|
Post by JohnV on Aug 26, 2018 15:51:13 GMT
I was quite surprised how much quicker you can get up to Yorkshire via the River Trent (tidal and non-tidal). I was thinking we might try it from South to North - where John was parked at Hazelford in July the Trent didn't look like nuffink to us, not scary at all. But anyway, that's 5 years in the future. And beforehand, we could drive over many Trent bridges and peer down and make our own judgements. River Trent at Fiskerton - not really scary River Trent at Newark - pussycat River Trent at Torksey - not a problem River Trent at Gainsborough - hmmm... getting wider River Trent at Keadby - probably OK if not a raging torrent. Turn left here for the Stainforth & Keadby Canal and into safety! River Trent at Trent Falls/Apex corner on a beautiful summers day with a very small tide SAM_1488 by mudlarker2, on Flickr smooth that day but big SAM_1492 by mudlarker2, on Flickr
|
|
|
Post by naughtyfox on Aug 26, 2018 16:16:36 GMT
Well, yes, obviously we won't be dropping down Trent Falls or going under the Humber Bridge in our 10hp bath tub. I thought it wildly adventurous to even think about going to Keadby and turning left. But that's all in the distant future. Reading about the Shropshire Union now. I see bell ringing at Market Drayton is on a Wednesday, and bell ringing at Audlem is on a Thursday... could be the making of a plan!
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Aug 26, 2018 16:17:51 GMT
Well, yes, obviously we won't be dropping down Trent Falls or going under the Humber Bridge in our 10hp bath tub. I thought it wildly adventurous to even think about going to Keadby and turning left. But that's all in the distant future. Reading about the Shropshire Union now. I see bell ringing at Market Drayton is on a Wednesday, and bell ringing at Audlem is on a Thursday... could be the making of a plan! You'd be fine to Keadby ..... I did it in Shapfell !!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2018 17:18:58 GMT
If I have understood previous stuff about this, it isn't CRT or BWML's responsibility to inform the PLA or the boater of their responsibilities (please correct me if I'm wrong). Obviously you (and me - but don't take much notice of what I think, I'm just learning) you think they should inform the PLA. Might be worthwhile if you explained why and how this might affect 'personal' responsibility for informing PLA. As you have 'named names', Magnetman has admitted to not informing the PLA of his trips - I'm struggling to understand whether you (and maybe others) wish a change of the rules or people to know and abide by the rules. It really all boils down to common sense and good practice, which don't enter into C&RT's actions or thinking in any shape or form, but do influence and drive the way a 'real' harbour authorities Vessel Traffic Services (VTS) radio operates and works to partly control, but mainly to assist and/or inform, those in charge of any and all the vessels underway in the area they cover. On busy commercial waterways vessel movements and the way the VTS works isn't entirely governed by hard and fast rules. The name 'Vessel Traffic Services' says it all really - they're there primarily to 'serve', in other words advise and assist, the masters of ALL the vessels moving about in their area, many of whom are engaged in a potentially dangerous game of waterborne dodgems with some big, lumbering stuff ranging from a few hundred tons displacement up to a few thousand. Some of the answers to your questions are to be found in the mindset of the C&RT management in comparison with those in similar positions of authority at the likes of the PLA and Associated British Ports (ABP), who are the navigation and harbour authority for the Humber, the Trent up to Gainsborough, and the Ouse up to Goole. C&RT invariably demand that passage though the tidal locks they control is booked at least 24 hours in advance, . . . but to what end do they demand this ? The C&RT/BWML staff at Limehouse don't make use of this time to pass on any of the navigational guidance and advice that the PLA have provided them with to ensure that the skippers and crews on the pleasure craft they'll be sending out onto the tideway next day know what to expect, and what is expected of them. Truth to tell C&RT just enjoy being officious and ordering people about whenever the opportunity arises, and that's probably why they lose all interest in pleasure craft that are escaping their clutches into another navigation/harbour authority's jurisdiction and don't bother to inform the London VTS about them. Above all, no harbour authority's VTS wants anyone cluttering up their already busy VHF working/listening channel by broadcasting information they don't want or need. Barring a mechanical breakdown or some sort of onboard accident, Magnetman and his small nippy motor cruiser are unlikely to be an impediment or a problem to any other river traffic, and as he's carrying VHF onboard he's able to contact the VTS, and all the other VHF equipped vessels in the vicinity, at any time if the need arises. On the other hand, a slow moving narrow canal boat without VHF and under the control of someone unfamiliar with the river and the standard practices and procedures that the regular commercial traffic will be following is highly likely to impede other, larger or faster vessels and to get into the sort of mess that Mr Stabby did on 10 August. Tony, there is no relationship between CRT and common sense. To be honest, there is no relationship between us and common sense at times. You have a problem with safety on parts of rivers, and I have a problem with boats no longer being able to navigate a beautiful system.
|
|
|
Post by TonyDunkley on Aug 27, 2018 21:35:28 GMT
For the holiday boater with little or no previous experience of the waters they're entering, tidal rivers busy with commercial traffic and shipping are potentially very dangerous places to be. The odds against surviving unscathed on a holiday jaunt on the Thames' London tideway have recently been drastically shortened with C&RT effectively washing their hands of any responsibility for the safety and 'wellbeing' of their 'customers' as they despatch them from Limehouse without bothering to inform the Thames' Vessel Traffic Services (VTS) of their presence on the busiest and most congested few miles of commercially used river in the UK. On 10 August last Mr Stabby of this forum was involved in an incident in which his boat was carried sideways by the tide into one of the piers of the Blackfriars Bridges when although technically being the 'stand-on' vessel he attempted to stop and giveway to a tug and tow approaching Blackfriars Bridges from the opposite direction. This incident was by no means a 'one-off' and there have in fact recently been an increasing number of similar incidents involving pleasure craft entering the river at Limehouse bound for either Brentford or Oxford. Including the 10 August incident at Blackfriars Bridges there are now eight recent, similar incidents for the Port of London Authority (PLA) to look into. It has been established that one of the major factors contributing to every one of the recent incidents is that C&RT and their wholly owned subsidiary, BWML, are releasing pleasure craft into the Thames at Limehouse and failing, in every instance, to notify the PLA's Vessel Traffic Services (VTS) of the presence of these inbound pleasure craft on what is the busiest part of the river with the greatest concentration of bridges and large and/or fast moving commercial vessels. The number and frequency of the recent incidents are a matter of great concern to the PLA, and they will be taking whatever steps are necessary to put an end to the bad practices that are behind these dangerous occurences. Notwithstanding the gloom mongering about narrow canal boats being banned from the London river that was evident on the 'Water restrictions' topic with regard the increasing number of incidents involving this type of vessel, there is no agenda, hidden or otherwise, on the part of the PLA to do any such thing, or to penalize any of the pleasure boaters involved. The Authority's sole concern is to put a rapid end to the sloppy and potentially dangerous practices and procedures that appear to have become the 'norm' for many of the visiting pleasure boaters and their neighboring Harbour Authority, the Canal & River Trust.
To this end it would be most helpful if anyone who has made the Limehouse - Brentford passage, in either direction, could put together and post a brief account including any concerns about anything of note which might have occurred during the passage, and details of any instructions, information and advice they were given by C&RT lockstaff prior to entering the river at either Limehouse, Brentford or Bow. I'm posting the above again to allay the fears of anyone, including or even especially Mr Stabby, who might believe that keeping quiet and trying to pretend that his incident at the Blackfriars Bridges on 10 August either didn't happen, or was of little consequence, is the way to ensure that no additional controls or restrictions will be imposed on canal boats by the PLA in the future. Any such beliefs could NOT be further from the truth. I'm sure that 6 years of C&RT's strangely unique cocktail of oppressive indifference to the waterways under their control, and the boaters who use them, will have left many with the impression that all navigation and harbour authorities will act in a similar deplorable manner. Nothing could be further from the truth. The PLA isn't looking for an 'excuse' to ban canalboats or impose any other sort of restrictions or requirements on visitors from the canals, but if incidents such as Mr Stabby's on 10 August continue to occur with the recent increasing frequency, I believe that they may well start looking at introducing compulsory pilotage and/or escort arrangement in conjunction a convoy system.
|
|
|
Post by TonyDunkley on Aug 31, 2018 9:21:10 GMT
---------------------------------- BUMP -------------------------------
Please see post above, . . . . this is not a matter best disposed of by ignoring it in the hope that the PLA will forget it ever happened.
|
|
|
Post by bills on Aug 31, 2018 9:29:23 GMT
I think the reason for the indifference is that the majority of narrowboat owners have no intention of taking their boats onto the Tidal Thames between Brentford and Limehouse. An alternative route exists which is more suited to the type of craft in question.
I have done that stretch in a Sealine 25, but that is a completely different kettle of fish.
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on Aug 31, 2018 9:36:53 GMT
I think the reason for the indifference is that the majority of narrowboat owners have no intention of taking their boats onto the Tidal Thames between Brentford and Limehouse. An alternative route exists which is more suited to the type of craft in question. I have done that stretch in a Sealine 25, but that is a completely different kettle of fish. If I were going to do it in a kettle of fish, I think I’d ask the fish to leave first.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 31, 2018 9:46:13 GMT
Oh dear
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on Aug 31, 2018 9:55:22 GMT
Well I’m feeling frivolous!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 31, 2018 10:01:24 GMT
I think the reason for the indifference is that the majority of narrowboat owners have no intention of taking their boats onto the Tidal Thames between Brentford and Limehouse. An alternative route exists which is more suited to the type of craft in question. I have done that stretch in a Sealine 25, but that is a completely different kettle of fish. If I were going to do it in a kettle of fish, I think I’d ask the fish to leave first. JimYou have competition again.
|
|
|
Post by bills on Aug 31, 2018 10:04:28 GMT
Well I’m feeling frivolous! Don't you mean wrinklier?
You must have cracked open the champagne already. Happy Birthday.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 31, 2018 13:05:24 GMT
Well I’m feeling frivolous! Frivolous? Is that like old? Rog (who's not 62 for ages)
|
|
|
Post by patty on Aug 31, 2018 18:25:48 GMT
Well I’m feeling frivolous! Champagne consumption frivolous?
|
|
|
Post by TonyDunkley on Sept 2, 2018 1:32:24 GMT
I think the reason for the indifference is that the majority of narrowboat owners have no intention of taking their boats onto the Tidal Thames between Brentford and Limehouse. An alternative route exists which is more suited to the type of craft in question. I don't see how the Paddington Arm and the Regent's (canal) being available as an alternative route has any relevance to this. The inescapable fact is that the owners of canal boats are taking their pleasure craft out onto the unfamiliar waters of the Thames at Limehouse, presumably in pursuit of the 'pleasure' of boating on the Thames tideway as an interesting and enjoyable alternative to the sheltered, non-commercial canals, and in doing so are both endangering themselves and impeding commercial operations and/or vessels. It's immaterial to the PLA whether or not the culprits are a majority or a minority. The reason for their concern is the increasing number and frequency of potentially dangerous incidents involving canalboats. As I've said more than once already, the PLA aren't looking to ban any particular class or type of vessel from their waters or, at least at present, introduce something along the lines of escorted or piloted convoys of the pleasure craft that are causing the problems, but if the incidents continue and there is little or nothing from ALL of those involved or responsible for causing them in the way of a demonstrable resolve and willingness to remedy the situation, then they (the PLA) WILL have no alternative other than to put appropriate measures of their own in place. It's yet another instance of the same old story, . . . the irresponsible, stupid, and incompetent few bollocksing things up for everyone else by demonstrating to the authorities that further regulations and constraints are going to be the only way forward. * Anyone who's had difficulties in getting a 45' long x 7' wide boat through a 185' wide bridge arch without clouting the bridge piers on one side of it - please take special note.
|
|