A polite plea to dawdlers.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Wanderer Vagabond said:

So the way to get it through the shallows on the Trent is to get it up on the plane then

 

Now then....

 

As you have spent the last 48 hours complaining about Nick claiming you have said things you havent can you please show me where have come close to suggesting that?

[IanD]

2 minutes ago, M_JG said:

 

Now then....

 

As you have spent the last 48 hours complaining about Nick claiming you have said things you havent can you please show me where have come close to suggesting that?

It would work though... 😉

[Wanderer Vagabond]

1 minute ago, M_JG said:

 

Now then....

 

As you have spent the last 48 hours complaining about Nick claiming you have said things you havent can you please show me where have come close to suggesting that?

No, I'm suggesting that, if the draught when up on the plane is less, surely they can go into the shallower waters?

[IanD]

1 minute ago, Wanderer Vagabond said:

No, I'm suggesting that, if the draught when up on the plane is less, surely they can go into the shallower waters?

So long as they never slow down and drop off the plane...

[matty40s]

21 minutes ago, TheBiscuits said:

 

Rach is probably not the best woman for you to try mansplaining powerboat handling to.  She has quite a lot of experience handling a fast boat.

 

Sometimes in unwise locations, but we won't hold that against her. 😁

 

 

It is thought that Brayford Pools might have to invoke CAA regulations on the episode in question....

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, Wanderer Vagabond said:

No, I'm suggesting that, if the draught when up on the plane is less, surely they can go into the shallower waters?

 

And if the depth suddenly gets even shallower?

 

Going at the speed required it will go belly up sharpish.

 

 

[nicknorman]

23 minutes ago, Wanderer Vagabond said:

Not 'mansplaining' or even criticising (what do I know about cruisers?) but it just seemed logical that if you lift one end of the boat up, the other end of the boat would go down. Alternatively, is it genuinely a hydrofoil effect?

Well I think we have the measure of you now. No knowledge of BW bylaws and no understanding of the difference between a displacement hull and a planing hull. What other major gaps in your knowledge exist? Ok yes I know, you can’t answer that Donald because you don’t know what you don’t know.

[Momac]

56 minutes ago, Naughty Cal said:

 

On the plane the draught is shallower as most of the boat and drive is out of the water. 

But I am sure you wouldn't suggest it would be wise to plane in order to travel over water that is too shallow to transit at displacement speed

 

20kts is a lot more fun than 5kts (if a bit pricey on diesel)

https://youtube.com/clip/Ugkxva7ZXAuN_FQZdcxIQ7wJQGDVRf7TT_He

 

[Iain_S]

4 hours ago, nicknorman said:

I disagree. Colregs rule 1 states “These Rules shall apply to all vessels upon the high seas and in all waters connected therewith navigable by seagoing vessels.”

 

So, apart from such things as the Manchester ship canal, and big rivers, the colregs specifically do not apply to “ordinary” canals frequented by narrowboats.

It is quite possible for a boat to be capable of navigation on a canal (even a narrow one) and also on the sea. Therefore, the application of Colregs depends on the water having a connection to the sea, either direct or indirect, and not on the size of the waterway. (Of course, they can be over ridden by local regulations, but these usually follow Colregs and are more likely to be additions than substitutions.)

Edited May 30, 2023 by Iain_S

[nicknorman]

10 hours ago, Iain_S said:

It is quite possible for a boat to be capable of navigation on a canal (even a narrow one) and also on the sea. Therefore, the application of Colregs depends on the water having a connection to the sea, either direct or indirect, and not on the size of the waterway. (Of course, they can be over ridden by local regulations, but these usually follow Colregs and are more likely to be additions than substitutions.)

Colregs have no basis in UK law, and there is a bit of a clue in the long name - Convention on the International Regulations for the Prevention of Collisions at Sea. Note the last 2 words!

 

Bottom line is that when there are specific UK bylaws regulating such things, such as the BW bylaws, these are the relevant regulations and the colregs are not the relevant regulations. Agreed, there is a lot of similarity but also some significant differences, for example the lighting rules I mentioned earlier. So whether it be the Trent and Mersey canal, or the river Trent (above Gainsborough), the applicable rules are the BW bylaws. Bringing the international colregs into the debate is incorrect and simply obfuscation, as is arguing that a paddle board used on the Trent and Mersey canal could also be used on the sea.

Edited May 31, 2023 by nicknorman

[Wanderer Vagabond]

11 hours ago, nicknorman said:

Well I think we have the measure of you now. No knowledge of BW bylaws and no understanding of the difference between a displacement hull and a planing hull. What other major gaps in your knowledge exist? Ok yes I know, you can’t answer that Donald because you don’t know what you don’t know.

In terms of any gaps in knowledge, any in mine are as nothing in comparison to the gaping holes in yours. The difference is that I don't have your level of arrogance. You might not have noticed but I actually asked the person concerned regarding the draught of her boat whereas you would undoubtedly have told her what it was!

[Momac]

13 minutes ago, nicknorman said:

Colregs have no basis in UK law, and there is a bit of a clue in the long name - Convention on the International Regulations for the Prevention of Collisions at Sea. Note the last 2 words!

 

Bottom line is that when there are specific UK bylaws regulating such things, such as the BW bylaws, these are the relevant regulations and the colregs are not the relevant regulations. Agreed, there is a lot of similarity but also some significant differences, for example the lighting rules I mentioned earlier. So whether it be the Trent and Mersey canal, or the river Trent (above Gainsborough), the applicable rules are the BW bylaws. Bringing the international colregs into the debate is incorrect and simply obfuscation, as is arguing that a paddle board used on the Trent and Mersey canal could also be used on the sea.

[Wanderer Vagabond]

1 minute ago, MartynG said:

To be honest all of the talk by the other poster regarding 'the law' is somewhat academic since there is no-one enforcing either COLREGS or BW bylaws. Where it would become relevant is in the event of a collision and it would be the insurance companies would assess who had breached the requirements or in the event of a fatality the MAIB would do so. The only place I've ever seen enforcement was on The Broads.

[nicknorman]

8 minutes ago, MartynG said:

I don’t know why you are quoting something from a yachting organisation - you might as well quote something from the Highway Code. Completely irrelevant. The Colregs are not the law on inland waterways, which is what we are (or were) talking about. If you want to be pedantic they are not the law in UK coastal waterways either, the relevant law is the The Merchant Shipping (Distress Signals and Prevention of Collisions) Regulations, which of course are very similar but not identical to the international ones.

 

By the way, things are exactly the same in aviation, ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organisation) publishes an abundance of rules, but it is up to individual states to accept them or not. Whilst the UK adopts much of it, it also publishes quite a number of variations from the ICAO rules, as do many other countries.

21 minutes ago, Wanderer Vagabond said:

 I don't have your level of arrogance.

Maybe not but you do manage to get a gold star for irony!

[Momac]

 

20 minutes ago, nicknorman said:

I don’t know why you are quoting something from a yachting organisation - you might as well quote something from the Highway Code. Completely irrelevant.

The RYA covers all aspects of boating  while the Highway Code does not.

21 minutes ago, nicknorman said:

 The Colregs are not the law on inland waterways

It seems to me the Colregs are certainly applicable on a tidal river or any water where a sea going vessel can travel eg Aire and Calder.  But you are entitled to your opinion. Arguably the Colregs might not apply to the smaller canals but why would you not observe them anyway? 

[GUMPY]

CEVNI would be more applicable to inland waterways than colregs.

Pity we never adopted it

 

[David Mack]

22 hours ago, haggis said:

At Derwent Mouth Lock many years ago I had wandered up to the lock as there were two boats going down ahead. To my amazement, both ( male ) skippers told their ( female ) lock workers to get back on board as soon as the boats started descending leaving muggins to open both bottom gates ( yes, they needed two) , wind down the paddles and close up after they had left. 

You should have walked away and motioned to Iain to pull into the lock mooring to wait things out. Let them sort themselves out from the bottom of a lock with all the gates closed!

[haggis]

25 minutes ago, David Mack said:

You should have walked away and motioned to Iain to pull into the lock mooring to wait things out. Let them sort themselves out from the bottom of a lock with all the gates closed!

One learns ones lesson ! Several years later, we were again going down the same lock and when we arrived the lock was filling from below with an assortment of boats- from memory two short narrow boats and three plastic cruisers. I watched as they shuffled around and exchanged ropes so that they were all nice and secure and then I asked who was working the lock. Consternation ensued as it was established who had a windlass and who could climb a ladder. Iain had arrived clutching a  windlass by this time but I asked him to stand back which surprisingly he did. 

I felt a bit sorry for the folk in the lock who only got no help because of what other boaters had done to us at the same lock a few years before. 

Going back to the first incident, one of the steerers  was someone we " knew" from the internet. 

I will always offer to help at locks but I will not be " taken advantage of ". . Don't know what kind of boater that makes me, apart from an ancient one 😁

[Guest]

12 minutes ago, haggis said:

Going back to the first incident, one of the steerers  was someone we " knew" from the internet. 😁

 

I'm presuming then that wasn't the time you and I met at that lock?

 

 

[haggis]

15 minutes ago, M_JG said:

 

I'm presuming then that wasn't the time you and I met at that lock?

 

 

It was actually 😀. I can still picture you and the other steerer telling your lady lock labourers to get back on before the boats were too low in the lock. I am sure it was a one off though and not something you would normally do .

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, haggis said:

It was actually 😀. I can still picture you and the other steerer telling your lady lock labourers to get back on before the boats were too low in the lock. I am sure it was a one off though and not something you would normally do .

 

Well that is very very strange because my wife never ever worked the locks as in never. She always stayed on our boat and I always worked the locks. We established that routine on our first ever narrowboat holiday as she didnt feel confident crossing lock gates and has dodgy knees.

 

I remember you coming up to me while I was on the lock side and asking who was from 'The Dog House' and I made myself known. But I certainly dont recall the events as you describe them.

[Private Fraser]

1 hour ago, haggis said:

It was actually 😀. 

Hilarious😂😂

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Private Fraser said:

Hilarious😂😂

 

Well it would be if it was correct. But unfortunately it isn't. My wife has only operated one lock in her life.

 

That was at Sutton Stop on our first boating holiday as a couple with no crew. 

 

That of course is a cinch to operate.

 

The next lock(s) was from memory Hillmorton flight.

 

She decided she didnt have the confidence to do the first one so we reached a pact whereby she learnt to steer the boat whilst we were passing through and I operated the locks.

 

And that is how we did it throught the rest of our hire boat hols and continued during our time as boat owners. So she simply could not have been called back to the boat by me. Particularly as I was actually on the lock side.

Edited May 31, 2023 by M_JG

[IanD]

2 minutes ago, M_JG said:

 

Well it would be if it was correct. But unfortunately it isn't.

Popcorn time... 🙂

[Jon57]

6 minutes ago, M_JG said:

 

Well it would be if it was correct. But unfortunately it isn't.

Who let the dog out.🤭🤭