eclipsing the Dust Bowl's July 1936 by an eighth of a degree

What is the margin of error? Asking for a friend...

The link that he posted offered no confirmation that Federal law (46 U.S.C. 2304) "only applies to distress calls" as he stated.

Please cite in the link where it said any of this. It does not. It is as detailed as linking the Constitution and saying that it does.

...is by far the best engine I've found for generating images, editing images, etc for use as informative or scene-setting images during GM'ing ttrpg sessions. So much better than any other free options. Better at understanding my descriptions anyway, and better at amendments "ok move that person to the left edge of the screen but have them facing the camera, but wearing the same uniform as the other character in the scene" sort of direction.

I understand Grok's image 2.0 is available free for a bit, so I guess we'll see. But 'available for free' means 'will be for pay eventually' so I'll probably keep using banana.

So... I dug some more.

Yes, his vessels (both of them, the yacht and its tender) fall into the large vessel category but Frederick Sound has no VTS, so both were legally obligated to be listening on channel 13 and channel 16. And large vessels aren't allowed to use one dual-channel radio like small vessels do (mine does!); they have to have two separate radios monitored by two separate people. This isn't because dual-channel radios are unreliable, but because they don't want the crewman who's using one radio to communicate to miss messages on the other channel due to task loading. It's about keeping the two crewmen unencumbered enough to effectively monitor both.

I've never learned much about radio requirements of large vessels, so this was interesting :-)

Large vessels aren't required to monitor 16, at least when in an area with an active Vessel Traffic Service (VTS) operation.. They are required to monitor 13 (the bridge-to-bridge channel) and the VTS channel (the frequency varies; it's never channel 16). But if the Coast Guard was calling them they'd be calling on the VTS channel, which Zuck's crew should have been monitoring.

So, you're right in substance, just not about the particular channel.

If they heard the call and did not help, it is implied it was a refusal to aid. So the yacht's excuse could be they never heard the call. But the call was on an emergency channel that they should be monitoring while sailing. However it would be unlikely that both ships somehow missed the call for aid.

Whether it's legally required depends on the type of vessel. "Voluntary" vessels, such as small recreational vessels, are not required to have a VHF radio at all. Those that have one are required to maintain a watch on channel 16 when they're not using the radio to communicate. In practice, most radios today have dual or triple-channel monitoring, so you can keep monitoring even if you've switched to a different channel to talk.

I had to look up the rules for larger "mandatory" vessels... and the result surprised me. Large vessels are required to have VHF radios and maintain a watch, but not on channel 16! They're required to maintain a watch on two channels, the bridge-to-bridge channel, 13, and the Vessel Traffic Service (VTS) channel, which varies from location to location. I guess the theory is that if there are distress signals that the vessel needs to respond to, they'll be routed to the VTS channel by the Coast Guard.

Either way, it sounds like Zuck's crew wasn't maintaining the required radio watch.

To review, I stated his link did not actually say what he claims it says. His response was not clarification of his claim but to claim I was too stupid/young to read.

You want to quibble that it was an ad hominem attack, go ahead.

Neither vessels responded to the call. We do not know if any actions will be taken yet against the crews as there is not an investigation yet.

Your link says nothing about what you claim it is. Ad hominem attacks do not answer the lack of detail in your answer.

No, that's not what that means. It means that vessels in the area are not required to drop everything and rush immediately to the vessel. It means assist if they can.

If they can means "if they can."

Seeing how there has not been any investigation, it is extremely early to say that "no laws were broken."

Bahahahahahaha. So your answer to your lie that there "was not a distress call" is to ask other to disprove your claims.

The yacht DID NOT help. That was the refusal.

So you refuse to post links validating what you claim then?

So your answer to you having the facts wrong which you won't support is to claim I did not search. How do you know how much I researched? You don't.

Ad hominem attack. Your answer is to attack other people who challenge you. Got it.

The superyacht passed by the vessel in distress. The superyacht had no mechanical issues. Thus it could have helped.

I never said one thing about Zuckerbug. You on the other hand seem ready to defend him at all costs.

Captains. Zuckerburg owned two vessels in the area. Neither of them assisted. These are facts. They seem inconvenient to you that both Zuckerburg ships did nothing.

Nowhere does your link say "applies if it's a distress call".

I doubt it. The crew might be investigated but the call was not the most extreme level of emergencies. The yacht should have helped if it could, and the crew might have to explain why it could not.