN that struck a tree! It was driven by another teenager - it was a result of operator error! Do we need to outlaw mini-vans from being on the road now 'cuz they get into accidents and kill people!? I know several people with Porsche's, Ferrari's and Lamborghini's with no accidents OR speeding tickets in them... Hmmm, dumb-luck or just responsible operators!?

Like Sgt. Friday used to say - "just the facts ma'am". I don't see how one groups speculation and desires should over-shadow another's, ESPECIALLY when there are no FACTS to support them! This is the Live Free or Die state, it is a free country last I checked and our freedoms should be held in the highest regard. We have laws on the lake today that aren't (or can't be due to lack of coverage) even enforced - 150' safe passage always comes to mind - how about we work on those first!? We can't teach common sense - I agree 100% - but we can teach people to be better and more safety-conscious boaters.

Uh...where are they here? :confused:

Lakefront dwellers on Ossipee Lake and at least two Maine lakes are represented here opposing Winnipesaukee's speed limits. A case of NIMBY?

Granted, I wouldn't want Lake Winnipesaukee's ex-cowboys near my guests and family either.

As a passenger, I've crossed Lake Winnipesaukee at 120-MPH. :eek:

The floatplane I was in was flown by my Dad—a proven pilot. :)

Moreover, both parents are certified floatplane pilots, and my Dad raced a "Laconia Speedster" on Winnipesaukee out of Melvin Village.

Both are non-drinkers and want speed limits on Winnipesaukee. That includes my in-laws, who had a kayak incident with an all-white, high performance boat within 75 feet of shore! (Visibility problem over an excessively-long deck, I'm hearing). :(

I instruct high-speed automobile car control—most recently at 130-MPH. Our club has paid corner workers, fire trucks, and ambulance "at the ready" on a closed course.

Is that enough safety—where there's absolutely no chance of drowning??

At speeds that vary between 50 and 130-MPH, I can afford only a glance at the temperature gauge once a lap: If experience tells us to avoid distractions at high speed, how does a "driver", speeding across Winnipesaukee's shoals and 253 island-strewn waters at 150-feet per second or faster, manage high speed distractions with this panoply of instruments :confused: :confused: ...plus GPS??? :eek: :eek:

http://www.pokerrunsamerica.com/arti...4fountain2.gif

http://www.livorsi.com/dash_gallery_...s/tbird_tn.jpg

http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i1...stractions.jpg

Acres per Second wrote:
At speeds that vary between 50 and 130-MPH, I can afford only a glance at the temperature gauge once a lap: If experience tells us to avoid distractions at high speed, how does a "driver", speeding across Winnipesaukee's shoals and 253 island-strewn waters at 150-feet per second or faster, manage high speed distractions with this panoply of instruments :confused: :confused: ...plus GPS??? :eek: :eek:

I have a few problems with this one.
First, if you were traveling across Winnie at 120 in a floatplane you had better have been airborne as liftoff is somewhere between 35 and 65.
Second, I raced SCCA a long time ago at speeds in excess of what you mention. If I could look only at the temp gauge once per lap we would have never won a race. You must develop a scan of the instruments, whether in an aircraft, a race car or a boat, performance or otherwise. When you have enough experience you just know when something looks wrong (a needle in the wrong position) without really seeing it. If you can't, you should be doing something else.

APS,

If you can't look at instruments at speeds between 50 and 130 MPH, then how do people fly jet planes? Last I heard they fly around 600 MPH, sometimes right over the lake.

Seriously, if the traffic on the lake is dense enough so don't have time to look at your instruments or to navigate, then you should slow down, you are being reckless.

If you are crossing shoals or dodging islands so fast that you can't read your instruments or navigate, you should slow down, you're being reckless.

If you operate your boat recklessly you should be fined or jailed.

Not one speed limit opponent will recommend operating recklessly.

Not one speed limit opponent will suggest that speeds over 45 MPH are appropriate at all times and all places.

This is pretty simple stuff you think that you would have got it by now.

I don't live on Winni, or any other body of water. In fact, I rarely boat on Winni. In fact, my PWC barely exceeds the proposed 45 mph limit. But I am adamantly opposed to the speed limit bill. When I do go on Winni, I don't want to be worried about my speed. Not to mention that if the proposal passes on the largest lake in the state, I would venture to speculate that it would be passed on other bodies of water as well.
I will say it again...there is no data that proves that speed is an issue on Lake Winni.

Now, why wouldn't you want to share the "lake of your choice" with Winnipesaukee's ex-cowboys?

But your "Unlimited Speeds" proponents tell us 120 is safe for boats! Floatplanes have options on the water—and virtually no traffic over the lake.

All boats are stuck in one dimension and, among Winnipesaukee's cowboys, small boats are the most-stuck.

I'll guess you didn't have GPS, or have three engines in your Sports Racer—or an instument panel that looks like this one: :rolleye2:

http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i1...stractions.jpg

Most of us use lights like this one:
http://www.pegasusautoracing.com/Images/M/AM3240.JPG

...you're writing of the "common sense" we aren't witnessing on the lake? :confused:

Running across islands, running upside-down into cottages, running over other boats, and running ashore is reckless, but how many others got stopped by the NHMP?

One would think so...:rolleye2:

I direct your attention to the first post in this thread, which begins..."Law or no law...."

"Law or no law, you cannot stop the speeding and noise any more than you can on route 93. I will continue to boat as I always have. And, from what I have been told, even if I get issued a ticket, which is VERY unlikely, it can be fought and won."

How about "over 90"?

"...As the owner of a boat that will do well over 90 mph,this proposed law will do nothing to change the way I boat one bit..."

I'm slow on the water, too.

Watch for me—especially if I'm capsized. :(

Sorry - did you just compare a float plane and a boat in the same sentence when discussing speed limits ON the water!? If that is the path you're going to take... You mention you teach high-speed car control in automobiles, most recently at 130mph. Impressive, but I have traveled over land at 640mph. - yes really! Ohhhh, wait - I was in a commercial airliner... but it's the same thing, right!? Sorry - your stance is really starting to take on water here - pun intended.

As much as I envy your dad for piloting the boat that he did - back in the day (loved those boats) - and being an accomplished pilot, I'm not asking about your Dad here, I'm talking about you. I don't mix alcohol and boating either - water on the water, beer on the pier - a rule (and saying) instituted by the publisher of Poker Runs Magazine, Bill Taylor. All those "distractions" you mention on the dash of a performance boat are very easily managed, if you have the experience and know-how. There are only a few that you need to be concerned about in the short-term, oil & water - temp and pressure, as you know are the "life blood" of ANY internal combustion 4-stroke motor. Aside of that, all the rest are fuel level, speed, tach, boost, volts, etc...


As far as the kayak incident being caused by "an excessively long deck" on the accused offending vessel - pure speculation! Once a performance boat is on plane, the deck is flat and you can see the horizon just fine above it, and what is in the water in front of you as well. Now, take a 35' or 40' cruiser plowing along at 15 knots - there is a visibility problem due to deck position! Notice the attached picture - that was taken at 110mph (see the GPS in the middle of the pic.?), look at the deck position - you can't even see it, visibility just fine! Oh, and that boat is 32' long - a real 32', not including any platforms etc... And we were running in the Delta, where there were no other boats to worry about and it is perfectly legal to do so. And yes, throttles are in the back position as it is operated with foot throttles, and full drive and tab trim controls on the wheel so you can keep both hands on it. And we are wearing suspender style life vests - USCG approved BTW...

Hearing Monday April 21
 

From an email...

The Senate Transportation commitee has set the public hearing date. It will be Monday, April 21st 9-12am.
This is the last public hearing before the NH Senate votes on HB847.

Darn, I'd love to be there but it's the same time as the Marathon.