Jump to content

I never did like Steve Haywood


nicknorman
 Share

Featured Posts

2 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

My Dog has 4 legs, therefore all animals with 4 legs are dogs.

 

"Tar, Brush, Same" springs to mind

 

1 hour ago, eid said:

 

Who are you referring to?

 

I guess you're not going to respond to the question so I'm going to answer assuming you meant me (your post was directly after mine so I think it's a safe bet).

 

You seem to have missed my point completely, perhaps you didn't read the whole thread or just forgot what my original point was.

I was replying to someone who (in a thread about an older person acting poorly) went on a self righteous rant about the older generation being brought up to have self-restraint which is no longer "fashionable".

My point was that you cannot make these generalisations, which this thread shows clearly (I'm sorry if you missed this).

 

So, in response to your post, I was not tarring anyone with the same brush, but pointing out that you shouldn't.

 

I hope that helps Alan.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...
On 13/10/2019 at 00:22, blackrose said:

 

On 13/10/2019 at 00:22, blackrose said:

Even at the beginning of that video the narrowboater is contravening regs by going across the bow of an oncoming vessel and forcing it to take evasive action. He should have turned behind it's stern in order to cross the river. 

As much as I disagree with this video, the narrowboater here actually took the correct path under the circumstances.   Anyone familiar with Henley will know that the lock layby is extremely narrow and only has about 100 feet of steamer piles to tie up to on the port side only.   You want to be on the 'wrong' side of the river approaching the lock in order to either get on the piles or hold the boat in the stream.   Anyone trying to go the 'correct' side of you (port to port) is a real nuisance as it puts you too close to the weir to 'hold' properly and then you'd need to go at right angles or back down the river to reach the piles or lock, cutting across traffic coming out of the lock.   Thus, can't complain about that manoeuvre particularly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Cal Ando said:

As much as I disagree with this video, the narrowboater here actually took the correct path under the circumstances.   Anyone familiar with Henley will know that the lock layby is extremely narrow and only has about 100 feet of steamer piles to tie up to on the port side only.   You want to be on the 'wrong' side of the river approaching the lock in order to either get on the piles or hold the boat in the stream.   Anyone trying to go the 'correct' side of you (port to port) is a real nuisance as it puts you too close to the weir to 'hold' properly and then you'd need to go at right angles or back down the river to reach the piles or lock, cutting across traffic coming out of the lock.   Thus, can't complain about that manoeuvre particularly.

You and others are all missing an 'important' point.

On a river with any flow it is good practice to 'head up to stream' because you have more control when working into the stream, igt helps to push the bow over and easier to slow down to pick up the mooring.

If you lose a mooring because some bounder was better placed to use that slot - it's neither here or there. He was nearer anyway.

 

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
On ‎23‎/‎05‎/‎2020 at 16:23, Cal Ando said:

As much as I disagree with this video, the narrowboater here actually took the correct path under the circumstances.   Anyone familiar with Henley will know that the lock layby is extremely narrow and only has about 100 feet of steamer piles to tie up to on the port side only.   You want to be on the 'wrong' side of the river approaching the lock in order to either get on the piles or hold the boat in the stream.   Anyone trying to go the 'correct' side of you (port to port) is a real nuisance as it puts you too close to the weir to 'hold' properly and then you'd need to go at right angles or back down the river to reach the piles or lock, cutting across traffic coming out of the lock.   Thus, can't complain about that manoeuvre particularly.

Quite agree. 

It is patently obvious that the narrowboater was in reverse, with the tiller pointing in the correct direction, as to be doing all he can to avoid a collision.

The poor bloke has had a lot of bad things said about him, on here and elsewhere, that he doesn't deserve. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 23/05/2020 at 16:23, Cal Ando said:

 Anyone familiar with Henley will know that the lock layby is extremely narrow and only has about 100 feet of steamer piles to tie up to on the port side only.

Assuming you a referring to Marsh lock here. 

 

There are no steamer piles below marsh lock. There is a lay-by with bollards on the port side going up and some posts but these are not steamer piles. 

 

Steamer piles are the posts sometimes installed on the other side where the lock approach is wide enough, without a walkway where steamers can wait and in the good old days gain priority at the lock. 

 

Hambleden has steamer piles on the upstream end. But marsh doesn't due to the Weir being immediately beside the lock and other considerations. 

 

It would be interesting to look at old photos and see if Marsh did originally have steamer piles. It may have done but as it is a gauging Weir and close to the lock I think perhaps not.  

 

There are a couple of piles above Marsh but they are not steamer piles as too close to the walkway over the Weir. 

 

Eta the three white posts on the right in this picture are steamer piles. Teddington lock. Not my photo. 

 

teddington-lock-1422.jpg?anchor=center&m

 

Steamer piles below Bray lock :)

 

Bray_Lock,_Buckinghamshire.jpg

 

I could go on ;)

 

 

 

Edited by magnetman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Murflynn said:

he didn't attempt to 'avoid a collision' until he had put his boat in a position where a collision with a static cruiser (already in the process of mooring up) was inevitable.

 

I think you are either Steve's alter ego or you are seriously deluded.

 

any discussion about whether the narrowboat was obviously heading for the mooring slot is irrelevant.  I expect a video taken from the narrowboat would have similarly shown that the cruiser was preparing to moor up.  Crew on the foredeck with a rope in hand.  The difference is that the cruiser had already occupied the slot while the narrowboat was still about 100m away.

The rule and etiquette on The Thames is that you take up your mooring facing upstream.

This allows the stream to gently push your bow in while you gently glide into a space just inches longer than your boat's

 

The chap's a cad and a bounder.

Pah!

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, OldGoat said:

The rule and etiquette on The Thames is that you take up your mooring facing upstream.

This allows the stream to gently push your bow in while you gently glide into a space just inches longer than your boat's

 

The chap's a cad and a bounder.

Pah!

 

 

Really? I thought the only rule was to give way to craft coming downstream. Downstream.

Edited by Dog
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, OldGoat said:

The rule and etiquette on The Thames is that you take up your mooring facing upstream.

This allows the stream to gently push your bow in while you gently glide into a space just inches longer than your boat's

 

The chap's a cad and a bounder.

Pah!

 

 

I thought that was general practice on all rivers with a noticeable current. I must admit that the last time I moored at Henley, I came downstream and just pulled in as there was no noticeable current. I remember being told that you moored into the current to prevent your rudder banging your stern!!;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Dog said:

Really? I thought the only rule was to give way to craft coming downstream. Downstream.

so are you suggesting that, if you are in the process of mooring up in accordance with custom and practice (i.e facing upstream), and a boat travelling downstream wants your mooring spot, then you should cast off your lines and go somewhere else.

 

I wish to revise my earlier opinion - even if you are Steve's alter ego you really are seriously deluded.

 

I have little experience of canals but 62 years experience of the Thames.  There is always a slight current except in the lock cut and it is always far easier to moor up by making a ferry glide, letting the stream move you gently into the mooring slot which could be just 6 inches longer than your boat.

Edited by Murflynn
  • Greenie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not quite sure why the lock was mentioned on this topic as the video clearly showed an incompetent and rather aggressive narrow boat steerer approaching the Mill Meadows mooring. Doesn't seem to have anything at all to do with the lock. It's a visitor mooring several hundred yards downstream of Marsh lock on the Henley side of the River. 

 

Strange. 

 

Edited by magnetman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, OldGoat said:

The chap's a cad and a bounder.

you are far too kind.

 

the chap deliberately (or drunkenly and irresponsibly) risked damage to the cruiser and injury to the crew lady .....................  he is possibly a potential criminal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Dog said:

Really? I thought the only rule was to give way to craft coming downstream. Downstream.

There is a general rule about giving way to craft coming downstream however this does not include green to green situations. The correct procedure is to give way to vessels moving with the water flow and allow them to pass red to red (port side). 

 

You can use sound signals to indicate that you would like to pass green to green but would need a reciprocal sound signal otherwise always default to the standard to avoid a collision. 

 

2 minutes ago, Murflynn said:

you are far too kind.

 

the chap deliberately (or drunkenly and irresponsibly) risked damage to the cruiser and injury to the crew lady .....................  he is possibly a potential criminal.

Causing a collision in a situation where no risk of collision existed prior to impact is definitely a bit dodgy. 

 

 

Edited by magnetman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, magnetman said:

Assuming you a referring to Marsh lock here. 

 

There are no steamer piles below marsh lock. There is a lay-by with bollards on the port side going up and some posts but these are not steamer piles. 

 

Steamer piles are the posts sometimes installed on the other side where the lock approach is wide enough, without a walkway where steamers can wait and in the good old days gain priority at the lock. 

 

 

 

PLEASE do not tell me about steamer piles!  I was out sailing one day when Mapledurham was just a spec in the distance.   The wind dropped, we drifted, She became bigger. We had a 20' mast with unfurled sail, burgee, etc   When she was about 20' away we paddled with our hands to evade being mown down.   Still don't know how that happened but I believe I passed a steamer pile sized something that day!

Also using a Land Rover, its winch, a boat trailer and a timber hitch, managed to take a redundant steamer pile away in one piece from Cookham Lock side, much to the Lock-keepers astonishment.   Took us 15 mins.   Must have weighed 3/4 ton!   Getting LR, trailer and overhanging steamer pile over the footbridge at Cookham Lock was also a challenge!

Having searched the internet, I found this recent photo.   I was partially wrong.    As a young man about 30 yrs ago they only had genuine steamer piles below Marsh and you  really did have to balance on the rail and edge around the piles like Harold Lloyd to reach the lock.  Clearly much better now but, as the picture shows, the original piles are still there if only surrounded by (still too narrow) walkways.   I still hate Marsh because of those piles and have normally 'held' the boat in the stream for the last 30 yrs rather than tie up.   Hence probably not noticed the improvements!   As you say, steamer piles were for steamers to tie up against and were normally on t'other side of the layby.  I consider that any post about 1 foot square sticking 15 feet odd out of the river bed is not much use to anyone except for tying steamers to, hence any such post I will term 'steamer pile'.   Interested to know if you think differently and if so, why they are there.. 

As Marsh is so narrow downstream, the steamers used the piles on the port side, forcing any boats seeking refuge to scatter and circle.

In a pathetic attempt to prove my case I enclose an old postcard which, although showing the upstream approach, shows two sets of genuine steamer piles against which one was supposed to tie a small boat then proceed along them risking life and limb to an unmanned lock.   Note piles are on both sides of the lock cut.   

Stay safe and enjoy the Thames

henley.jpg

henley 2.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those posts are there so you can moor against the lower lay-by even if it is completely flooded. Obviously the lower lay-bys get flooded much more often than the upper ones because of the River being sloped. I wish they would paint these white. It would look much better and make navigation towards the lock in low light conditions more comfortable. 

The genuine steamer piles, which are not connected by any walkways, were white for a very good reason. 

 

Interesting to see the piles in your second image they do look like steamer piles but as there is quite a strong pull from the weir there they may be protection for that rather than just steamer piles. 

 

I've never had much trouble with Marsh lock in a variety of different boats. It is quite a short lower layby that's true and a bit of weir effect there as well but it always seems to be okay. 

 

Having said that the last time I came through a couple of weeks ago I had someone closing the lower gates which I had just hand wound open for my boat, as I was about 50ft away motoring towards the lock. I had to wake him up with my unusually loud train horn. He was completely oblivious to my rather noticeable vessel approaching. He just didn't even look. 

 

Clueless.

 

Lack of keepers at the locks is definitely a bit of a problem at the moment. 

I'd like to see them back asap. 

 

 

Edited by magnetman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, magnetman said:

 

..........

Lack of keepers at the locks is definitely a bit of a problem at the moment. 

I'd like to see them back asap. 

 

 

As to the dreaded Steve (I thought that issue had been put to bed ages ago....)  How often has anyone sized up an empty mooring space, only to find that someone appears "out of nowhere" and pinches it! I know I do - but then I move on; mebe casting aspersions on his parentage the while....

 

We've been on the Thames ever since I built the boat and there was a time that the locks were only manned 9-5 with a lunch break and there weren't relief keepers, so that some locks weren't manned  anyway.

Then EA - as a result of nagging from boat clubs - stiffened up the relief system and introduced assistants both of which improved matters considerably.

This year - I guess - no assistants, fewer reliefs  and acres of steel netting will not improve the experience and certainly fewer locks manned.

 

I don't understand why folks don't like working the Thames locks themselves?

  • Proceed at your own pace
  • Position the boat where you want it
  • Pretend power over other boaters using the lock at the same time
  • Avoid the ignominy of throwing a line and missing the bollard....

Lovely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love working the locks myself. 

 

The problems come when you have set things up only to find other boaters being completely unaware that anyone else might be doing something. 

 

Marsh lock bloke closing gates with me about 50ft away after I had hand wound them open myself. 

 

Marlow lock boats coming down gates left open I was first in queue for lock. Untied and pushed off boat only to find two boats behind cruise past into the lock totally oblivious. 

 

Yes self operation is great but not when idiots get involved because they are completely clueless. 

 

At least the keepers when they are on do a certain amount of traffic control...

 

And they get paid to do a job. If they keep hiding for much longer I wonder if some accountant in an oroffice somewhere might decide they are surplus to requirements. 

 

That would be a great shame. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, magnetman said:

I love working the locks myself. 

 

The problems come when you have set things up only to find other boaters being completely unaware that anyone else might be doing something. 

 

Marsh lock bloke closing gates with me about 50ft away after I had hand wound them open myself. 

 

Marlow lock boats coming down gates left open I was first in queue for lock. Untied and pushed off boat only to find two boats behind cruise past into the lock totally oblivious. 

 

Yes self operation is great but not when idiots get involved because they are completely clueless. 

 

At least the keepers when they are on do a certain amount of traffic control...

 

And they get paid to do a job. If they keep hiding for much longer I wonder if some accountant in an oroffice somewhere might decide they are surplus to requirements. 

 

That would be a great shame. 

I agree,

101% (!) of Thames boaters are completely clueless, thus it's comforting to know that most of them are content to stay in their marinas and don't venture forth.

 

The lockies are not being paid to operate the locks - that's a benefit to the boating traffic. However, over the years organizations such as the TMBA and ATYC have banged away at EA to improve the lock service function. EA are aware that the registration fees paid by boaters goes a considerable way to pay their salaries and therefore they'd better take some notice of boaters. A succession of harbour masters have taken notice and while the current HM is away on duty elsewhere his assistant (A boater, I'm told) is making efforts to improve matters. Under current conditions he's unable to do much, but major efforts have been made to clear floating trees and sunken boats as soon as reasonably possible and inform boaters at large.

 

(If you are a thames boater - why not join the TMBA - only a fiver - and that increases the weight behind what's being said when 'discussing' matters with the EA)...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, magnetman said:

I did not know that lock keepers were not paid to operate the locks. 

 

That has come as a genuine surprise to me. Boating on the River more or less every year since the early 90s and I never knew that...

 

 

I wonder if he meant they are not paid, but operate locks, or that they are paid and do not operate locks.

 

.............................    and I guess I must be one of the 101% of boaters. .........................  bloody insult !!

 

 

 

.........................   p'raps the old git goat is best ignored most of the time.   B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, magnetman said:

I did not know that lock keepers were not paid to operate the locks. 

 

That has come as a genuine surprise to me. Boating on the River more or less every year since the early 90s and I never knew that...

 

 

Do I notice a trace of sarcasm in your reply?

It was always explained to me was that their primary function was to 'work the weirs'. Anything else was a secondary consideration. (Cynics might say to keep them occupied and mebe to justify the 'registration charge').

 

Perhaps you don't get the oportunity to talk to those wearing lots of gold braid on their hats. Some are very approachable and happy to talk to boaters whether in shiny plastic or more humble steel...

 

On the subject of weirs - it's revealing to realise how much work a lockie has to do when instructed by 'control' that really does mean they have to be on site  (most of the weirs are manually operated)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Murflynn said:

so are you suggesting that, if you are in the process of mooring up in accordance with custom and practice (i.e facing upstream), and a boat travelling downstream wants your mooring spot, then you should cast off your lines and go somewhere else.

 

I wish to revise my earlier opinion - even if you are Steve's alter ego you really are seriously deluded.

 

I have little experience of canals but 62 years experience of the Thames.  There is always a slight current except in the lock cut and it is always far easier to moor up by making a ferry glide, letting the stream move you gently into the mooring slot which could be just 6 inches longer than your boat.

There was a widely viewed clip at the time - one of the Queen's celebrations - of the official boat skipper doing just that to bring the royal barge alongside. Many folk were convinced it must have had bow thrusters but it was proudly stated at the time that it was all down to experience and knowledge of the waters!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • 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.