Proposed Law

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by jrc

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.

[DoTheMath]

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.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by codeman671

"...plenty of people supporting the speed limit live on other lakes as well....

Uh...where are they here?

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.

Originally Posted by DoTheMath

"...How about anyone on this thread that is in favor of a speed limit!? Real experience..."

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

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).

Originally Posted by DoTheMath

"...We can't teach common sense...but we can teach people to be better and more safety-conscious boaters..."

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 ...plus GPS???

[Seeker]

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 ...plus GPS???

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.

[jrc]

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.

[chipj29]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

Uh...where are they here?

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.

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.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by chipj29

"...I rarely boat on Winni. In fact, my PWC barely exceeds the proposed 45 mph limit...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..."

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

Originally Posted by Seeker

"...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..."

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.

Originally Posted by Seeker

"...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..."

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:



Most of us use lights like this one:

Originally Posted by jrc

"...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..."

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

Originally Posted by jrc

"...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. ..."

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?

Originally Posted by jrc

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

One would think so...

Originally Posted by jrc

"...Not one speed limit opponent will recommend operating recklessly. ..."

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."

Originally Posted by jrc

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

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..."

Originally Posted by jrc

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

I'm slow on the water, too.

Watch for me—especially if I'm capsized.

[DoTheMath]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

Uh...where are they here?

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.

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 ...plus GPS???

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...

[chipj29]

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.

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by chipj29

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.

[Airwaves]

I found these two articles, one from the Associated Press the other from the Boston Globe, interesting and very telling for the future funding of the New Hamsphire Marine Patrol.

First the AP article from March 28:
Boatbuilding hits the rocks

Then this article today from the Globe
Boat owners struggling to jump ship

(It appears you may have to register for free in order to view the articles) There are other articles that talk about stock prices for boat manufacturers taking hits, and West Marine Q4 profits way off as well but these two articles are representative, and funny neither one mentions a speed limit as the cause or even a factor!

So, how do these stories impact the Marine Patrol? As has been mentioned a number of times on this forum, the Marine Patrol gets its funding from NH boat registrations. That is why they have been doing direct mailings recently to boat owners asking you to register directly through the Marine Parol. That way they don't have to share the revenue with the towns.

If the economic factors that are effecting the boatbuilder and Massachusetts boaters looking to get out are also being felt in New Hampshire, the Marine Patrol budget will suffer.

So now we're looking at the possibility of a new law that will require new enforcement efforts from an agency that is facing funding cuts. Since New Hampshire Governor John Lynch has told his agency heads that because of an expected $50,000,000 budget shortfall to be prepared for cuts.

Even in the unlikely event that the state does step in and level fund the Marine Patrol the need for a new series of radar patrols is still a cutback since those patrols require radar certified Marine Patrol officers (training costs) to run radar duty instead of conducting safety patrols (patrol cutbacks). Accomplishing that, to cover a lake that is 72 square miles, is going to take more than one radar boat!

Such a move would be a reduction in safety to all boaters that I strongly oppose and actually will make the lake a LESS SAFE PLACE TO BE!

Ironic, a law requiring a speed limit could actually make the lake less safe!

In another thread someone asked how opponents to the speed limit would react if there are 22 speed related deaths this summer? I will pose the same question to you. How are you going to sleep at night if, because of the required radar patrols to enforce your speed limit, a boat is involved in an accident in an area where a Marine Patrol boat would normally be but can't be because it's doing a speed trap patrol and the victim of the accident dies?

Speed is not a problem on Lake Winnipesaukee but there are problems and taking the only law enforcement on the lake and cutting their patrol time to enforce an unnecessary law is just plain stupid!

[ApS]

Originally Posted by DoTheMath

"...Now, take a 35' or 40' cruiser plowing along at 15 knots - there is a visibility problem due to deck position...!"

In defense of oversized Winnipesaukee cruisers, many have flybridges. (And passengers on the foredeck).

Originally Posted by DoTheMath

"...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.

The incident—as told to me—was very close to shore, involved the boat leaving a dock after an overnighting, and proceeding at somewhere between headway speed and jogging speed. The "driver" failed to acknowledge their warning shouts, and didn't even acknowledge his error as he passed. (Not even glancing in their direction—not saying anything at all).

Perhaps he was distracted by something (cellphone?), but my "math" tells me that he simply couldn't see the lesser boat because of excessive deck on his boat.

Originally Posted by DoTheMath

"...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...And we were running in the Delta, where there were no other boats to worry about and it is perfectly legal to do so..."

On Lake Winnipeaukee, you'd be traveling at 161.334 feet per second on protected inland waters with an "Unsafe Passage" law. Your "driver" would have less than one heartbeat to dodge a turtle, a surfacing loon, capsized sailboarder or a swimmer. (And certainly couldn't come to a halt in time).

At those speeds (and greater) the GPS should be of a "heads-up" display, not low on the panel; that is, if the windshield were suitably undistorted.

Say, is that a boat "not to be worried about" in the windshield distortion?

Originally Posted by DoTheMath

"...All those "distractions" you mention on the dash of a performance boat are very easily managed, if you have the experience and know-how..."

Like the instruments on this $1-million boat?

Originally Posted by DoTheMath

"...we were running in the Delta, where there were no other boats to worry about and it is perfectly legal to do so..."

You don't indicate which "Delta", but isn't this boat part of "the Delta Experience"?

[chipj29]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

On Lake Winnipeaukee, you'd be traveling at 161.334 feet per second on protected inland waters with an "Unsafe Passage" law. Your "driver" would have less than one heartbeat to dodge a turtle, a surfacing loon, capsized sailboarder or a swimmer. (And certainly couldn't come to a halt in time).

At those speeds (and greater) the GPS should be of a "heads-up" display, not low on the panel; that is, if the windshield were suitably undistorted.

Say, is that a boat "not to be worried about" in the windshield distortion?


Like the instruments on this $1-million boat?





You don't indicate which "Delta", but isn't this boat part of "the Delta Experience"?

I don't see the point of posting this stuff, the poster was talking about being in a boat at 110 mph...somewhere OTHER than Lake Winni.
Where were those pics taken? Were they on Lake Winni? Was the driver experienced? Was the driver in either instance perhaps impaired?

Maybe next you should post some pics of sailboat accidents that occurred somewhere around the globe.

[chipj29]

These guys must have been going more than 45!

[DoTheMath]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

In defense of oversized Winnipesaukee cruisers, many have flybridges. (And passengers on the foredeck).


The incident—as told to me—was very close to shore, involved the boat leaving a dock after an overnighting, and proceeding at somewhere between headway speed and jogging speed. The "driver" failed to acknowledge their warning shouts, and didn't even acknowledge his error as he passed. (Not even glancing in their direction—not saying anything at all).

Perhaps he was distracted by something (cellphone?), but my "math" tells me that he simply couldn't see the lesser boat because of excessive deck on his boat.





On Lake Winnipeaukee, you'd be traveling at 161.334 feet per second on protected inland waters with an "Unsafe Passage" law. Your "driver" would have less than one heartbeat to dodge a turtle, a surfacing loon, capsized sailboarder or a swimmer. (And certainly couldn't come to a halt in time).

At those speeds (and greater) the GPS should be of a "heads-up" display, not low on the panel; that is, if the windshield were suitably undistorted.

Say, is that a boat "not to be worried about" in the windshield distortion?


Like the instruments on this $1-million boat?





You don't indicate which "Delta", but isn't this boat part of "the Delta Experience"?

So, you never addressed YOUR experience with performance boats!? Your "racer" that you built at Brewster... was it really a 1/12 scale!? Or was it the little 10' footer I mentioned with the 15hp outboard on it!? Come on, you can tell us Establish some credibility with me (and the board) here before you continue, that way we know if you know what you are talking about with regard to performance boats - and didn't just read it in a magazine.

As for the boat I was in, Cali. Delta - and the canopies only look distorted from that angle (the back seat) - they are F16 canopies that are optically correct and provide a PERFECTLY CLEAR view when sitting in either of the two front seats. (I know, I was sitting in both of them - at different times - at some point in time that day). That is a boat that you see through the canopy - it was over 1 mile down, we slowed down long before getting to it. And the GPS - who cares where that is located, it offers NO information pertaining to safe operation, it just tells you how fast you're going. Again, if you had any real experience with performance boats, you'd know that.

As for the $1mil. dollar boat that you posted a picture of above, do you know the owner and / or story behind that picture!?!? I do! What was your point in posting that...!? It happened 2,000 miles from the lake.

In fact - your point in posting any of those pics!? I can start to post pics of car accidents, plane crashes, jet skis that are smashed up - even bowriders that are wrecked... again, what's the point!?

Tell you what - again, establish some credibility for yourself in the high performance boating world, and we can have an adult conversation - now that you "are all grown up". Until then, stop posting your propaganda - 'cuz all you're doing is clouding the facts...

As far as the incident as "told to you" on the long foredeck issue, that is - at best - second-hand information, again - pure speculation, and since you were not actually there, dismissed!