|
Register | Donate | Events Calendar | Picture Albums |
Show Reports Reports and pictures from recent Steam events |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|||
Quote:
You are STILL missing the main point of RTA insurance, and You are drifting off into the LA LA Land of Public Liability, which has NOTHING to do with playing with engines, The important part of the link that You have posted is in paragraph 3 BUT for You to recognise this would merely expose the irrelevence (In this matter) of the NTET and it's 'Dream up a problem that dosen't exist and then fail to solve it' mentality. 'Use' is of no relevence to RTA insurance and in trying to give it some relevence You are effectively betraying the entire Road steam fraternity. |
|
|||
Quote:
Why did the driver feel the need to shove the button in? is it the equivalent of your boy racer with a noisy exhaust trying to make up for some lack of size in the trouser department? If you want to demonstrate the engines power then do so in a sensible manner like a professional driver. |
|
|||
Any activity has risks,
You could be sitting in an armchair in your basement and a large aeroplane could crash into your house and kill you !! But that is very unlikely.
Over revving a 100 year old engine while standing next to the 100 yr old flywheel is rather riskier What matters to most of us is that the risk takers take their risks in circumstances and places where others will NOT be hurt and neither will the hobby itself suddenly find restrictions imposed by government. In Canada and the States the spectator sport of watching monster truck racing came under tighter scrutiny and regulation after one ran amok , out of the arena, and killed a few spectators. Play safe, have fun, and if you want to push the envelope do it so you will not harm anyone else. Regards David Powell |
|
||||
Quote:
|
|
|||
Is it worth pointing out that both of the last 2 officials of the NTET who agreed to differ with Me are now no longer even members of the NTET? |
|
|||
Not a worry there !
If that happened then the engine would soon stop ! Everyone around would get a shower in VERY hot water. ! The fusible plug would likely melt and whatever water was left in the boiler might put the fire out, or it might have a burned crown. Even in 2" size a fitting breaking off is a bit scary, but not a disaster. Regards David Powell.
|
|
||||
Quote:
Do you have other info on this case or have I misread? It states on page 3 of the judgement that AXA, Pheonix engineering's insurers paid out over £2m to Pheonix and the neighbour to settle the claim. AXA then took action against UKI (Holden's RTA insurer) in Pheonix name to recover their loss as they felt Holden to be responsible and his RTA policy should cover the liability. In the first case the judge found UKI not liable, in the appeal that decision was reversed and UKI was felt to be liable and then in the third case in the Supreme Court even taking into account again the EU situation the appeal was overruled and the first judgement upheld that UKI was not liable and the activity undertaken was not "normal use of the vehicle" and thus not covered under the policy. It takes a bit of reading to understand it but I can't see that UKI the RTA insurer ever paid out anything? Do I have that wrong? I assume if I haven't that AXA / Pheonix could persue Mr Holden personally for the damages if they could prove negligence, probably not in their interest as even if they won he is probably unlikely to have the resources for them to recover their loss and as he was an employee albeit probably not on pay at the time Pheonix themselves may have culpability by virtue of allowing the work to proceed and as AXA is Pheonix insurer it would be an even more convoluted circle! Phoenix also agreed to limit their pursuit of the claim to UKI. Notwithstanding my second para I can't see how this illustrates the gold plated RTA insurance covers all eventualities? As far as I can see UKI the RTA insurer never paid a penny in settlement of the claim although they would have incurred substantial legal costs. The judgement also establishes case law for future similar situations. Obviously this case is unrelated to the dyno testing as there is no employee / employer relationship and it was in a public space not private property where the public were excluded. Let's just be thankful that there was no need on this occasion to put the legalities to the test! Paul.
__________________
Strange - There is never enough time to do the job properly but there is always enough time to do it again when it goes wrong! |
|
||||
there is a lot of talk about governors, I am not fully up on the speck of Boadicea but would I be right in thinking that road locomotives would not usually be fitted with them?
As far as testing an engine's performance as I see it in its working life an engine would have been pushed to work hard, however as the engine not only had a high value to its owner but it would be expected to earn its keep day in and day out so working the engine as hard as we see some engines worked today would have been frowned upon and probably to the extent of sacking the driver. I love to see an engine working hard but it should always be kept within the bounds of reality.
__________________
If I rest I rust, if I rust I bust. no rest, no rust, no bust. |
|
|