Jump to content

nicknorman

PatronDonate to Canal World
  • Posts

    21,991
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    119

nicknorman last won the day on June 5 2023

nicknorman had the most liked content!

4 Followers

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Aberdeen
  • Interests
    Electronics, gliding, motorbikes
  • Occupation
    helicopter pilot - retired
  • Boat Name
    Telemachus

Recent Profile Visitors

23,488 profile views

nicknorman's Achievements

Veteran II

Veteran II (12/12)

6k

Reputation

2

Community Answers

  1. No, but women have built in buoyancy bags that are much bigger than men’s
  2. Tarleton lock and the savick brook (probably only after the 1/2 tide lock) are CRT waters, the Douglas and the Ribble are not CRT waters and there is a PRN for both. CRT are not empowered to make any demands on anyone exercising the PRN on the Douglas or the Ribble. My original question was about whether the lifejacket rule was enforced (and thus whether I needed to buy some). It was hijacked by some people being “shocked and outraged” by the thought that I might be contemplating doing it without LJs. So I was not provoking that argument, but when it arose I was minded to point out that things to do with safety are not always as clear cut as they at first seem. Unfortunately in this modern world, anyone with a different opinion from the populist groupthink is considered a pariah who probably ought to be killed to silence the heresy. Never mind, I feel your post may have a hint of “olive branch” and I’m happy to accept it. Most amusingly (not) I have just demonstrated my own point about unintended consequences of safety equipment. When my mother still visited us I installed a handrail in the shower/bath and in fact since my Meniere’s issues I have found the hand rail a comfort. But I don’t think it has ever stopped me falling over. 30 mins ago I had a shower, dropped the shampoo bottle, bent down to pick it up and stood upright - and in doing so I split my head open on the corner of the shower handrail. Much swearing and blood pouring out ensued! Now nursing some butterfly stitches in my rather sore head!
  3. There were certainly plenty of difference between early and late hulls, rounded vs cut and welded gunnels, weed hatch design etc. Yes the later boats including ours had steel laser-cut by the supplier. Do you consider this to be a bad thing? Assembling the flat cut pieces into a boat which had plenty of curvy bits, could not really be described as “just welded together”. It seems you have something personal against him though, so I doubt I will change your opinion. Well he gets full marks for patience with customers.
  4. Been through Harecastle several times, never worn a lifejacket. Our most recent passage was after the chap fell off the back and died. We did have to wear LJs going through Standedge but CRT provided them. oh and a ridiculous hard hat which meant I banged my head a couple of times because I couldn’t see the roof because of the hat peak. We ran it pretty fast on the tidal Trent and there was no change in operating temperature, so I’m hoping it will be OK on that score at least.
  5. “A liar” seems a bit strong. He built over 200 boats over several decades, it doesn’t seem too surprising that the design evolved a bit. What motive would he have for lying in the face of the evidence? Perhaps it was just a miscommunication.
  6. Presumably you wear a lifejacket in the bath then?
  7. Well that was not our experience. But he didn’t suffer fools gladly and maybe there was a “clash of personalities”.
  8. Your first para: you are not really asking the right question. You can drown in shallow water, or deep water. But the risk takes into account the probability. On the canals you are often stepping on and off the boat, walking on the gunnels, climbing a lock ladder etc. On a tidal river you are doing none of those things, so the probability of falling in is massively less. Yes, once you have fallen in a tidal river probably you are more likely to drown, but as I said risk is the product of the severity and the probability. I am not telling other people whether to wear lifejackets or not, it is other people that are deriding me for the suggestion that I might not want to because I have properly analysed the risk. I think someone single handing on the canals doing locks is at much higher risk than someone staying within the confines of their boat during a tidal crossing, and so if they (the former) want to wear a lifejacket I think that is perfectly reasonable and I certainly wouldn’t criticise them for it. Maybe I will wear a lifejacket for the departure and arrival, and take it off when they can’t see me just to be naughty? We did this when I flew offshore in Borneo for a year, it was too hot to wear a lifejacket in flight but when we approached base we had to don them in case the chief pilot saw us. The passengers probably though I was a bit odd that the pilots didn’t wear lifejackets over water but put them on as we coasted in!
  9. I'm not sure what the physics of "being swept away from the boat" is. Surely the boat and the person in the water are going to be equally affected by the current? Maybe not if it is very windy, but not due to the current. The point I am trying to make is that humans are very bad at applying a superficial assessment of what is dangerous and what isn't. Well I should of course say the degrees of danger, because danger/safety is not a binary thing. As you have said, far more people have been killed by drowing on the sunny calm canals than on the Ribble. Of course in part this is due the different exposure (lots of people on the canals, few on the Ribble) but I still think there are far more opportunities to kill yourself on the canals than there are on the Ribble. It's just that we are accustomed to them so we don't see it. You say "so the risks are clearly much bigger" without presenting a shred of evidence. Blinkers firmly on. And just for clarity let us remember that risk = severity of occurance x probability of it happening. If it hasn't yet happened in 20 years, we don't know the probability but it is likely fairly remote. Especially if your bucket has a hole in it. Maybe try it on a boat first? But actually you make a good point. People are telling you it is scary so you think it is scary. In fact it might be scary, but scary does not equate to dangerous. Statistics show that it is no more dangerous than a lot of other things you do without concern.
  10. No absolutely not! You have been reading fake news in the boating comics! He did want the outside to look the same (either tug deck or well deck, and everything a trad stern, but any length you liked) as a brand thing, but the internal fitout was whatever you wanted. We chose maple. We had an open plan saloon/dinette/kitchen and double bed at the back. We had slightly taller cabin sides (because I'm 6'5" in shoes). We had fancy digital DC distribtion and control system (which he didn't like, but went along with it!). Maybe he restricted what could be done at the back if it was a trad mid-engine and boatman's cabin, but we had no desire to go that route. He certainly did some fairly "extreme" internal fit-outs, look at Sarah Kay as an example. https://newandusedboat.co.uk/used-boats-for-sale/2094
  11. Yes but my point is that people/steerers falling /knocked overboard happens on sunny canals as much or more than on the ribble link. Meanwhile people on here who are so adamant about wearing an LJ on the ribble, do not and do not advocate wearing a LJ on the canals. It is not rational. Yes but did they end up in the water and have to use lifejackets? I doubt it. But were the boaters in the water bobbing about with their lifejackets inflated?
  12. I just did! £90 that could have been spent on gin! But of course the gin would be much more likely to kill me than the Ribble!
  13. Yes I was aware of the seatbelt argument when I made the post which is why I played down that element. But in order to form a valid opinion one really should look at the statistics, not the superficiality. With seatbelts (and crash helmets that were mentioned earlier) there is clear and overpowering statistical evidence that there is net safety benefit. Yes people do fall in, bang their heads occasionally and drown. But this mostly happens when there is something to bang your head on like canal infrastructure. And yet the zealots on here are not clamouring for lifejackets to be worn when boating on sunny calm canal. It doesnt really stand rigorous analysis. I flew over the North Sea in helicopters for much of my career, pilots and passengers had to wear lifejackets but definitely not of the automatic type, you had to pull the cord. This depite the helicopters having floatation bags that automatically inflated on contact with water
  14. Funnily enough we specifically chose a builder who did everything from steelwork to fitout. In part because we lived 450 miles away and regular visits to check on things would be difficult. I was a bit worried that we might end up with a separate hull builder and fitter-outer blaming each other when things went wrong. Our builder employed about 15 people with skills ranging from steelwork to carpentry to engines/electrics so I think you argument about being "jack of all trades" could only apply to a small builder
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.