collision - a pednat writes

Most definitely - and I quote from gcaptain.com


"In covering the recent San Francisco Bay Bridge incident I have noticed most (but not all) of the news articles have made a small error in terminology. In describing the incident where the Cosco Busan hit the Bay Bridge many prominent news organizations referred to event as a collision when in fact it was an allision.

For clarification: A vessel collides with another moving vessel…. A vessel allides with a fixed object (unless it is submerged) and is presumed at fault.
 
Great. I shall attempt to use this in a conversation as soon as possible.
My recent offers to make "an infusion of leaves" for some colleagues has made me a marked man coming shortly after having alluded to the late Jade Goody as having been gauche.
 
IMO the use of allision is limited to the US legal system; note all the web sites above are US based law firms or linked therewith.

The rest of the Maritime Law worldwide still seem to use the term, "collided with the side of the bridge" etc.

My Concise Oxford English Dicitionary does not show the word nor does the spell checker. So it doesn't exist in the real world. /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif
 
A strick "pednat" might now that even if you think you are "stationary" you actually have motion due to the spinning of the Earth, the Earth round the Sun and the whole system through space itself. And probably some more from other besides.

The later alone is in the region of 600,000 mph.

Tends to make mockery of a 6knot Harbour speed limit doesn't it ?

;-)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top