Leaderboard

I visited the incident site yesterday as part of my chaplaincy towpath walk. There was plenty of chatter about what happened with little consistency. One person told me with great confidence that it was because two boats tried to exit the bottom of the lock at the same time (this is an issue with signs at the previous lock) How two boats get wedged with their bows at the upper level after passing the bottom gates was not explained! (Scarring of the lock walls indicated that the incident occurred with the boats near the upper level) I did notice that the lock wall on the side of the shorter private boat has a short ledge where the main wall is just a little further out than the coping stones, probably enough to catch a gunnel. However there are other possibilities so I will not speculate. A crew from ABC were in the process of recovering their boat, breasted up to another. The engine room was flooded (and, judging by the 'stuff' left on the roof so was some of the cabin) They did not try to start the engine until it has been fully inspected and dried out by their engineers back at the hire base (not that far away) I got the impression that ABC have clear working procedures in place and measures to ensure that their staff are fully briefed on what to do in such an event. I suspect that it is a whole lot simpler and cost effective to leave specialist work to specialists with the paperwork always at the ready. I understand that the release of the boats was fairly straightforward but did involve winching after locating a suitable anchor point (itself a matter of experience) The present day legal position regarding insurance etc etc means that fewer people are around who have the necessary paperwork in place to undertake a speedy recovery - ABC obviously have that for towing but not the actual release. ABC have a significant fleet and so can usually cope with one boat out of action for a short while. (and less down time and cost than having to replace an engine) Whilst I was out on the towpath I received a Stoppage Notice that said that a notice had already been posted at the lock to the effect that boats should enter and exit one at a time. When I passed the lock on my return no such notice was evident. Others were surprised as it is hard to understand why such a restriction would help when the boats became wedged whilst bot sets of gates were closed! Everyone was especially relieved that no-one was injured in the incident or the recovery - apart from having quite a scare. In general I felt that comments about how it could all be done much better if only we went back to the good old days do not do justice to the diligence of a variety of people involved to comply with all relevant advice and regulation, much of which was not in place in the distant past (like when I started boating!) Suggesting otherwise cannot have a positive effect on those folk who certainly were trying to do their very best (and were)

Not only that, if the identification is true, then there is every indication that he got another waterways forum forcibly shut down by the host company. Aided and abetted by a few other members who responded with what looked like libellous statements to me. I fear some of those involved have come back here. I just hope the mods can keep things under control, and those responsible do not create excessive work for them.

I'm starting to realise that new electrical hardware for the boat is my drug. Hello everyone, my name is Jen. It has been a week now since the last fix from my Victron dealer. I am taking it one day at a time.

There are cost savings associated with health and safety as well as costs. If a highly trained, specialist technician is injured or killed, it can mean delays to the project whilst another is recruited and trained. Then the companies insurance goes up. Similarly if a member of the public is injured or killed the compensation costs can be eye watering, as will their increased public liability costs.

Today's H&S culture is often ridiculed, certainly criticised. But we need to consider how we arrived at this position in order to see if, anything, can be done to improve it: A century ago, industrial accidents, many fatal, were all too often a characteristic of everyday life. Sometimes made worse by the complete lack of financial support for someone involved in an accident that came about from placing profit above all other considerations. (I am not saying that profit is bad or a necessary evil but unrestrained it can lead to all sorts of consequences) In modern times, many of the regulations, laws and paperwork has arise from an outcry following a particularly horrific accident. "They must do something to prevent this ever happening again" is a common red-top newspaper reaction. The only way that 'They' can do anything is usually by regulating and inhibiting harmful activity. Alas, it generally means that the inherent costs fall in the first instance on the industry originally involved but those costs inevitably work their way through to all of us - and, in a way, rightly so. Society demands that accidents do not happen and there is usually no cost-free of reducing risks. (Just occasionally commonsense wins the prize, but rarely - after all, if it had been deployed before the accident, it would not have happened!) Another route is to mitigate the costs, both to the 'victim' as well as the organisation, by making insurance compulsory. As well as being yet another cost, the insurance companies regularly reduce their risks by imposing restrictions that are not enshrined in law, or even implied by it. We all know that at time insurers can be excessively vigilant in protecting their shareholders and customers from false claims including those that fail becasue they fall outside the small print. Canals were designed and built at a time when fatalities were very common and no-one did much to stop it. I think that most of us know, even if reluctant to admit it, that were the canals to be introduced today, especially as a leisure activity enjoyed solely by untrained and inexperienced individuals, what we have today would come nowhere near being approved! The Navigation Authorities have taken many steps at some cost to mitigate risk - such as the installation of lock ladders - and some brought incidental benefit, such as in the case cited, making single handing operation much more feasible. An all to common cause of accidents is when someone, perhaps insufficiently trained or supervised, takes a well-intentioned action that has unforeseen consequences. My boating experience dates back to 1967 and in that time I have had several near misses that I now about and probably others that I did not. On one occasion, I was helping a boater that had got himself stuck in a silted up winding hole. I was pushing the boat with a long pole when it slipped. I had leant too hard on the pole and narrowly missed falling in the water. However the pole slid along my neck with a splinter causing a tiny nick which if deeper would have been fatal. Only later did I have a nightmare about how near a miss that was! (You should see my pole!) All too often, the lack of commonsense leads folk to react to an accident, fatal or otherwise, by seeking recompense from another party, whether or not the Man on the Clapham Omnibus would have thought them responsible. (A while back I was familiar with a case where an adult with learning disabilities injured themself, not seriously. Normally this would be considered no-one's fault but the individual. However, the legality hinged on the fact that such an individual cannot be considered to be liable and 'someone' has to found at fault. The law can sometimes land in surprising places.) The litigious nature of modern society is expensive and one of the costs is a risk-averse regulatory environment. It is a fact of life now and we all have to accept and bear some measure of responsibility. None of us can ignore the consequences of past social actions all around us. It seems to me entirely understandable (and corporately responsible) to have acted as CaRT did.

Just reading the thread about Barbridge reminded me to report: Tap and Spile in Gas Street Basin has reopened under new management, been take over by 5(?) boaters all of them living across the way there, it’s good, the beer is being well kept, currently: Taylor’s Landlord, Titanic’s Plum Porter and Theakston’s (?) Hairy Biker kitchens won’t be up and running til June (?), but they got cobs (yes cobs) and sausage rolls, and the sausage rolls are top! They really are a good eat with a pint. Give it a try if you pass through, it’s a lovely location from which to watch the boats. Somewhere I’d only popped in to in the past because it’s a busy tourist pub at evenings and weekends, but I think with the new management it could be a good locals’ pub and good for boaters.

I saw the post Saturday evening and thought "I'm sure we went past there earlier on, and it certainly looks like W&B paddle gear". I remembered to grab a picture on the way back down. Interesting that the roof beams seem to have had a fairly serious rework, as well as the more obvious brickwork.

In this case it's somewhere to put a water tank. If you look at the picture the post by @Stroudwater1 above you can see the tower doing the same job. Once very common in single story 'industrial' buildings.

This was a Waterways Archive image and the date has been shown to be 1910 rather than 1810. The caption is indeed Lock 15 and in 1810 the Worcester & Birmingham Canal had completed the boat lift at Tardebigge. Lock 15 was later and the stable block later still. With the reconstruction of Tardebigge Top Lock by CRT this year it would be of interest to see what could be seen of the older lock structure

My Grandad ordered a new car in Black Tulip after his retirement from the motor trade. When a purple Austin 1300 arrived at the showroom, my Grandma flatly refused to get accept it. They drove away in the red one sitting next to it.

In the case of humour, I think it's a fairly well accepted truism that if you have to explain the joke it loses some of its spontaneity and impact.

The cottage there also runs off the generator, or did do, no mains supply.

Yes, and these days the the symbolic equivalent is the main protagonists in court wearing silly wigs.

It's clearly a personal choice, but whilst I may find something funny or amusing on first hearing or sight, the humour very quickly wears thin. I therefore would never choose a 'comic' name. I guess others are more eager to be amused, and can maintain that joy. Rog

The moorings at Brick Lock on the Stort have done exactly this - there's a shed of lithium batteries, a load of solar panels on the shed and on the ground and also a backup diesel generator. They distribute power to the 10 or so moorings there, although not all are residential. Oh, and a massive compost heap too. Can't be the only moorings doing this!

Having done so, my comment stands. Why are so many people so scared of challenging authority, where they have overstepped the mark? I had similar on here a while ago, where my simple comment about taking on businesses in court has always been successful for me. It was noted that I was "willy waving" by a couple of the cowed members, who believe that authority's word is carved in stone.

Just go and google Tony Dunkley and don't subject the rest of us to his barrage of bull excrement.

To make it simple, I have changed to using soap in just those months where it is required by the BSS, to save the planet...

I'm putting in a claim for $100 million for the trauma inflicted upon me just reading about these stuck boats. (I have relatives in the US.)

I dare say ABC would be more than capable of salvaging their own boat and likely have done many times over the years. But they aren’t a salvage operation and wouldn’t have liability insurance to cover the other craft. Things may have been different if it were just their boat or perhaps two of their boats. That sort of thing probably didn’t stop hire companies in similar circumstances back in the day; but it matters today. Quite possibly because someone, somewhere, found out the hard way what happens when you do things for which you’re not insured. Competence is largely an irrelevant factor because salvage is an inherently risky business.

One thing I find striking with the original photos of the incident is that both of the bottom gate paddles are still fully raised, which would rather suggest that as things started to go wrong no-one thought to drop them. I kind of get it that once the boats were trapped they don't want the lock filling so they would need to leave them slightly open to allow the water to flow through the lock, but they don't need to be fully up. Whenever I've had anything untoward occur in any lock the first cry is always,"Shut the paddles!!!"

Look out, here comes the OP: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/ZvFyqHrCWIQ

It might be because they can't afford to do it properly 🫣 It's a lot to lay out in one hit rather than the dribble of extra fuel every week.

"Turning water into wine was quite difficult enough thankyou..."..(Jesus...AD 31)

Very nearly three whole days after these two boats got themselves properly wedged in Lock 19 at Seend, on the Kennet & Avon, a - quote -"Professional Rescue Team"- on instructions from the C&RT, has driven down to Seend from Stafford this morning, carried out the precautions/preliminaries that I advised of yesterday, and after slowly filling the lock, floated both boats out, re-opening it to navigation In other words, a task that, . . before Parry and co. fired them all and replaced them with something in the region of 1500 pointless office chair polishers, . . would have been sorted out, on the day of the incident, by a Navigation Authority Length Foreman accompanied by a Lock Keeper and/or Lengthsman. I'm now going to make it my business to find out the cost, to this useless sick joke of a Navigation Authority, of this wholly unnecessary exercise in wasting the money that they witter on endlessly about being so very short of.

I really don't get the objections here -- CART are closing facilities which are used by very few boaters (but quite a few non-boaters, allegedly...) and are expensive to maintain (and often out of order), and going to use the money saved to improve/better maintain Elsan/water/pumpout facilities which are used by almost all boaters. Why would anyone think this is a bad idea? Except those who either hate anything CART does as a matter of principle, or -- against all the evidence -- think there's a magic canal money tree to pay for them... 😉

Safety concerns aside, the way I'd do it is with a generator controller - something like a Deep Sea Electronics module. It's a programmable controller, used in basically every single big diesel genset on the market. These are designed to start and stop diesel generators remotely in unmanned locations, paired with 4G modems for telemetry. This monitors the engine's coolant temperature, oil pressure etc and shuts it down if one parameter is out of spec. It also provides an engine start/stop control, and can be connected to a Victron Cerbo via CANBUS so you can use it to start and stop the engine remotely via the VRM platform. Depending on the controller, it'll also give you visibility of engine RPM and a few other parameters remotely. @Tony Brooks - the Deep Sea controllers use crankshaft RPM to decide when the engine has started, so you need to install a magnetic pickup on the crank pulley. You set the controller up to say attempt cranking a maximum of 3 times, and tell it at what RPM to disengage the starter.

Meander Dreamcatcher Anything with Knot masquerading as Not Lazy Days/Daze

I called mine after a dance tune. I was tempted by the tune that immediately followed it in the book, which was "Lady Windermere's Dump" but my signwriter rebelled.

I don't think in this day and age you can assume that women don't have a willy 😲

Just came up on Facebook