|
Post by NigelMoore on Oct 24, 2016 21:33:43 GMT
A bit of deja-vu from Hogg’s Weekly Instructor, a magazine published between 1845 and 1849. An article on why canal companies declined: - amalgamation of different navigations under unified control, leading to monopolies, which led to greed and extortion; success and lack of complaint led to negligence of the infrastructure and failure to provide the service paid for: - Plus ca change . . .
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2016 5:51:11 GMT
A clip from 1990 that has surfaced on the Friends of The Nene facebook page, gives a good indication of the way the locks should function in normal river conditions. The statement by the EA that the locks were designed for navigation is very economical wuith the truth, the dual role they serve can be seen from this video if you are not familiar with the river. Thanks, very interesting! And if you want to go back just a little further in the history of the Nene navigation, the opening chapter of Stanley Asher’s 1957 report to the IWA Fenlands Branch “The River Nene Navigation” also gives a clear picture of the dual role of the Nene locks. “There are 38 locks throughout the navigation, all of which are in very good condition and of modern construction. Dimensions are 83 feet 6 inches long and 15 feet wide with wooden conventional type top gates each containing a sluice known locally as a “paddle” or a “slacker”, and a vertically rising guillotine of steel in lieu of the normal type bottom gates.
Usually the slackers are found in the “closed” or down position and normal reaction is to leave them down after clearing a lock. The slackers are, however, used by the Nene River Board engineers to control the run of water during rainy weather, in order to minimise the risk of flooding in the valley and lower reaches of the river; working to a remarkably accurate forecast available to them, the engineers open the slackers and regulate the river levels well in advance of the expected rainfall.
Thus, upon arrival at a lock, one slacker might be discovered to be fully open or partially open, and the other slacker might be fully closed. It may even happen that the navigator will encounter a whole sequence of locks with slackers left in this manner. He is at liberty to reset them to suit with his requirements while locking through, but, and this is vitally important, the slackers must be left exactly as found.
Failure to comply in this respect will result in a “rocket” from the N.R.B. engineers who, although usually very tolerant and friendly people, are justifiably angry when their carefully calculated levels are messed up by failure of other people to comply with above regulation.”It is possible, of course, that the EA staff currently charged with management of the river Nene are equally "tolerant and friendly people" as their N.R.B. counterparts from nearly 60-years ago. Sadly their knowledge of the river is most definitely not on a par as their latest bit of incompetence demonstrates so well. Thanks for posting that. The locks would have been approximately 24 years old then. The need for regulation of every lock dropped with the installation of automatic slices, the need to reverse the locks at times of high flow as you say always has and always will be there. The steady state of decline in knowledge has also coincided with the retirement of the guy's that regulated the river for donkeys years.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2016 5:59:31 GMT
A bit of deja-vu from Hogg’s Weekly Instructor, a magazine published between 1845 and 1849. An article on why canal companies declined: - amalgamation of different navigations under unified control, leading to monopolies, which led to greed and extortion; success and lack of complaint led to negligence of the infrastructure and failure to provide the service paid for: - Plus ca change . . . Isn't it just! You would like to think Aickman, Rolt et al would take a dim view of the iwa stance on this.
|
|
|
Post by Ssscrudddy on Nov 2, 2016 20:00:30 GMT
Cant remember where I read it, but I seem to remember summat about CaRT dont want the Nene & the Ouse, & the Middle Levels as well unless they can start charging for the Middle Levels. While there is something to be said about EAs declining management & experience, I certainly dont want CaRT in charge.
|
|