Power at observing sessions at the WSP

I think it should be the way it was almost 150 years ago - you take your own risk. You know what its going to be like. Why put the blame on somebody else if it was YOU who stuck your finger in there in the first place, when you were told not to!

Or 15000000 years ago, you do silly things, go get removed from the gene pool. God belss natural selection, now if only it could be applied in the courts...

In fairness to the OPW, it's not just the chancers and the members of Litigious Ireland that they would be worried about. Let's face it, how many of us, if we were involved in a spill from the Leviathan which just resulted in a broken leg (and it could be a lot worse!), would not make a claim against the insurance of the OPW? Legitimate claims are something they would be very worried about, as well as the chancers. Falling off the Leviathan and coming out with just a broken leg would be getting off lightly.

That's pretty sad. I wonder what Lord Rosse would have thought of people being too worried to fix the scope for fear of 'chancers' taking running jumps off the top gantry?

So the OPW actually 'own' the scope now? - What about waiver forms, of the type you have to sign if you're going bungee jumping; "I hereby declare that should I cause death or injury to myself by falling off the gantry or into the tube (whether accidentally or on purpose) I shall not hold the OPW liable."

Or, even better, double the attraction of the Leviathan by installing bungee ropes on the top gantry for the chancers.

Or, even better, double the attraction of the Leviathan by installing bungee ropes on the top gantry for the chancers.

How about use bungee ropes instead of hydraulics?

god I need some sleep...

Cheers,
~Al

Or, even better, double the attraction of the Leviathan by installing bungee ropes on the top gantry for the chancers.

How about use bungee ropes instead of hydraulics?

god I need some sleep...

Cheers,
~Al

They probabily would have lasted longer the the hydrolics.
If insurance is the problem, just dont let the "public" up on the thing.
Only participating IFAS club members be allowed use it ??

The club here (SAC) tried to build an obervatory about 15 years ago and public liability was the last hurdle we just could not overcome, the insurance basically wanted someones house as a gaurentee.
i.e. if we got sued, that person could have lost their house,.... crazy.
The thinking at the time was to use the observatory to get in more members, so if the public couldn't get in then it wasn't worth building, that wouldn't be the going opinion nowadays.

As it turns out, the light pollution in that area went off the scale in the mid ninetees, we dont go observing there anymore,so maybe it was a blessing in disguise.

Only participating IFAS club members be allowed use it ??

Or Dave Gradwells Idea of putting a webcam in it. realtime display online, kids get to play with a computer demo of actual images taken, if there was a public night or something the images could stream onto a big screen. Its a big enough light bucket for that to work.

[quote[
The club here (SAC) tried to build an obervatory about 15 years ago and public liability was the last hurdle we just could not overcome, the insurance basically wanted someones house as a gaurentee.[/quote]
So what is the legal status of having someone sign a stupidity waiver?