bajaleo
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2014
- Messages
- 51
- Reaction score
- 27
Kind of a bullshit ticket. We were going really slow. Other boats were going faster than us. Just an FYI.
It's bullshit.....impossible to not have a small wake with the flow of the river.
I got a warning last year and it's maybe idling at 900 rpms
Haven't been up there in so long I forget if that's a "No Wake" zone or posted speed ? No wake is extremely ambiguous, since every boat is going to leave a wake, so 100% compliance is virtually impossible. So have him take it to court and see if the judge can make a determination if 'No Wake' means 0" or 1" or 4" --- then get back to us please
Maybe Boatcop will see this thread and chime in, he's knows all this good shit :thumbsup
Wake less speed is defined as minimum speed possible to maintain headway.
While this sounds like a fair description, using this as a LEGAL formula, if a vessel can maintain headway (and steerage) at 1 MPH, than 2, 3, 4, or 5 MPH could be considered excessive speed.
That's why most jurisdictions rely on a visual breaking wake, coupled with speed no greater than 5 MPH.
But in an area with a 7 knot current you will be churning a wake to maintain headway[emoji848]
Boatcop...on the downriver side of Parker, while they were working on the bridge, they posted a 5 mph/no wake zone. The current is about 4mph, headed up river, anyone maintaining headway is throwing a huge wake.
What's your advice on this situation? I ran through at 80, satisfying the "no wake" requirement....but there were a few times I had to turn back while other boats were doing 5mph, bow up, making wakes so big the rollers would sink me.
Are they still video enforcing that area too? IMO just got picked out for a "so called safety check" and the wake was the excuse for the stop.