Wanderer Vagabond
Patron
-
Posts
3,698 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
231
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Gallery
Blogs
Store
Posts posted by Wanderer Vagabond
-
-
1 hour ago, Alway Swilby said:
Do people change their drive plates as a matter of course even if it is still working? I.E preventative maintenance. If so what interval would you suggest is good. Our Beta 43 with PRM 150 gearbox has now done getting on for 5000 hours of which approx 4500 have been for cruising with the other 500 idling to charge the batteries. Should I be looking to change it or should I just carry on regardless?
I'm probably tempting fate here by commenting, but as an example on my boat we got it at 1100 hours on the meter and have now run it up to 9,200 hours without a whimper from the drive plate. It is regularly serviced (by me) and the gearbox oil changed every year (not sure if that has any relevance) but I'm of the mindset of 'if it ain't broke, etc'.
For those who have had drive plate failure, does it just go 'clunk' and the boat doesn't go any more? (a bit like a clutch plate on a car) or do you get a bit of warning to be able to get somewhere to get it fixed?
-
3 minutes ago, Paul C said:
I'm not an Apple fan boy. I used (and loved) Android for a long time. But.....phones got bigger and bigger, I wanted a modern powerful-ish phone but without the creeping enlargement of screen size and it getting more and more awkward to fit into a coat or trouser pocket (along with the other phone - the work phone - I need to carry. And no, I can't really combine them to carry just one phone). If there was an Android phone that could "do it" the same way as an iPhone mini but for the mag mount, I might very well get one and stick the magnetic sticker on the back of it. But there isn't. So I had to switch to Apple, at least for a personal mobile.
Not being of the smart phone fraternity, I'm a bit of a bystander on this subject, but one observation to make is that as I've got older, a small screen on any phone isn't really a selling point to me
-
1
-
-
8 minutes ago, Loddon said:
No anchor I deploy would ever just be dumped overboard it would be gently let out on the warp once the 20metres of chan had gone and the boat brought to a gradual stop.
Which would certainly be the sensible approach. On offshore boats where anchors are pretty much compulsory (otherwise how will you moor in some pretty little cove?) I've never lobbed it over the side and hoped for the best. I would have thought putting a single loop around the T bar and then use rope friction to slow the boat to a halt would be a decent approach. You also get a feel as to whether the anchor has bitten or not.
-
3 hours ago, M_JG said:
The chandlers at Sawley certainly used to stock them. Its were we bought ours (and chain) on the way to the Trent for the first time.
But that was a good few years ago now.
That would seem the significant line. The advance of the internet has changed the rules quite a bit
It no longer makes any economic sense for chandlers to keep much in stock that is expensive, unless it is something there will be a high demand for, and anchors don't fit that remit. We have a small chandlery in the basin where I moor who keep a stock of whole lot of relatively low value stuff in constant use, rope,small fenders, Elsan Blue, coal,kindling, etc.etc. but they can get next day delivery on a whole raft of stuff so why buy it in? It's a bit like stacking money on the shelves and leaving it.
-
18 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:
Chandlers will stock / supply what 'sells'.
I guess due to the lack of knowledge of canal user about anchors, when they intend to venture out onto a river thay'll just say "we want an anchor" and the Chandler will say "these are popular with canal boaters and they are not expensive" (relatively).
It means they don't need to stock a variety or shapes, sizes or makes.
Maybe as more boaters learn that there are alternatives that work better, and for not a great 'premium' in pricing the demand for the Kobra2 or Beugal etc may increase.
Looking at it from a business perspective, and with the current enthusiasm for buying online, why would any inland waterway chandler bother stocking anchors? You fork out £120 or so for something that is going to sit in your shop for years. Of course there is also the point of what online sales have done for other businesses; if a chandler does stock them, people will come in to use the place as a showroom to see what the anchor is like, and then go and buy them cheaper on the internet anyway.
Lumpy water chandlers might stock them, but I don't see much point in inland waterway chandlers stocking them, for them it is just dead money.
-
3 hours ago, enigmatic said:
The anchor is more for when your boat has no speed whatsoever, and the river decides you want to start heading downstream not upstream, and definitely not towards a bank, like me last week (I have another knackered drive plate for my collection!)
On the Kennet a boat pole would probably be more use.
That was my thought as well with the mention of the Kennet. Given the usual width of that river,there are many scenarios there where the unwise deployment of an anchor would make a bad situation a whole lot worse. Imagine you've come out of Midgham Lock, heading towards Woolhampton bridge, with the current, and a tyre wraps itself around the prop. With a pole you might fend off from the bridge, (or not hit it too hard
), lob an anchor over the bow and you are going to be sideways across the river, and jammed.
-
43 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:
Absolutely - but because it is in the locker, you can 'extract it from the locker' if the need arises.
If the anchor is 'still in the chandlery,' that option would not be available to you.
To be honest, if my anchor was in the locker when needed, by the time I'd extricated it from all the other crap on top of it, whatever the emergency was would probably have resolved, one way or another.
-
15 minutes ago, mrsmelly said:
We are so lucky on the forum to have you to give us guidance lol.
Not giving guidance, merely stating that someone bragging about having a Boatmaster Licence as though that gives a qualification about everything to do with boating is no different to someone claiming that because they have a driving licence they have a qualification about everything to do driving. Had you merely expressed your opinion regarding the usage, or otherwise, of anchors without trying to 'big it up' by mentioning the Boatmaster (which sounds impressive, but isn't really) then no comment would have been made.
1 hour ago, MartynG said:It does sound like the skipper of the ship made a mistake on that occasion.
Thing is that it is a pretty fundamental mistake. It's a bit like a car driver saying," Surely you don't expect me to check both ways every time I come out of a junction do you?" when the logical answer would obviously be."Yes".
-
6 minutes ago, M_JG said:
We often had to tuck ourselves out of the way. As in this example as we emerged from the lock at Sprotbrough. Unfortunately despite having the opportunity to let us know the locky didn't tip us off that Humber Princess was approaching. so there was a bit of hasty reversing involved to get out of her way on that occasion.
To be honest I'd rate the competence of the "Humber Princess" skipper (and the skippers of the Thames tugs) well above the competence level of the passenger boat skippers any day.
-
3 minutes ago, MartynG said:
Keeping out of the way of ships (any commercial vessels really) is a thing the we in our little pleasure boats need to do. A large vessel will in general be much more confined by its draft than a small vessel.
The principle is the least manoeuvrable vessel has priority . So if in doubt give the 'ship' plenty of space .
The two hoots indicates ''I am turning to port''
I fully get the principle, but we need to be given a chance to do so. Had the boat pulled out when I was further back, I'd have simply cut across it's stern but I was so close to where it was coming out from it's mooring that all I could do was go with it out across the river to avoid colliding. Obviously once I'd avoided the collision situation created by the boat pulling out without looking, I then reduced engine speed and passed across his stern as he pulled away. My understanding of Colregs is that it is the responsibility of all to avoid collisions.
Yes I was aware what the two blasts on the horn meant, but it doesn't mean "I have priority and I'm pulling out whatever might be coming".
-
5 minutes ago, peterboat said:
Needs mirrors I think?
Nothing quite so technical, simply looking behind before setting off would have sufficed. I can tolerate such a 'schoolboy error' from a newby, boat hirer, I might be slightly miffed if an experienced boater does it to get to a lock having seen me coming (it has happened, more than once) but from someone responsible for a boatload of paying customers, to me, it is totally unacceptable. It's not the only incident, the one on the Thames involved some muppet skipper reversing his boat off Tower Pier into my path, and then holding station whilst seemingly pointing out the sights of London to his customers, oblivious to my boat barrelling towards him on the flooding tide.
I'm more impressed by someone who tells me they've been boating continuously on the system since the 1980's, done 15,000 miles around the system and never been involved in any incident, than I am by someone telling me they hold a Boatmaster Licence.
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:
I think I'd pretty much agree :
Oh, I thought it was bigger than that. Yes it was that one that gave two blasts on the horn and then pulled out directly into my path on the Trent. I was so close that I couldn't even cut across it's stern and had to steer out into the river to avoid a collision. This was back in 2015 and I'm not saying that the other poster was skippering, but in my view, if you cast off and cause another boat to have to take serious evasive action to avoid a collision because you haven't looked behind, then you have seriously fouled up. Hence my comment about holding a Boatmaster Licence isn't necessarily evidence of competence.
-
59 minutes ago, MartynG said:
The boaters handbook also indicates a need for an anchor
https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/refresh/media/thumbnail/41331-the-boaters-handbook.pdf
I would rather question the practicality of having two anchors ready for use. I have found somewhere to stuff the one that I have in the bow locker when it's not needed, I have no idea where on earth I'd put a second one when not needed. I suppose I could get a lifeboat to tow behind and put it on that
-
4 minutes ago, M_JG said:
I guess its much like all professions/jobs.
Some coppers are clearly crap, but they tend to be in the minority. Same as my old profession, not all nurses are 'angels'.
Following the Marchioness disaster I would have expected to see a severe clamp down on standards of Thames Passenger Boat Skippers, from my anecdotal experience, they still aren't that good. So if muppets such as they can get a Boatmaster Licence, it rather undermines holding it up as some sort of 'Gold Standard'. I wouldn't expect any airline pilots to be 'a bit crap' and I don't expect passenger boat skippers to be either. The way they performed endangered both me and their own paying customers.
-
3 minutes ago, mrsmelly said:
Anyone who actualy knows anything about boating would always carry an anchor, a fool may not. Speaking as someone who holds 3 different boatmasters licence I can say in full knowledge that, had I taken the Nottingham Princess out without BOTH its anchors I could have been prosecuted, they were part of the very strict regulations pertaining to that particular boat. Yes, i fully understand we are talking leisure boats here so there is no requirement in law but if an anchor is deemed necessary on an inland waterway such as the Trent for a commercial passenger boat, then anyone who knows anything about boating would have the sense to realise that an anchor makes sense. Anchors cost diddly squat, if say I was mug enough to pay well over the odds for a narrowboat and then not pay a few hundred pounds for an anchor that would make me stupid. Problem is some people know better than all the proffesionals.
Anchors aside, having seen the standard of some of the Boatmaster Licence Holders on both the Thames and the Trent, I'm unsure of how much of a recommendation that is in reality.
I was well impressed by the standard of the Tug Skippers on the Thames, but they were just pulling rubbish barges, now after the Marchioness disaster I was expecting the passenger boat skippers to be absolutely First Class, sadly I was very disappointed, they were crap.
-
On 18/10/2022 at 10:39, Tam & Di said:
I can't think of any UK working boatman I've known who wore gloves, and unlike most pleasure boaters the life obviously includes winter snow and ice. We certainly never have done ourselves, and would not allow trainees on our barge-handling courses to do so either. Continental boatmen do if they are using wire ropes - generally the heavy duty ones as frequently found in gardening shops. I do know someone who now has less than the allocated number of fingers for exactly the reason given by blackrose.
Tam
Interesting one that because all of the sailing chandlers sell sailing gloves specifically for use when hauling on sailing ropes (https://www.force4.co.uk/department/clothing/accessories/gloves), I always wore such gloves both for dinghy sailing and offshore since otherwise you are likely to end up with rope burns on your hands. I also had a lot of dealings with Brixham fisherman over the years, many of whom did not wear gloves (and none of whom wore lifejackets😱) and a lot of them were also incapable of counting to ten using only their fingers. The cause was often a cold hand caught in a winch chopping the finger off before you even feel it. I tend to wear the leather gardening style of glove when rope handling on the narrow boat, quite loose fitting so that if any part of the glove becomes trapped in anything I can pull my hand out of the glove. Wearing such gloves also makes lowering the the Ham Baker paddles on the Hatton flight easier without getting greasy crap all over your hands as you release the pawl and let the paddle down, braking it with your hand.
In terms of keeping one's hands warm in winter, I've always found the easiest way was to operate the tiller with it under your arm and keep both hands in your pockets.
-
1 minute ago, Jerra said:
To me that is the point. A puncture is an inconvenience needing an anchor when you don't have one is potentially life threatening. Yet the majority of motorists will have some way of mitigating the situation even if it is just "gunk" to spare into the tyre. It seems odd somebody would consider not taking the same precautions against potentially life threatening situations.
I would suggest that a puncture on one of these damn fool 'smart' motorways is indeed life threatening.
-
1
-
-
I haven't had mine done (yet) but one yard I was looking at was Debdale Wharf although they are likely to be pricey. To be fair, anywhere can be a risk, I got chatting a few years back to someone who had theirs done at Norton Canes who as far as I was aware had a really good reputation. At the time I spoke with him he was really pleased with the job (I had commented on how good the job looked). Six months later I met him again out on the cut and started the conversation by saying,"Oh, you were the one with brilliant paint job, weren't you?" to which he replied,"Don't talk to me about that!", apparently the job had started to break down and he'd been in a long dispute with the yard concerning how it had been done.
So even the best can cock the job up.
-
13 minutes ago, LadyG said:
I've lifted quite a few people out of the water, best if one is trained, if the casualty is relatively light and fit, and the rescue boat is designed for the job.
I did an offshore rescue exercise, simulating jumping off a ferry, the idea is to cross hands to hold lifejacket down on entry to
prevent it rising up
, A bit like falling off a tidal Trent lock.
Yes. I've done safety boat for our sailing club and pulled people out onto a rib which is relatively easy particularly if they can assist and you can get hold of parts of their anatomy (legs, etc). For pulling someone out of a lock however, none of the ideals are there (except hopefully a lock ladder).As you say if you jump in with a lifejacket on it is probably best to cross hands to hold the lifejacket down on entry to stop it riding up , but since they are designed to inflate and turn an unconscious casualty face up in an emergency, it's not essential to do so since that is what the crotch strap is there for. Trying to haul them out of the lock with the crotch strap cutting into their nether regions is a different prospect however, I'm sure it can be done and would be more than willing to watch someone else demonstrate how.
-
6 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:
Offshore 'twin-bladder and crotch strap' lifejackets (as well as many single bladder) usually incorporate a harness used for lifting / dragging the caualty out of the water.
A standard 'cheapy' lifejacket does not have a harness designed for taking the weight of a casualty,
Life jacket with safety harness - All boating and marine industry manufacturers (nauticexpo.com)
I've never actually tried to be lifted out of the water by a lifejacket but the question I'd tend to ask would be will it have engaged under your arms before the crotch strap cuts your nuts off? I'm more than content to see someone else test the theory.
-
1 hour ago, LadyG said:
I'm trying to prevent my drowning..
Which it did in your incident.
Using a jib sail and halyard is standard practice on a yacht , same idea.
My drowning is bad enough for me and even worse for rescuers, I don't think they are too worried about lifting a casualty with a tarpaulin.
My lifejacket is an offshore affair with two bladders and one crotch strap, pretty sure I could be pulled out by two people using the neck / back strap
You would not believe just how painful that is likely to be. We tried to haul the little old lady out via that method, she literally screamed in pain. I suppose that if you straddled a mooring line and then asked a few people to try to lift you up with it, it may give the general idea
-
1 hour ago, PaulJ said:
Just my observations based on what I see or I dont see as I chug around. I see plenty of new pilings, some dredging, repairs to locks/infrastructure, tree cutting and bankside clearance but rarely weed cutters/collectors.
I generally do somewhere between 2,200 and 3,000 miles and the greater part of the system in any one year so I count myself lucky as I do get the chance to see a fair bit.
Bedford Great Ouse has now remained clear for 2-3 years - only because of the EAs massive efforts-it was really getting choked before when left unchecked. Not healthy for the wildlife.
Worst I can think of this year-try the Selby Canal or Stainforth and Keadby, getting to and from Keadby Lock (not Pennywort though).
All easy enough to plough through on a skin tank cooled motor but I wouldnt want to fight through it on any sort of raw water cooled engine. And I wouldnt want to be a fish either.
I would agree with you re Selby Canal or the Stainforth and Keadby, it looked like a lawn when we passed through there a few years back. I tend to think that the reporter is rather overstaing the issue in the linked article. When you look at the large scale photo of Brayford Pool it shows the unnavigable section of where the Witham comes into it and you'd probably need to be in a very low canoe to get under those bridges in the photo to clear it. We left Brayford Pool on 1st August having been in Lincoln on the hottest day of the year, and whilst there was weed present, it didn't seem exceptional at that time, unless it grew massively after we left. Below Bardney Lock was an issue on the Witham but that was matweed under the water, not surface weed.
-
3 minutes ago, LadyG said:
I wear a lifejacket on a few occasions most are related to being singlehanded
I wear one on the Trent.
I wear one when conditions are treacherous.
I wear one when I think I'll might drown and some poor person might have to pull me out.
Having some direct experience of the last one, what makes you think that wearing a lifejacket is going to make things any easier for someone pulling you out? I was standing by a lock once when an elderly lady fell in and her lifejacket immediately inflated. It was still a PITA to try to get her out of the canal again though. We eventually got her out by sinking a tarpaulin under her and lifing her out on what was essentially a sling.
-
13 hours ago, Midnight said:
When I hit a large hole and fell off riding across the moors where I live I landed on my head against a large rock and damaged my helmet. Thinking about how much damage the helmet sustained, I've had illusions of a fractured skull ever since. You have the ability to make a point of not landing on your head - you're a superstar.
Not really, whilst walking I have fallen over on a number of occasions and not managed to fall on my head. Likewise, I go ice skating and occasionally go down (often when taken out by some youngster) and miraculously have never fallen on my head either. Do you lead with you head or something?
Had you read the Mayer Hillman document you would have seen that the helmet that you wore is designed to be damaged on impact. The impact that they are designed to absorb is the impact that a small child would sustain falling off a stationary cycle. For real protection you would need to be wearing something like a motorcycle full face helmet, which many BMX riders do now indeed use. The actual protection you get from the standard helmet is minimal but the risks are increased because a) people wrongly believe they have greater protection than they actually have so take more risks and b) surveys show that drivers will pass closer to cyclists wearing helmets than they will to cyclists not wearing helmets (https://www.cyclingnews.com/news/research-indicates-drivers-pass-closer-to-helmet-wearers/) and since the biggest cause of death for cyclists is being run over by a car, your helmet will serve no purpose whatsoever should that happen (and if vehicles are passing closer to you, the likelihood of that is increased).
Drive Plate Routine Replacement
in Boat Building & Maintenance
Posted
That is pretty much my take on it (whether right or wrong). Whenever changing from forward to astern I always give the gearbox a few seconds to settle before re-engaging (unless it's an absolute emergency and I need lots of reverse.....like now!!).