Page 6 of 11 FirstFirst 1234567891011 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 107
  1. #51

    Default Re: Jet ski-ing Dangers - ref. wave wimp

    Nowhere did I comment on fuel consuption (having just checked my last post) I merely stated that the newer machines are cleaner than the old ones.

    In terms of the beauty spot comment no I wouldn't but then I actully treat others as i would like to be treated (old fashioned I know and maybe in this day and age a bit naive) and bear this in mind when I am out on the water.

    As for the wildlife from what I have experienced (limited I know) it does not tend to disappear. I and other skiers at my local beach have seen seals swimming along so close to us you can see their whiskers (now that really is amazing).

    Woofy - Thankyou for aknowledging that those of us who have posted here do recognise that there is a loutish element and that we do dislike it (lets face it, if we didn't care we wouldn't post). You say you would like to see if I can control a ski? I dont do stunts, have never done 70 mph and am happy to go slowly around sailing vessels to admire their beauty as well as being as unobtrusive as possible. Look at my user name. I am a wimp. I just like to be on the water, just as you do.

    As you have said we are on a hiding to nothing here and while we all know that we will never see eye to eye I hope some of you have seen that some of us really do care. Thats all from me. enjoy the water, however you use it.

  2. #52

    Default Re: Jet ski-ing Dangers - ref. wave wimp

    It seems to me that this is a classic case of "shooting the messenger". The jet skiers who are posting here largely seem to be concerned about the louts, but they then find themselves being taken to task for the louts behaviour.

    I will freely admit that I don't like JS's, because of the way that they are so frequently used/abused, but it doesn't seem to be very constructive to be having a go at people who are clearly wanting to do something about it. I think that a bit more diplomacy on our side may help to foster a more productive relationship with the "other side".

    I suppose I'll be shot down for saying this. Such is life! [img]/forums/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]

  3. #53
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    19,967

    Default Re: Jet ski-ing Dangers - ref. wave wimp

    As a raggie, I can say that I have been out on a JS a few times, and thoroughly enjoyed it. They are great fun.

    I agree with Nigels's comments above about cross exposure and education. It would do the JS'ers some good to realise how hard they are to spot, and the effects of their wake, and it would do the sailors some good to realise how hard the stand up models are to ride at slow speeds.

    I am aware of one case in the Orwell of a moboer with two JS's onboard... and a favourite past-time was buzzing up and down the channel in the Mobo creating a large wake for the JS's to hop over.... now... this looked extremely good fun... it was just in the wrong place.... this was dealt with very easily.... a few people complained to the lock operator who also control the relevant section of the river... and the lock operators refused to let him lock either in or out.... different approach, same effect.... and a resulting inability to continue being a pest...

    FWIW, I too praise the responsible owners that have posted here. They are obviously aware that a thoughtless idiotic minority are spoiling for many a hobby/sport that really can be good fun, and IMHO have done their cause a lot of good in exposing us to a more considered side of their sport.

  4. #54
    jerryat is offline Registered User
    Location : Nr Plymouth
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    3,570

    Default Re: Jet ski-ing Dangers - ref. wave wimp

    Hi NAS,

    Whilst generally agreeing with your points, I'm afraid that in my experience there is not 'an idiotic minority'.

    Quite the contrary, there is an idiotic MAJORITY, and that is something even the well intentioned efforts of wavewimp and the other JS posters, are going to find it damned difficult to change WITHOUT some form of formal control. [img]/forums/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img] [img]/forums/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

    I appreciate and applaud their efforts (as I'm certain many others here do) in trying to change what is now a pretty hardline 'anti' attitude, and hope for everyone's sake they are successful. [img]/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

    Cheers Jerry

  5. #55
    whisper is offline Registered User
    Location : Stratford upon Avon & S.Devon
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    5,151

    Default Re: Jet ski-ing Dangers - ref. wave wimp

    Well said, that man.

  6. #56
    peterb is online now Registered User
    Location : Radlett, Herts
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Posts
    2,834

    Default Re: Jet ski-ing Dangers - ref. wave wimp

    [ QUOTE ]
    Whilst generally agreeing with your points, I'm afraid that in my experience there is not 'an idiotic minority'.

    Quite the contrary, there is an idiotic MAJORITY, and that is something even the well intentioned efforts of wavewimp and the other JS posters, are going to find it damned difficult to change WITHOUT some form of formal control.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    I don't know whether its a minority or a majority, but I'm certain that it will seem like a majority. The problem is that the well-behaved PWCs, by definition, play in areas where they don't annoy and therefore don't get noticed. The ones that do get noticed are the ones that play close to other people, and hence annoy.

    It's the annoying (and sometimes dangerous) ones that need to be tackled, and the first step must be to ensure some sort of identification. Would video help?

  7. #57
    oldharry's Avatar
    oldharry is offline Registered User
    Location : North from the Nab about 10 miles
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Posts
    7,134

    Default Re: Jet ski-ing Dangers - ref. wave wimp

    [ QUOTE ]
    well its an agree to disagree stale mate.
    it is true we did enter your forum, but only to state our case.
    Your convinced the good guys are the minority, so at least we made some head way.
    PWC use is young, extremely young compared to many hundreds if not thousands of years of sailing evolution.
    We do admit our rogue element, and the 'debate' could go on for ever.
    Its just going to end in a nit picking session. and go on and on. it aint' good for either side.
    i have to disagree about the wildlife green issue, but i have my own experience on that and its Lakes not sea use.

    Its a free world, its a free sea, if you guys see bad riders report em, We are only on this thing once, and we all want what we think is the best time on it.
    Enjoy life, Enjoy your sport.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Keep up the good work BigMik - trouble is I have only once this year amongst the hundreds of skiers around seen ONE who was attempting to stay within the 8 knot speed limit at his launching place. The rest just jump on and flat out through the swimmers and moored boats.

    And rather too often they hit and hurt or kill other people in or on the water. How many more people have to be killed? Or have their holidays ruined?

    Skiers on the whole seem to disregard the rules: both the laws designed (harrumph!) to protect us all, and the elementary rules of basic safety that to the rest of us are common sense.

    And I still want to have a go on one!
    Is Conservation for wildlife or conservationists?
    http://boatownersresponse.org.uk

  8. #58
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    46

    Default Re: Jet ski-ing Dangers - ref. wave wimp

    [ QUOTE ]
    I see your in a case of denial, I've just read some advertising for jetskis and they burn 12 gals per hr. Thats about 10 x more than a car and there's not cat converter. They're also reffered to as muscle craft, full on throttle fun etc. Like I say they have got quieter but do the math if you got 9 craft in close proximity you got a lot of noise in one place.

    If they're so benign, please tell me why the wildlife dissapears when they are opperating?

    Answer honestly, would you like someone to have some full throttle fun around your family with a 200kg 70mph motor bike at your local beauty spot?

    Wake up and smell the coffee, or as you seem to prefer the petrol fumes!

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Like in a previous topic about stolen boats, can you backup those claims?

    My own experience:

    My PWC counts its engine use in metric hours, ie 4.9 hours etc.

    My car (Peugot 307 Petrol 2.0 litre engine) driving from Newquay to Guildford was running for 4.5 hours, and covered 290 miles - the fuel low warning light was lit when I arrived at home and I will need to fill it within the next 15 miles, else I'll most likely run out.

    So 4.5 hours use, 80 litre fuel tank.

    My PWC, going around the Isle of Wight, slow gentil cruise, 3.8 hours, will use almost all my fuel. Just short of 4 hours is counted on the skis clock - this does not include time when the engine isn't running. The ski has a 64 litre tank.

    The ski has used the same if not less than my car. Thats based on hours of engine running time, the ski has only covered 70 miles, whereas the car has travelled just short of 300 miles.

    To back-up your end of the arguement, if I pin the throttle I can use a full tank in less than 2 hours, and if I was allowed to drive my car like that at full throttle I guess it would run out of fuel very quickly also, if someone can arranged for me to drive my car like that up the M1 legally I'd be happy to test that theory.

    Wildlife, many scientific surveys have been conducted here in the UK and in the states concerning lakes etc, and concluded that PWC's are no worse than other craft. Yes any moving, or powered craft creating a wash, and noise will cause animals to move - don't single PWC's out, small mobo's will have the same effect.

    However some rogue PWC users and some rouge small speed boat owners will stay in one area, so that will have a greater effect on wild life. Again it isn't just PWC's so don't single them out.

    You obviously recycle, switch lights off, and care about the environment - so anything which uses non-renewable fuel is bad. There are electric PWC's out there, I bet you could re-charge one of those from a solar panel - can you do that with your mobo?

  9. #59

    Default Re: Jet ski-ing Dangers - ref. wave wimp

    If I do 56 mph average in my car and my car does 44mpg I burn 1.3 gal per hr. So, there or there abouts, according to the advertisements you told me to look at it is roughly ten x more polluting and that is not taking into account there is no cat converter on a JS. Personally speaking it is not very often I see a JS going for a gentle run as you describe!

    Is your ski a 4 stroke muscle craft [img]/forums/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img] as the advertisments descride. I think a way forward should be that only 4 stroke skis are sold. Unfortunately, still 50% of the craft I see for sale are of the 2 stroke variety.... Do a search on Google. Likwise your comment about the wildlife is skewed, these craft operate close to shore, unlike MBs and they also operate in packs concentrating the noise where they can disturb wildlife & gull colonies. It is well documented by the RSPB that young nesting birds have been observed falling out of the clifftop nests when sppoked by these craft as they cannot yet fly.

    So in short the way forward, as I see it, is to only sell 4 stroke mcs, have 1000m JS free zone extending from the shoreline as well as having a registration / licsencing system.

    Like I say, why do the laws that protect the majority of people on land from wreckless motor bike use & aggresive behaviour suddenly stop at the shoreline? I guess it is only a matter of time before there are more tragic accidents that brings in tighter legislation.

    As the old saying goes if you can't see there's a problem you are part of it!

  10. #60
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    46

    Default Re: Jet ski-ing Dangers - ref. wave wimp

    A all boats create a wake, large mobos create larger wakes than PWCs as they are larger and displace more water.

    My craft is a 4-stroke, but like all second hand craft, there are also a lot of older 2-stroke outboard engines available as well.

    Interestingly, my old 2-stroke which was direct injection used less fuel than my new 4-stroke, but on the other hand it doesn't burn oil.

    All your points are correct and true, except that you make all your points sound as if it is only PWC's which cause these problems, all motorised craft create noise, all craft including birds who swim create a wake.

    As for the law, the rules don't stop on the shoreline, within 300 yards or meters (always get confused) there is a 10knot speed limit all the way around the UK, and on the solent this is increased to 1000.

    At that slow speed there should be very little engine noise and a lot less wake.

    However the authorities do little to enforce existing laws.

Page 6 of 11 FirstFirst 1234567891011 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
  •