MtB Posted October 23, 2017 Report Share Posted October 23, 2017 8 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said: That is because I can't do a square sign. We used to have a superscript format option here for that. But the recent forum software 'upgrade' (lol) took that away too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerra Posted October 23, 2017 Report Share Posted October 23, 2017 1 hour ago, Machpoint005 said: I'm not - it's definitely "forums". I'm reminded of a judge I one heard insist that the plural of "scenario" was "scenaria" but she may deliberately have been speaking facetiously. According to the "Grammarist": Fora and forums are plurals of forum. The former conforms to the original Latin, which some people prefer, while others like the Anglicized form. So both seem to be correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murflynn Posted October 23, 2017 Report Share Posted October 23, 2017 what a load of nit-picking. .................. as my dad used to say - when a dog is about to bite you, don't worry about the colour of the dog's eyes. if that was my boat I would consider the damage to be horrendous. let's face it - that plastic tub bears the scars of endless collisions or at least abrasions resulting from careless driving or careless mooring. I feel great sympathy for anyone who encounters said bath-tub and is not able to avoid close proximity with him. I am amazed that the boat name is so easily read. I hope CRT checks out his licence, BSC and insurance details. Let's face it, this guy should be excluded from all CRT and EA waters. If he was driving on the road he would have been disqualified years ago. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X Alan W Posted October 23, 2017 Report Share Posted October 23, 2017 7 hours ago, oats said: Cant believe the attitude of some folk, why is it acceptable to bash into someone else's property and not stop to sort it out. Remember a lot of boats are peoples homes how would they feel if someone was to smash into their house or even car and just laugh it off as oh 'it happens get a life'. Having had it done to us its not funny. Probably taking Tim of Tim & Pru at his word "It's a contact sport" looking at the state of the plastic boats hull paintwork the owner thought there was no damage caused no excuse for his actions though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebfg Posted October 23, 2017 Report Share Posted October 23, 2017 12 minutes ago, Murflynn said: what a load of nit-picking. .................. as my dad used to say - when a dog is about to bite you, don't worry about the colour of the dog's eyes. if that was my boat I would consider the damage to be horrendous. let's face it - that plastic tub bears the scars of endless collisions or at least abrasions resulting from careless driving or careless mooring. I feel great sympathy for anyone who encounters said bath-tub and is not able to avoid close proximity with him. I am amazed that the boat name is so easily read. I hope CRT checks out his licence, BSC and insurance details. Let's face it, this guy should be excluded from all CRT and EA waters. If he was driving on the road he would have been disqualified years ago. He is licensed. So I presume insured. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victor Vectis Posted October 23, 2017 Report Share Posted October 23, 2017 2 hours ago, ditchcrawler said: OK so the boat weighs say 3000 kg, it is moving at 1.5 m/s and the area of impact is an area 6 cm. I am sure someone can work out how that compares with a blow from a 0.75 Kg ball pein hammer. Depends on the speed of the hammer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
haza Posted October 23, 2017 Report Share Posted October 23, 2017 no damage you would be surprised the damage these plastic boats can do ...but those of you who seem to think .the damage is minor .i would like to now how you would feel if it where your boat ...bla bla bla ..dont some people just p.ss you off well done for reporting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark99 Posted October 23, 2017 Report Share Posted October 23, 2017 (edited) 17 minutes ago, Victor Vectis said: Depends on the speed of the hammer. I think we have the info to work that out. Conserving momentum (probably not right as "bounce" back) momentum of pos = mass × velocity = 3000 kg × 1.5 m/s = 4,500 kg m/s Rearrange the equation: velocity = momentum ÷ mass velocity of hammer = 4500 kg m/s ÷ 0.75 kg = 6,000 m/s Possibly over-egged the speed and weight of pos. Plus the bounce back. I could be wrong. Edited October 23, 2017 by mark99 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rasputin Posted October 23, 2017 Report Share Posted October 23, 2017 There seems to be a lot of anti-fiberglass posts on this thread, does it really need stating that it is a fiberglass boat every time it is mentioned, would the same be true if it was a beaten up metal boat? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebfg Posted October 23, 2017 Report Share Posted October 23, 2017 (edited) 34 minutes ago, mark99 said: I think we have the info to work that out. Conserving momentum (probably not right as "bounce" back) momentum of pos = mass × velocity = 3000 kg × 1.5 m/s = 4,500 kg m/s Rearrange the equation: velocity = momentum ÷ mass velocity of hammer = 4500 kg m/s ÷ 0.75 kg = 6,000 m/s Possibly over-egged the speed and weight of pos. Plus the bounce back. I could be wrong. If the first hit was at a certain velocity and momentum, would the following three be at a lesser rate than the previous one with the last being quite a gentle hit. I'm not sure if having the accelerator on will make a difference or not. As after the first hit the momentum to build up speed is lost. Or am I confusing myself as well as others? Seemed logical in my head. Eta. Still not a nice thing to happen and I hope the insurers deal with it. Edited October 23, 2017 by thebfg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerra Posted October 23, 2017 Report Share Posted October 23, 2017 1 minute ago, rasputin said: There seems to be a lot of anti-fiberglass posts on this thread, does it really need stating that it is a fiberglass boat every time it is mentioned, would the same be true if it was a beaten up metal boat? In my innocence I just assumed the mention of materials was to underline/explain the differences in construction and the way different boats move under different conditions. Obviously I was wrong and it is some obscure form of vendetta. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matty40s Posted October 23, 2017 Report Share Posted October 23, 2017 2 hours ago, mrsmelly said: Jeeeeeeeeesus what an essay. Now I absolutely know why I never read blogs. Now we know you just did. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rasputin Posted October 23, 2017 Report Share Posted October 23, 2017 5 minutes ago, Jerra said: In my innocence I just assumed the mention of materials was to underline/explain the differences in construction and the way different boats move under different conditions. Obviously I was wrong and it is some obscure form of vendetta. Sadly I think you are wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ditchcrawler Posted October 23, 2017 Report Share Posted October 23, 2017 1 hour ago, Victor Vectis said: Depends on the speed of the hammer. Correct, but I was hoping that someone may know that as I don't Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WotEver Posted October 23, 2017 Report Share Posted October 23, 2017 1 hour ago, Mike the Boilerman said: We used to have a superscript format option here for that. But the recent forum software 'upgrade' (lol) took that away too. Oh no it didn’t Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murflynn Posted October 23, 2017 Report Share Posted October 23, 2017 20 minutes ago, WotEver said: Oh no it didn’t clever clogs, innit? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StephenA Posted October 23, 2017 Report Share Posted October 23, 2017 1 hour ago, mark99 said: I think we have the info to work that out. Conserving momentum (probably not right as "bounce" back) momentum of pos = mass × velocity = 3000 kg × 1.5 m/s = 4,500 kg m/s 3 Tonnes? Really? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rasputin Posted October 23, 2017 Report Share Posted October 23, 2017 1 minute ago, StephenA said: 3 Tonnes? Really? I was thinking that, but, my 18 foot plastic boat is 1.5 tons so it is a possibility Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark99 Posted October 23, 2017 Report Share Posted October 23, 2017 5 minutes ago, StephenA said: 3 Tonnes? Really? Dunno not my assumption. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ditchcrawler Posted October 23, 2017 Report Share Posted October 23, 2017 2 minutes ago, mark99 said: Dunno not my assumption. A guess Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MtB Posted October 23, 2017 Report Share Posted October 23, 2017 32 minutes ago, WotEver said: Oh no it didn’t Ok they moved it then! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
artleknock Posted October 23, 2017 Report Share Posted October 23, 2017 1 hour ago, haza said: no damage you would be surprised the damage these plastic boats can do ...but those of you who seem to think .the damage is minor .i would like to now how you would feel if it where your boat ...bla bla bla ..dont some people just p.ss you off well done for reporting If it was your boat I would say "Isn't that terrible". If it was MY boat, I would hit the roof. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharpness Posted October 23, 2017 Report Share Posted October 23, 2017 4 hours ago, Athy said: The epithet was "plastic pos" not "POS", and there was no indication that it was an abbreviation for anything. That being so, the context was not particularly illuminating. Most people, this one included, would infer that it was a type of boat. Was I the only one who thought it was a typo for pot, as in yoghurt? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mac of Cygnet Posted October 23, 2017 Report Share Posted October 23, 2017 4 hours ago, Athy said: I did not think that I would insult your intelligence by appending a yellow smiling face. I have, however, amended that post. I am happy with "fora" or "forums". Perhaps I will find more information on the social mediums. No need to amend. The comment was taken exactly as intended, as, I hope, was mine. As referendums seem to be de rigeur these days, perhaps we should have one on Latinised plurals? I'm sure the public will be just as well informed on the subject as they were in the last one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Mack Posted October 23, 2017 Report Share Posted October 23, 2017 3 hours ago, Jerra said: According to the "Grammarist": Fora and forums are plurals of forum. The former conforms to the original Latin, which some people prefer, while others like the Anglicized form. So both seem to be correct. I think 'Anglicized' is the Americanised form! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Featured Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now