NeverAgain

I'm not surprised. They have removed a non-slip 'Shellgrip' type of surface and replaced it with a smooth one. I wonder why as the corner isn't, or wasn't, a particular accident black spot. Its not even that smooth, quite a ridge getting onto the new tarmac compared to the old surface, perhaps they just laid the tarmac on top of the old shellgrip?

Anyone see the repair to the trim tab on SP's Facebook page? 2 new panels welded in? seems an odd choice to me, I'd have replaced all 3 pieces. Enough to pass an MOT no doubt (like replacing one wishbone rather than a pair of wishbones)

So what you trying to say? in your expert opinion (which I'm not questioning) the first picture was caused by debris and the second was caused through metal fatigue (ie age and force of the engine)

Something that wouldn't stop a crisp packet or a coke bottle but would be big enough to stop something like a large fish being ingested. It most likely wouldn't stop fish nets or ropes either but what's the chances of that?

Not at all, that's why I wrote 'it looks like' which means 'I'm unsure, but it could be a possibility'

Judging by the damage I'd say it was almost certainly metal contact on the bottom picture, whether it came into contact with another mechanical part from the boat well I can't say without looking at the official report. Debris is easy to blame but litter/debris normally either sinks or floats on the surface and being a big boat it sits far enough away from both surfaces. I'd be amazed if a filter isn't fitted otherwise every time a jet ski went out it would also break down.

That's understandable, I too would rather trust someone who is paid to do the job than some randomer on the internet. It was only my observation and a thinking out loud style comment as I noticed a couple of things : The metal itself isn't clean, layers of muck as shown on the photo would hide most signs of early metal fatigue, the break itself doesn't look like clean shiny metal, it looks old and pitted.

And yet another self proclaimed, expert, know-it-all. But even more clever - one that can spot metal fatigue from a photo. The Press Release states that these were checked and passed by the regulatory authorities just before coming in to service this year. '. You don't have to be an 'expert' to know metal fatigues with age and stress, I said 'looks like' because that IMO is what it looks like, looking at the top photo of the a frame you can see the deterioration its not clean metal where it has been broken/snapped.

That looks like metal fatigue rather than anything else? how old are these parts? doesn't mention when they were last replaced.

No, it's not, it was removed this morning It most definitely is, select your date as 8/4/2015 from IOM - Heysham, it tells me no crossing is available the only alternative is Liverpool on the Mannanan instead.

Its still letting me book a sailing to Liverpool for tomorrow despite the sailing being displayed as cancelled on the website, no Heysham alternative is offered!

Very interesting, car depreciation has cost me £3,000 in 3 years, car maintenance has cost me somewhere around £1,000, so in equivalent I could lease a new car for around £110 a month and be no worse off.

Why would they? or would it be as some sort of punishment?

who fits winter tyres anymore? very 70's- 4x4 are one of the worst in snow and always buried in hedgebacks 4x4's fitted with summer road tyres are horrendous, a 4x4 fitted with winter tyres is just as good as a normal car with winter tyres, a 4x4 with AT mud & snow tyres will outperform almost anything else. If you think of a 4x4 as a range rover with low profile road tyres then yes, expect them to be in every hedgerow.

All around Europe people are driving in conditions like this every day, difference is in most European countries its a legal requirement to fit winter tyres during winter months. Every year Britain grinds to a halt as soon as snow falls, it causes havoc and must be costing hundreds of thousands of pounds every year.

No ridiculous is closing it when its covered in a few inches of snow, anybody with winter tyres fitted could get over the mountain road easy, 4x4's fitted with multi terrain tyres would also get over it with ease. Basically its closed because people cannot be trusted to drive sensibly in snow/ice conditions and fail to realise that summer tyres are just that.

Looks like you won your own sweepstake, it was at exactly 6.45pm they announced it was closed.

So your rateable value has to be £108 or less in order to be in the '70% better off' camp............

Nobody will be better off, this is called having the wool pulled over your eyes, where did you get a figure of 70% will be better off from? I heard the same thing on the radio! So it must be true.... I strongly suggest people check the rateable value of their property and make their own calculations.

Nobody will be better off, this is called having the wool pulled over your eyes, where did you get a figure of 70% will be better off from?

Or just install water meters measuring in and out like is done in parts of the UK, you pay for what you use, simple as that. Massive upfront costs on those and lots of extra civil servants to work it all out. Fantastic. What we actually need is less government workers doing "bugger all" jobs or simply doing bugger all. If you think that has been sorted, it truly has not. Even people who work in government are up in arms about their legions of colleagues who don't. Another problem with the rateable value approach to this will be some big bills heading towards hard pressed businesses/employers. Massive upfront costs perhaps, but it would be in the interest of everyone to do it, its no different than gas or electric, its a basic 'service' that you pay for what you use. Once installed it requires one person to check the meters (I've no doubt the gas man could read both meters at the same visit, thus extra workers wouldn't be needed. It really is the only sensible and fair option. Charging varying amounts for people on varying incomes is just opening a can of worms that shouldn't be opened. A pensioner in a bungalow is likely to be charged as much as a working family, completely wrong, its invariably going to push private rents up which is already hitting those on low incomes hard enough. I understand the need to charge for such services and I'm grateful for it being subsided up until now, but the way this is being pushed out is disgusting.

Well he's failed, the new system is no fairer than the old system, he admits its not perfect so why not just install a perfect system to start with.

Or just install water meters measuring in and out like is done in parts of the UK, you pay for what you use, simple as that.

Its just bloody ridiculous a quick look through Deanwoods properties for sale and a 2-3 bedroom house could be anywhere from £79-£200, how an earth can that be considered fair?

That's grossly unfair, rateable value has so many variables, two 3 bedroom houses can be charged two different amounts, how on earth is that calculating it fairly?