Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 05/01/17 in all areas

  1. No clearly not. However I think you and a few other people fail to grasp the issue. Sure, it is fairly unlikely that the drone will crash into someone or something and kill them. But the point is that the act is illegal and thus if anything goes wrong, the drone operator will most likely be prosecuted. Just look at the people walking along the aqueduct towpath and looking up at the drone. Let's say that whilst looking up at the drone, one of them walked into the canal and was either injured or possibly drowned. As soon as the other person cited the drone as being the distraction, the drone operator would be hunted down and if caught, prosecuted under the Air Navigation Order. No doubt they are looking to make examples of folk at the moment. I would liken it to having a car accident whilst slightly over the drink drive limit. Even if the accident was totally not the fault of that driver, and unavoidable even for a sober driver, they would likely be considered to blame and certainly prosecuted for drink driving. At the very least, I do hope that the people operating these drones illegally are at least aware that they are breaking the law and are prepared to take that risk. If so - fair enough but if you do the crime you have to be prepared to serve the time! But I think more likely, they have foolishly convinced themselves that they are doing nothing wrong. Eventually the penny will drop.
    2 points
  2. This post cannot be displayed because it is in a forum which requires at least 10 posts to view.
  3. Seen a few going over the Pontcysyllte Aqueduct, bloody mad if you ask me but I like the fact there are still mad buggers in the world, so good on em
    2 points
  4. This post cannot be displayed because it is in a forum which requires at least 10 posts to view.
  5. This post cannot be displayed because it is in a forum which requires at least 10 posts to view.
  6. Me I will be around next weekend and you can have all the wood
    1 point
  7. I personally recommend Google
    1 point
  8. This post cannot be displayed because it is in a forum which requires at least 10 posts to view.
  9. just imagine that the water tank outlet piping is leaking somewhere. the LAST thing you want to do is to fill the water tank, allowing the contents to drain out into your bilges.
    1 point
  10. I came to the decision many years ago (after being badly 'burnt' and having no legal recourse because surveyors are not responsible if they 'miss' something) never again to buy a boat because of a 'good' surveyors report'. I have since that time (using my own judgement) brought more than a dozen boats and never had any 'problems'. When it comes to surveyors "Caveat Emptor"
    1 point
  11. My experience would suggest the answer to your question is yes... Myark is a 50' 1980 Colecraft cruiser stern, with about 12' of back deck (quite a bit bigger than many 50' cruiser sterns these days). She's got a full height bulkhead between the engine & cabin bilges & all the cabling holes are right at the top of it, so well above normal water line. I managed to get her stern hung up on a protruding bolt on a lock gate in a fast filling C&H lock, which resulted in the counter going under water & the engine bay getting pretty much filled with water - it was over the rocker cover of the BMC 2.5. With the stern being held down & the lock filling, she rapidly gained an alarming bow up trim & I was convinced she was about to sink. However, as soon as the water level in the lock dropped enough to free her from the offending bolt, the stern shot back up & she was left happily floating, albeit with exhaust & bilge pump outlets under water.
    1 point
  12. This post cannot be displayed because it is in a forum which requires at least 10 posts to view.
  13. When taking a boat to the historic gathering at the Black Country Living Museum, they used to supply free house coal so you could create the correct "atmosphere"! George ex nb Alton retired
    1 point
  14. BSS Guide 7.8.1 says: LPG pipework must be made of either seamless copper tube, or stainless steel tube, or copper nickel alloy. I'm not sure that corrugated stainless steel tube necessarily complies with that requirement. I wouldn't be surprised for a clarification to be issued dis-allowing corrugated flexible tube. You may be building for an argument with the BSS examiner in the future. If the gland is above the level of the regulator and the cylinder valve then it complies with BSS 7.8.2: LPG pipes passing through metallic bulkheads or decks must be protected by the use of sleeves, grommets, or bulkhead fittings.
    1 point
  15. This post cannot be displayed because it is in a forum which requires at least 10 posts to view.
  16. Keep your fish under the weed hatch, and just lift it when you need to feed them.
    1 point
  17. This comment highlights not only the repeated misdirection that has echoed down this debate over the years but the profound and distasteful bias that taints the ground. Firstly the test is bona fide FOR navigation. "Bona Fide" does not qualify "navigation". End of! Intelligent people who hang on that for arguably rhetorical reasons walk in the shadow of Goebells. To rephrase the quote, "there are people moving far enough to be 'navigating'" so How could that possibly be not bona fide? The fact that Paul Davies had a job was One factor in a considerable matrix and had he been travelling more than 9 miles every couple of months it would have been immaterial. The simple fact is, a cohort will take against anyone who remains in one -let's call it "broad location" to distinguish it from "place"- because they have been, or perceive themselves to have been inconvenienced; either financially, while navigating or indeed because they have a problem with hippies. It engenders ever greater prejudice which I do not hesitate to condemn. There are a good number of people in category 3; me among them and Boston too if the advice from The Board's representative is anything to go by, who enjoy the life, keep a decent distance moved, yet still inspire the ire of the knuckle draggers and sanctimonious finger wavers who are happy to tar the majority with the sins of the minority. Dave, you and I both know someone who gave evidence in the Lords during committee stage of the BW Bill, I suggest that you nip down to Portland basin and have a word with Chris about what that "navigation" was perceived to ensue. I promise you will be disappointed... Remember that the bill started out trying to outlaw people living on boats but was massively watered down. In all the years debating I have seen not One gram of evidence that that watering did not stretch to S17, there is a condition there to discourage stopping in One place in perpetuity and not paying for the privilege and that is the full extent of the law. Bellicose opinion will do nothing to change that, nor will it relieve said cohort of the weight on their shoulder.
    1 point
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.