NB on weir at Ditchford, R. Nene

[Mike Tee]

one doesn't - one does! 50/50. Same as those ashore from what I can make out!

The one on the back of the boat probably has his lifejacket on under his waterproof, so thats all right then.

[Theo]

The one on the back of the boat probably has his lifejacket on under his waterproof, so thats all right then.

 

No it's not all right!

 

Or was that a humorous statement and I missed the point.

 

N

[John Holden]

No it's not all right!

 

Or was that a humorous statement and I missed the point.

 

N

 

Easier to discard waterproof if it's over life jacket than if it is under.

[MtB]

Easier to discard waterproof if it's over life jacket than if it is under.

 

Having seen a life-jacket inflate on someone wearing it in a pub, I'd be mighty impressed if you could physically succeed in removing a waterproof tightly stretched over the top of an inflated automatic life-jacket.

 

In fact I'd say to wear a waterproof (or ANY garment) over the top of an automatic inflatable life-jacket is extremely dangerous.

 

MtB

[John Holden]

Having seen a life-jacket inflate on someone wearing it in a pub, I'd be mighty impressed if you could physically succeed in removing a waterproof tightly stretched over the top of an inflated automatic life-jacket.

 

In fact I'd say to wear a waterproof (or ANY garment) over the top of an automatic inflatable life-jacket is extremely dangerous.

 

MtB

 

Well it was a thought! (what about a string vest?)

[howardang]

The one on the back of the boat probably has his lifejacket on under his waterproof, so thats all right then.

Only if he has a death wish!

 

Never, ever wear anything - even a radio - over an inflatable life jacket.

 

Howard

[ditchcrawler]

Well it was a thought! (what about a string vest?)

When I worked Offshore we used Inflatable Lifejackets, somewhat of a higher standard than the ones in use on the inland waterways. One problem we had was that scaffolders would wear holes in them, so we had special waistcoats made to wear over them that would not impede them inflating and it was the only thing ever worn onto of them.

[ditch paddler]

RCR would like to respond to some of the comments on the forum in regards to the rescue.

Everyone is entitled to their opinions, but sometimes these are not based on fact or knowledge about the issues involved. For those who prefer to know the true fact behind the rescue you could visit www.narrowboatworld.com . However as there has been much speculation and criticism based on individuals opinions RCR would like to respond directly to clarify the facts.

 

 

 

In Reply to your point 7 i was there and the 2 other boats that where moored on the pound, 1 off which was not effected at all and the other just sat and watched and at no time did he try to call a halt to your efforts.

 

In Reply to point 9 again i was there and failed to see any life jacket being removed or put on so find this statement very confusing.

 

 

 

1) Pictures of the boat which were posted on face book were sent to us by the owner a short while after the accident, the rescue team were not on site until later that evening.

2) A rescue attempt was not made on the first night due to health and safety and restrictions placed on us by EA and the regulator

3) The boat was secured using 2.5" rope rated at over 100+ tons to prevent it moving, and has proved that it was more than adequate for this job.

4) The salvage was discussed in-depth with a number of parties include crane lifting and divers, before the best solution was decided upon

5) Although there was speculation about damage to the hull, luckily there was no damage and as suspected this turned out to be simply the observation of someone who did not recognise the standard construction of a narrow boat below the waterline.

6) The 1st rescue attempt on Sunday had 2 * 3"pumps, and was more than sufficient to clear the water internal to the boat. The key to the success was to get water levels as low as possible whilst we were pumping out the vessel. This was also to help us to identify if water was coming in to the boat from a suspected hull breach.

7) The main reason that we were not successful was due to the boaters moored in the vicinity insisting that the rescue stop and the water levels increase as they were concerned about their own vessels, coupled with un-forecast rain causing the river levels to rise faster than the water could be released.

8) The boom was not removed from the back of the boat until enough water had been removed from the vessel as it provided an additional safety tether whilst the water was begin emptied and the flow around the boat was at its strongest.

9) All staff at the rescue wore life jackets and dry suits whilst working on the outside of the boat, however life jackets were removed whilst working inside the vessel, the inside of a submerged boat is full of floating debris, loose furniture and electrical items and submerged obstacles which have to be cleared, to be able to pump water successfully. Life jackets can pose a serious risk if these inflate prematurely whilst 'fishing' around in the water.

http://www.facebook....&type=1

10) The rope that was attached to the roof of the boat, had been under huge strain and saturated with water as it had held the boat in position for a week, (as seen on the photo)it is over 75ft long and 2.5 inches diameter and therefore is extremely heavy, hence why the engineer could not 'throw a line'. It is also the reason that it was not untied and attached to the bow before the boat was pulled in to position. It took 4 men to lift the coil back in to the vans when the rescue was complete.

11) The 'list' on the vessel was not due to water, but most of the furnishings and fixings which were saturated were on one side of the vessel, the vessel was not in any danger or capsizing. Anyone who has been involved in salvage operations will know that a narrow boat without a substantial amount of water inside is very difficult to capsize.

12) RCR undertakes rescue operations around the country and are often the first on site, and where a boat is still accessible have a 100% success rate and have saved many vessels from complete submersion.

 

If anyone has any questions on any aspect of our work, please feel free to email us directly, as long as we are not inundated we will endeavor to provide you with as much background and information as possible on any element of our service…. Which has and does include rescue and salvage operations.

Edited November 11, 2012 by ditch paddler
To make DP's comment clearly identifiable

[boathunter]

At risk of being shot down in flames, if you were such experts you wouldn't have dithered for days, letting the boat become a complete wreck before doing the obvious thing and shutting the gates to take the water pressure off, pumping it out (which maybe wouldn't have even been needed if you'd got on with it) and pulling it clear with a rope. It's not rocket science. We "amateurs" could see that just looking at pictures and we weren't wrong were we? - that's exactly what you did eventually...

[John Holden]

At risk of being shot down in flames, if you were such experts you wouldn't have dithered for days, letting the boat become a complete wreck before doing the obvious thing and shutting the gates to take the water pressure off, pumping it out (which maybe wouldn't have even been needed if you'd got on with it) and pulling it clear with a rope. It's not rocket science. We "amateurs" could see that just looking at pictures and we weren't wrong were we? - that's exactly what you did eventually...

 

Consider yourself shot down in flames.

The rescue attempt affected other boats and other people which caused delays. Not to mention the acres of countryside that had to be protected from flooding.

[Mike Tee]

Sorry, I promise never to be ironic or sarcastic again

Sorry, I promise never to be ironic or sarcastic again

Sorry, I promise never to be ironic or sarcastic again

Sorry, I promise never to be ironic or sarcastic again

so as not to waste space, I promise to write this out a further 96 times before bedtime.

[John Holden]

Sorry, I promise never to be ironic or sarcastic again

Sorry, I promise never to be ironic or sarcastic again

Sorry, I promise never to be ironic or sarcastic again

Sorry, I promise never to be ironic or sarcastic again

so as not to waste space, I promise to write this out a further 96 times before bedtime.

 

You were just copying and pasting

[Mike Tee]

busted

[Taslim]

matty40s.

 

Would you mind if I used your quiz at tomorrows 'team' meeting? I think it might make some smile while some will squirm. Tee-Hee!

 

taslim.

Edited November 11, 2012 by TASLIM

[boathunter]

Consider yourself shot down in flames.

The rescue attempt affected other boats and other people which caused delays. Not to mention the acres of countryside that had to be protected from flooding.

Not according to Ditch paddler, who was there (ref other boats)... and as the boat was damming the river to quite a large extent, it seems to me that shutting the gates for 30 mins to even out the levels and remove the boat would have helped aleviate possible flooding rather than cause it. I'm just discussing, it's a discussion forum after all.

[John Holden]

Not according to Ditch paddler, who was there (ref other boats)... and as the boat was damming the river to quite a large extent, it seems to me that shutting the gates for 30 mins to even out the levels and remove the boat would have helped aleviate possible flooding rather than cause it. I'm just discussing, it's a discussion forum after all.

 

I was going by Oracles post, he being there and involved.

And yes, I'm discussing as well.

[gazza]

At risk of being shot down in flames, if you were such experts you wouldn't have dithered for days, letting the boat become a complete wreck before doing the obvious thing and shutting the gates to take the water pressure off, pumping it out (which maybe wouldn't have even been needed if you'd got on with it) and pulling it clear with a rope. It's not rocket science. We "amateurs" could see that just looking at pictures and we weren't wrong were we? - that's exactly what you did eventually...

 

The sluices are controlled by the EA, I would be surprised if the EA would alter their flood control procedures to save one boat that shouldn't have been navigating the river at that time. At ditchford There is a busy haulage yard adjacent to the river on the site of a former chicken carcass processing plant, I doubt they would have been happy at the risk of flooding their yard.

 

Mobilising the ea and a rescue operation quickly enough to prevent the boat sinking would be a big ask.

[David Mack]

RCR would like to respond to some of the comments on the forum in regards to the rescue.

 

9) All staff at the rescue wore life jackets and dry suits whilst working on the outside of the boat, however life jackets were removed whilst working inside the vessel , the inside of a submerged boat is full of floating debris, loose furniture and electrical items and submerged obstacles which have to be cleared, to be able to pump water successfully. Life jackets can pose a serious risk if these inflate prematurely whilst ‘fishing’ around in the water.

 

Why was anyone working inside the vessel? Pumps and hoses could easily be dropped in through windows and the stern hatch. If anything had gone wrong while there was someone inside the cabin you could easily have been looking at a fatality.

 

And as others have said life jackets should ALWAYS be worn over other clothing.

 

10) The rope that was attached to the roof of the boat, had been under huge strain and saturated with water as it had held the boat in position for a week, (as seen on the photo)it is over 75ft long and 2.5 inches diameter and therefore is extremely heavy, hence why the engineer could not ‘throw a line’. It is also the reason that it was not untied and attached to the bow before the boat was pulled in to position. It took 4 men to lift the coil back in to the vans when the rescue was complete.

 

That rope may have done its job holding the boat until the rescue could be carried out, but why were additional ropes of more manageable size not used, tied to the bow and stern dollies, to pull the boat off once refloated? Much easier and safer to handle, and by pulling from gunwale level you wouldn't have increased the risk of the boat turning over.

 

11) The ‘list’ on the vessel was not due to water, but most of the furnishings and fixings which were saturated were on one side of the vessel, the vessel was not in any danger or capsizing. Anyone who has been involved in salvage operations will know that a narrow boat without a substantial amount of water inside is very difficult to capsize.

 

Mattresses and bedding will have absorbed water and may have moved within the boat, but surely most of the furnishings are fixed, and the weight of the loose contents even if over to one side would not account for this much list:

 

So I think there probably was quite a lot of free water still inside the hull, and whilst a dry (or nearly dry) narrowboat is very stable, any boat with a lot of free water most certainly is not. And if it was so stable, why are three blokes hanging off the side at this point?

 

Finally, although not entirely clear from the video, there appear to be engine vents on either side just below the back edge of the cabin, one of which is dipping below the water line as the boat is pulled across:

 

Some basic H&S stuff seems to have been overlooked here. Do RCR prepare Method Statements and Risk Assessments before starting jobs like this? Woudl they be happy for their insurers to see this video?

 

Nearly as bad as this lot!

[the grinch]

ditch paddler's version or Oracle's ?? sorry but my money is most definately on DP's version of events!!

[gazza]

Do bear in mind no attempt was made until the Sunday to try to salvage the boat, and despite Oracles post, heavy rain was forecast for the Saturday night/Sunday day.

[Dave-Shrop]

Mattresses and bedding will have absorbed water and may have moved within the boat, but surely most of the furnishings are fixed, and the weight of the loose contents even if over to one side would not account for this much list

 

They do not seem to understand the ballast has moved, with the boat tipped at such an angle held by the boom.

[PaddlingSnapper]

In Reply to your point 7 i was there and the 2 other boats that where moored on the pound, 1 off which was not effected at all and the other just sat and watched and at no time did he try to call a halt to your efforts.

 

I was there for the second recovery but not the first but spoke to the boater who was instrumental in calling a halt to the first one. The phrase "So you're going to sunk a boat to save a boat?" shouted by said boater - who was most definitely effected (mooring lines as taught as guitar strings and a developing list) - should ring some bells. He was moored further upstream for the second attempt with the EA bods keeping an eye on him from time to time to make sure he was OK.

 

In Reply to point 9 again i was there and failed to see any life jacket being removed or put on so find this statement very confusing.

 

I certainly saw some life jackets coming off at one point on Friday.

 

As regards delay between recovery 1 and recovery 2 anyone who's seen any of the Nene downstream of that point knows what the flooding has been doing (the debris spread around Titchmarsh Marina was impressive yesterday) so adding to any of that when it was at its height would have been pretty silly. No wonder EA waited until Friday to start managing the level at Ditchford to aid the recovery.

[John Holden]

They do not seem to understand the ballast has moved, with the boat tipped at such an angle held by the boom.

 

Uphill?

[RLWP]

Uphill?

 

Anti-ballast

 

Richard

[ditch paddler]

I was there for the second recovery but not the first but spoke to the boater who was instrumental in calling a halt to the first one. The phrase "So you're going to sunk a boat to save a boat?" shouted by said boater - who was most definitely effected (mooring lines as taught as guitar strings and a developing list) - should ring some bells. He was moored further upstream for the second attempt with the EA bods keeping an eye on him from time to time to make sure he was OK.

 

 

 

I certainly saw some life jackets coming off at one point on Friday.

 

As regards delay between recovery 1 and recovery 2 anyone who's seen any of the Nene downstream of that point knows what the flooding has been doing (the debris spread around Titchmarsh Marina was impressive yesterday) so adding to any of that when it was at its height would have been pretty silly. No wonder EA waited until Friday to start managing the level at Ditchford to aid the recovery.

[/quote

 

Not sure what attempt you are relating to but i was there sunday 4th November early afternoon and no boater put a stop to the rescue, the rescue attempt came to an end when the sluice gates where closed by the EA as instructed by the RCR Chief Engineer at which point the boat was supposed to 'pop up" as described by the Chief Engineer. But all that happened was the boat was submerged by the rising river level and remained wedge against the wall and resting on the bottom.

 

In other words the botched rescue attempt failed.

Edited November 12, 2012 by ditch paddler