Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length.

[knoby]

An interesting question has been raised on a facebook page as to whether a 'spotter' is required by someone operating a model boat using FPV goggles. There is nothing in the MPBA rules to cover this & my club certainly has no mention of this. Would insurance cover an accident?

[steamboat66]

a spotter is only required under CAA regulations, therefore, surface based FPV is totally outside of this requirement.

[JimG]

While there is no rule saying that a spotter is essential, if they are sailing with other models then one would be a good idea as the field of view is more restricted. Most setups have no view to the side or the rear so reversing would have to be out.
Jim

[knoby]

i just thought it an interesting question, if there were to be an insurance claim what would be the outcome.


i have also seen many boat drivers that don't wear FPV goggles that would benefit from a spotter 

[tigertiger]

Liability insurance is designed to cover third parties from injury (not always physical) by the insured. The most common cause is through negligence. On that basis I think your insurance would have to pay out in the case of the FPV argument.
In the CAA case if you did not have a spotter, and there was an accident (or if otherwise caught), you could be open to prosecution by the authority.

[justboatonic]

i just thought it an interesting question, if there were to be an insurance claim what would be the outcome.


i have also seen many boat drivers that don't wear FPV goggles that would benefit from a spotter 

It is an interesting question. Just because the model isnt flying doesnt mean a spotter isnt needed, it just means land \ water modelling organisation possibly havent considered the wider implications of collisions with wildlife, casual bystanders \ kids paddling etc.
It will only take one accident for bad publicity to circulate.

[Plastic - RIP]

What sort of boat is this planned for? Something slow won't be any problem but some nuttcase hydroplane may be a bit different. Surely the risk increases with speed and momentum?

[kinmel]

Just the fact that the question is posed shows reasonable doubt.

Our club insurance requires ..... " The Insured shall take all reasonable precautions to avoid, prevent or minimize any injury to Employees, third parties or Damage to the property of others"
Our H&S policies reflect this condition, so we would no allow sailing under FPV during club sessions.

[malcolmfrary]

At a Laser event a couple of years ago someone put an FPV camera on one.  The then European champion (who wasn't bad at driving a Laser) had a go with it.  Took about a couple of minutes before he rammed the bank.  From near water level, you get a totally different, and not always helpful, perspective on what the boat is doing.
Having a spotter might not be a legal requirement, but not having one really is a dumb idea.  There is no idea of perspective, and zero conception as to what is going on around your boat out the camera's line of sight.