ReportWire

Tag: Boats

  • State Says Boats As Holiday Gifts Just Beginning – KXL

    [ad_1]

    SALEM, OR – The Oregon State Marine Board says if you’re planning to give a friend or loved one a boat as a holiday gift, you should remember there is more to boating than just a boat, like required equipment, including a life jacket and whistle.

    Boats come in all shapes and sizes and have associated required safety equipment out on the water. Paddlers need to have on board a properly fitting U.S. Coast Guard-approved life jacket and a whistle. If out on the water at night or during periods of reduced visibility, paddlers also need to display a white light source, like a flashlight.

    As for the cost for the additional required equipment, that depends. A comfortable, inherently buoyant vest-style life jacket can range in price, with inflatable belt packs being on the higher end. A whistle costs a few dollars, and a light source varies depending on the model and brand.

    The other requirement is having a Waterway Access Permit, which all paddlecraft operators will need in 2026 when using the boat on the water. Permits are transferable to other paddlecraft, and youth under 14 do not need to have one.

    Waterway Access Permit options cost $6 for a 7-day permit, $20 for an annual permit, and $35 for a 2-year permit. Money the state collects from you are supposed to be invested in improved or new non-motorized water access and will help expand boat inspection stations for aquatic invasive species through the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife.

    The Marine Board also offers FREE online paddling courses to help newcomers learn the basic skills and techniques to stay safe.  To get more information, visit Boat.Oregon.gov.

    More about:

    [ad_2]

    Tim Lantz

    Source link

  • Current Yachts Launches Revolutionary Yacht Brokerage Platform, Disrupts Traditional Commission Model

    [ad_1]

    Current Yachts announced its official launch with a mission to transform the yacht brokerage industry by eliminating excessive commissions and putting consumers first. The company’s innovative model is a service-based, patent-pending approach, where traditional 8-10% commission structures are replaced with transparent, flat-rate pricing while maintaining the highest professional standards.

    Current Yachts announced its official launch with a mission to transform the yacht brokerage industry by eliminating excessive commissions and putting consumers first. The company’s innovative model replaces traditional 8-10% commission structures with transparent, flat-rate pricing while maintaining the highest professional standards.

    Current Yachts also launched the beta version of a new seller platform designed to shorten listing time, boost listing quality, and elevate customer experience.

    Reimagining Yacht Sales for the Modern Market

    Current Yachts addresses long-standing industry frustrations by offering an alternative to commission-heavy traditional models. The firm’s consumer-centric approach delivers significant cost savings to sellers, facilitates faster transactions, and promotes unprecedented transparency throughout the buying and selling process.

    “The yacht industry has operated under the same outdated commission model for decades. It was about time we challenged it with a fresh take,” said Amanda Haley, co-founder and yacht broker at Current Yachts. “We’re offering professional brokerage services at a fraction of the cost while elevating industry standards.”

    A key differentiator is Current Yachts’ collaboration of two skill sets with every transaction: a yacht broker and a transaction manager. “This approach allows the broker to focus on the customer while the support team oversees the entire transaction,” explained Maryline Bossar, co-founder and marketing lead.

    Key Advantages

    • Transparent Flat-Rate Pricing: Predictable selling expenses replace percentage-based commissions

    • Professional Service Without Inflated Pricing: Full access to experienced, licensed yacht brokers and complete transaction management

    • Flexible Buyer Commission Structure: Sellers maintain control over co-brokerage commissions

    • Advanced Technology Integration: Streamlined online listing intake — from vessel valuation to online listing agreement signature and payment processing — and real-time performance analytics

    Annapolis Sailboat Show Launch

    Current Yachts debuts at the 2025 Annapolis Sailboat Show, the largest annual sailboat show in North America, from October 9-12 at booth AB-22. Media representatives are invited to a press conference Friday, October 10, 10:30-11:00 AM.

    About Current Yachts

    Current Yachts is a licensed yacht brokerage firm co-founded by marine industry veterans Amanda Haley of Fort Lauderdale, FL and Maryline Bossar of Annapolis, MD, along with technical co-founders Jeff Dorso (25+ years scaling startups across multiple sectors) and Sean Walsh (Inc. 500 CTO and AI solutions expert). The company serves yacht owners and buyers seeking alternatives to traditional commission-based brokerage models.

    For more information, visit www.currentyachts.com

    Source: Current Yachts

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Schooner parade ‘the best day of the year for Gloucester’

    [ad_1]

    Hundreds lined Stacy Boulevard on Sunday’s sun-kissed morning to witness two dozen schooners pass by in a celebration of Gloucester’s maritime history.

    The majestic Parade of Schooners was part of the 41st annual Gloucester Schooner Festival, a Labor Day weekend celebration hosted by Maritime Gloucester.


    This page requires Javascript.

    Javascript is required for you to be able to read premium content. Please enable it in your browser settings.

    kAm%96 4C@H5 7C@> v=@F46DE6C 2?5 6=D6H96C6 H:E?6DD65 D49@@?6CD 7C@> r2A6 p?? 2?5 36J@?5 AC@4665 7C@> E96 x??6C w2C3@C A2DE E96 u:D96C>6?’D |6>@C:2= @? $E24J q@F=6G2C5]k^Am

    kAm%96 G6DD6=D E96? =:?65 FA 2?5 D2:=65 E@H2C5 E96 s@8 q2C 3C623:2 %C@A9J @77 t2DE6C? !@:?E]k^Am

    kAm%9:D J62C’D A2C256 @7 D2:= E@@< A=246 2>:5 =:89E H:?5D 2?5 2 =@H E:56] %92E <6AE E96 D49@@?6CD D@>6H92E @77 D9@C6[ 2H2J 7C@> E96 G:6H:?8 2C62 2=@?8 E96 3@F=6G2C5] !2C256 6>466 s2:DJ }6== ?@E65 D@>6 @7 E96 3@2ED 92G6 2 5C27E @7 6:89E @C ?:?6 766E @C >@C6 36=@H E96 H2E6C=:?6[ E@@ 566A E@ 86E E@@ 4=@D6 E@ E96 D9@C6 2E =@H E:56]k^Am

    kAm$A64E2E@CD H6C6 8C66E65 H:E9 E96 D@F?5D @7 D:8?2= 56G:46D 7C@> E96 3@2ED[ 2?5 4@CC6DA@?5:?8 3=2DED 7C@> E96 42??@? 2E $E286 u@CE !2C<]k^Am

    [ad_2]

    By Ethan Forman | Staff Writer

    Source link

  • This $15K Electric Hydrofoil Is the Mountain Bike of the Sea

    This $15K Electric Hydrofoil Is the Mountain Bike of the Sea

    [ad_1]

    It’s not until the fourth time I fall into the choppy, rolling waves at the mouth of San Francisco Bay, directly below the Golden Gate Bridge, that I realize I probably never should have gone this far out on a motorized surfboard I’ve never ridden before.

    I’m zipping around—a foot above the waves most of the time—on an electric hydrofoil board made by the Canadian company Hydroflyer. Jerry McArthur, Hydroflyer’s CEO, is on another of his company’s boards behind me. We started out at a peaceful lagoon inside the bay in Sausalito, but I’ve decided to trek over to the bridge—where the current and waves are the strongest—just to see if the Hydroflyer could handle it. Turns out, it very much can. The question is whether I had the aquatic acumen.

    It’s high tide, meaning currents coming in from the ocean are strong and the headwind is ripping, making the approach under the bridge difficult. (McArthur had warned me about these precarious conditions before we left.) At one point I’m gunning the thro

    ttle as fast as I can make it go, and the board and I are all but staying in place. I finally cross the threshold to the other side of the bridge, then the wind whips me into the water again. This time, McArthur helps me back up onto the board before the waves can smash me into one of the bridge’s pillars, and finally I can get going.

    We head back to the Sausalito lagoon, out of the wind. By the time we are almost home, I’m so exhausted that it’s hard to stay standing on the board. The whole experience was an adrenaline rush—a magnificent scene that I probably never would have experienced without this very expensive electric board. McArthur laughs and says his lawyers probably wouldn’t be very happy to hear that he took me out that far in these conditions. OK cool, I’ll be sure not to tell them.

    The author atop the Hydroflyer

    Courtesy of Boone Ashworth

    A photo of Jerry and Boone testing out the Hydrofoil under the Golden Gate Bridge in San Francisco.

    Hydroflyer CEO Jerry McArthur (left) with WIRED’s Boone Ashworth.

    Courtesy of Boone Ashworth

    Floating World

    Hydrofoils are growing in popularity, particularly among rich dudes. (Just ask Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, who famously takes his hydrofoiling hobby very seriously. They can also be spotted at beaches and on lakes. Around the world, there are already around 1,700 companies in the hydrofoil business. Some are the electric kind, powered by either jet or propeller motors. Others are powered and steered purely by human movements. Both designs achieve the same goal of giving the rider a new and fun way to zip around atop the water. Hydrofoils are quieter and less obnoxious than jet skis, and they can be a thrilling stand-in for windsurfing on days when there’s no breeze.

    Courtesy of Hydroflyer

    Courtesy of Hydroflyer

    Hydroflyer, a Canadian company, has been selling its efoil boards for about a year, and McArthur says the company has sold around 150 of them in total. The Hydroflyer is available in one version for now, called Cruiser. Two more models—the flashier Sport and the more beginner-oriented Inflatable—are coming soon. Prices for the Cruiser start at $15,990.

    Image may contain Boat Hydrofoil Transportation and Vehicle

    The craft has attachments that make it more stable, and other attachments that can be removed to reduce drag and make it more nimble.

    [ad_2]

    Boone Ashworth

    Source link

  • A Ghost Ship’s Doomed Journey Through the Gate of Tears

    A Ghost Ship’s Doomed Journey Through the Gate of Tears

    [ad_1]

    The ballistic missile hit the Rubymar on the evening of February 18. For months, the cargo ship had been shuttling around the Arabian Sea, uneventfully calling at local ports. But now, taking on water in the bottleneck of the Bab-el-Mandeb Strait, its two dozen crew issued an urgent call for help and prepared to abandon ship.

    Over the next two weeks—while the crew were ashore—the “ghost ship” took on a life of its own. Carried by currents and pushed along by the wind, the 17-meter-long, 27-meter-wide Rubymar drifted approximately 30 nautical miles north, where it finally sank—becoming the most high-profile wreckage during a months-long barrage of missiles and drones launched by Iranian-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen. The attacks have upended global shipping.

    But the Rubymar wasn’t the only casualty. During its final journey, three internet cables laid on the seafloor in the Bab-el-Mandeb Strait were damaged. The drop in connectivity impacted millions of people, from nearby East Africa to thousands of miles away in Vietnam. It’s believed the ship’s trailing anchor may have broken the cables while it drifted. The Rubymar also took 21,000 metric tons of fertilizer to its watery grave—a potential environmental disaster in waiting.

    An analysis from WIRED—based on satellite imagery, interviews with maritime experts, and new internet connectivity data showing the cables went offline within minutes of each other—tracks the last movements of the doomed ship. While our analysis cannot definitively show that the anchor caused the damage to the crucial internet cables—that can only be determined by an upcoming repair mission—multiple experts conclude it is the most likely scenario.

    The damage to the internet cables comes when the security of subsea infrastructure—including internet cables and energy pipelines—has catapulted up countries’ priorities. Politicians have become increasingly concerned about the critical infrastructure since the start of the Russia-Ukraine war in February 2022 and a subsequent string of potential sabotage, including the Nord Stream pipeline explosions. As Houthi weapons keep hitting ships in the Red Sea region, there are worries the Rubymar may not be the last shipwreck.

    The Rubymar’s official trail goes cold on February 18. At 8 pm local time, reports emerged that a ship in the Bab-el-Mandeb Strait, which is also known as the Gate of Tears or the Gate of Grief, had been attacked. Two anti-ship ballistic missiles were fired from “Iranian-backed Houthi terrorist-controlled areas of Yemen,” US Central Command said. Ninety minutes after the warnings arrived, at around 9:30 pm, the Rubymar broadcast its final location using the automatic identification system (AIS), a GPS-like positioning system used to track ships.

    As water started pouring into the hull, engine room, and machinery room, the crew’s distress call was answered by the Lobivia—a nearby container ship—and a US-led coalition warship. By 1:57 am on February 19, the crew was reported safe. That afternoon, the 11 Syrians, six Egyptians, three Indians, and four Filipinos who were on board arrived at the Port of Djibouti. “We do not know the coordinates of Rubymar,” Djibouti’s port authority posted on X.

    Satellite images picked up the Rubymar, its path illuminated by an oil slick, two days later, on February 20. Although the crew dropped the ship’s anchor during the rescue, the ship drifted north, further up the strait in the direction of the Red Sea.

    [ad_2]

    Matt Burgess

    Source link

  • “I Was Actually Stone-Cold Sober”: Colin Jost Can’t Blame Weed for Buying Staten Island Ferry Boat (Unlike Pete Davidson)

    “I Was Actually Stone-Cold Sober”: Colin Jost Can’t Blame Weed for Buying Staten Island Ferry Boat (Unlike Pete Davidson)

    [ad_1]

    Everyone has had a questionable online shopping moment: It’s late at night, you’re having fun with your friends, things go a little too far, and before you know if you’re calling up Cameron Crowe to see if he’s ever considered following up We Bought a Zoo with a sequel called We Bought a Decommissioned Staten Island Ferry Boat and Oh My God Now What?

    Pete Davidson has (kind of) explained the purchase he and Colin Jost made with comedy club owner Paul Italia by saying that “we were very stoned” when they bought the allegedly roach-and-asbestos-infested boat for $280,100 back in January 2022.

    Speak for yourself, Jost recently added, with what we imagine was the deepest of sighs.

    “Is it worse that I was actually stone-cold sober when we bought the ferry?” he asked in an Instagram post on Wednesday that featured a headline referencing Davidson’s explanation.

    Instagram content

    This content can also be viewed on the site it originates from.

    Honestly, the vibe is that in his heart of hearts, he knows the answer to the question. Colin, do you need a hug? A nice glass of cold seltzer and a quiet place to sit for a few minutes?

    While Davidson seems to be actively praying for someone to sink the behemoth boat he and Jost bought and then christened Titanic 2, Jost, in his caption, said, “We’re excited to prove the non-believers wrong. You’re going to be BEGGING to get on this ferry in two years. Mark my words.” In the past, the pals, who worked together on Saturday Night Live, have mentioned plans to turn the ferry into a floating comedy venue. They have also mentioned that this would be very expensive, to say the least. 

    So it makes sense that Jost’s third item on the Instagram caption agenda reads, “UNRELATED I’m going on a Ferry Money Tour this week and next week.” He helpfully designed a poster for the mini-tour, featuring the bright-orange boat in the same carousel, then later shared a more tasteful fan-made poster for the shows. Graphic design does appear to be his passion. Sorry, comedy, and big ups to “izzy whoever you are.”

    Instagram content

    This content can also be viewed on the site it originates from.

    Since our last coverage of the only ship more delightful than friendship, where Davidson admitted he had no idea where the ferry was currently moored, multiple Staten Island locals have reached out to offer boat intel, telling us that it is at a boat repair place along the island’s Kill Van Kull, and it has not yet sunk. A big thank you to our ferry godparents: Pete may not know where his boat is, but now we do.

    [ad_2]

    Kase Wickman

    Source link

  • Videos Reveal Drone Kamikaze Boat Assault On Russia’s Black Sea Fleet

    Videos Reveal Drone Kamikaze Boat Assault On Russia’s Black Sea Fleet

    [ad_1]

    On the morning of October 29, warships of Russia’s Black Sea Fleet based at Sevastopol found themselves assailed by sixteen kamikaze robots. By Russia’s own account, extensive cannon and missile air defenses on land and Russian warships shot down nine Ukrainian drones.

    Russia initially claimed it had defeated the attack without damage, much as it had denied the successful strike on its flagship missile cruiser Moskva right up until after it sank. Never mind the smoke seen rising from Sevastopol’s harbor.

    But Ukrainian sources then released black and white video feed footage recorded by kamikaze boats that clearly managed to smash into Russian ships: the Black Sea’s new flagship, the multi-role frigate Admiral Makarov, and the minesweeper Ivan Golubets.

    Indeed, internal Russian reports indicate both were damaged, with the Makarov’s radar knocked out and the Ivan’s hull holed.

    The Makarov may have been singled out for launching Kalibr land-attack cruise missiles to bombard Ukrainian cities, though the Black Sea Fleet still has many other ships that can mount Kalibr missiles. You can read more about Admiral Makarov’s history dodging prior Ukrainian attacks, as well as its current condition in a forthcoming Forbes article by my colleague David Axe.

    The Ivan Golubets is a Project 266M Aqumarine-type minesweeper displacing 873 tons, with a crew of 68. Equipped with multiple mine-sweeping trawls, it also has defensive armament including anti-submarine rockets, portable Strela anti-air missiles, and two each 30-millimeter gatling cannons, 25-millimeter autocannons, and 12.7-millimeter heavy machine guns.

    Between that and its multiple radar and sonar sensors, it theoretically should have had the means to detect and destroy the incoming small USVs. Russia officially admits minor damage to the vessel, while an anonymous Ukrainian official told the New York Times

    NYT
    it had sustained severe damage, possibly crippling it.

    Ukrainian journalist Andriy Sapliyenko posted another video showing the perspective of additional USVs racing towards Russian warships. This recording uses a color camera, possibly implying Ukraine used more than one type of USV.

    Unlike the black-and-white recording, the color-camera USVs have clearly been detected, with helicopters, ships and boats spraying machinegun and cannon fire at them. Given how the video is edited (ie. none are close enough to ram a ship), it seems likely Russian defensive fire managed to destroy these USVs. At one point, the USV either intentionally or inadvertently narrowly avoids colliding with a Russian boat.

    Sapliyenko claims at least three Russian warships capable of carrying Kalibr missiles were hit by the attack, adding “There is a good chance that several ships are not just damaged, but sunk.”

    The simultaneous air-and-sea attack is clearly a deliberate strategy intended to over-saturate and distract the theoretically extensive multi-layered defenses around these warships. Thus, while the air attack and most of the USVs may have been destroyed before they could hit anything, they almost certainly created the conditions allowing at least two USVs to evade notice and strike Russian ships.

    It’s unclear for now how serious the damage from the attack is, and a repeat of the Moskva’s dramatic sinking seems unlikely given the proximity of nearby repair facilities. However, the attack will undoubtedly disrupt Russian surface naval operations, which were already heavily geographically curtailed following the sinking of the Moskva by Ukrainian land-based missiles.

    Russia has retaliated by suspending its participation in a Turkey-brokered initiative with Ukraine guaranteeing safe passage through the Black Sea for Ukrainian grain ships, a move again threatening global starvation. This deal would otherwise have expired November 19. Moscow justified its withdrawal by claiming the attack on its warships violated an arrangement for safe passage of civilian grain shipping. The Kremlin was already threatening to withdraw, however, due to complaints over sanctions-related difficulties it had selling grain abroad.

    Re-imposing a Russian blockade on Ukrainian grain shipping could be difficult without deploying ships far beyond Sevastopol and thereby exposing them to attack. However, Russia could turn to submarines, naval attack aircraft, or long-range Bastion-P land-based anti-ship missiles to harry grain shipments departing from Odessa.

    Russia has blamed British “specialists” for the attack, as well as for sabotage of the Nordstream I undersea pipeline generally believed to have been perpetrated by Russia itself. The UK is known to have transferred drone submarine minehunters (launched in turn from uncrewed drone boats) for demining activities near the mouth of the Danube, but not offensive kamikazes as far as is known.

    Russian sources also claim a large U.S. RQ-4B Global Hawk long-endurance surveillance drone taken off from Italy likely conducted pre-strike reconnaissance on Ukraine’s behalf that morning.

    In a bid to preserve dignity, Moscow often claims its shocking military setbacks in its invasion of Ukraine are the result of covert NATO forces in Ukraine. However, there’s also no denying that NATO surveillance assets operating outside of Ukraine have provided intelligence which has been hugely beneficial for planning Ukrainian strikes.

    Meanwhile, Ukraine’s government hasn’t claimed responsibility for the attack, though Ukrainian journalist Yuri Butusov reports the attack was jointly executed by Ukraine’s military and the SBU intelligence agency. Ukrainian hackers also posted a taunting message on Russian military websites this morning implying an attack would take place.


    Ukraine’s Mysterious Maritime Robots

    Back in September a curious robotic boat was found run aground near to the shoreline of Sevastopol, the main base of Russia’s Black Sea Fleet. After photographing the mysterious boat, the Russian Navy towed it back into the water and blew it up—a disposal method certainly reinforcing theories that this USV had been built in Ukraine to mount kamikaze attacks on Russia’s Navy.

    One analysis calculated the boat may have had a radar cross section of just .6 square meters—smaller than that of a submarine periscope, though still detectable from miles away if actively searching.

    Theoretically, the crashed USV should have warned Russia’s Navy of the possible threat of kamikaze attacks from Ukraine’s purely coastal Navy. After all, the Black Sea Fleet has numerous small boats, and even a unit of trained killer dolphins, specifically designed to guard against sabotage attacks from NATO naval special operations forces, including frogmen and small watercraft. Clearly that foreknowledge did not result in sufficient countermeasures.

    It was also then unclear whether Ukraine had many more of the heretofore unknown robot USVs beyond the one lost in September, or whether that represented an unsuccessful, one-off ploy. Maintaining long-distance radio control links with drone surface vehicles is much more difficult than with aerial drones, and the crash of the USV in Sevastopol might suggest the Ukrainian design was technically immature.

    However, the coordinated attack on October 29 implies Ukraine produced at a minimum eight of the USVs—and leaves a question mark on how many more it may have in reserve, or can quickly produce.

    Uncertainty as to whether Ukraine can repeat such a strike will complicate Russian naval planning going forward, even as maintaining maritime supply lines to Crimea rises in importance due to the crippling of the railroad bridge connecting mainland Russia to Crimea over the Kerch Strait earlier in October.

    Ukraine’s at least partially successful USV assault also marks an unprecedented breakthrough for uncrewed surface vessels. During World War II, harbor attacks were undertaken by frogmen, commandos in launches and mini-submarines. These high-risk/high-reward ops sometimes resulted in massive damage to target ships, but also often ended with the capture or death of the commandoes—even when successful! Japan furthermore employed kamikaze torpedoes and motor boats at the end of World War II.

    Uncrewed USVs now emerge as a viable method to launch such attacks without exposing human crew to likely death or capture. Admittedly, Ukraine’s kamikaze USVs in some ways seem comparable to a torpedo—but they likely traversed much greater distances from their launch point to target and can be employed more flexibly.

    Once again, Putin’s invasion of Ukraine has led to the innovation and combat-testing of a robotic weapons formerly confined to theoretical wargames and exercises.

    [ad_2]

    Sebastien Roblin, Contributor

    Source link