Boat sinks “lock keeper bang out of order”

[doratheexplorer]

18 minutes ago, Jerra said:

Sorry b ut when the statement brings in differentials like they don't put as much strain on the infra structure and pay the same the implication is one is better than the other.    There would be no reason for mentioning the difference otherwise.

Disagree.  You've assumed that putting less strain on the intrastructure must always be a good thing.  I can see pros and cons.  But as I said before, there's no 'best'.

 

In any case, my point was to highlight the issue of people taking issue with boaters who dare to boat in a different way to them. 

13 minutes ago, TheBiscuits said:

 

Absolutely the best - and I was told that something like 85% of all marina boats on CRT waters are never logged anywhere else a few years back.

 

That's a lot of licence money for boats that rarely go further than the pub mooring on a couple of Saturdays a year.

Be careful what you wish for.  If enough boats stop cruising, CRT will happily shut down the system, citing lack of use.  (I realise you're being only semi-serious)

 

The canals actually need lots of different types of user.  Not everyone seems to grasp this.

[doratheexplorer]

13 minutes ago, Ex Brummie said:

No, a git-gap is where the boat is moored in the middle of a gap which precludes others mooring in the space. You only know this if you see it moor. Machpoints explanation is credible.

Hence 'colloquially'.

 

In other words, people are happy to criticise moorers for their spacing without knowing how things ended up a certain way.

[tree monkey]

3 hours ago, TheBiscuits said:

 

"Nibling" according to Wikipedia, but I'd not have guessed.

 

Presumably from Niece/Nephew and Sibling.

I like that

[TheBiscuits]

1 minute ago, tree monkey said:

I like that

 

I refer to all of our extended family's kids as my niecephews ...

 

 

The old joke when their respective mothers were pregnant was that I didn't know if they were having a boy or a girl, so I wasn't sure if I was going to be an aunt or an uncle! 

 

[Machpoint005]

3 minutes ago, TheBiscuits said:

>>The old joke<<

 

None the worse for its age. I've recently learned that I'm going to be a Grandad (or a Grandma) again this year.

[TheBiscuits]

40 minutes ago, doratheexplorer said:

Be careful what you wish for.  If enough boats stop cruising, CRT will happily shut down the system, citing lack of use.  (I realise you're being only semi-serious)

 

The canals actually need lots of different types of user.  Not everyone seems to grasp this.

 

That's not a wish, it's how it actually was a few years ago according to one of the CRT staff who would know.  I don't know if it's got better or worse since then, but I didn't get cross at CRT when they decided to save all the water for the peak July/August holiday season on the Northern canals last year.  

 

I fully appreciate that without those boats being able to do their week or ten days out of their marinas my licence would have to be many times higher than it is now.

 

I agree that different users are needed, and I try to do my part by reporting issues to CRT early and litterpicking wherever we go rather than just grumbling about the state of the network.

[tree monkey]

3 minutes ago, TheBiscuits said:

 

I refer to all of our extended family's kids as my niecephews ...

 

 

The old joke when their respective mothers were pregnant was that I didn't know if they were having a boy or a girl, so I wasn't sure if I was going to be an aunt or an uncle! 

 

I have embraced my Uncle role fully, I have the album of embarrassing photos and work quite hard at making them squirm and both have been christened by Uncle decree, Gobshite.

 

It's a role I enjoy

[magnetman]

5 hours ago, Higgs said:

 

Since when did a job stop anyone from doing someone a good turn?

 

 

 

 

Elfin safety ? 

 

Anyway if it was the Culham resident lock keeper I expect he has become fed up with it after about 50 years on the job and looking forward to retirement. 

 

He must have seen a few changes including a massive increase in the number of idiots turning up on boats. 

 

Longest serving keeper on the Thames as far as I know. 

 

Plus of course Culham is a very deep lock and everyone knows that the River level changes fast below locks when there has been rain. This is partly why (apart from it being a lock layby) one does not moor a boat immediately below a lock even in winter unless one has discussed it with the lock keeper in advance and he has specifically agreed to manage the ropes in your absence. 

 

 

 

Not wishing to cast aspersions or appear judgemental but I could do both about the author of the video if required. 

 

 

Edited January 5, 2021 by magnetman

[David Mack]

20 hours ago, TheBiscuits said:

I was told that something like 85% of all marina boats on CRT waters are never logged anywhere else a few years back.

But since CRT's logging process is so haphazard that is hardly surprising. Boaters who have requested their sighting record have commented on here before how few observations there were of their boat. And the record used for CCer movement and licence enforcement doesn't include the records taken by CRT staff at manned or booked facilities such as Harecastle Tunnel, Tuel Lane lock, Anderton Lift etc. So its not surprising some boats are never logged away from the home mooring.

[Higgs]

18 hours ago, magnetman said:

Elfin safety ? 

 

Anyway if it was the Culham resident lock keeper I expect he has become fed up with it after about 50 years on the job and looking forward to retirement. 

 

He must have seen a few changes including a massive increase in the number of idiots turning up on boats. 

 

Longest serving keeper on the Thames as far as I know. 

 

Plus of course Culham is a very deep lock and everyone knows that the River level changes fast below locks when there has been rain. This is partly why (apart from it being a lock layby) one does not moor a boat immediately below a lock even in winter unless one has discussed it with the lock keeper in advance and he has specifically agreed to manage the ropes in your absence. 

 

 

 

Not wishing to cast aspersions or appear judgemental but I could do both about the author of the video if required. 

 

 

 

Health and Safety - Were there any signs to indicate dangers? 

 

As there is no certification to distinguish the competent from the incompetent, I'd have to blame the licensing authority. Everyone who knew about the dangers of the mooring below the lock would have a certain experience this couple didn't have. 

 

 

Edited January 6, 2021 by Higgs

[Arthur Marshall]

3 minutes ago, Higgs said:

 

Health and Safety - Were there any signs to indicate dangers? 

 

As there is no certification to distinguish the competent from the incompetent, I'd have to blame the the licencing authority. Everyone who knew about the dangers of the mooring below the the lock would have a certain experience this couple didn't have. 

 

 

It's not just experience they didn't have, though, it's the intelligence to do a bit of research.  I think they'd had the boat three months, that's long enough to learn that rivers go up and down, and also that you need to keep it somewhere safe, rather than just dumping it on the towpath and going back to the house when it rains.  That is, after all, why all he advice is to sort out your mooring before you buy your boat, unless you're going to be a pretend continuous cruiser.

And as I have said before, I can never understand why someone would leave a multi thousand pound investment lying about, in a public place, with no protection, for weeks. It's like me leaving a twenty thousand pound guitar on a table in a Liverpool pub and expecting it to be there when I wander back for a gig the next weekend. (NB no particular reason for picking Liverpool, except that someone stole my hat last time I played there.)

[Higgs]

27 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

It's not just experience they didn't have, though, it's the intelligence to do a bit of research.  I think they'd had the boat three months, that's long enough to learn that rivers go up and down, and also that you need to keep it somewhere safe, rather than just dumping it on the towpath and going back to the house when it rains.  That is, after all, why all he advice is to sort out your mooring before you buy your boat, unless you're going to be a pretend continuous cruiser.

And as I have said before, I can never understand why someone would leave a multi thousand pound investment lying about, in a public place, with no protection, for weeks. It's like me leaving a twenty thousand pound guitar on a table in a Liverpool pub and expecting it to be there when I wander back for a gig the next weekend. (NB no particular reason for picking Liverpool, except that someone stole my hat last time I played there.)

 

I suppose some research would have been in order. But was it a question they understood needed asking, for the safety of their boat. After all, your hat was stolen. You probably knew it was a possibility, in hindsight.   

 

 

Edited January 6, 2021 by Higgs

[magnetman]

20 minutes ago, Higgs said:

 

Health and Safety - Were there any signs to indicate dangers? 

 

As there is no certification to distinguish the competent from the incompetent, I'd have to blame the licensing authority. Everyone who knew about the dangers of the mooring below the lock would have a certain experience this couple didn't have. 

 

 

I meant health and safety for the lock keeper. Lone worker etc. They have special systems in place for lone Weir work where you have to respond to an automated phone call in order to demonstrate you have not fallen in..

 

I'd say that attending to a badly secured boat would be well outside of the lock keeper's allowed behaviour unless the boat is in the lock itself.

 

 

To be fair there isn't any signage on that bit of Culham downstream lock cut. There are often signs like "mooring for lock use only" and I do think this is a good candidate for signage.

 

 

Edited January 6, 2021 by magnetman

[Alan de Enfield]

3 minutes ago, Higgs said:

 

I suppose some research would have been in order. But was it a question they understood needed asking, for the safety of their boat. After all, your hat was stolen, and you probably knew it was a possibility, in hindsight.   

 

 

 

You'd think that the historical disappearence of hub-caps in Liverpool would have given him a clue.

[David Mack]

10 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

 

And as I have said before, I can never understand why someone would leave a multi thousand pound investment lying about, in a public place, with no protection, for weeks. It's like me leaving a twenty thousand pound guitar on a table in a Liverpool pub and expecting it to be there when I wander back for a gig the next weekend.

 

What about all the boaters who pay CRT for a home mooring on the publicly accessible towpath then? Or places like Braunston Marina where there is nothing other than perhaps a Private notice to stop anybody wandering onto the boat moorings?

[Higgs]

3 minutes ago, magnetman said:

To be fair there isn't any signage on that bit of Culham downstream lock cut. There are often signs like "mooring for lock use only" and I do think this is a good candidate for signage.

 

It does show a good mooring for boats that reach the lock, to go up. Very deceptive, in the sunlight. 

 

 

 

 

[matty40s]

13 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

. It's like me leaving a twenty thousand pound guitar on a table in a Liverpool pub and expecting it to be there when I wander back for a gig the next weekend. (NB no particular reason for picking Liverpool, except that someone stole my hat last time I played there.)

Perhaps you should have left your trombone for a week......bet that would still have been lying there.?

[magnetman]

I suppose you could argue that anyone using a boat should have at least a basic understanding of how the system works and learn how to recognise the difference between a lock approach/waiting area and a visitor mooring site. 

 

The latter, if it is a proper site with rings or bollards, will generally be signed as being a mooring and the maximum stay allowed. 

 

A length of made up river bank with bollards on it and very close to a lock is probably going to be a lock layby/waiting area. 

 

It seems obvious. 

 

Probably isn't though and the fact there is also a small section of layby the other side of the bridge is confusing. 

 

 

The reason there is also a layby below the bridge is obvious when you think about it. If the lock is in the process of being emptied then the turbulence makes it dangerous to attempt to moor up wait for the lock between lock and bridge. So they provided an extra bit below the bridge to take out this hazard. 

 

That is only an option if people don't use it as a visitor mooring...

[Higgs]

8 minutes ago, magnetman said:

I suppose you could argue that anyone using a boat should have at least a basic understanding of how the system works and learn how to recognise the difference between a lock approach/waiting area and a visitor mooring site. 

 

The latter, if it is a proper site with rings or bollards, will generally be signed as being a mooring and the maximum stay allowed. 

 

A length of made up river bank with bollards on it and very close to a lock is probably going to be a lock layby/waiting area. 

 

It seems obvious. 

 

Probably isn't though and the fact there is also a small section of layby the other side of the bridge is confusing. 

 

 

The reason there is also a layby below the bridge is obvious when you think about it. If the lock is in the process of being emptied then the turbulence makes it dangerous to attempt to moor up wait for the lock between lock and bridge. So they provided an extra bit below the bridge to take out this hazard. 

 

That is only an option if people don't use it as a visitor mooring...

 

With boating on the canal, it's a case of learning on the job, unless you actively seek out some training. Hoping you don't end up on a cill, in a poorly maintained lock. Good fortune?

 

 

Edited January 6, 2021 by Higgs

[dmr]

Assuming this sinking was very recent and not in fact ages ago, the big question for me is why inexperienced boaters chose to go onto the Thames in winter and chose to leave a boat unattended on the river?  Had they checked the flows and weather forecast etc. Was it a case of total inexperience or taking a calculated risk, and did they choose to ignore any advice that they were given?

 

.................Dave

[haggis]

But they are BMW Drivers and that explains a lot .... ?

[David Mack]

18 minutes ago, magnetman said:

 

 

 

If someone had adjusted the boats ropes to allow it to remain afloat in that location as the river rose, then there must be a very real chance that as the waters receded the boat would be caught partly on the bank, and may well have toppled over and sunk on its side. Which would presumably make refloating a whole lot more difficult and expensive.

[Hudds Lad]

3 minutes ago, dmr said:

Assuming this sinking was very recent and not in fact ages ago, the big question for me is why inexperienced boaters chose to go onto the Thames in winter and chose to leave a boat unattended on the river?  Had they checked the flows and weather forecast etc. Was it a case of total inexperience or taking a calculated risk, and did they choose to ignore any advice that they were given?

 

.................Dave

from what i recall from the vids, they bought it months ago and were in the process of moving it to the K&A, but covid kept getting in the way and then winter water levels

[Higgs]

3 minutes ago, David Mack said:

If someone had adjusted the boats ropes to allow it to remain afloat in that location as the river rose, then there must be a very real chance that as the waters receded the boat would be caught partly on the bank, and may well have toppled over and sunk on its side. Which would presumably make refloating a whole lot more difficult and expensive.

 

It's a possibility, depending on the draft of the boat, and how much slack the ropes would have been given. 

 

 

[Jerra]

19 minutes ago, matty40s said:

Perhaps you should have left your trombone for a week......bet that would still have been lying there.?

Having bought a Trombone for our youngest about 20 years ago it certainly wouldn't be still lying there!