How much Wake is "No Wake"?

[Hudson Force]

Originally Posted by scallywag

.................. If you are traveling at a speed to create a wake and you enter a "Slow Speed Zone" and you cut your engines, you are still ticketed because of the following wake entering the Slow Speed Zone.

This is the crazy use of the undefined term "wake". Any forward progress creates a wake!

[Cheechako]

It is ambiguous for sure. I consider 6" or less no wake. But as you mention... some on shore don't!
Some boats seem to throw big wakes. I watched the Xmas boat parade in Ft Lauderdale one year from my dingy. Big boats. They were all pretty much at the same speed (had to be to keep in the line) Some 100 ft boats left virtually no wake.. maybe 4" or so. Others similar size left 1.5 ft wake.
I always thought if you don't want to be flooded or have waves... don't live or travel on the water! But I guess that's unrealistic.... :>)

[scuba0_1]

Marine rules are nothing if not unclear or open to interpretation..

Sent from my SM-N910V using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[markpierce]

Here, commercial ships/tugs use the term "minimal" wake. This implies there will be some wake.

[tenchiki]

Around here, the "no wake" bouys are to keep the wakes below the bottom of the basement windows on the houseboats...

[denverd0n]

Originally Posted by Dsanduril

Florida does define minimum wake...

Curious where you found that definition. I searched the state statutes and found no clear definition. Is this, perhaps, from some DMV or FWC publication?

[thinwater]

I get the distinct impression that no one on this thread drives 64 in a 55; they all drive 50, just to be safe. Actually, I don't believe for 1 minute that they don't drive 70 on occasion, and they probably aren't actually in a hurry.

a. My cat leaves very little wake. My dingy leaves more, if I throttle up... which I don't.

b. Construction in a waterway or harbor must be designed for a 6-knot wake. Anything else is unrealistic. Sorry.

Yup, climbing the mast can be a real thrill on the weekend. I guess I'm OK with that. To expect people to transit miles of harbor or creek at 3-4 knots is just a little selfish and I don't expect people to do it. There.

[sailorboy1]

I've seen sailboats get tickets for speeding in the no wake zone


Sent from my iPhone using Cruisers Sailing Forum

[Mike OReilly]

I try and adjust my speed based on what I see. Since the "no wake" demand is for the benefit of boats or land structures around, I look and observe what is happening with my boat, or similar boats. If I/they go by and I see docked/anchored boats rolling around or waves bashing the shore, then I slow down. If the opposite, I might speed up.

And yes, I don't think it's too much to expect people to transit at slow enough speeds so as to NOT cause negative impacts on others, or to shoreline. Selfish would be to ignore the impact you're having on others just b/c you don't want to slow down.

[MarkSF]

Originally Posted by colemj

How does one travel BELOW idle speed?

Mark

When I come down the fairway, I leave the engine at idle and put the engine in and out of gear, resulting in a speed much lower than the cruise speed at idle.

[Jon Eisberg]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

I try and adjust my speed based on what I see. Since the "no wake" demand is for the benefit of boats or land structures around, I look and observe what is happening with my boat, or similar boats. If I/they go by and I see docked/anchored boats rolling around or waves bashing the shore, then I slow down. If the opposite, I might speed up.

And yes, I don't think it's too much to expect people to transit at slow enough speeds so as to NOT cause negative impacts on others, or to shoreline. Selfish would be to ignore the impact you're having on others just b/c you don't want to slow down.

Yup, in The Real World, the local boaters pretty much determine what "NO WAKE" amounts to, by their own behavior...

In many of the officially designated No Wake Zones along the ICW - places like Core Creek north of Morehead, Palm Valley between JAX Beach and St Augustine, for instance - what the folks who actually live in those areas apparently consider to be acceptable, is roughly the size of the wake thrown by a 28' center console powered by twin 250 HP outboards, running at full bore... :-) Because, that's the way they generally run through their own backyards... I doubt I have ever seen a center console or similar running through that developed stretch of Core Creek at anything less than planing speed...

As an aside, I certainly hope Confederate flags never disappear entirely from properties fronting the ICW... They have always been the surest indicator of where us Yankees might really need to throttle back...

:-)

But for tight, congested places such as the ICW thru Lauderdale, the 15" limit often posted seems a pretty reasonable and realistic number, as a general rule...

I've lived a sheltered life, I suppose, but I have never, ever, seen a sailboat "ticketed" for a No Wake violation...

:-)

[Roy M]

At a previous marina, populated by folks who had recently purchased their first mega sportfishers, we often had this "conversation" regarding excessive speed while operating at minimal throttle. The noobies were unable to process the concept that boat speed can be controlled by means other than operating at idle settings. We managed to get the idea across by introducing them to some experienced boat drivers who explained the value and mechanism of moving their craft at dead-slow creep speed. It's all about reducing the velocity of the turning prop. First, you don't HAVE to use BOTH props. Second, while operating on a single prop, you can put it in neutral for long periods at idle and "coast". If you suddenly need to make a sharp turn, you can do so by momentarily engaging (and reversing) the other prop. It appears the skipper who can't control their boat is either functionally diminished, arrogant, privileged, inexperienced, or just completely clueless.

[zeehag]

in the real world, the eyeballs of the harbie watching is the judge of what is too much wake.
i was ticketed in a 5 kt zone travelling 2 kts because a harbie in sd thought the bump of water behind my dinghy propelled by a long shaft outboard was too high. go figger. no wake behind me, just a badly trimmed longshaft engine pushing water to the transom of the dink. i won in court, but it is arbitrary.

[Robin3]

Originally Posted by Hudson Force

Ok, I must confess. There have been some times when I was actually proud of being asked to slow down in order to produce less wake while operating my sailboat.

Especially if under sail alone??


Have you thought of towing a drogue?

We used to have a Zodiac Fastroller back in the UK (the high pressure inflatable floor model) inflatable tender with a Honda 2 hp motor and small as it was, it could create quite a noticeable wake. Prior to that we had a 12ft Tinker inflatable sailing tender and the little 2hp Honda would plane that one just with one person and had heads turning when motored with the mast still up, (without sails). short waterline length makes for more wake at displacement speeds and I reckon a 10ft LOA dinghy has a theoretical hull speed of only around 4kts

[dannc]

I found the no wake regulation confusing as heck when I live in FLA decades ago. Frankly I think it is up to the discretion of the officer.

Just looked it up for NC and the statute says,

"No-wake speed" means idle speed or slow speed creating no appreciable wake.

Idle would be bad of the engine to run for any length of time but they throw in the magic word "or" followed by "slow speed" and "no appreciable wake." So the key phrase falls on "no appreciable wake" and what does that mean.

When we were on the boat of the type we want to buy I was paying particular attention to its wake, not because of No Wake signage, but as a sign, pun intended, of good hull design and build. We were doing 6-7 knots and there just was a itty bitty ripple in the water from the wake.

As has been said on TF before, I noticed that NC state, states the following about the ICW,

No Wake Zones in Federally Maintained Waters

The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission does not have statutory authority to establish No Wake Zones within Federal waters such as the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway (AIWW). The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) maintains the AIWW with Federal funds in support of interstate commercial navigation traffic. With rare exceptions USACE does not concur with establishment of No Wake Zones along the open reaches of the AIWW. No Wake Zone signage placed on private property along the AIWW, and without the concurrence of USACE does not mark a legitimate No Wake Zone and is not enforceable. For questions about No Wake Zones in Federal waters please contact the USACE Wilmington District at Headquarters U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

I would be shocked if that does not apply to all states as well. The NC page also had language about no wake sign requirements and their legality that was interesting.

Later,
Dan