RCR would like to respond to some of the comments on the forum in regards to the rescue.
Everyone is entitled to their opinions, but sometimes these are not based on fact or knowledge about the issues involved. For those who prefer to know the true fact behind the rescue you could visit www.narrowboatworld.com . However as there has been much speculation and criticism based on individuals opinions RCR would like to respond directly to clarify the facts.
1) Pictures of the boat which were posted on face book were sent to us by the owner a short while after the accident, the rescue team were not on site until later that evening.
2) A rescue attempt was not made on the first night due to health and safety and restrictions placed on us by EA and the regulator
3) The boat was secured using 2.5” rope rated at over 100+ tons to prevent it moving, and has proved that it was more than adequate for this job.
4) The salvage was discussed in-depth with a number of parties include crane lifting and divers, before the best solution was decided upon
5) Although there was speculation about damage to the hull, luckily there was no damage and as suspected this turned out to be simply the observation of someone who did not recognise the standard construction of a narrow boat below the waterline.
6) The 1st rescue attempt on Sunday had 2 * 3”pumps, and was more than sufficient to clear the water internal to the boat. The key to the success was to get water levels as low as possible whilst we were pumping out the vessel. This was also to help us to identify if water was coming in to the boat from a suspected hull breach.
7) The main reason that we were not successful was due to the boaters moored in the vicinity insisting that the rescue stop and the water levels increase as they were concerned about their own vessels, coupled with un-forecast rain causing the river levels to rise faster than the water could be released.
8) The boom was not removed from the back of the boat until enough water had been removed from the vessel as it provided an additional safety tether whilst the water was begin emptied and the flow around the boat was at its strongest.
9) All staff at the rescue wore life jackets and dry suits whilst working on the outside of the boat, however life jackets were removed whilst working inside the vessel, the inside of a submerged boat is full of floating debris, loose furniture and electrical items and submerged obstacles which have to be cleared, to be able to pump water successfully. Life jackets can pose a serious risk if these inflate prematurely whilst ‘fishing’ around in the water.
10) The rope that was attached to the roof of the boat, had been under huge strain and saturated with water as it had held the boat in position for a week, (as seen on the photo)it is over 75ft long and 2.5 inches diameter and therefore is extremely heavy, hence why the engineer could not ‘throw a line’. It is also the reason that it was not untied and attached to the bow before the boat was pulled in to position. It took 4 men to lift the coil back in to the vans when the rescue was complete.
11) The ‘list’ on the vessel was not due to water, but most of the furnishings and fixings which were saturated were on one side of the vessel, the vessel was not in any danger or capsizing. Anyone who has been involved in salvage operations will know that a narrow boat without a substantial amount of water inside is very difficult to capsize.
12) RCR undertakes rescue operations around the country and are often the first on site, and where a boat is still accessible have a 100% success rate and have saved many vessels from complete submersion.
If anyone has any questions on any aspect of our work, please feel free to email us directly, as long as we are not inundated we will endeavor to provide you with as much background and information as possible on any element of our service…. Which has and does include rescue and salvage operations.
