Jump to content

Aire & Calder Breach


Featured Posts

https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/news-and-views/news/an-update-on-the-aire-and-calder-navigation-breach 

 

Update 23/12/20

 

We are aware that where the water levels in the navigation have dropped, isolated sections along the bank have moved inwards as a result of the loss of pressure from the water. 

Whilst this looks unsightly, it does happen from time to time with canals where we take the water out for maintenance. It is not a cause for concern. Our engineers have checked the waterway this morning and will continue to do so. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, ditchcrawler said:

But with a pub type business then things like the daily menu can be updated as easy as adding a post here. Unfortunately my email is now with Google

Build the website with a link to "Today's Specials" called (say) Daily_Specials.pdf (add the tags for always download, don't cache etc).

 

Then the owner saves Daily_Specials.pdf every day and we have an Uncle Robert (OK - you'll still get people mailing at 06:00 saying you haven't updated from last night but that's going to happen whatever the technology)

 

I hate FB although it seems now you can't live without it - I'm still being chased by an American Restaurant in Denver, Colorado, which I visited in March 2019 "You haven't visited for a while" No - I live over 5,000 miles away, I visited the state, never mind your restaurant, once on business 20 months ago - I'm unlikely to do so again - Now go away" (I viewed their page as the only way to find it by road and meet my American Colleagues)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whilst the situation with the canal itself at the breach site and the likely causes have been quite well covered (dare I say in depth?) it has been drawn to my attention that the situation below the canal  bed is far more complex with the story beginning with Vermuyden and pretty much ending with the construction of the M62 motorway. It's interesting that both CRT and ABP are consulting with probably the most experienced boatman in the region as to possible long-term solutions. It's certainly in John Branford's best interest to get it right so that the sea-dredged sand flow from Hull to Leeds can both continue and, ultimately, thrive. 

  • Greenie 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 The new repair has partially failed. CRT have been to have a look and say there is not a risk of flooding. I don't know the affect to the water level in Goole. It was about a foot below normal when we left there at about 2pm Wednesday which was the highest we've seen since the breach. More pictures in Thursdays blog. Oleanna.co.uk. Pictures taken by Mark Penn from his drone.

Edited by Alway Swilby
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Alway Swilby said:

 The new repair has partially failed. CRT have been to have a look and say there is not a risk of flooding. I don't know the affect to the water level in Goole. It was about a foot below normal when we left there at about 2pm Wednesday which was the highest we've seen since the breach. More pictures in Thursdays blog. Oleanna.co.uk. Pictures taken by Mark Penn from his drone.

Those pics are helpful as it helps reference exactly where the breach is.

 

Up to now it wasnt 100% clear.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 22/12/2020 at 10:10, Mike Todd said:

 

 

BTW, can so0meone remind me of just when was the golden age when the canals were maintained so well that they never failed?

Hold on, I'll just fetch my rose tinted glasses to look that up...

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Orwellian said:

Have they fixed it yet?

No, in fact the "repair" is failing and the CRT have lowered the levels on that stretch even more. We in Goole are isolated from the canal by the defective emergency stop gates.

 

Taken from a Facebook Barge Group.

 

 

 

 

Screenshot_2021-01-04-23-38-42-830.jpeg

Edited by Joe Bourke
Link to post
Share on other sites

Oleanna's reports (see https://oleanna.co.uk/) seem a little more positive with regard to water levels. The CaRT quote in Joe's post I think means that they have (already) lowered the water level - in fact did so as soon as the breach was reported, rather than that they have reduced it further from the initial level. Certain that is not Pip's reading of the levels as measured by them and others at Goole, taking their pontoon as a reference level.

 

As far as I can see, the short term repair is working about as well as could have been expected - it was only intended to prevent major flooding and the reports suggest that it is not leaking any more over the past few days.

 

Once the coffer dams are in place then clearly the leak is stabilised but it particularly bad news for the resumption of commercial carrying as it does suggest that the permanent repair will not be a speedy affair. After all, it seems that the immediate cause was a failure of a third party culvert (much as happened recently on T&M) so it will involve several parties to agree on a solution that not only fixes the immediate problem but deals with its underlying weakness. It is not clear to me how much the culvert is in active use and how much it is a relic of a former drainage scheme. In any event, it sounds as if they are expecting to discover a significant failure - the images I have seen do suggest that it was more than a simple bank collapse type of breach.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Mike Todd said:

Oleanna's reports (see https://oleanna.co.uk/) seem a little more positive with regard to water levels. The CaRT quote in Joe's post I think means that they have (already) lowered the water level - in fact did so as soon as the breach was reported, rather than that they have reduced it further from the initial level. Certain that is not Pip's reading of the levels as measured by them and others at Goole, taking their pontoon as a reference level.

 

As far as I can see, the short term repair is working about as well as could have been expected - it was only intended to prevent major flooding and the reports suggest that it is not leaking any more over the past few days.

 

Once the coffer dams are in place then clearly the leak is stabilised but it particularly bad news for the resumption of commercial carrying as it does suggest that the permanent repair will not be a speedy affair. After all, it seems that the immediate cause was a failure of a third party culvert (much as happened recently on T&M) so it will involve several parties to agree on a solution that not only fixes the immediate problem but deals with its underlying weakness. It is not clear to me how much the culvert is in active use and how much it is a relic of a former drainage scheme. In any event, it sounds as if they are expecting to discover a significant failure - the images I have seen do suggest that it was more than a simple bank collapse type of breach.

Thanks Mike. I think this represents the situation very fairly.  The major problem is that this has (as stated) not turned out to be a conventional breach (if such a thing exists!) and the actual position of the leak is not yet known and won't be until the immediate area is drained.   This is why it's been difficult to stop the leak completely with stone etc.  Once the extent of the repair needed has been established the Trust then has to decide whether to re-open the canal on a temporary basis (assuming that is possible) while designs etc are agreed, and permissions obtained from third parties various, or whether to keep the canal closed and crack on as soon as possible.  Clearly the latter would be cheaper, but the former would be preferred by the commercial operators and leisure users.

David L

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Joe Bourke said:

We have dropped a foot in the last 24 hours.

It's not unusual in normal times, when there is no breach and the gates by the railway bridge are open, for the level in the docks and the two marinas to drop by about 6" just by the operation of Ocean Lock a few times. So I suspect that may the cause of the fluctuation. How is the level now?

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Alway Swilby said:

It's not unusual in normal times, when there is no breach and the gates by the railway bridge are open, for the level in the docks and the two marinas to drop by about 6" just by the operation of Ocean Lock a few times. So I suspect that may the cause of the fluctuation. How is the level now?

27-28"' below normal, same as yesterday, but hey it could be Ocean Lock, what do I know?

IMG_20210106_135410_521.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...

When it happens, it will be 3 or 4 weeks,2 full dams across waterway either side of breach. 

Goole docks has apparently got an extra steel gate in place now to try to keep the water level up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For an on-the-spot analysis of the situation see page 16 at https://edition.pagesuite-professional.co.uk/html5/reader/production/default.aspx?pubname=&pubid=d192940e-f732-42bc-a9d9-6fbce501da9a

 

Whilst CRT have listened carefully to John Branford's ideas they are still insisting on coffer dams, a temporary supply to Goole docks, de-watering and eyeballing the culvert. The alternative is simply to pile each side of the culvert, taking it out of commission, and pump the drainage water straight into the canal, rather than taking it via the culvert under the canal and then pumping it into the Dutch River.

 

This way the canal can be re-opened and the Leeds aggregate traffic and Rotherham oil run can continue. Then the canal can be widened out again at this point which has always been an obstacle to navigation with the failed section of culvert being right where loaded barges have to open the throttle to power round the sharp corner here. It's inevitable that the culvert is right in the firing line of rather large and powerful propellors. This, combined with the fact that when the canal was widen from 70 to 100 foot, the culvert was not lengthened now causes the problem which will remain until the culvert is taken out of service and the 'necked in' section of the navigation widened out again. This could be done with the waterway back in action once the culvert is piled off.

 

If I was living in the Fishlake area I'd certainly want CRT to be employing John Branford's strategy and generally going in for a great deal more lateral thinking! 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Up-Side-Down said:

For an on-the-spot analysis of the situation see page 16 at https://edition.pagesuite-professional.co.uk/html5/reader/production/default.aspx?pubname=&pubid=d192940e-f732-42bc-a9d9-6fbce501da9a

 

Whilst CRT have listened carefully to John Branford's ideas they are still insisting on coffer dams, a temporary supply to Goole docks, de-watering and eyeballing the culvert. The alternative is simply to pile each side of the culvert, taking it out of commission, and pump the drainage water straight into the canal, rather than taking it via the culvert under the canal and then pumping it into the Dutch River.

 

This way the canal can be re-opened and the Leeds aggregate traffic and Rotherham oil run can continue. Then the canal can be widened out again at this point which has always been an obstacle to navigation with the failed section of culvert being right where loaded barges have to open the throttle to power round the sharp corner here. It's inevitable that the culvert is right in the firing line of rather large and powerful propellors. This, combined with the fact that when the canal was widen from 70 to 100 foot, the culvert was not lengthened now causes the problem which will remain until the culvert is taken out of service and the 'necked in' section of the navigation widened out again. This could be done with the waterway back in action once the culvert is piled off.

 

If I was living in the Fishlake area I'd certainly want CRT to be employing John Branford's strategy and generally going in for a great deal more lateral thinking! 

The black line on the map shows the 'necked in' area of the navigation dating from the widening of the canal. The culvert was not lengthened at this time so just where loaded barges heading west are having to power round the corner the stern comes dangerously close to the bank. No amount of culvert repair is going to eliminate this fundamental problem.

 

 

If I was a subscriber to the many conspiracy theories in life, I might be forgiven for thinking that CRT were continuing to do everything in their power to eradicate commercial carrying from the NE waterways ......... 

Maps showing suggested piling – John Branford.pdf

Edited by Up-Side-Down
Link to post
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
  • 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.