BSS Examiner Fees

[MtB]

14 hours ago, MartynG said:

It has been known for people to put water in their fuel tank.

The fuel type is marked on a car filler so why not on a boat

 

That's just a courtesy I'd say.

 

Or is it an MOT fail if not marked? 

 

[LadyG]

2 hours ago, MtB said:

 

I knew that.

 

I was trying to under-exaggerate...

Anyways that matter nought, the Scheme is supposed to be there to prevent innocent passers by getting killed, though I doubt this has ever happened.

It has turned in to a nightmare for examiners and a nightmare for boaters.

 

 

 

 

 

[Tracy D'arth]

15 hours ago, Tonka said:

should be like cars where the petrol pump gun will not fit in a diesel filler and visa versa.

What?  How's that then?  The unleaded nozzle is/was different.  Folk still manage to put the wrong fuel in cars.

[MtB]

18 hours ago, Tonka said:

should be like cars where the petrol pump gun will not fit in a diesel filler and visa versa.

 

This should be true, but I don't think this is. If it were true, firms like this would not exist.

 

https://www.wrongfuel-recovery.co.uk/

 

"Have you just put the wrong fuel in your car?
Don't panic, we can help.
0800 772 3842"

[Peanut]

The petrol nozzle will fit a diesel filler but the diesel one won't fit a petrol filler.  You may get away with a small amount of petrol in a diesel tank if it is an older engine.  I have, you just dilute it down with more diesel.  Newer diesel engines are  more  temperamental.  Filling a petrol tank with diesel is more difficult as the nozzle won't fit, a little and the car may not run very well, a lot and it probably won't run at all. A friend did it with his Merc, diluted it,  and got away with it.  There is plenty of opportunity to empty tanks and pockets, and dispose of contaminated fuel.

Edited December 10, 2022 by Peanut
typo

[MtB]

2 hours ago, Peanut said:

The petrol nozzle will fit a diesel filler but the diesel one won't fit a petrol filler.  You may get away with a small amount of petrol in a diesel tank if it is an older engine.  I have, you just dilute it down with more diesel.  Newer diesel engines are  more  temperamental.  Filling a petrol tank with diesel is more difficult as the nozzle won't fit, a little and the car may not run very well, a lot and it probably won't run at all. A friend did it with his Merc, diluted it,  and got away with it.  There is plenty of opportunity to empty tanks and pockets, and dispose of contaminated fuel.

 

I see. Last time I had a petrol vehicle the tank filler was just as big as a diesel, but this must have been 20 years ago. 

 

Getting back to the point though, if they have to design fillers to prevent to wrong pump nozzle being used, filler labels must be insufficient and don't work.

 

So given we know this, why does the BSS mandate them? A pointless regulation.

 

 

 

 

[Momac]

49 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

I see. Last time I had a petrol vehicle the tank filler was just as big as a diesel, but this must have been 20 years ago. 

 

The petrol filler being made smaller was when cars started to have catalytic converters fitted.

It prevented leaded petrol being put in which would have damaged the catalytic converter . 

Catalytic converters become mandatory in 1993. 

[Arthur Marshall]

52 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

I see. Last time I had a petrol vehicle the tank filler was just as big as a diesel, but this must have been 20 years ago. 

 

Getting back to the point though, if they have to design fillers to prevent to wrong pump nozzle being used, filler labels must be insufficient and don't work.

 

So given we know this, why does the BSS mandate them? A pointless regulation.

 

 

 

 

There are apparently regular meetings of engineers, boat electricians etc, all beavering away thinking up more regulations. Surprisingly this means more work for engineers, boat electricians etc, and of course increased fees for examiners (who are mostly engineers, boat electricians etc) but absolutely no increase in safety for the boater.

You'd almost think someone had a vested interest...

[MtB]

9 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

There are apparently regular meetings of engineers, boat electricians etc, all beavering away thinking up more regulations. Surprisingly this means more work for engineers, boat electricians etc, and of course increased fees for examiners (who are mostly engineers, boat electricians etc) but absolutely no increase in safety for the boater.

You'd almost think someone had a vested interest...

 

No, it's just what bureaucrats do. It's in their DNA to write ever more regulations to prevent imagined risks. Especially when funded with OPM. After all, who can possibly argue for 'less safety'? 

 

"Better safety" is always a good thing whatever the cost, Shirley. 

 

I'd love to see the stats on boat accidents injuring passers-by before and after the BSS was introduced. I doubt there was any reduction in an already vanishingly small number of cases, but I'd be delighted to see some actual facts. 

[Mad Harold]

15 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

There are apparently regular meetings of engineers, boat electricians etc, all beavering away thinking up more regulations. Surprisingly this means more work for engineers, boat electricians etc, and of course increased fees for examiners (who are mostly engineers, boat electricians etc) but absolutely no increase in safety for the boater.

You'd almost think someone had a vested interest...

A comittee is usually set up to address a problem or to set up regulations.

When the problem or regulation has been thrashed out, the commitee is redundant.

To keep themselves in what is probably a lucrative sideline, they have to make up more rules.

 

 

[Laurie Booth]

7 hours ago, Tracy D'arth said:

What?  How's that then?  The unleaded nozzle is/was different.  Folk still manage to put the wrong fuel in cars.

When I was in America the petrol was a black hose and the diesel was a green hose, very confusing for me

 

[MtB]

Just now, Laurie Booth said:

When I was in America the petrol was a black hose and the diesel was a green hose, very confusing for me

 

 

Not only that but they call petrol "gas". Even more confusion for me!

 

I wonder what they call, actual, real, gas....

 

 

[Tracy D'arth]

3 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

Not only that but they call petrol "gas". Even more confusion for me!

 

I wonder what they call, actual, real, gas....

 

 

And tiny gallons too!  A good pub quiz question " What is the only thing smaller in America compared with the UK?"

[Tonka]

7 minutes ago, Laurie Booth said:

When I was in America the petrol was a black hose and the diesel was a green hose, very confusing for me

 

And their live wire is colour coded black

[Laurie Booth]

17 minutes ago, Tonka said:

And their live wire is colour coded black

And switches are up for on and down for off

 

[Tracy D'arth]

1 minute ago, Laurie Booth said:

And switches are up for on and down for off

 

Quite common across the world, does catch you out sometimes but then I am used to 2 and 3 way switching.

 

With toggle switches its less obvious.

[Tonka]

3 minutes ago, Laurie Booth said:

And switches are up for on and down for off

 

That is the same for aircraft, so being an aircraft engineer seemed normal to me

[MtB]

Just now, Laurie Booth said:

And switches are up for on and down for off

 

 

And they talk funny. 

 

Like the French and that Sturgeon woman, I think they do lots of things differently specifically to be different.

 

What is it they say about the USA and us? "Two nations divided by a common language"?

 

 

[Alan de Enfield]

7 minutes ago, MtB said:

What is it they say about the USA and us? "Two nations divided by a common language"?

 

 

The difference between an American and a Brit :

 

One thinks 100 miles is a long way and the other thinks 100 years is a long time.

[Laurie Booth]

16 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

And they talk funny. 

 

Like the French and that Sturgeon woman, I think they do lots of things differently specifically to be different.

 

What is it they say about the USA and us? "Two nations divided by a common language"?

 

 

And try getting into Warner Bros Studios with a name "Laurie" on your pass !!

[MtB]

9 minutes ago, Laurie Booth said:

And try getting into Warner Bros Studios with a name "Laurie" on your pass !!

 

Shud'a spelled it "Lorry"! 

 

 

[Mike Todd]

2 hours ago, MtB said:

 

I see. Last time I had a petrol vehicle the tank filler was just as big as a diesel, but this must have been 20 years ago. 

 

Getting back to the point though, if they have to design fillers to prevent to wrong pump nozzle being used, filler labels must be insufficient and don't work.

 

So given we know this, why does the BSS mandate them? A pointless regulation.

 

 

 

 

For several decades now it has been a central aim of good quality industrial design to remove the opportunities for mistakes. Several investigations in (eg) hospitals regarding the incorrect use of drugs and syringes etc have resulted in design changes just for this. Human Factors began in earnest in the aviation industry, made all the better by a philosophy of no blame reporting. The underlying principle is that (aside of malicious activity) mistakes are as much the responsibility of 'the system' as the individual employee. If only we could see that approach more widely in society where every disaster is accompanied by a which hunt to find 'who is to blame' (ie who can we sue) Equally, a management that accepts that it is ultimately responsible and does not seek to dump every bad thing onto some unsuspecting junior, ought always to be the aim.

[Tonka]

5 minutes ago, Mike Todd said:

For several decades now it has been a central aim of good quality industrial design to remove the opportunities for mistakes. Several investigations in (eg) hospitals regarding the incorrect use of drugs and syringes etc have resulted in design changes just for this. Human Factors began in earnest in the aviation industry, made all the better by a philosophy of no blame reporting. The underlying principle is that (aside of malicious activity) mistakes are as much the responsibility of 'the system' as the individual employee. If only we could see that approach more widely in society where every disaster is accompanied by a which hunt to find 'who is to blame' (ie who can we sue) Equally, a management that accepts that it is ultimately responsible and does not seek to dump every bad thing onto some unsuspecting junior, ought always to be the aim.

and then Boeing forget all that to save money

The B787 which BA dropped onto its nose because Boeing put a hole near where the Landing Gear lock pin should go. The hole was also big enough to put the pin in 

The B737 Max which had a flight control system added that was only fed by one sensor

Being prime examples

[MtB]

18 minutes ago, Mike Todd said:

For several decades now it has been a central aim of good quality industrial design to remove the opportunities for mistakes. Several investigations in (eg) hospitals regarding the incorrect use of drugs and syringes etc have resulted in design changes just for this. Human Factors began in earnest in the aviation industry, made all the better by a philosophy of no blame reporting. The underlying principle is that (aside of malicious activity) mistakes are as much the responsibility of 'the system' as the individual employee. If only we could see that approach more widely in society where every disaster is accompanied by a which hunt to find 'who is to blame' (ie who can we sue) Equally, a management that accepts that it is ultimately responsible and does not seek to dump every bad thing onto some unsuspecting junior, ought always to be the aim.

 

Interestingly this philosophy is widely understood by engineers but by very few others, politicians especially not.

 

The MAIB investigations subscribe to this principle, being very careful to just describe what happened and not to point fingers. Also it appears to have a special status where it cannot be used in a court of law as evidence to prosecute IIRC, specifically to support the need to 'understand what happened' without the worry that the investigators write could get called as expert witnesses and ripped to bits by a clever lawyer.

 

There is a similar board for air accidents AIUI. 

[Tonka]

6 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

Interestingly this philosophy is widely understood by engineers but by very few others, politicians especially not.

 

The MAIB investigations subscribe to this principle, being very careful to just describe what happened and not to point fingers. Also it appears to have a special status where it cannot be used in a court of law as evidence to prosecute IIRC, specifically to support the need to 'understand what happened' without the worry that the investigators write could get called as expert witnesses and ripped to bits by a clever lawyer.

 

There is a similar board for air accidents AIUI. 

I read a very interesting article once where they were stating that there should be an independent air accident authority set up because as it is at the moment it is too political.  You have the American air accident authority paid for by the government who also pay Boeing backhanders, In uk you have the AAIB paid for by the government who also give backhanders to Airbus. The reason i say "backhanders is because the government's are not allowed to pay aircraft manufacture's as it is against competitive rules.