Rocks in the SF Bay - Page 4 - SailNet Community
Seamanship & Navigation Forum devoted to seamanship and navigation topics, including paper and electronic charting tools.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #31 of 36 Old 02-14-2012
Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 82
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Rep Power: 5
 
L124C,

Respectfully, you should think a little bit about the concept of navigation. Yes, sure, fine, blow up all the rocks, remove all the bridges, while you're at it, why not get rid of all the pesky shorelines out there, god forbid someone should run aground! Perhaps we can just melt all the polar ice-caps, ridding us of this dry-land problem once and for all. After all, wasn't WaterWorld with Kevin Costner awesome?

The point is, that even with the rocks and bridges *that are already clearly marked or outside of the shipping lanes* removed, there would still always be something for some incompetent pilot to run into. Accidents are accepted as a daily consequence of driving cars around. I'm not suggesting that every reasonable measure possible couldn't or shouldn't be taken to avoid accidents due to poor pilotage, but the idea that we should just blow up any possible obstruction, especially those outside of shipping channels is simply ludicrous. If you disagree, feel free to take your Zodiac and dynamite out and by all means, please report back on your excellent success. Tell the powers that be that you're more informed than they are and in a better position to make these judgements. I'm sure it'll be an interesting story to tell your cellmate.

Thanks,
h

Sailing a '74 Challenger 40' Ketch rig out of San Francisco
sfchallenger is offline  
Quote Quick Reply Share with Facebook
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #32 of 36 Old 02-14-2012
Gin Swilling Yacht Monkey
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: S.F. bay area, CA
Posts: 92
Thanks: 4
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Rep Power: 5
 
the logical objections about the rocks being marked are all true, and yet it does seem like a bad idea to have rocks so near the shipping lanes (or in them depending on how you read the chart, i am no expert or pilot).

what surprises me is that i thought we, as a country, were pretty handy with bunker-busters, mining, fracking, drilling, and general large scale blowing up of stuff. i know nothing is really as easy as it seems, especially underwater, but still...
groggy is offline  
Quote Quick Reply Share with Facebook
post #33 of 36 Old 02-15-2012 Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
L124C's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,435
Thanks: 58
Thanked 6 Times in 6 Posts
Rep Power: 8
 
The concept of navigation?

Quote:
Originally Posted by sfchallenger View Post
L124C,

Respectfully, you should think a little bit about the concept of navigation. Yes, sure, fine, blow up all the rocks, remove all the bridges, while you're at it, why not get rid of all the pesky shorelines out there, god forbid someone should run aground! Perhaps we can just melt all the polar ice-caps, ridding us of this dry-land problem once and for all. After all, wasn't WaterWorld with Kevin Costner awesome?

The point is, that even with the rocks and bridges *that are already clearly marked or outside of the shipping lanes* removed, there would still always be something for some incompetent pilot to run into. Accidents are accepted as a daily consequence of driving cars around. I'm not suggesting that every reasonable measure possible couldn't or shouldn't be taken to avoid accidents due to poor pilotage, but the idea that we should just blow up any possible obstruction, especially those outside of shipping channels is simply ludicrous. If you disagree, feel free to take your Zodiac and dynamite out and by all means, please report back on your excellent success. Tell the powers that be that you're more informed than they are and in a better position to make these judgements. I'm sure it'll be an interesting story to tell your cellmate.Thanks,
h
"Respectfully", that is probably the most condescending, ridiculous response I have ever read in this forum! You might want to "think a little bit" about what you are saying before responding! Remove bridges and shoreline? Blow up any possible obstruction? No one has suggested any such thing in this thread! I specifically identified two potential navigational hazards for discussion. I then provided an example of an accident that occurred involving a much more obvious obstacle, to support my concern. Lastly, I have suggested that IMO the two rocks in question ARE CLEARLY in a "shipping lane" and are not "marked". I provided a chart to support my opinion. No one has specifically disputed my interpretation of the chart. If my "concept of navigation" is incorrect on that specific point, please enlighten me. Otherwise, stop stating it is not true.
So please...."think a little bit" before responding. Realize that not responding when you have nothing constructive to add to the discussion is always an option. Sometimes less is more!

Last edited by L124C; 02-15-2012 at 12:34 PM.
L124C is online now  
Quote Quick Reply Share with Facebook
post #34 of 36 Old 02-15-2012
Senior Member
 
dabnis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Truckee, CA
Posts: 8,676
Thanks: 2
Thanked 116 Times in 114 Posts
Rep Power: 9
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by L124C View Post
"Respectfully", that is probably the most condescending, ridiculous response I have ever read in this forum! You might want to "think a little bit" about what you are saying before responding! Remove bridges and shoreline? Blow up any possible obstruction? No one has suggested any such thing in this thread! I specifically identified two potential navigational hazards for discussion. I then provided an example of an accident that occurred involving a much more obvious obstacle, to support my concern. Lastly, I have suggested that IMO the two rocks in question ARE CLEARLY in a "shipping lane" and are not "marked". I provided a chart to support my opinion. No one has specifically disputed my interpretation of the chart. If my "concept of navigation" is incorrect on that specific point, please enlighten me. Otherwise, stop stating it is not true.
So please...."think a little bit" before responding. Realize that not responding when you have nothing constructive to add to the discussion is always an option. Sometimes less is more!
L,

Easy, easy!! not good for your blood pressure. SF was just pulling your chain and you bit. Fwiw, I agree on your position. It has been done before and with today's technology it shouldn't cost that much. But, as mentioned earlier, generally it takes a disaster to get anything started. Besides some crabs might die from blasting.

Dabnis
dabnis is offline  
Quote Quick Reply Share with Facebook
post #35 of 36 Old 02-16-2012 Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
L124C's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,435
Thanks: 58
Thanked 6 Times in 6 Posts
Rep Power: 8
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by dabnis View Post
L,

Easy, easy!! not good for your blood pressure. SF was just pulling your chain and you bit. Dabnis
I disagree. I don't mind having my "chain pulled" if it's done cleverly. This was simply a silly, witless response, with some unjustified arrogance mixed in. I'll "bite" at that every time!
I value this forum, as I have learned a lot from it. And yes...at times it can be entertaining and funny. This was certainly not one of those times!
L124C is online now  
Quote Quick Reply Share with Facebook
post #36 of 36 Old 02-16-2012
Senior Member
 
dabnis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Truckee, CA
Posts: 8,676
Thanks: 2
Thanked 116 Times in 114 Posts
Rep Power: 9
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by L124C View Post
I disagree. I don't mind having my "chain pulled" if it's done cleverly. This was simply a silly, witless response, with some unjustified arrogance mixed in. I'll "bite" at that every time!
I value this forum, as I have learned a lot from it. And yes...at times it can be entertaining and funny. This was certainly not one of those times!
Well, maybe next time. I spent many years on the Bay and outside, enjoy your posts.

Dabnis
dabnis is offline  
Quote Quick Reply Share with Facebook
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

By choosing to post the reply above you agree to the rules you agreed to when joining Sailnet.
Click Here to view those rules.

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the SailNet Community forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
Please note: After entering 3 characters a list of Usernames already in use will appear and the list will disappear once a valid Username is entered.


User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
On The Rocks SailKing1 General Discussion (sailing related) 13 04-26-2011 11:38 AM
this hammock rocks QuickMick Gear & Maintenance 0 04-18-2011 04:13 PM
On the Rocks - Off the Rocks Sequitur General Discussion (sailing related) 7 03-08-2010 05:03 PM
Cork on the Rocks mattny08 Seamanship & Navigation 4 03-01-2010 07:07 AM
How we hit the rocks wemsail Sabre 5 09-30-2009 07:53 AM

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome