2 near misses today

[luctor et emergo]

"I work locks for a living, only about 8000 of them" to me means you work 8000 locks, which presumably must therefore exist. On the other hand, if you meant you work 1 lock 8000 times, that means you really have a massive amount of experience! NOT! Anyway, you just want to be rude for the sake of it and I can't be bothered with your petty insults. Missus giving you trouble is she? (assuming anyone would have you with behaviour like that!). Maybe you should go to beddiebies now so that you can stay awake for your gripping 8001st identical button-pushing lock operation of the year.

Edited to add that I note you are a Thames lock keeper. When we visited the Thames a couple of years ago, we noted that in general the lock keepers were officious, patronising, rude and obnoxious. So I can see how you would fit in well and enjoy your job! When we visited the Weaver recently, we noted how absolutely charming, helpful and pleasant those lock keepers were and we said at the time "EA should send their lockies on secondment to the Weaver to be taught how to behave towards their customers". But I guess that would be cruel to those nice Weaver lockies though!

Hmm.. Pot? Kettle?

 

 

Or do you still not quite get irony?

[The Lockie]

No can't be bothered with you now, if it makes you feel better you win, I can appreciate how frustrating the world must be for you, when only you are right and the rest just don't understand that, found the dummy yet, it's where you spat it out

[Timleech]

Edited to add that I note you are a Thames lock keeper. When we visited the Thames a couple of years ago, we noted that in general the lock keepers were officious, patronising, rude and obnoxious. So I can see how you would fit in well and enjoy your job! When we visited the Weaver recently, we noted how absolutely charming, helpful and pleasant those lock keepers were and we said at the time "EA should send their lockies on secondment to the Weaver to be taught how to behave towards their customers". But I guess that would be cruel to those nice Weaver lockies though!

 

We found Thames lock keepers always polite, and mostly friendly and helpful (last year).

I've known grumpy officious keepers on the Weaver, though not recently.

 

Tim

[mayalld]

"I work locks for a living, only about 8000 of them" to me means you work 8000 locks, which presumably must therefore exist. On the other hand, if you meant you work 1 lock 8000 times, that means you really have a massive amount of experience! NOT! Anyway, you just want to be rude for the sake of it and I can't be bothered with your petty insults.

 

 

 

 

Nick,

 

I think we all get it now. You know everything about operating locks, to the extent that it is utterly unreasonable for anybody to doubt your abilities or to express a desire for you not to "help".

 

Anybody who suggests otherwise is an idiot or a liar and to be insulted and treated with contempt.

 

With a skill set such as yours, you shouldn't be handing out your services free of charge. In fact, I would suggest that you adopt a new policy of only helping boaters who pay you 50 quid per lock.

 

Alternatively, you could remove your head from up your own arse and accept that it is entirely reasonable for people to go about their own business without you imposing yourself on them.

[luctor et emergo]

I'm confussed. Is it good, fashionable, subversive or sad to agree with Dave today.

 

Whichever it is, I agree with him on the above.

[nicknorman]

No can't be bothered with you now...

Good, now get on with pushing some buttons and grumping at boaters. It's what you're good at.

[mayalld]

I'm confussed. Is it good, fashionable, subversive or sad to agree with Dave today.

 

Whichever it is, I agree with him on the above.

 

Subversive.

 

Its all part of my master plan. Slowly and insiduously, I'm going to get people to agree with me about things. They will hate themselves for it, but they won't be able to avoid it.

 

Having assembled this cult following, I will move onto phase II (world domination)

[luctor et emergo]

I like world domination..

[mayalld]

I like world domination..

 

Your Dave Mayall Cult membership card is on the way.

[Chop!]

 

Problem: people open gate paddles too soon

Solution: keep the front doors closed/locked when doing locks (uphill)

With tarpaulins that could be a tad difficult

[DillyDally]

Loving this thread for the entertainment value... Jeez there's some witty folks on this forum!

[DeanS]

it's all about the entertainment, and knowing when to extract oneself from the fray. I had typed a nice response to Nick's assumption that I am not confident in a lock, but took the higher road and deleted it to desist from causing further in house bickering.

 

 

eta....but then thoroughly enjoyed the continued harrassments from all parties in my absence.

Edited July 17, 2013 by DeanS

[mayalld]

it's all about the entertainment, and knowing when to extract oneself from the fray. I had typed a nice response to Nick's assumption that I am not confident in a lock, but took the higher road and deleted it to desist from causing further in house bickering.

 

Post it.

 

If Nick wants to act like a petulant 2 year old just because people DARE to lack an inate faith in his skills, then that is very much his problem.

[Chop!]

We ended up with a bent rudder on our motor, I'd entered the lock and was climbing the bottom of the ladder, when a 'helpful' hire boater opened the paddles full chat, I couldn't get back quick enough to avoid the crash into the rear gates.

I didn't shout at them, I explained why they should ask first, and then open the paddles slowly as there was no rush for us when our butty was being bow-hauled behind us.

I told them I would reverse up to the top gate once they were in, leave it on tickover in reverse, (this system caused people to shout at us at times, as they couldn't see our butty was already in the lock) ready to haul the butty out and give them a hand if they needed it.

We'll drydock Freyja in a few weeks and straighten her rudder out ;o)

[DillyDally]

Well done Dean for keeping your cool both here and on the boat! ;-)

[nicknorman]

 

Nick,

 

I think we all get it now. You know everything about operating locks, to the extent that it is utterly unreasonable for anybody to doubt your abilities or to express a desire for you not to "help".

 

Anybody who suggests otherwise is an idiot or a liar and to be insulted and treated with contempt.

 

With a skill set such as yours, you shouldn't be handing out your services free of charge. In fact, I would suggest that you adopt a new policy of only helping boaters who pay you 50 quid per lock.

 

Yes. And your point is...?

[mayalld]

Yes. And your point is...?

 

... obvious to everybody who isn't busy throwing their toys.

[Tuscan]

Oh dear .....perhaps it is a let's all agree with Dave day

[nicknorman]

 

... obvious to everybody who isn't busy throwing their toys.

 

Sitting at the computer, no airborne toys in sight (I crashed my model helicopter!).

 

Anyway, being slightly sensible for a moment, my original point was that a\ we don't have a problem with others helping us and b\ in general, others don't have a problem with being helped. As I mentioned, I find body language an adequate means to know what to do and don't feel the need to explicitly ask permission. I don't think this has ever got me into trouble, though I have found an increasing number of people who are very particular about what they want you to do with "their" lock and tell you so freely. Its this need to be seen to be "in control" and have what is a very straightforward task, done in a very specific way when in fact almost any way has the same outcome, that seems to be an increasing trend that I think is a shame for all the reasons I previously mentioned.

 

As an aside, when I am captain of my helicopter, flying in tricky conditions over a hostile North Sea in the dark, rain and fog etc, flying with a "baby" co-pilot as the pilot flying, I just let him get on with it and don't micro-manage him, for if I did he would consider me a pain in the arse and it would prevent him from learning. Of course if we are heading down a dangerous path I will suggest an alternative strategy and in extremis of course take control, but that very rarely happens. I apply the same approach to boating, I don't see the need to micro-manage someone else's actions unless a dangerous situation is developing, and as we know there are lots of different ways to do it but they all have the same outcome.

 

I am reminded of Tewkesbury lock, Lockie was adamant that it was "his lock" and I must use ropes going downhill, even though no other boats in the lock. To me it seemed quite unnecessary and slightly dangerous, but he was going to have it done "his way" or not at all. To be fair, that was what he had been told and to deviate was obviously "more than his job was worth".

So we complied, the boat didn't want to budge an inch on the way down. So then we trundle onto the severn and hit the first huge lock, going uphill. The lockie there is not in the least bit interested in us using ropes, suggests we might want to hold on to the wires (if we wished) and the boat came up with a little motion but nothing too scary. So 2 professionals, one into micro-managing the boaters and one who had confidence in the behaviour of his lock. The same outcome, but one was a bit of a control freak and the other wasn't.

Edited July 17, 2013 by nicknorman

[Guest]

 

Sitting at the computer, no airborne toys in sight (I crashed my model helicopter!).

 

Anyway, being slightly sensible for a moment, my original point was that a\ we don't have a problem with others helping us and b\ in general, others don't have a problem with being helped. As I mentioned, I find body language an adequate means to know what to do and don't feel the need to explicitly ask permission. I don't think this has ever got me into trouble, though I have found an increasing number of people who are very particular about what they want you to do with "their" lock and tell you so freely. Its this need to be seen to be "in control" and have what is a very straightforward task, done in a very specific way when in fact almost any way has the same outcome, that seems to be an increasing trend that I think is a shame for all the reasons I previously mentioned.

 

As an aside, when I am captain of my helicopter, flying in tricky conditions over a hostile North Sea in the dark, rain and fog etc, flying with a "baby" co-pilot as the pilot flying, I just let him get on with it and don't micro-manage him, for if I did he would consider me a pain in the arse and it would prevent him from learning. Of course if we are heading down a dangerous path I will suggest an alternative strategy and in extremis of course take control, but that very rarely happens. I apply the same approach to boating, I don't see the need to micro-manage someone else's actions unless a dangerous situation is developing, and as we know there are lots of different ways to do it but they all have the same outcome.

 

Don't we have any female 'baby' co-pilots......?

 

A semi serious question as in is it purely a male domain?

[alan_fincher]

Hehe my mum did name me Angela because she says I looked angelic when I was born.

 

A lot has changed since then

Irrelevant fact no 3473......

 

According to my mum, had I been a girl, I would have been called Angela...........

 

(Thought you would be dying to know that!.....)

[pquinn]

 

Sitting at the computer, no airborne toys in sight (I crashed my model helicopter!).

 

Anyway, being slightly sensible for a moment, my original point was that a\ we don't have a problem with others helping us and b\ in general, others don't have a problem with being helped. As I mentioned, I find body language an adequate means to know what to do and don't feel the need to explicitly ask permission. I don't think this has ever got me into trouble, though I have found an increasing number of people who are very particular about what they want you to do with "their" lock and tell you so freely. Its this need to be seen to be "in control" and have what is a very straightforward task, done in a very specific way when in fact almost any way has the same outcome, that seems to be an increasing trend that I think is a shame for all the reasons I previously mentioned.

 

As an aside, when I am captain of my helicopter, flying in tricky conditions over a hostile North Sea in the dark, rain and fog etc, flying with a "baby" co-pilot as the pilot flying, I just let him get on with it and don't micro-manage him, for if I did he would consider me a pain in the arse and it would prevent him from learning. Of course if we are heading down a dangerous path I will suggest an alternative strategy and in extremis of course take control, but that very rarely happens. I apply the same approach to boating, I don't see the need to micro-manage someone else's actions unless a dangerous situation is developing, and as we know there are lots of different ways to do it but they all have the same outcome.

that view is fair enough but it is my opinion that somebody needs to be "in control" or else there is no control.myself and the wife have a system where i control the locks and she controls the boat and she is nervous about this because sh1t tends to happen,as in a track suit getting wrapped around the prop and a control cable snapping and sticking the boat in reverse.i dont mind somebody helping out but if i somebody was to walk up and assume control it would throw the system on its head.i will only open paddles/racks when she is comfortable and gives me the go ahead.a third party could not be privy to this system.

[nicknorman]

 

Don't we have any female 'baby' co-pilots......?

 

A semi serious question as in is it purely a male domain?

Not many actually! I think at the moment in Aberdeen there are two. One is very good and will get her command soon, one is very nice but really struggles. There are a couple of female captains. Against that there are perhaps 70 male pilots, so they are well outnumbered.

 

I know I will be accused of all sorts of sexism but my experience of female pilots is that they either seem to be very good, or very marginal. Don't know why, there dont seem to be any "middle ground" ones. Then there is the one who is always pregnant! As a pilot, as soon as it is determined that you are pregnant you can't fly any more. You also of course get maternity leave post delivery. So for each baby, and she has had 4 now, she seems to be off for at least a year. In her case, there was perhaps 3 months between returning to work and getting pregnant again. So really not a good deal for the company, who has to pay her all that time, and if we all did that we would have gone bust a long time ago. The company has no policy on recruitment of women (and it would of course be totally illegal) but if I were running it, I would consider female pilots to be "high risk" for these reasons.

 

I'm sure we don't do that, and in fact the proportion of interviewees for new jobs who are male roughly reflects the workforce sex balance. So in short, its a pretty male dominated occupation for the time being. Less so in the airlines, it seems.

Edited July 17, 2013 by nicknorman

[pquinn]

the missus knows a female chopper pilot who is also an instructor.

[nicknorman]

that view is fair enough but it is my opinion that somebody needs to be "in control" or else there is no control.myself and the wife have a system where i control the locks and she controls the boat and she is nervous about this because sh1t tends to happen,as in a track suit getting wrapped around the prop and a control cable snapping and sticking the boat in reverse.i dont mind somebody helping out but if i somebody was to walk up and assume control it would throw the system on its head.i will only open paddles/racks when she is comfortable and gives me the go ahead.a third party could not be privy to this system.

But my point really is that someone only needs to be in control when carrying out an abnormal or difficult activity where decisions have to be made. For example, do you have to decide who is "in control" when having a cup of tea, or do you just get on with it? Somebody needs to be able to take control if things start to go wrong, I agree, but that rarely happens. I think you re-inforce my point that your wife doesn't like anyone interfering because she is nervous about the whole process. I suppose that can't be helped, but it is that nervousness which translates into insecurity, that is at the root of your need for fine control and micro-management of the process. If she could get over her nervousness she would find the whole process much more enjoyable, though I suppose that is easier said than done. If I am helping with your lock (although it sounds as though I wouldnt be allowed to) I would be paying attention to what the boat was doing and if it had lost thrust and was getting into difficulty, you would find that I was closing the paddles before you had time to speak.

Edited July 17, 2013 by nicknorman