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
-
-
14 hours ago, Midnight said:
It's a bit like wearing a crash helmet when cycling - you don't need one until you fall off!
That is actually opening a whole new can of worms, you don't need a cycle helmet until you fall off on your head. As a cyclist of many years riding, and one who does not wear a helmet, I have come off twice (diesel and ice) but made a point of not landing on my head. The works of a 91 year old, lifelong cyclist, Mayer Hillman are worth reading on the subject (https://mayerhillman.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/cycle-helmets.pdf) in that the 'protection' that you might think they give you is illusory. To have some sort of protection you'd need to be wearing something more like a full face motorcycle helmet, and on the subject, those I had dealings with in fatal car accidents have died from head injuries (a side impact is excellent for sticking your head through the drivers door window) so why isn't it compulsory for all car drivers and passengers to wear helmets?
-
1 hour ago, PaulJ said:
If I remember rightly, the lady had actually got off the boat onto the landing stage but was unable to hold it against the flow, I assume on the centre line.Scary stuff.
Obviously what she needed then was an anchor.....wasn't it?
-
13 minutes ago, rusty69 said:
Whats the method then?
I admit I used to get it wrong in the early days, but can tie it in the dark these days. Used mainly on our sailing boat, but its still my go to knot.
To demonstrate it is probably necessary to actually show it but (trying my best
) you get hold of the rope and about a foot from the end (depending how big a 'noose' you want) put a loop in it. From the long end (not the end you are trying to make the loop) you then feed a second loop through the first loop. You then get hold of the end of the rope and feed it through the second loop. You now have the 'noose' and holding onto the longer end just pull it all tight, the second loop pops back through the first loop and makes a perfect bowline. I don't know if that description helps, perhaps you needed to be there
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, IanD said:
Maybe, but even a boatmans/lightermans hitch -- assuming that's what you mean -- can lock up under those circumstances...
Not very likely to happen as the loops are passed under the rope under tension. I suppose there is a remote possibility of it happening going down in a lock.
1 minute ago, rusty69 said:Careful with the sheep bend. If you get it wrong it can kill ewe.
Also, the canalnan knot though similar to the granny knot, should not be mistaken for a reef knot.
It is very easy to get the bowline wrong. Learn it correctly the first time, and it will be your friend for life.
The rabbit comes up the hole, runs around the tree, and goes back down the hole.
's fuuny I was shown how to tie a bowline a number of years ago by an expert, up until that time I'd been using the 'rabbit and hole' method and occasionally getting it wrong. The method he showed me, and I have used ever since, you never get it wrong and I can confidently say that I can tie a bowline, behind my back, blindfolded and in the dark if necessary and still never get it wrong
-
8 minutes ago, Midnight said:
When on my friends boat on the ebb I walked along the roof brought the anchor to the stern and dropped it in. There are a lot of sharp bends below Cawood so the alternative would have seen us in the willows on the outside of such a bend. With the flow against the side pushing the boat against the lower branches its likely the boat would list and take in water. That's what happened to another friend who had the same issue with a large underwater branch stopping his engine and was smashed against Selby road bridge. Fortunately the tide rose enough to eventually turn the boat backwards and upright through the offside arch just as the fire brigade were climbing down to rescue him and his crew. I've also accompanied yet another mate up the Ouse when a branch stopped the engine. Fortunately that time we were on the long straight above Turn Head so had time to clear the prop before the anchor was deployed. I think I've done that stretch about 30 times and had two incidents and know of at least two more. To suggest going up there is such low risk that an anchor isn't required doesn't stack up. In my experience there's a 1 in 15 chance of a problem with debris.
You kind of illustrate my point for me, although I didn't say that it was such low risk that an anchor isn't required. What I said was that if you deploy your anchor and, whilst the boat spins around it, your stern catches on the bank you could be in a whole lot more trouble being held at the bow by the anchor, at the stern by the bank and across the current. I should also say that on Turnpost Corner on the Trent I had a similar situation whereby the boat ran through the trees on the Port side as I went around the corner, sinking was never an option although it could have cleared the roof boxes off the boat.
My own view on safety would be that walking along the roof of a narrowboat, that is presumably now not under control, whilst carrying an anchor, doesn't sound remotely 'safe' to me
-
1 hour ago, Midnight said:
No insults coming however are you saying you would be happy to take your new boat up to York without an anchor? Have you ever been on a tidal river?
To be honest, as one who has gone from Selby up to Naburn (and other tidal rivers besides) I'm not sure that deploying an anchor on that stretch is that advisable. Bearing in mind you are either going up on the flooding tide or coming down on the ebbing tide, if you throw the anchor over the side the first thing that the boat then has to do is spin around the anchor to face into the current. Get the stern caught on the bank and you are in all sorts of trouble. Deploying the anchor from the stern would involve rapidly changing the point at which the anchor is secured to the boat and now you have the stern secured (assuming the anchor bit) with the current now running at the back of the boat, which on my boat is a whole lot lower than the front. I see anchors as a possible assistance under the right conditions, but not as a life saver. When we have anchored whilst offshore sailing it has never been under emergency conditions, (which are exactly the conditions when everything is likely to go wrong). We choose our anchorage carefully and pay out the line, equally carefully; lobbing it over the side and hoping for the best has never been a 'procedure'.
-
2
-
-
2 minutes ago, IanD said:
Me too, except it was just two turns round a bollard and a half hitch, as the boat rose the two turns locked tight. Cost us a bottle of gin and a bottle of chilli source -- both together unfortunately, nothing recoverable... 😞
Could have been much worse if the rope hadn't been cut though, the boat was *well* heeled over by this time...
Interestingly you don't even need the half hitch if you are using the tapered bollards you get in some locks. If you just put a loop over the bollard the wrong way around, as the boat rises it will lock off (DAMHIK
).
-
15 minutes ago, Tam & Di said:
The boatman's hitch is extremely useful, but the clove hitch used for mooring can tighten so that the only way to release it is with a knife - not very economical, and something that was never used on any of our craft.
Tam
In total agreement about the boatman's hitch because it sounds as though you, like me, don't want to use any knot that will 'lock' for a mooring line. It's bad enough if it has just tightened because of passing boats, it gets a bit more serious however if the line has gone tight either because the water level has risen, or fallen. At least you can untie a Canalman's/boatman's hitch under load.
-
23 hours ago, jupiter1124 said:
I just tried the sheet bend and the carrick bend. Both feel strong, sheet is a little easier I'd say, carrick was a bit of a b*****d to untie but much prettier, I think I'll go for the sheet.
I am still not completely sure where I would use a bowline, but I tried it and it does "feel" useful.
You're right about needing to use them regularly, that's the reason I only know four. I have tried out many others but it's about getting yourself into a situation where you need a knot, knowing which one you want to reach for, and then being able to execute regularly.
Like a lot of knots, if it is your 'go to' knot you then find a whole load of situations where you can use it. The beauty of a bowline is that no matter how much strain you put on it you can still untie it and yet it is a very secure knot. It is my 'go to' knot and examples of where I've used it are 1) to tie the centre line to the roof ring meaning it I ever want to use it for anything else I can just untie it 2) if I want to put a loop on the end of a mooring rope to throw over a mooring bollard and haven't got a splice loop on the end 3) if I'm recovering anyone from having fallen into the canal it creates a loop into which they can step without it tightening up around their foot 4) when mooring in Birmingham, I tie one tightly around the bollard and then tie off the other end on the boat, whilst it is an easy knot to untie, you cannot untie it under load, so it 'discourages' the muppets who might wish to cast you adrift. I'm sure that given time I can think of a variety of further uses, and then you go to all of its uses on sailing boats
-
10 minutes ago, Tony Brooks said:
Absolutely, I noticed the fall through arches when we went to Limehouse on a falling tide. One needed to line up in plenty of time for safety if anything went wrong.
I witnessed similar on the Trent approaching Gainsborough Road bridge on the flooding tide. I lined up for the centre arch well in advance (pretty much as soon as I could see the bridge) but the boat behind seemed to be staying to the starboard side of the river for a lot longer than I would have chosen to do even though the recommended channel is more central. I looked back again as he reached Gainsborough Road Bridge and my immediate thought was,"Christ! he didn't miss that by much" which he confirmed when chatting with him at West Stockwith.
-
7 hours ago, Scholar Gypsy said:
I'd agree on the Tidal Thames using the anchor is a last resort, but should be there as an option. In the convoy heading up for the Reflections Flotilla on Saturday evening, one boat got rope around the prop (not the result of poor maintnance). They called VTS on the radio and a harbour service launch appeared quite quickly to give them a tow while they checked the weedhatch. Anchoring would be the next option. (Here are some photos of the event - nighttime navigation was a little hairy ...)
https://scholargypsy.org.uk/2022/09/27/reflections-flotilla-post-1-of-3/Having looked at your link, it was interesting to see the guy checking his depth gauge, showing 16 metres of water. If you work on the normal 8 : 1 ratios (so for every metre of water depth you need 8 metres of anchor rode) I honestly don't know where I'd put 128 metres of warp in a deployable situation (you don't want to just heave it over the side and hope it doesn't knot up). When you say anchoring would have been the next option, I think you might mean the 'nuclear' option when absolutely everything else had failed. Even then, on the tidal Thames you aren't going to be swept over any weir, you are just going to get carried up on the tide or down on the river flow.
-
10 hours ago, MoominPapa said:
That's a scary prospect as well. I wonder did something like that happen to the chap who fell asleep on the M62 and dumped his Landrover into the path a a train on the East Coast Mainline?
Probably, and they could have gone after the uninsured owner of the sunken boat, in turn. It didn't seem wise or fair to go after a fellow moorer who had already lost a lot for our small losses, if it risked coming from him rather than his or our insurer.
MP.
The insurers will only go after what they think they will be able to recover (they wont go after the anecdotal 'man of straw') so given the costs of the ECML Crash they wouldn't recover anything like the costs (unless the man was a multi-millionaire).
As far as the blacking goes, it was probably a good choice not to go after the fellow moorer. Insurers invariably have a 'no-betterment' clause in their policies so might well claim that the only part that needed re-blacking was along the waterline where the diesel had damaged the paint leaving you to pay for the rest of the blacking. They would also 'argue' about what was the state of your blacking before the diesel damage (had it only just been blacked? or was it blacked 4 years ago?). I've run into diesel on the cut occasionally and just take the hit.
-
3 minutes ago, MoominPapa said:
The road traffic act(s) contain clauses that prohibit insurers from denying _third_party_ liabilities if the policy holder breaks the insurance contract. If you drive down the A1 pissed and crash into another car, the insurance company will refuse to pay for your car, but they can't refuse to pay for the one you hit.
The waterways acts have the same clauses, word-for-word, requiring insurance, but not the stuff about third parties. I found this out when a boat sank in our marina and the insurance wouldn't pay up because the sinking was caused by corrosion and lack of maintenance. They insurance wouldn't pay for damage to the blacking on many boats caused by leaking diesel from the wreck either.
So, negligence in a boat can land you with a liability of millions that's not covered by your third party insurance in a way which is not possible with a car, at least under UK law.
MP.
I think what you will find with car insurance is that if the insurance companies are forced to pay out to third parties, even though you have broken the terms of the insurance contract, they can then come after you civilly to recover their losses, which could be considerable. As regards the damage to the blacking of your boat by the leaking diesel, could that not have been claimed for on your own insurance?
Not entirely sure how this relates to this thread however, if having an anchor aboard was an insurance requirement then it would be part of your terms and conditions, I've had a quick look at mine and can't find any such reference.
-
6 minutes ago, Stroudwater1 said:
.....Fast flowing flood rivers I would avoid
whenever possible.........FTFY
6 minutes ago, IanD said:The jammed boat was coming up the lower five, it got really solidly wedged -- luckily the lockies spotted the problem before the water rose enough to flood the boat and really put the kibosh on the whole thing. IIRC they'd just bought the boat and it was their first day out on it, not a good start... 😞
That is a bit easier to resolve if the boat is coming up
-
2 minutes ago, IanD said:
Obviously, hence the smiley 🙂
Someone bunged up Foxton for about an hour doing that last time we went through... 😞
Yes, I've also seen that but with Hurleston you jam as you go in but, if the example I saw at Foxton was anything to go by, you jam as you go down which is a whole lot more problematic because refilling the lock on a jammed boat has the potential to sink it if is doesn't kick free.
-
1 minute ago, Mike Todd said:
The normal type of fenders on a narrowboat are unlikely to protect the paint, it would only be the black anyway. Cruising with them down is not recommended and can cause problems in certain locks. They do have their role - when moored they generally can help avoid being kept awake by constant banging against the edge.
Yes, Hurleston is notorious for it having myself seen someone try to get in with the pipe fenders down and then having to be 'flushed' out of the lock because he'd jammed. As you say fenders do certainly have a role, big one's to get away from the 'Shroppie Shelf' being the favourite, but leaving them down when on the move is somewhat pointless. The only real exception I'd make would be for GRP boats in locks with us well 'ard narrow boats, because it makes them feel safer.
-
2 minutes ago, IanD said:
Pipe fenders do the same, but at least are not quite as horrible to get off the prop...
I have never quite 'got' why people leave them down when on the move, let's face it they aren't going to do anything, except possibly get sheared off in the next lock. I don't know how many fenders you'd need on a 60 foot narrow boat to make any difference at all in a collision on the move, but it's probably quite a lot.
-
1 minute ago, IanD said:
To protect your shiny expensive sprayed-on paint job? 😉
They normally tend to be below the gunwale 'cos if you hang 'em on the handrail, you'll probably scratch that as well.
-
1 minute ago, Sass said:
on a similar note, is there such thing as 'too many; tyres and inflatable things hanging from your boat to protect it, providing you're not doubling them up? it seems so sensible yet a lot of boats seem to not have many and im wondering if there's a reason?
That all depends upon what your boat is made from. If it is GRP with gelcoat then there probably isn't such a thing as too many fenders. If on the other hand you are 'well hard' like an 18 ton steel narrowboat, what do you need fenders for?
-
2 hours ago, LadyG said:
Assuming a boat hired by a school would have mostly untrained children, lifejackets could have been used, the type used by the CRT to protect their staff and lock volunteers. All sail training organisation use them, all dingy sailors use them, in fact most people who are at risk.
If anyone skippers a boat they have a responsibility to act responsibly, just like any car driver .
Just a small correction, dinghy sailors don't use lifejackets, we use buoyancy aids since the nature of the sport says that there is a possibility of capsize. You don't want an automated lifejacket to go off every time you fall in and then have to wear a 'Mae West' for the rest of your sail
.
-
3
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, blackrose said:
I think you're right, having to deploy an anchor is rare, but that doesn't mean having an anchor and appropriate chain/rope can be ignored.
My engine started to overheat on the tidal Thames once between Brentford and Teddington because of a snapped fanbelt. Fortunately it happened at slack water between tides and I was travelling with another boat and had their phone number so they turned around and came back to give me a tow. Otherwise if I'd been alone I'd have had no option other than drop an anchor.
To be honest though, you were on the Tidal Thames not 100 miles out in the Atlantic. With a mobile phone you could call London VTS, Teddington/Brentford Lock, a passing boat or if things get really hairy even the RNLI (Chiswick, Teddington and Tower). This idea that we must save ourselves without any outside assistance becomes a bit unrealistic on inland waterways. Many of the anecdotes on here are along the lines of, "...I went to help someone who would otherwise have gone over a weir..." whereas there don't seem that many anecdotes along the lines of "The anchor saved my life". I'm not arguing against anchors, I carry one myself, but I'm also realistic about what it can and cannot do. Have done a lot of offshore sailing involving the use of anchors, I can't think of any situations when the anchor was deployed in an emergency since normally anchoring involves finding suitable locations to anchor and carefully deploying the anchor. Lobbing one over the side and hoping for the best probably isn't the best approach. There was another similar thread to this recently and I pointed out on that one that trying to deploy an anchor whilst being swept through London on the flooding tide between Limehouse and Brentford probably wouldn't have a good outcome. Assuming that everything on your boat was strong enough to take the strain of stopping an 18 ton narrowboat barrelling through London at 9mph (the speed we passed under Tower Bridge according to GPS) you now have a relatively small stationary boat anchored in the middle of a very busy waterway, what could possibly go wrong
.
On other rivers deploying the anchor could easily make a situation worse, If you were cruising the Ouse to York (so going up on the flooding tide) and a problem arose so you flung the anchor over the side, you need to be sure that the river is going to be wide enough for your boat to pirouette around the anchor without getting caught up on the bank because if the bow was held by the anchor and the stern was caught on the riverbank, this may well put you across the river flow which really isn't what you want to be doing in a narrow boat.
-
3
-
-
3 minutes ago, mrsmelly said:
Single use, thats what they are generaly for on narrowboats, just emergency kit. It was a great idea/system and would have saved the day we think. Anchors on narrowboats for the vast majority of people are just for emergencies. Still very much needed bit of kit like lifejackets and vhf radio.
So essentially then, once he's resolved whatever the issue with his boat is, he's going to cut the warp free and leave it in the river. I cannot imagine how 'pleased' I'd be, going down the Trent and picking up a stray warp around my prop if it was attached to a 60 kg anchor
-
1
-
-
41 minutes ago, mrsmelly said:
Having a commercial boatmasters licence for the Trent both Tidal and non Tidal for 250 passengers I can also say Ive never heard of " Trentlink " ??
We carried two anchors, a bruce and a Danforth on the two boats I skippered. Approx 60 and 110 tons ( the boats, not the anchors lol ). We deployed them at least monthly during training but never once in anger. However including on the boat I sold last year I had a substantial length of warp including a very heavy chain, classed as disposable and a one of use if needed. A good idea a friend of mine had was a 60 kg Danforth mounted on a wooden board on the roof of his narrowboat that could be tipped over the side if needed, no need to lift it. You did have to get on the roof to deploy it but that was no problem, it may well have ended up taking paint off but thats of zero consequence.
I take it the the 60Kg Danforth was intended as a 'single use' piece of kit then? or does your friend have a winch on his narrow boat because he won't be hauling up 60Kg plus chain plus all attached mud by hand.
-
15 minutes ago, Cheshire cat said:
Midland Chandlers latest owners seem to have reduced the range of products they stock. It could be down to supply issues but on a recent visit I got the impression that staff morale was rather low.
Yes, I got that feeling on my recent visit to the Braunston branch. I wouldn't like to comment on staff morale but I was a bit surprised that they had no 10-40W oil on the shelf. I had to ride to Halfords at Daventry to get some.
Actual use of anchors in emergencies on UK canal/river network
in General Boating
Posted
How many boaters on the canals do you actually see wearing lifejackets? If they aren't volunteer or full time lockies, virtually no-one.