Page 9 of 16 FirstFirst 12345678910111213141516 LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 160
  1. #81
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    3,265

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Refueler View Post
    Alterations to port are not normally taken unless no other alternative ... it's shied upon generally.
    Really? Why would that be then?
    Samphire Owners Association
    http://www.samphireyachts.org

  2. #82
    Woodlouse's Avatar
    Woodlouse is offline Registered User
    Location : Behind your curtains.
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    6,453

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LittleSister View Post
    Really? Why would that be then?
    It comes from both vessels having to turn to starboard when head to head. As that is the only time in the colregs when the specific avoiding action is stated the most common interpretation by power driven vessels is that you turn to starboard in any give way situation. Knowing this a stand on vessel that turns to port might find it's self on another collision course when the give way vessel alters course to starboard.

  3. #83
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Posts
    21,281

    Default Alteration of course to port - Rule 17 (c)

    .
    As that is the only time in the colregs when the specific avoiding action is stated the most common interpretation by power driven vessels is that you turn to starboard in any give way situation.
    Rule 17 (c) A power-driven vessel which takes action in a crossing situation in accordance with sub-paragraph (a) (ii) of this rule to avoid collision with another power-driven vessel shall, if the circumstances at the case admit, not alter course to port for a vessel on her own port side.

    - W

  4. #84
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,116

    Default

    Private Message: Re: I will continue to defend my corner

    Today, 00:46
    timbartlett timbartlett is offline
    Registered User

    Join Date: Nov 2005
    Posts: 256
    Default I will continue to defend my corner
    Quote:
    But I will continue to defend my corner against those who chose to suggest that people have to fit a certain sterotype due to their occupation and as such will always 'fight' for my side.
    So why do you and your (former?) colleagues expect to go on believing in the stereotype that anyone who doesn't receive a government salary must be a crook, without our "side" fighting back?

    The ball is in the civil service's court: chuck out the fraudsters, reward what little intelligence and integrity is left amongst its staff, and start treating the citizens of this country with a bit of courtesy and consideration. Then it might slowly start to recover the respect that it has thrown away.
    __________________
    www.timbartlett.co.uk

    I am not sure why you have chosen to go to private messages other than maybe due to being off topic? Anyway I will answer it openly in the forum:

    So why do you and your (former?) colleagues expect to go on believing in the stereotype that anyone who doesn't receive a government salary must be a crook, without our "side" fighting back?

    Where does that gem of an insight come from? I assume that boat owning civil servants never get boarded. Police officers never get stopped on the road. Customs officers never get stopped at airports, etc.

    The ball is in the civil service's court: chuck out the fraudsters, reward what little intelligence and integrity is left amongst its staff, and start treating the citizens of this country with a bit of courtesy and consideration. Then it might slowly start to recover the respect that it has thrown away.

    Unfortunatetly change is not really in the hands of those that the public get to meet on a day to day basis. Respect and courtesy works both ways...

    W.

  5. #85
    timbartlett Guest

    Default

    My reply to Pilotwolf moved to The Lounge as a new thread called Civil(?) service - moved from PBO Forum
    Last edited by timbartlett; 24-10-09 at 12:20. Reason: To get this thread back on track

  6. #86
    Refueler's Avatar
    Refueler is offline Registered User
    Location : Far away from hooray henrys
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    4,328

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Searush View Post
    TB & PW, Can I hold your coats while you step outside & sort this out?

    Maybe a deep breath & count to 10 would help.
    About time someone called this out .... we have a sensible thread here and it's being destroyed by others insisting on having a ridiculous bun-fight over absolutely ridiculous off-topic rubbish.

    Maybe they can "Grow up" and get back on topic or start another thread somewhere else to have their spat !
    Last edited by Refueler; 24-10-09 at 12:08.

  7. #87
    Refueler's Avatar
    Refueler is offline Registered User
    Location : Far away from hooray henrys
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    4,328

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Woodlouse View Post
    It comes from both vessels having to turn to starboard when head to head. As that is the only time in the colregs when the specific avoiding action is stated the most common interpretation by power driven vessels is that you turn to starboard in any give way situation. Knowing this a stand on vessel that turns to port might find it's self on another collision course when the give way vessel alters course to starboard.
    thank you ... in fact in the rules it does say a turn to port is to be avoided except when overtaking ...

    Most Ships / vessels will rather do a 360 round turn to stbd than turn to port .... a) because the round turn adds time and distance to the incident, b) avoids the other vessel turning to stbd as is the norm.

    It's really common sense ... you only have to consider what are usual actions of a vessel and it makes sense.
    Last edited by Refueler; 24-10-09 at 12:14.

  8. #88
    Refueler's Avatar
    Refueler is offline Registered User
    Location : Far away from hooray henrys
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    4,328

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by timbartlett View Post
    .......It's actually rather rude to reply to private messages in public, and even worse to publish the whole thing. But you are an (ex) civil servant, and you have already made it clear that you do not expect the rules that apply to other people to apply to you.
    It has been confirmed by YBW Moderators that PM's are regarded as private and not to be cut and pasted to forums unless BOTH parties involved agree. I asked Dan and previous mods about this specifically after previous incidents.

    Anyone not believe me ? Go ask Dan yourself.

  9. #89
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,116

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by timbartlett View Post
    You said it: it's way way way off topic and because it is pretty obvious that several people who are following the original thread are bored with this backwater.


    It's actually rather rude to reply to private messages in public, and even worse to publish the whole thing. But you are an (ex) civil servant, and you have already made it clear that you do not expect the rules that apply to other people to apply to you.
    Well that's your view - this was a public discussion and you chose to make it private, I did not invite your message and as such by your values it could be deemed to invade my privacy. I have nothing to hide in my comments, maybe you do? I am rather bored with it too as clearly you are always right and woe betide those that disagree with your views or opinions. I have never to my knowledge suggested that others obey rules that I don't, nor have I had to lower myself to abusing you to make a point.

    Quote Originally Posted by timbartlett View Post
    It comes, amongst many other places, from a statement made to the so-called "Independent" Complaints Assessor by a Director of the DVLA, who said that the DVLA could not differentiate between innocent motorists and the "thousands" who were "simply trying to avoid payment of the penalty". In other words, once the DVLA had decided that you are guilty, innocence (even proven innocence, as in my case) does not let you off the penalty. What really disgusted me was that the ICA accepted this concept without demur. Fortunately for me, the court disagreed with both of them.



    Actually, change *is* in the hands of those that the public meet every day. When that DVLA clerk was told to lie to me in order to con or coerce me into paying an unlawful penalty, she had a simple choice: she could either obey the order, (and by doing so become guilty of fraud herself) or she could have refused, or she could have reported the matter to the police, and helped get her corrupt superiors put away. I accept that the latter is not easy -- particularly as it would have involved dealing with another government agency which suffers from exactly the same problem. But the fact that that particular matter went through at least five layers of management without anyone putting a stop to it is indicative of the depth of the rot.
    So the DVLA have upset you so every civil servant is bad? Hmmm... interesting thought process.


    Quote Originally Posted by timbartlett View Post
    Have you noticed that the places that display notices threatening their customers with penalties for arguing with staff are invariably the very ones in which the service is so poor and the staff are so unhelpful that tempers are almost certain to become frayed?
    Strange as they seem to be everywhere these days - maybe in your view nowhere and no companies now offer any form of (good) quality service.

    Quote Originally Posted by timbartlett View Post
    It is because the civil service regards itself as above the law that I regard it as beneath contempt. Cause and effect in that order -- not vice versa.

    PS I know you are going to say that I have referred to just one "isolated" incident, but I assure you there are many more. If I had not referred to a specific incident, I am sure you would have adopted standard civil service procedure and accused me of talking vague generalizations.
    Yes, but as I have said it works both ways - maybe it's your attitude to dealing with the various civil servants that have upset you that causes the problem in the first place?

    PW

  10. #90
    timbartlett Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Refueler View Post
    About time someone called this out .... we have a sensible thread here and it's being destroyed by others insisting on having a ridiculous bun-fight over absolutely ridiculous off-topic rubbish.

    Maybe they can "Grow up" and get back on topic or start another thread somewhere else to have their spat !
    I can't agree that standing up for democracy against totalitarianism is "a ridiculous bun-fight over absolutely ridiculous off-topic rubbish." ;-) but I entirely agree that it's off topic.
    So I've moved it.

Page 9 of 16 FirstFirst 12345678910111213141516 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •