Go Back   Winnipesaukee Forum > Lake Issues > Boating Issues > Speed Limits
Home Forums Gallery Webcams Blogs YouTube Channel Classifieds Calendar Register FAQDonate Members List Today's Posts

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-05-2009, 12:15 PM   #1
OCDACTIVE
Senior Member
 
OCDACTIVE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Fort Myers FL / Moultonboro
Posts: 1,045
Thanks: 444
Thanked 574 Times in 178 Posts
Default

elchase,

First welcome to the forums. By all means those who disagree with you are not trying to chase you away or are calling you wrong. There is no right or wrong when dealing with opinions. As you have said your opinions are your opinions and your observations are your observations.. But what many people contend is that people are trying to call opinions fact. Thus trying to move people or change peoples arguements.

In my own opinion it is very difficult to say "people say" or "the majority of people in the lakes region think" etc. because normally people tend to befriend or associate with those with similar likes or interests. As an example if you are big into sailing then you probably have friends who are as well. If you talk to or poll those individuals the vast majority would be Pro-SL. If you have a family run about on the lake, in all likelyhood the majority of the people you associate with are in the same boat (no pun intended). Given there will be exceptions to the rule but I am sure you can see my point.

So to say that most people or the majority of people think or say XYZ is difficult to claim. As is the opinion of "most" people are happy with the limits.

As you have probably seen from previous posts I am opposed to the limits and if someone asks me I could easily say Most people oppose because from my observations almost everyone I know or associate with does not think they are needed. It is just a matter of perception.

That being said, I will say that "In MY opinion" the 45 MPH is not a perfect compromise. I have read the suggestion of opening up the broads. I think that is a perfectly fair compromise. I disagree with it, but I'd be willing to accept it. I think there are far larger problems then speed i.e. captain boneheads and people not paying attention to their surroundings then where limits do not even play a roll.

You mention that 45 is fast enough for a "reasonable boating activity". Again this is an opinion. My question is what do you consider reasonable? I think cruising to a resturant across the broads at 60 in my type of boat is perfectly reasonable.

What I find again is that many opinions are based on the individual owners determination of "fast" based on their own boat. For example if you have a 21 foot 1982 Century with a 260, when the boat is a WOT (wide open throttle) it gets up to approx. 46mph. The boat is bouncing around and is very loud in comparrison to its normal cruising speed of 30ish. With my boat cruising at 3600 rpms I will be at 50 mph. At that speed I am perfectly comfortable and well in control. Passengers can talk and have sodas while enjoying the lake. So that being said it is a "reasonable boating activity" for me. Where an individual with a boat that is 17 feet long crusing comfortably at 22 mph that gets passed by me may not realize it feels the same.

I have discussed limits for years now with individuals. In many situations those in favor of limits (even once with a MP officer) I offer to take them for a ride. In doing so we go across "cruising" and they are astounded the control and how slow you feel you are going in a performance boat at 45 or 55 mph.

It becomes upsetting to me and friends of mine, that those passing the laws and those in favor of limits have never been on or experienced a performance boat. Now you may have, but I am just making a generalization.

That being said, I invite you at anytime (once my boat is fixed) to take a ride if you have not experienced a performance boat ride. You may feel differently.
__________________
Have you had your Vessel Inspected Yet?
OCDACTIVE is offline  
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to OCDACTIVE For This Useful Post:
BroadHopper (08-05-2009), hazelnut (08-09-2009), Kracken (08-05-2009), malibu (08-05-2009), NoRegrets (08-06-2009)
Old 08-05-2009, 12:36 PM   #2
Kracken
Senior Member
 
Kracken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Alton
Posts: 223
Thanks: 46
Thanked 130 Times in 50 Posts
Default wait a second.

OCDACTIVE,

I 100% agree with you, so does that mean I can't get a ride?
Kracken is offline  
Old 08-05-2009, 12:45 PM   #3
OCDACTIVE
Senior Member
 
OCDACTIVE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Fort Myers FL / Moultonboro
Posts: 1,045
Thanks: 444
Thanked 574 Times in 178 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kracken View Post
OCDACTIVE,

I 100% agree with you, so does that mean I can't get a ride?
Once she is fixed absolutely.. Nothing pleases me more then showing someone who has never been out on a GFB and then seeing the permagrin on their face.
__________________
Have you had your Vessel Inspected Yet?
OCDACTIVE is offline  
Old 08-05-2009, 01:23 PM   #4
VtSteve
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,320
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 230
Thanked 361 Times in 169 Posts
Default

Hey wait a minute!! You promised me first

Are you telling me you're not going to be at the Naswa on August 21 or 22?

VtSteve is offline  
Old 08-05-2009, 01:28 PM   #5
OCDACTIVE
Senior Member
 
OCDACTIVE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Fort Myers FL / Moultonboro
Posts: 1,045
Thanks: 444
Thanked 574 Times in 178 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VtSteve View Post
Hey wait a minute!! You promised me first

Are you telling me you're not going to be at the Naswa on August 21 or 22?


Sorry man... Even if I was there I blew my engine

getting a complete rebuild this winter and having the supercharger removed... I will be slower (mid 70's) but much more reliable... also if all goes according to plan she won't be the mighty whitey anymore...... Paint job will happen as well!!!!!
__________________
Have you had your Vessel Inspected Yet?
OCDACTIVE is offline  
Sponsored Links
Old 08-08-2009, 04:55 AM   #6
ApS
Senior Member
 
ApS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Florida (Sebring & Keys), Wolfeboro
Posts: 5,938
Thanks: 2,205
Thanked 776 Times in 553 Posts
Cool Try a SOHC engine or DOHC engine...

Quote:
Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE View Post
"...Even if I was there I blew my engine
What speed did it blow up at?

Allow me a guess: It was the valve train, right? While "Detroit Iron" may take a supercharging, "Detroit Iron" can't take the revs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE View Post
"...getting a complete rebuild...slower (mid 70's) but much more reliable...Paint job will happen as well...!!!!!"
Try painting one side red and the other side blue: If you are reported by a law-abiding resident as exceeding "mid-70s", you'd reduce the chance of being stopped by the MPs by 50%.

BTW: Too few "complete rebuilds" support New Hampshire Lakes Region businesses.

I would also advise that boaters don't spend too much on paint (or "graphics") where they might encounter other boats at the docks.

Odometer?
__________________
Is it
"Common Sense" isn't.

Last edited by ApS; 08-10-2009 at 06:26 AM. Reason: Jus adding to my rant. ;)
ApS is offline  
Old 08-05-2009, 01:26 PM   #7
Kracken
Senior Member
 
Kracken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Alton
Posts: 223
Thanks: 46
Thanked 130 Times in 50 Posts
Default Might be expensive

I bought a new boat this spring (a family truckster, top speed 60). I was originally looking at a boat that might be considered a performance boat (Powerquest 25'). I went with the truckster due to the speed limit, it may have been a mistake. A ride in performance boat may make me trade mine in way earlier than I could have imagined.
Kracken is offline  
Old 08-05-2009, 01:27 PM   #8
Airwaves
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: I'm right here!
Posts: 1,153
Thanks: 9
Thanked 102 Times in 37 Posts
Default A compromise exists if we want to look at it.

Once again I bring your attention to Navigation Rule 6. It is flexible and it gives MPO more authority to get dangerous boaters off the water.

It works well in the ocean and in most states, there is no reason it can't work here. Attach penalties to it, link it a drivers license etc. to give it teeth.

And I would suggest it be approved statewide, not specifically to New Hampshire's LARGEST body of water.
Airwaves is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to Airwaves For This Useful Post:
Resident 2B (08-05-2009)
Old 08-05-2009, 03:31 PM   #9
BroadHopper
Senior Member
 
BroadHopper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Laconia NH
Posts: 5,576
Thanks: 3,214
Thanked 1,103 Times in 794 Posts
Thumbs up My compromise.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Airwaves View Post
Once again I bring your attention to Navigation Rule 6. It is flexible and it gives MPO more authority to get dangerous boaters off the water.
Adopting the above rule and keeping the reasonable and prudent clause of the current law will go a long way to helping keep navigable waters in this state safe.

I strongly believe the Power Squadron test as well as the Boater's safety test will promote more common sense to all boaters.

Setting arbitrary limits such as 45/25 does nothing to promote safety. One will think he/she will have to drive 25 at night because it is the law. In fact it could be a very dangerous speed due to adverse conditions. Arbitrary speed limits gives a false sense of comfort. Even at 45, you can be driving dangerously under the conditions you are boating in.
__________________
Someday may never be an actual day.
BroadHopper is offline  
Old 08-05-2009, 04:23 PM   #10
OCDACTIVE
Senior Member
 
OCDACTIVE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Fort Myers FL / Moultonboro
Posts: 1,045
Thanks: 444
Thanked 574 Times in 178 Posts
Default

WOW VTSTEVE.. Great post, I think you had hit all the major points. You have been saving up it seems since the SL debate had been put on hold.

Keep up the great work.!!!
__________________
Have you had your Vessel Inspected Yet?
OCDACTIVE is offline  
Old 08-06-2009, 09:24 AM   #11
LIforrelaxin
Senior Member
 
LIforrelaxin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Texas, Lake Ray Hubbard and NH, Long Island Winnipesaukee
Posts: 2,871
Thanks: 1,037
Thanked 892 Times in 524 Posts
Default

Well First let me thank Woodsy for starting this thread....

Second I like the post I am seeing here....

Third....Right now I am seeing that speedster as some would call them, OCD and Woodsy, are showing that they are willing to talk about this, and that is what comprimise is all about

Quote:
Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE View Post

That being said, I will say that "In MY opinion" the 45 MPH is not a perfect compromise. I have read the suggestion of opening up the broads. I think that is a perfectly fair compromise. I disagree with it, but I'd be willing to accept it. I think there are far larger problems then speed i.e. captain boneheads and people not paying attention to their surroundings then where limits do not even play a roll.

You mention that 45 is fast enough for a "reasonable boating activity". Again this is an opinion. My question is what do you consider reasonable? I think cruising to a resturant across the broads at 60 in my type of boat is perfectly reasonable.

.
OCD, I only quoted part of you post here but you have put some good stuff out there.... By the way also sorry to here about the boat... that really stinks....hope you rebuild goes well.....

Now onto the snipit that I took from OCD

Openning up the boards is a start to comprimise OCD..... it is the one place, that I feel should not be ruled by a speed limit.....because it is wide open with plenty of room I have never ever been out there when I felt any danger from other boats no matter how fast they where going.... It however is not the only place that I feel should be left out of speed consideration.... in fact my thoughts have always been leave the lake with out a speed restriction except for certain locations:

1) Meredith --- already taken care off
2) the area around the weirs channel... say the imaginary line form the lighted bouy to the town docks, just like the bike week restriction
3)Wolfeboro Bay ---- make a line like was done for Meredith
4) possibly Center Harbor and Alton....

After that speed limits in my mind are worthless, just need to create a few more no-wake zones in the congested areas, via the Meredith Method or the Eagle / Governs island method.....

Now I also liked Woodsy idea..... speed limit at night.... I thought the way Woodsy came up with the 30 mph was reasonable.... however I could even see 35.....or maybe jsut modifying the 150' rule to say 500' at night or something.... I don't think speed is as much an issue at night, as people being able to judge proximity..... I have never seen anyone go what I would call exsessively fast at night..... even the night I had an issue (no accident just a close call from my stand point)..... speed was not an issue, we where both comming up on plane, the other boater just didn't judge well how far he was away from me when he turned and cut accross in front of me.....
__________________
Life is about how much time you can spend relaxing... I do it on an island that isn't really an island.....
LIforrelaxin is offline  
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to LIforrelaxin For This Useful Post:
BroadHopper (08-09-2009), Kracken (08-06-2009), OCDACTIVE (08-06-2009), Resident 2B (08-06-2009)
Old 08-06-2009, 10:56 AM   #12
VtSteve
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,320
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 230
Thanked 361 Times in 169 Posts
Default

RULE 6 - UNITED STATES COAST GUARD

RULE 6
SAFE SPEED
Every vessel shall at all times proceed at a safe speed so that she can take proper and effective action to avoid collision and be stopped within a distance appropriate to the prevailing circumstances and conditions.

In determining a safe speed the following factors shall be among those taken into account:

(a) By all vessels:

The state of visibility;
The traffic density including concentrations of fishing vessels or any other vessels;
The manageability of the vessel with special reference to stopping distance and turning ability in the prevailing conditions;
At night, the presence of background light such as from shore lights or from back scatter from her own lights;
The state of wind, sea and current, and the proximity of navigational hazards;
The draft in relation to the available depth of water.
(b)Additionally, by vessels with operational radar:

The characteristics, efficiency and limitations of the radar equipment;
Any constraints imposed by the radar range scale in use;
The effect on radar detection of the sea state, weather and other sources of interference;
The possibility that small vessels, ice and other floating objects may not be detected by radar at an adequate range;
The number, location and movement of vessels detected by radar;
The more exact assessment of the visibility that may be possible when radar is used to determine the range of vessels or other objects in the vicinity.


Basically, a more detailed, yet less legalese version of the current Winni law. I think they'd do well to add more detail into the current bill. Either way, it does assist the MP with their duties.

Another aspect, enforcement. There are two other threads, one dealing with problems on the lake, and another that suggests improper enforcement. There are differing opinions on both topics. So when I get done doing some actual work , I'm going to see if we actually know what's really going on out there. It's always hard to come up with solutions if you really don't know what the problems are, if any.
VtSteve is offline  
 

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not 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

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:31 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.

This page was generated in 0.38210 seconds