Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 20, 2019 10:31:50 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by naughtyfox on Aug 20, 2019 10:50:47 GMT
Who is issuing licences to all these 'unsafe' boats, then? The EA?
Looks like no-one really cares.
|
|
|
|
Post by TonyDunkley on Aug 20, 2019 11:42:55 GMT
Also worthy of note in relation boat safety on the Thames is C&RT's routine practice of sending basically unsuitable and ill-equipped canal boats in the hands of inexperienced amateurs out onto the Thames tideway at Limehouse without either ensuring that the pleasure boat crews are fully informed of and prepared for what they're getting into, and equally importantly, without informing the PLA's Vessel Traffic Services (VTS) of the pleasure craft entering the river.
We have in fact recently marked the first anniversary of C&RT sending Mr Stabby out of Limehouse on his way to an alarming encounter with Blackfriar's Bridge from which he was extremely fortunate to escape almost unscathed.
|
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Aug 20, 2019 14:38:57 GMT
it is a totally unrealistic recommendation. Yes you could improve the safety on the big trip boats and the party boats which can carry up to 620 passengers. There is good grounds for insisting on better safety features on vessels carrying such large numbers of people. The problem is they are insisting on the same safety features on historic vessels such as the Thames sailing barges which can only carry 12 people and in fact on race days that is reduced to 8. On these vessels the cost of such modification to a historic vessel that carries such a small number of people is prohibitive, often it will also involve changes to the structure of the vessel. These lovely old barges run on a very tight shoestring, private ownership is prohibitively expensive for all except millionaires and most of them now only survive because of the sailing trips .  079 by mudlarker2, on Flickr It's the normal sledgehammer to crack a nut and could very easily see the end of many of these magnificent vessels |
|
|
|
Post by bills on Aug 20, 2019 14:46:27 GMT
Having been on a "party boat" on the Thames in the dark where I had to remind the skipper, who was barely out of his teens, to look at where he was going, rather than staring at the admittedly scantily clad girls onboard, I would say there is a world of difference between that scenario and a dedicated, knowlegeable and professional skipper piloting a historic craft in the daylight.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 20, 2019 14:54:06 GMT
I sunk my dinghy with several young girls my sister's friends (5 x 11 year olds) in it a few days after the Marchioness was sunk. Someone saw a dead fish and they all went to the front of the boat... Near Kingston on Thames. Non tidal bit. Emergency services did get quite excited and sent everyone out until my mother came and shrieked at me then they all legged it!
I believe I did save a life that night as none of us had lifejackets on and I helped one of the girls to the side as she was a non swimmer.
As for Marchioness the addition of a cabin on top of the existing stern saloon raised the CoG and made it so the skipper could not see astern without leaving the helm.
Modifications like this need some sort of approval system.
|
|
|
|
Post by patty on Aug 20, 2019 14:56:25 GMT
Having been on a "party boat" on the Thames in the dark where I had to remind the skipper, who was barely out of his teens, to look at where he was going, rather than staring at the admittedly scantily clad girls onboard, I would say there is a world of difference between that scenario and a dedicated, knowlegeable and professional skipper piloting a historic craft in the daylight. I went on a 'party boat ' at night, on the Thames in my youth.. I hated it ..felt very unsafe... Oh on this occasion not scantily clad.... |
|
|
|
Post by patty on Aug 20, 2019 14:57:28 GMT
it is a totally unrealistic recommendation. Yes you could improve the safety on the big trip boats and the party boats which can carry up to 620 passengers. There is good grounds for insisting on better safety features on vessels carrying such large numbers of people. The problem is they are insisting on the same safety features on historic vessels such as the Thames sailing barges which can only carry 12 people and in fact on race days that is reduced to 8. On these vessels the cost of such modification to a historic vessel that carries such a small number of people is prohibitive, often it will also involve changes to the structure of the vessel. These lovely old barges run on a very tight shoestring, private ownership is prohibitively expensive for all except millionaires and most of them now only survive because of the sailing trips . 079 by mudlarker2, on Flickr It's the normal sledgehammer to crack a nut and could very easily see the end of many of these magnificent vessels That boat is stunning... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 20, 2019 15:04:15 GMT
  Same boat believe it or not. Salters of Oxford. Beautiful thing. That extra saloon cabin was detached in the accident  Its not about upgrading the safety features of historic boats its about disallowing inappropriate modifications to existing vessels. |
|
|
|
Post by thebfg on Aug 20, 2019 17:13:29 GMT
My first thoughts were like JohnV said. Converting the hulls to have watertight compartments can never be a basic recommendation. The article says. "A public inquiry held in 2000 said poor lookouts on both vessels were responsible for the collision The captain of the Bowbelle, Douglas Henderson, had drunk six pints of lager on the afternoon of the collision The Metropolitan Police were "ill-prepared" and had no contingency plan for such an event, the inquiry found January 2002, the Royal National Lifeboat Institution introduced four lifeboat stations on the River Thames." Those 4 things would be basic recommendation. Sober, good lookouts,an emergency service plan and the lifeboats. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 20, 2019 17:34:01 GMT
it is a totally unrealistic recommendation. Yes you could improve the safety on the big trip boats and the party boats which can carry up to 620 passengers. There is good grounds for insisting on better safety features on vessels carrying such large numbers of people. The problem is they are insisting on the same safety features on historic vessels such as the Thames sailing barges which can only carry 12 people and in fact on race days that is reduced to 8. On these vessels the cost of such modification to a historic vessel that carries such a small number of people is prohibitive, often it will also involve changes to the structure of the vessel. These lovely old barges run on a very tight shoestring, private ownership is prohibitively expensive for all except millionaires and most of them now only survive because of the sailing trips . 079 by mudlarker2, on Flickr It's the normal sledgehammer to crack a nut and could very easily see the end of many of these magnificent vessels I guess it would be like retro fitting air bags and other current safety devices to a classic car? |
|
|
|
Post by naughtyfox on Aug 20, 2019 17:39:15 GMT
Don't you have anything important to do? Like helping Jan with the dishes?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 20, 2019 17:44:58 GMT
Don't you have anything important to do? Like helping Jan with the dishes? Just exactly what is your problem with posting a boating related topic on here? Oh, and we have a dishwasher, niether she nor I need help 'doing the dishes'. |
|
|
|
Post by patty on Aug 20, 2019 20:27:33 GMT
Don't you have anything important to do? Like helping Jan with the dishes? Just exactly what is your problem with posting a boating related topic on here? Oh, and we have a dishwasher, niether she nor I need help 'doing the dishes'. I don't have room for a dishwasher.. but thats ok cos hardly ever cook |
|
