[A polite plea to dawdlers.]

8 hours ago, noddyboater said:

I've never heard so much tosh in my life.

The navigable channel of the tidal Trent is wide enough for 2 gravel barges to pass or overtake at low water,  nevermind 2 narrowboats!

So would you care to explain as to why last year, when about 12 feet off the navigation channel travelling from Cromwell to Torksey, the boat rode over a sand bar? The fact that water levels were low (as they seem to be this year) might very well have had some impact upon it, but your generalisation isn't particularly helpful if wanting to avoid grounding.

 

I haven't much of an issue travelling upstream on a flooding tide, since you will probably be lifted off as the tide continues to rise, grounding on an ebbing tide is a whole different ball game. So in terms of 'tosh' it would seem that is what you might well be talking

11 hours ago, nicknorman said:

Having 280 horses and 0-60 in 5.3 seconds in the car, or 180 horses and 0-60 in 3.2 seconds on the bike,  I tend not to do that. One problem with carrying that excess energy is the unpredictability of the car to be overtaken. They might panic and clap on the brakes as you loom large in their mirror and something appears opposite direction, just as you have decided not to overtake. Well it’s happened to me, rear end shunt very narrowly avoided so I don’t repeat the scenario.

Well I suppose you'd best tell the IAM and Emergency Vehicle trainers that they've got it all wrong then.

[A polite plea to dawdlers.]

20 minutes ago, GUMPY said:

Depends entirely how many horses you have hiding under the bonnet whether you need to do this or not.

 

Regardless of how many horses you have, it is still a better method of overtaking since you are already going faster than the vehicle you intend to overtake before you cross onto the wrong side of the road. It is the way overtaking is taught on courses that teach such things.

[A polite plea to dawdlers.]

1 hour ago, GUMPY said:

Going back to cars and overtaking on many of the roads I drive it's easy to pass another car coming the other way but almost impossible to overtake another car without putting both parties in danger.

I guess many only drive on A roads😂

As one also accustomed to driving on Devon roads, overtaking can be done but it is helped a lot if you know the road. If you are aware of where the straighter bits are, with no side roads/entrances/farm gates coming in, you build up a speed differential to the vehicle in front before you get to the section, and if something is coming then bail out.

 

That is where another difference with overtaking in a boat lies, it is almost impossible to build up much of a speed differential to the boat being overtaken.

[A polite plea to dawdlers.]

21 minutes ago, Tacet said:

What will you do if meeting a boat travelling in the opposite direction on the Trent?

 

I am not sure what chart you use, but does it really show the navigable channel as the same width as your boat?

Why would someone be coming up from Torksey to Cromwell on an ebbing tide? When they get there they wont be able to lock. (and just to add that navigation rules are that the boat being carried by the tide/current has priority, so it is upstream boat's responsibility to get out of the way).

 

In answer to your second question, yes the Tidal Trent navigation charts are pretty specific as to where you should be on the river (and they are updated to account for any changes). To give you some idea of what the chart looks like, this is my GPS track along the river (so I hold the copyright to this image, it hasn't been pilfered from the chart, but the chart looks pretty much identical).

 

 

I'll leave you to gauge as to the accuracy.

[A polite plea to dawdlers.]

6 minutes ago, nicknorman said:

 

you didn’t intimate what speed you go at nor did I elude to it. This is because the actual speed you go at is irrelevant. In your opinion the speed you go at (which probably varies according to your mood) is the speed. The right speed. And any other speed is wrong. Or at least, any other speed will not be accommodated because it differs from your speed.

 

You have presented various scenarios where on a narrow shallow canal, overtaking might be difficult. Fair enough. But if you are extending that to making out that overtaking on the tidal Trent is problematic, then you lose all credibility.

Have you been on the Trent? do you know what you are talking about?? (if not where lies your credibility) As I clearly stated I was only about 12 feet off the charted channel and ran over a sand-bar so anyone who thinks I might change course in any way whatsover to accommodate them overtaking me on the Trent is going to be seriously disappointed. If they wish to venture off the charted channel on an ebbing tide, they are perfectly free to do so, but if they get stuck I'm, not going back for them.

 

You are also, once again, making wrong assumptions on my behalf. How many times to I have to repeat that I'm quite content to move over to let people pass before you stop make false accusations?

[A polite plea to dawdlers.]

2 hours ago, nicknorman said:

Because the CRT rules (let’s not argue about the enforceability of them) says “no breaking wash” and this is for a good reason, breaking wash erodes the banks and can harm wildlife. It is a feature of the system, in the same way that cycling up hill or into wind is, that’s just the way things are and no point resenting it.

 

But there is a big difference between a feature of the system, Vs the whim of an individual and the consequence of that whim being forced on other people.

 

Anyway, we are going round in circles. The bottom line as I see it is that if someone comes up behind us (which happens fairly often because we are deep drafted) I will facilitate their overtake as soon as I can. I would expect the same in return. Let everyone go at whatever speed they want to is my motto. And the same applies in the car, I tend to drive quite fast along the rural Scottish roads that I frequent, but if someone comes up behind I’ll try to facilitate their overtake as best I can.

 

Yours seems to be that you’re going at the speed you want to go at and if anyone wants to go faster, well tough. Just relax and go at my speed. I’m in front so get over it.
 

It’s pretty clear to me which one of us is the more considerate, but perhaps your brain works in a different way to mine and you really think you are the better person. Who knows!

Once again making assertions on my behalf that I have never made. Perhaps you could possibly highlight anywhere on this thread where I have intimated what speed I go at (again, it is going to be difficult because I haven't). I'm not going to come onto a thread and get very aerated (which you seem to be doing) because someone wants to travel slower than I may be doing. IF they are travelling at a speed that is so slow that my boat in unable to travel at, then that is a different issue, as I've previously said. The fact is that, unlike you, I have no righteous expectation that others should have to accommodate me. If they happen to do so, then all well and good, but if they don't, that's life.

 

An example where I'm going to do nothing at all to accommodate an overtaker would be travelling on an ebbing tide from Cromwell to Torksey on the Trent. Now this is a wide river, and so far the conversation has been about narrow canals. I'm not going to try to stop them overtaking me, but the decision and responsibility for any consequences are entirely theirs. Most cruisers will have a shallower draft than my boat so they aren't likely to be a problem, but if another narrow boat chooses to try to overtake,my sole concentration will be to keep within the navigation channel since last year, when water levels were down, I inadvertently drifted about 12 feet out of the charted channel towards the centre of the river (I have a GPS tracker that shows my track on the river), and found myself riding over a sand-bar. The only accommodation I will make to anyone overtaking is that I will avoid a collision (COLREGS) but other than that I will not be changing course on their behalf under any circumstances. 

On 24/05/2023 at 17:11, Victor Vectis said:

Changing the subject slightly……

Talking of speeding boats, what’s the PB  you have made on your boat?

(Excluding on the back of a lorry etc)

 

Ours is 12.7mph. 

That is a curious one for the inland waterways, what does a PB actually prove? Unless you've got a hell of an engine on your boat I would guess that your PB was either being carried by a river current or on a flooding tide. The fastest my boat has gone was 10 knots under Tower Bridge but then I would probably have been travelling at a similar speed sitting on a log since the flooding tide generated most of that speed.

 

What I regard as a better judge of 'achievement' was being able to keep up about 3 - 3.5 knots all the way from Tarleton to Asland Lamp pushing into a flooding tide with engine running at about 85% - 90% of full throttle without overheating (and then pushing into an ebbing tide all the way to Preston).

[A polite plea to dawdlers.]

1 hour ago, nicknorman said:

You do seem to be applying a scattergun approach to try to justify your attitude. Nobody mentioned 4mph, nobody mentioned  creating a breaking wash, so why are you suddenly talking about it as a justification to disallow people to overtake?

I would of course agree that overtaking on a boat is not the same as overtaking in a car, but I would put this into the category of “stating the bleedin obvious”

Perhaps you'd care to highlight the bit where I mentioned a breaking wash (possibly going to be difficult, because I didn't), I merely pointed out that you are going to be eroding the infrastructure more by travelling faster than you will be doing by travelling slower. On the other hand a breaking wash can often suddenly appear when you've previously been travelling at your favoured 3.5mph as part of the canal becomes shallow, are you going to slow down for it? or are you going to say,"I'm within the speed limit"? And if you are content to slow down to stop the breaking wash, why not for a slower boat?

[A polite plea to dawdlers.]

6 hours ago, Tacet said:

The hydrodynamics are indeed different.  But if boats can pass in opposite directions there is fundamentally enough room to overtake, contrary to the suggestions of some.  The technique needs to be appropriate to the manoeuvre, as always.

I think you are still in the car driver's mindset whereby if a road is wide enough for two cars from opposite directions to pass, it is wide enough to overtake on. The difference in the canal is that both boats want to occupy the centre of the channel and when overtaking that is simply impossible, at least one has to get out of the centre channel to let the other pass.

 

The trouble with adopting the car driver's mindset is that it isn't really comparable in any way to navigating a narrow boat. Does it make any difference to the wear on the motorway if I'm travelling at 50mph or 70mph? no not at all. Does it make any difference to the wear on the canal banks if I'm travelling at 2.5mph or 4mph? yes it does, quite a lot. If I try to travel at 3.5mph along the South Oxford summit I'm going to be putting a lot of erosion on the banks, which then makes it a bit pointless complaining about CRT not maintaining the system when people are trying to go faster. The 4mph advisory by CRT isn't a target, it's a limit. As I've said I'm quite content to stop and let people pass, but I'm not going to criticise someone (as long as they are travelling at a speed my boat is capable of going down to) for going slower since they are causing less damage to the infrastructure.

[A polite plea to dawdlers.]

1 minute ago, Paul C said:

 

How or where did you get that from?!?!!????

 

I didn't infer that from what Nick wrote. In fact, I think he explicitly stated that if they're only going marginally slower than him, its not worth overtaking anyway and he's happy to adjust to their pace.

 

The figure he gave that he'd be happy with to stay behind was 3.4mph if he had been doing 3.5mph, that'll be 0.1mph!!

[A polite plea to dawdlers.]

9 hours ago, nicknorman said:

Obviously if we have caught them up from far behind, they are going more slowly than us. How much slower can be assessed by the rate of closure. The effect you mention is going to slow them, but only by a very small amount. Something like a trough aqueduct is of course going to make the effect more significant, but most of us spend less than 0.1%  of our time on such aqueducts so you point is an exception not normality.

 

The obvious indications of a boat ahead at or close to tickover are virtually no sign of prop wash and virtually no discernible ripples from the bow. But surely you know this?

 

 If we are only very slowly catching them up, eg we are doing 3.5mph and they are doing 3.4 mph, then I am not fussed about overtaking and we will reduce from say 1300rpm to 1200 rpm, no big deal. It is the people who you come up behind rapidly with their boats barely making a ripple from the bow or the prop, that are the issue. Our boat does about 2 to 2.5 mph at tickover (depending on depth etc) and any slower, we have to go into neutral.

 

I can’t help feeling that if you put more effort into thinking about how to considerately let others pass you, and less effort into thinking up reasons why they shouldn’t, the world would be a better place.

No it isn't going to slow them by' ...a very small amount...' the closer to the back of the boat in front you get, the more you are going to be slowing them down. It would seem that you expect people to stop and get out of your way if they are doing more than 0.1 mph slower than you, I on the other hand don't have any expectation of anyone stopping and getting out of my way and I find the world a better place for it. 

[A polite plea to dawdlers.]

1 minute ago, nicknorman said:

All true. But surely if you like to travel at tickover, being slowed down for a minute as a boat overtakes you doesn’t really matter. If it did matter to you, surely you would be going at a normal speed in the first place?

But how do you know that the boat you are trying to overtake is only on tickover? You also have to take some responsibility for slowing him down by virtue of the fact that you are behind him. The example I quoted earlier of crossing the Pontcysyllte Aqueduct is a case in point. The boat behind got so close to me that I was virtually stationary in the water. It would have made no difference whatsoever to have increased my engine speed to full speed, in fact it would simply have made the situation even worse since he was already drawing my water. If I increased engine speed all that I would have done was move more water, not moved any more boat.

[A polite plea to dawdlers.]

1 hour ago, Mike Todd said:

I say again, the hydrodynamics of boats passing in opposite directions is different from in the same direction. Also the time for which an accurate position to avoid a collision is much shorter in one case than the other. The traditional docey-do method of passing in opposing directions, esp if both deep drafted, does not work for overtaking.

I kind of get the feeling that a few are viewing overtaking in a boat in the same fashion as they look at overtaking in a car, but as you have said the hydrodynamics is totally different. If I overtake in a car it isn't going to make the car that I'm passing go any slower whereas in a boat that is exactly what does happen. Two boats travelling in the same direction are drawing twice as much water in the same direction and both are in a shallower area of canal since they cannot both be in the middle, and by both drawing the water they are both making the canal even shallower. Two boats travelling in opposing directions are drawing from the same bit of water for a lot shorter period of time, and once they've passed the problem ceases to exist (as they effectively start pushing water back up the canal towards one another).

[A polite plea to dawdlers.]

23 hours ago, Stroudwater1 said:

 

 

 

 

Generally the boat being overtaken slows right down, its unwise not to and isnt much different in time it takes to get anywhere but it certainly takes much less time to be overtaken. This could be why folk are objecting to shallow canals etc. Slow right down to slow tickover, move over, aim to the bank and you will be pulled back into the middle. If you go at any speed when being overtaken then you are asking for trouble. 

 

 This isnt a car being overtaken scenario. By several peoples suggestions on here they may tend to dawdle, so a slower dawdle to let someone past isnt asking much.

 

I fear some on here maybe the sort of person that deliberately speed up when being overtaken by another car. 

 

I suppose I'd better re-iterate before I start that when caught up by a boat going faster I will invariably stop to let them go past (before the usual suspects accuse me of trying to force others to travel at a slow pace), I've even been known to let Hire Boaters go ahead of me at locks since I'm in no rush😱. 

 

Thinking back however to the first time I hired a narrow boat, my first impression on the Saturday was along the lines of ,"Jeez, It's going to take forever to get anywhere at this speed", by the Monday I'd grown out of that mindset towards thinking,"You know what? this is the ideal speed". However you slice it, a narrowboat is going to be a very slow way of getting from A to B (other options are available, you could probably cycle the towpath at 3 times the speed you will ever do on the boat). I think that canals were once described as 'The fastest way to slow down'.

 

To add further controversy, you also need to consider how much YOU are responsible for the slowness of the boat in front. When shifting an 18 ton, 60' narrow boat through a shallow, narrow canal you will be drawing water from quite a long way ahead of you. Any observant fisherman (a rare breed) will see this by watching his float and can see the direction an oncoming boat is approaching from by his float being drawn in that direction, even when the boat in question is a long, long way away. You will also notice that as you travel along the canal the water level alongside your boat drops by a couple of inches as you pass by. I had a practical demonstration on one of my early forays onto the Llangollen Canal, passing through the trough of the Pontcylsyllte Aqueduct (no overtaking, obviously) when the muppet in the boat behind got right up my stern. The effect was that he was drawing the water from under my boat and neither of us were going anywhere fast. I tried to explain that he needed to move further back, but I don't think he really 'got it'.

 

As I've said my approach is, because overtaking is generally a PITA, if I catch up with a slower boat, whilst still over 100 yards behind, I will see if I can match their speed, and if I can, I will stay where I am (100 yards behind). The real problem arises when I cannot match their speed because it is slower than my boat is capable of travelling at.

[A polite plea to dawdlers.]

6 minutes ago, IanD said:

 

And that is exactly the problem -- he must have been aware that you'd been on his tail for an hour, so why didn't he invite you to pass? At most places on the GU (with no moored boats!) this can be done with no big problem with a bit of co-operation.

 

If he ended up in the reeds, this was his fault, not yours...

It is a problem, but not one I'm going to get very aerated about, it was just one problem of many to overcome. Interestingly the follow on was that we stopped for lunch at Stoke Bruene with the intention of going on through Blisworth Tunnel later. The 'slow boat' arrived about an hour or more later, then I realised that he was going to carry on towards Blisworth. That was the fastest we've ever cleared the decks and cast off, to get going before he got to us as the thought of spending a couple of hours behind him going through Blisworth Tunnels really didn't appeal

[A polite plea to dawdlers.]

5 minutes ago, Tacet said:

If there is space for two boats to pass in opposite directions, there is space for one to pass the other in the same direction, given suitable cooperation and skill in both instances.

 

As I said earlier, that would be the case if the canals were dredged to the same depth across their entire width, but they aren't. The only deep bit is in the middle (on most narrow canals) and when you put two boats travelling in the same direction, neither of them will be in the deepest bit so both will be slowed down. 'Co-operation' involves one boat stopping and moving to the side (probably holding it on the centre line whilst standing on the bank), anything else is just a poor compromise. 

[A polite plea to dawdlers.]

2 hours ago, Captain Pegg said:

@Tom and Bex on Tatty Lucy passed @Rob-M and myself on Vulpes with no difficulty at all half way along the central section of the Walsall canal during last years BCN Challenge. The Rushall has nothing on the Walsall when it comes to weeds and shallowness.

 

The reason that was possible is because we got ourselves into a position where they could overtake because it was obvious they were much faster than us.

 

 

 

Did that involve pulling over to the side and stopping? I think that @MtB earlier in the thread mentioned that was his approach to allowing overtaking boats to pass, and realistically it is probably the easiest way to do it. Anything else invariably involves either someone running aground (given how shallow the canals generally are) or either the bow or stern drifting out as the other boat passes.

 

A while back I had to force my way past a boat on the Grand Union that was travelling at a speed that my boat simply could not cruise at. I'd spent over an hour behind him constantly going from drive into neutral and finally on a clear straight stretch decided to overtake as he wasn't going to invite me to do so. The effect is that as the pressure wave from your bow hits his stern, his bow then starts to go to port (towards your boat). As the pressure wave then travels along his boat to his bow, it pushes it away from you, and in this case he ended out in the reeds.  Can't say I felt particularly good about it, but constantly going into and out of drive, as I was doing, cannot be good for the boat. I suppose that, as others have suggested, I could simply have stopped and had lunch or a coffee break, or something, but the speed he was going, even if I'd stopped for half an hour, I'd still have caught him up again.

[A polite plea to dawdlers.]

3 minutes ago, IanD said:

If you're following someone down a canal with not enough room or water to pass, then stay behind.

 

Which is different to the case where there *is* enough space and water, as I keep saying but you keep ignoring... 😉

The problem is that with most of the narrow canals there isn't going to be enough space and water. To take as an example, when passing oncoming boats I will tend to remain in the centre of the canal until almost the last minute and then turn to starboard (assuming that the other boat is going to do the same) and then as my bow passes the centre point of the oncoming boat, begin to turn towards their stern, so that we are both out of the centre channel for the minimum amount of time, because the centre is obviously where the greatest depth is going to be. With any overtaking manoeuvre you are both going to be out of the centre channel for a considerable time, so it just becomes a slog, even with the best intentions in the world. Perhaps if all canals were dredged to the same depth across their width (as I believe they were when they were built), then it would be less of an issue, but they aren't.

[A polite plea to dawdlers.]

1 minute ago, nicknorman said:

 

It is not about rushing, it is about going along at a normal pace and not seeing virtue in going as slow as possible and holding up people as much as possible. Yes there can of course be unforseen events such as trees down and other stoppages, but these are not within the power of boaters. Holding people up unnecessarily, and causing frustration, is within the power of other boaters and I just think it is a shame that some people relish wielding that power to control how other people conduct themselves. As I said, I don't want to force other people to go faster than they want, I just don't want them to force me to go slower when they could let me pass.

As to your final sentence, well thank you for your opinion on whether or not the canals are suitable for me. That is a phenomenal display of arrogance and it is easy to see why you think it quite OK to force other people to go along at your pace.

I think that you will find that nowhere have I said anything about forcing other people to 'go at my pace', in fact I have clearly stated in my first post,".....To be honest, if I'm caught up by another boat I'm quite content to pull over and let them pass....."  but you obviously missed that. The fact is that on most narrow canals, overtaking is simply a PITA because of the underwater profile of the canal (always shallower at the sides). Overtaking on wide canals and rivers, no real problem, but narrow canals not really. So you are following someone down the Rushall canal (if it's open at the moment), or the Chesterfield, or the Huddersfield and you want them to get out of your way (and inevitably run aground) so that you can overtake, that to me sounds more like arrogance.

12 minutes ago, M_JG said:

 

I cant understand why somebody doesnt wish to make 'reasonable' progress and in doing so force somebody else to go at their pace. Not a problem on places like the A&C where there is ample opportunity to pass but on the usual canals its just imposing you wishes on somebody else.

 

It frankly smacks of arrogance.

I'm not sure that carries much weight, coming from a caravanner

[A polite plea to dawdlers.]

1 minute ago, M_JG said:

 

So what happens if having turned back you then encounter another blockage or stoppage?

 

That is no gurantee that you might need to press on when going back.

Which rather brings us back to the point of not getting particularly excited by getting caught behind a slow boat, because there are a whole host of other things that may well stop you, from sudden flooding (River Soar) to engine breakdown. As far as the Soar Flooding went, we were just told by the hire company to moor where we were and they'd ship the following week's hirers to us, and then take us back to the boatyard from there.

[A polite plea to dawdlers.]

7 hours ago, nicknorman said:

The canals are primarily a transport system. I am not advocating speeding and eg creating a breaking wave, but equally there is no virtue in going as slow as possible and causing frustration to people behind who just want to go at a normal speed. You say there is not much difference between 2mph and 4 mph but in fact there is a huge difference. A journey that would take 1 day at 4 mph, will take 2 days at 2mph and some people have busy lives that don’t allow for an extra day to be taken.

 

If you want to go at 2mph then fine, but don’t force everyone else to do it.

It may have once been primarily a transport system, it is now primarily a leisure system. The difference between 2mph and 4mph is minimal since you can rush as much as you want, as I've heard boaters saying,"We have to get around the Leicester Ring"(really?) only to go around the next corner and find either a tree down across the canal which may well hold you up for a couple of days or a lock gate that some muppet has dislodged that may also hold you up for a couple of days. In my hire boating days I always had a 'bail out' point where if I hadn't reached there by halfway through the week (for whatever reason) I'd turn around and go back the way I'd come. I always reference the comment of an old friend that I used to go salt water sailing with, "We don't do timetables, we just do destinations". If your life is dependent upon tight schedules it's possible that narrowboating isn't really for you since there are a whole host of things that can bugger up any schedule, not simply slow boaters.

[A polite plea to dawdlers.]

7 minutes ago, Mike Todd said:

I suspect that almost all of those working on a canal boat are professional boat movers. I which case, better to price in the cost of the known average speed (like sat vav/Google Maps will do) rather than risk high blood pressure.

 

It is a rare occurrence, one that many/most boaters will be unaware of, and there is no way to distinguish between those with a commercial rather than leisure reason to push on. It is also not easy to work out whether the following boat actually knows anything about overtaking - I will only invite an overtake if I can reasonably see that it is safe to do so, not always visible to the follower (eg oncoming or moored boats, other obstructions, width limits etc)

The funny thing when people moan about those going slowly is that the difference we are talking about is the difference between 2mph and 4mph and however one slices it, both speeds are slow. The purpose of the canal boat is the journey, not the destination (if it were, then travelling by quicker transport would be the way to go). As I said, if someone in front of me is travelling at a speed my boat is capable of keeping down to whilst still in drive, I have no problem staying behind them and continuing to admire the scenery, it only becomes a problem if their boat seems to be driven by a 4 inch propeller.

[A polite plea to dawdlers.]

To be honest, if I'm caught up by another boat I'm quite content to pull over and let them pass, but if I catch up with a boat going at a speed slower than I am, I'm equally content to slow down and stay behind them provided they are travelling at a speed my boat will travel at.  What does drive me mad is when I catch up with someone travelling at a speed that my boat wont travel at, meaning that I'm constantly putting it into neutral/putting it into drive/putting it into neutral/putting it into drive, it becomes like sawing wood and probably isn't doing my drive plate much good. If someone feels the need to go that slowly then they need to let everyone go past them, or speed up.

[How do you not get scammed?]

9 hours ago, MtB said:

 

 

And if like me, they don't really 'do' facebook, an alternative reassurance occurs to me. Ask them to show you a selection of photos of their boat in various locations over the years of their ownership. I'm sure we all take photos of our boat from time to time when out. 

 

Don't we? 

 

 

I think I've got more photos from the early years of having the boat, less from later years. Although I could direct them to my really boring blog which will show them where the boat has been moored for every night that I've had it ( I just wanted to remember where all the good (and bad) moorings were).

[Towing]

1 hour ago, howardang said:

Sometimes the tow can be even longer with the ideal for the tug to be on one wave crest and the tow to be on a following wave crest. For example,  I have seen tows as long as 2000ft  or more at times. That of course can cause complications in shallowing water and care mus be taken to shorten the tow and possibly reduce speed in plenty of time to prevent the catenary of the tow wire from dragging along the sea bed.

 

 

Howard

 

 

 

I can beat that. We were on a sailing race from Lerwick to Bergen when a surveying boat ahead told the racing fleet that we were all going to have to divert at least 5 Km behind them. Someone called up questioning the reason and apparently they were towing some sort of surveying device on a 5 Km towline (no I don't know what it was, but something pretty sensitive apparently).

[How do you not get scammed?]

1 minute ago, magnetman said:

and if it was not kosher I may have saved someone's bacon!

Would that be kosher bacon? or non-kosher bacon?