Speeding Jetskis - police action - brilliant news

[dylanwinter]

In the recent thread on the subject I posted a short vid of me swearing at jetskis and a power boat speeding through the moorings at West Mersea.

the link is here....language warning.....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6B1L4mVgIBE


Last night this message popped into my youtube inbox

Hi,
Just received your video i will track these down and prosecute for you, average fine is £1200 per offender.
Please email me your contact details to XXXXXX

XXXXXX is a great bloke - they are currently running a campaign on the Essex Rivers - so next time you see one speeding - film it and put it on youtube. It seems to me that the long arm of the law just got a bit longer. You could at least hold your camera aloft and wave it in their general direction.

Dylan
Edited by Dan - Personal details of someone who has contacted you privately should not be posted in a public forum. I realise no ill intent but we take privacy seriously. I was contacted about the language in the video but it seems to have been edited now.
http://www.youtube.com/user/dylanwinter1

 

[SimbaDog]

This one should cheer you up

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCHBynPJ7WA

 

[jenku]

Not sure, he seems to come out if it unharmed and so does the vessel?

 

[tokenjam]

That's great news Dylan and good luck!

Just be careful they don't counter sue for using bad language at the poor little boys - they were only enjoying themselves, they probably come from broken homes, doing badly at school etc - you know the sort of thing.

 

[rickp]

Not sure, he seems to come out if it unharmed and so does the vessel?

Yes - I thought the playground swearing a bit over the top for such tiny wake. Perhaps he wants them to go past dead on the speed limit creating far bigger wash - which seems to be the result of the policy in Chichester Harbour?

 

[sarabande]

It is an interesting fact that the most significant factor in the kinetic energy of a moving body is that the KE relates directly to the square of the speed. So guessing that the 'safe' speed of a ski at 6kts, is about one third of the cruising speed as in the video, this means that the KE of the jet ski is NINE times greater.

Add to which, is the question of 'domain of control'. By this I mean the area within which a vessel can stop or manoeuvre without collision or allision. Clearly at planing speeds the effective safe domain is much greater than at sub-planing speed. I accept that the wash created at low speed may be greater than that at planing speeds, but the use of such craft at the speed recorded on video, within close proximity to moored vessels and e.g. perhaps small rowing boats, shows that the drivers were not operating the craft with cognizance of their kinetic energy or domain.

Posters will be aware that unless there are local rules by an appropriate authority, Rule 2(a) of ColRegs applies.

There is already this week, the sad case in Scotland of the boy killed by a speeding jet-ski (note that I did not say jet-skier). It is hard to find any reason, justification or excuse for the use of craft at the videoed speeds within close proximity to moored vessels.

 

[dylanwinter]

absolutely agree

get ready chaps

- the next line of defence from the speed apologists will be that at they were just high spirited lads "showing off" for the camera.

I am reasonably convinced that they had no idea I was there or that I had a camera

 

[johnalison]

Yes - I thought the playground swearing a bit over the top for such tiny wake. Perhaps he wants them to go past dead on the speed limit creating far bigger wash - which seems to be the result of the policy in Chichester Harbour?

I suppose you could define that as a tiny wake insofar as no boats were actually swamped within view. The other people sitting in their craft on a quiet day might have thought differently.

If you want to see how it should be done, go to Salcombe and watch the rib run by the local photographer; always a sensible speed and scarecely a ripple of wake.

 

[Ubergeekian]

Just received your video i will track these down and prosecute for you, average fine is £1200 per offender.
Please email me your contact details to xxxxx

Are you sure? I see some feedback ostensibly from Essex Police sent by user "emmyloupinkchick" - a curious choice for someone called Simon Lofting.

 

[dylanwinter]

I am an old hack - so I spoke to him on the phone. Seems entirely credible. But you are right to be suspicious

 

[crazybass]

He is legitimate, he regularly gives us updates on our pwc forum. We all support what he is doing pity it does only seem to be down south though.

http://www.pwcforums.co.uk/forum_posts.asp?TID=34670

 

[RIB_imposter]

It is an interesting fact that the most significant factor in the kinetic energy of a moving body is that the KE relates directly to the square of the speed. So guessing that the 'safe' speed of a ski at 6kts, is about one third of the cruising speed as in the video, this means that the KE of the jet ski is NINE times greater.

but if that were the case then he would still have less KE than a boat weighing a couple of tonnes but travelling at the limit!

Add to which, is the question of 'domain of control'. By this I mean the area within which a vessel can stop or manoeuvre without collision or allision. Clearly at planing speeds the effective safe domain is much greater than at sub-planing speed. I accept that the wash created at low speed may be greater than that at planing speeds, but the use of such craft at the speed recorded on video, within close proximity to moored vessels and e.g. perhaps small rowing boats, shows that the drivers were not operating the craft with cognizance of their kinetic energy or domain.

Not condoning speeding but they looked to be in control of their craft, didn't hit anything (or appear to nearly hit anything) and so perhaps they have far more cognizance than you think! Actually you may be surprised just how much more controllable a craft like that is ON the plane than off it!

It is hard to find any reason, justification or excuse for the use of craft at the videoed speeds within close proximity to moored vessels.

really - so if they were responding to a vessel or person in distress? Not saying they were but there are some circumstances where exceeding the speed limit may be justified. Perhaps less so but I know one jetskier who complains his plugs foul at low speed meaning on a trip to/from "open water" his engine may suddenly conk out. No power=no steering so he would claim keeping the engine at higher speed actually makes him safer... and avoids a tow back to shore ...I'm not convinced but understand his argument.

Am I the only person that is slightly perturbed by the apparent intervention of the police? Firstly I don't see it as the police's role to prosecute. Surely that falls either to the relevant H.M. and or the Crown Prosecution Service. I would see it as the police's role to investigate and gather evidence. The suggestion that he "will prosecute" means he is very confident he can positively ID a suspect. Does the "suspect" not get a chance to present his case before the police publically declare that they will prosecute and even imply the level of fine that might be expected. Does the body of evidence stack up to the standard required for criminal prosecution? I would suggest a single DIY video may not, in which case pursuing it cannot be in the public interest.

 

[dylanwinter]

rib imposter

utterly, utterly brilliant repost from the rib imposter. Beyond parody.

they were answering an emergency call - good one. Let us try to imagine what sort of emergency that could be. International rescue - ferrying a transplant organ to the cuaseway at the top of the strood.

Next....

My plugs oil up if I go slow - I am speeding for my safety and yours

try that one on the road traffic cops to see how it goes down.

Brilliant!

Amatuer video - what has the status of the camerman got to do with it - although I am a professional cameraman.



there are no lengths to which people will go to justify inconsiderate and dangerous behaviour.

petrol heads really crack me up.

Dylan

 

[jenku]

Yes - I thought the playground swearing a bit over the top for such tiny wake. Perhaps he wants them to go past dead on the speed limit creating far bigger wash - which seems to be the result of the policy in Chichester Harbour?

Just for the record, I was referring to the "flipped jetski video", not Dylan's. While I personally do think jetskis are far less annoying than mobos (they are noisy but create hardly any wash), I'd still rather not have them zoom nearby when I am at anchor or moored, just for the annoying bit.

 

[Elessar]

Am I the only person that is slightly perturbed by the apparent intervention of the police?

No. I'm all for prosecuting the reckless, but prosecution by you tube seems to be the wrong side of the line.
I have no sympathy for the jetskier being prosecuted, and the fact that this case does make for a smile masks the underlying seriousness of this privacy invasion.

 

[dylanwinter]

Invasion of privacy.....

- they were in a public space breaking the speed limit - posing a risk to other users of the water.

Should I have turned the camera off to avoid invading their privacy while they violated the speed limit. Come on....

How many security and speed cameras do we pass every day? Should all video evidence be discarded because it violates people's privacy?

I think its a jolly goood thing if every hot headed rule breaking speed freak is just a little concerned that anyone with a camera could film them breaking the law and they stood a good chance of ending up before the beak. I hope this incident reaches the ears of the jetski community.

But as a journalist I do think that the way this story is developing is entertaining and a sign of the way the world is changing.

 

[bedouin]

I have no sympathy for the jetskier being prosecuted, and the fact that this case does make for a smile masks the underlying seriousness of this privacy invasion.

The jetski was being driven in public. There is no assumption of privacy under those circumstances and hence there can be no invasion of privacy.

 

[Major Catastrophe]

I sincerely hope that prosecution by Youtube doesn't become the norm, but inless the drivers of the jetskis can be positively identified and traced this is a gross misuse of police time and public money to even try and trace them. I assume there is a speed limit within the moorings the alleged offence took place. If not, then upsetting you is not prosecutable.

Must admit, those ripples they caused looked fearsome.

My advice is to chill out a bit.

 

[toad_oftoadhall]

I'm a sailor. I've got the greatest of respect for Dylan, I love KTL - it's a bloody masterpiece.

However, I think a little bit of live and let live is required, sailors could be a bit tolerant of being rocked every now and then. It can be frustrating when the wind gets knocked out of your sails and I suppose you could end up with a cup of tea on your lap or swamped in your dinghy (although it rarely seems to happen) but it isn't *that* bad. At least one of those jet ski's made no wash at all!

Let's face it yachts aren't exactly friendly to our environment. For all their noise, when the PWC folk go home they take their vessels home and that's that's it. We leave acres and acres of ugly plastic moored in some of Britains best waterways 24/7. We don't like their wash - maybe they'd prefer not to have their playground full of moored boats which aren't being used.

I speak as someone who got utterley soaked in my dinghy by a mobo 3 weeks ago - brand new iPhone in pocket.

So greatest respect to DW. Some mobos should slow down and some yachties should get a sense of humour.

As for police involvement in speeding PWCs, Jesus, this country is going mad.

 

[rhumlady]

Someone getting into a dinghy or pulling away from their boat when these guys go through like that could well end up in big trouble. If there is a speed limit then they should be prosecuted and it should be made plane that it will not be tolerated.