Author Topic: Silly signs  (Read 340401 times)

Re: Silly signs
« Reply #1200 on: 25 May, 2016, 09:05:12 am »

T42

  • Apprentice geezer
Re: Silly signs
« Reply #1201 on: 25 May, 2016, 10:02:26 am »
Ric de Flour, Hat flavourings, Hat colours... who cares about nuts?
I've dusted off all those old bottles and set them up straight

Mr Larrington

  • A bit ov a lyv wyr by slof standirds
  • Custard Wallah
    • Mr Larrington's Automatic Diary
Re: Silly signs
« Reply #1202 on: 25 May, 2016, 03:41:10 pm »
Hat colours?  Are they pink or something?  Or what?
External Transparent Wall Inspection Operative & Mayor of Mortagne-au-Perche
Satisfying the Bloodlust of the Masses in Peacetime

Re: Silly signs
« Reply #1203 on: 28 May, 2016, 06:12:14 am »
"May contain nuts" but not in amounts that need to appear on the label

Re: Silly signs
« Reply #1204 on: 30 May, 2016, 03:27:42 pm »
In Castle Combe. Syntax and ambiguity.


They laughed when I said I was going to be a stand-up comedian. They're not laughing now.

T42

  • Apprentice geezer
Re: Silly signs
« Reply #1205 on: 20 June, 2016, 07:40:35 am »
"Is careful falls the stone please to depend on the dike to pass rapidly" and lots more here:

http://www.pbase.com/mjunsworth/chinglish

Found on PBase.
I've dusted off all those old bottles and set them up straight

billplumtree

  • Plumbing the well of gitness
Re: Silly signs
« Reply #1206 on: 20 June, 2016, 12:00:31 pm »
No pic, cos it's on a busy road with nowhere handy to stop, but the Vote Leave sign in a field by the side of the road near Newby Bridge has been lightly (and quite convincingly) modified to Vote Beaver.

caerau

  • SR x 3 - PBP fail but 1090 km - hey - not too bad
Re: Silly signs
« Reply #1207 on: 20 June, 2016, 12:02:08 pm »
No pic, cos it's on a busy road with nowhere handy to stop, but the Vote Leave sign in a field by the side of the road near Newby Bridge has been lightly (and quite convincingly) modified to Vote Beaver.


I think you'll find that's been viral on t'internet for a while, plenty of photos out there so you can rest easy  :-)
It's a reverse Elvis thing.

Kim

  • Timelord
    • Fediverse
Re: Silly signs
« Reply #1208 on: 20 June, 2016, 03:13:01 pm »
To cancel that out, there's a guy standing on the central reservation of the Bristol Road in the pissing rain holding a large EU flag.  I'm sure that'll help.

Re: Silly signs
« Reply #1209 on: 27 June, 2016, 12:54:27 pm »
From Ship AIS for a tanker berthed on the Mersey

Latest AIS
Map Hist ?
Name:   Blue Sky
MMSI:   636014378 [LR]
IMO:   9413016
Callsign:   A8TK7
Speed/Dir:   0.1 kts / 358° N
Status:   Underway by Sail
Dest:   Gb Liv
ETA:   Jun25 04:12
Type:   Tanker Haz D (84)
Details:   Crude Oil Tanker
Size:   229m x 42m x 8.9m
Built:   2009
Received:   12:49:56 27 Jun 16 BST
“There is no point in using the word 'impossible' to describe something that has clearly happened.”
― Douglas Adams

Re: Silly signs
« Reply #1210 on: 27 June, 2016, 01:19:25 pm »
I don't get it - why is that a silly sign?
<i>Marmite slave</i>

T42

  • Apprentice geezer
Re: Silly signs
« Reply #1211 on: 27 June, 2016, 01:21:16 pm »
Bloody big sails, then.
I've dusted off all those old bottles and set them up straight

billplumtree

  • Plumbing the well of gitness
Re: Silly signs
« Reply #1212 on: 27 June, 2016, 01:21:28 pm »
It took me a little while, but

Status:   Underway by Sail
Details:   Crude Oil Tanker

Re: Silly signs
« Reply #1213 on: 27 June, 2016, 01:22:34 pm »
Status Underway by Sail

At 0.1 knots it's not underway and at 229 metres long it's not capable of sailing anywhere.

The junior deck officer has entered the wrong setting onto the GPS unit
“There is no point in using the word 'impossible' to describe something that has clearly happened.”
― Douglas Adams

T42

  • Apprentice geezer
Re: Silly signs
« Reply #1214 on: 27 June, 2016, 01:24:24 pm »
Masthead the silly blighter.
I've dusted off all those old bottles and set them up straight

Mr Larrington

  • A bit ov a lyv wyr by slof standirds
  • Custard Wallah
    • Mr Larrington's Automatic Diary
Re: Silly signs
« Reply #1215 on: 27 June, 2016, 01:34:22 pm »
Keelhaul him, then make him walk the plank!

Yarr!
External Transparent Wall Inspection Operative & Mayor of Mortagne-au-Perche
Satisfying the Bloodlust of the Masses in Peacetime

Re: Silly signs
« Reply #1216 on: 27 June, 2016, 02:10:49 pm »
Status Underway by Sail

At 0.1 knots it's not underway and at 229 metres long it's not capable of sailing anywhere.

The junior deck officer has entered the wrong setting onto the GPS unit
Well, unless it is using a Skysail auxilary propulsion unit. Getting more common on tankers, saves (on average) 5.5% fuel.

If you are using motor and sail, rules of navigation say you declare yourself as 'sailing'.

<i>Marmite slave</i>

Re: Silly signs
« Reply #1217 on: 27 June, 2016, 02:16:26 pm »

If you are using motor and sail, rules of navigation say you declare yourself as 'sailing'.

No if you using an engine for propulsion you are a power driven vessel

Col Regs Rule 25(e)
“There is no point in using the word 'impossible' to describe something that has clearly happened.”
― Douglas Adams

T42

  • Apprentice geezer
Re: Silly signs
« Reply #1218 on: 27 June, 2016, 02:37:58 pm »
They've obvious leant their ship against the wall while they're in the caff gorging on CAEK, and it's blocking off half the satellites.  Any minute now they'll show up in Oldham.
I've dusted off all those old bottles and set them up straight

Re: Silly signs
« Reply #1219 on: 27 June, 2016, 02:42:22 pm »

If you are using motor and sail, rules of navigation say you declare yourself as 'sailing'.

No if you using an engine for propulsion you are a power driven vessel

Col Regs Rule 25(e)
What are you talking about? That's the rule for a sailing vessel and is about lighting (well, specifically, displaying an inverted cone).

If you are both motoring and sailing you displaying signals indicating both, so that other vessels know you are restricted in your ability to manoeuvre. So a tanker flying a Skysail (or equiv) would very reasonably indicate on their AIS that they were under sail.
<i>Marmite slave</i>

Re: Silly signs
« Reply #1220 on: 27 June, 2016, 02:43:20 pm »
Boringly it was just leaving - it's out at the Bar racon now and still thinks it's sailing.

At some point they'll get a sarky radio call from the coastguard.
“There is no point in using the word 'impossible' to describe something that has clearly happened.”
― Douglas Adams

Re: Silly signs
« Reply #1221 on: 27 June, 2016, 02:52:26 pm »

If you are using motor and sail, rules of navigation say you declare yourself as 'sailing'.

No if you using an engine for propulsion you are a power driven vessel

Col Regs Rule 25(e)
What are you talking about? That's the rule for a sailing vessel and is about lighting (well, specifically, displaying an inverted cone).

If you are both motoring and sailing you displaying signals indicating both, so that other vessels know you are restricted in your ability to manoeuvre. So a tanker flying a Skysail (or equiv) would very reasonably indicate on their AIS that they were under sail.

No you wouldn't. The colregs are clear - if you are using an engine for propulsion you are not sailing, whatever sails you may have hoisted. You need to exhibit the day sign for motor sailing or the correct navigation lights at night to indicate to other vessels that you are not sailing. Also if fitted with AIS you need to display the correct information.

The navigation rules that apply to you are those for motor driven vessels.
“There is no point in using the word 'impossible' to describe something that has clearly happened.”
― Douglas Adams

Re: Silly signs
« Reply #1222 on: 27 June, 2016, 03:14:56 pm »

If you are using motor and sail, rules of navigation say you declare yourself as 'sailing'.

No if you using an engine for propulsion you are a power driven vessel

Col Regs Rule 25(e)
What are you talking about? That's the rule for a sailing vessel and is about lighting (well, specifically, displaying an inverted cone).

If you are both motoring and sailing you displaying signals indicating both, so that other vessels know you are restricted in your ability to manoeuvre. So a tanker flying a Skysail (or equiv) would very reasonably indicate on their AIS that they were under sail.

No you wouldn't. The colregs are clear - if you are using an engine for propulsion you are not sailing, whatever sails you may have hoisted. You need to exhibit the day sign for motor sailing or the correct navigation lights at night to indicate to other vessels that you are not sailing. Also if fitted with AIS you need to display the correct information.

The navigation rules that apply to you are those for motor driven vessels.
So why did you cite a colreg for a sailing vessel?
You are wrong, you know. This is your colregs 25(e) (e) A vessel proceeding under sail when also being propelled by machinery shall exhibit forward .

Anyway, we aren't talking colregs, this was AIS.

I strongly suspect that the incorrect code was  entered in the AIS for the tanker, but the statement that "A tanker is too big to be sailing" is also wrong. A tanker can be motor sailing.
<i>Marmite slave</i>

Re: Silly signs
« Reply #1223 on: 27 June, 2016, 03:53:43 pm »

If you are using motor and sail, rules of navigation say you declare yourself as 'sailing'.

No if you using an engine for propulsion you are a power driven vessel

Col Regs Rule 25(e)
What are you talking about? That's the rule for a sailing vessel and is about lighting (well, specifically, displaying an inverted cone).

If you are both motoring and sailing you displaying signals indicating both, so that other vessels know you are restricted in your ability to manoeuvre. So a tanker flying a Skysail (or equiv) would very reasonably indicate on their AIS that they were under sail.

No you wouldn't. The colregs are clear - if you are using an engine for propulsion you are not sailing, whatever sails you may have hoisted. You need to exhibit the day sign for motor sailing or the correct navigation lights at night to indicate to other vessels that you are not sailing. Also if fitted with AIS you need to display the correct information.

The navigation rules that apply to you are those for motor driven vessels.
So why did you cite a colreg for a sailing vessel?
You are wrong, you know. This is your colregs 25(e) (e) A vessel proceeding under sail when also being propelled by machinery shall exhibit forward .

Anyway, we aren't talking colregs, this was AIS.

I strongly suspect that the incorrect code was  entered in the AIS for the tanker, but the statement that "A tanker is too big to be sailing" is also wrong. A tanker can be motor sailing.

Nope you're still wrong I'm afraid

Rule 25(e) defines the point at which a vessel ceases to be a sailing vessel (obeying the rules for sailing vessels) and becomes a motor vessel (obeying the rules for motor vessels). That definition is also in rules 3(b) and 3(c).

Even though AIS has not been formally integrated into the COLREGS it is used as its name implies for identification of ships out of sight of each other and therefore needs to show the correct information and in this case should show either moored or underway. Not underway by sail.

If a tanker is motor sailing it is not sailing  - they are very different situations and would be handled differently.

As far as I am aware there is no current technology that would allow a 125,000 dwt vessel to proceed under sail alone it will always need to use its propulsion engine and will therefore be a motor vessel.

http://www.mar.ist.utl.pt/mventura/Projecto-Navios-I/IMO-Conventions%20(copies)/COLREG-1972.pdf
“There is no point in using the word 'impossible' to describe something that has clearly happened.”
― Douglas Adams

Vince

  • Can't climb; won't climb
Re: Silly signs
« Reply #1224 on: 02 July, 2016, 10:24:10 am »
For col-regs arguments please go to the YBW.com forum where you will be wrong (whatever you say)
216km from Marsh Gibbon