Jump to content
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
Grace and Favour

Yorkshire Gravel Barges - Happier days

Featured Posts

3 minutes ago, The Happy Nomad said:

The share function from any app or web page is a pretty well established way of er 'sharing' content.

I wouldn’t know. You appear to though. Don’t assume that just because you know something that everyone else does, it’s an extremely poor habit. 

  • Greenie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, The Happy Nomad said:

Lol

 

I answered the question about what the share button did. Simple.

And then felt the need to edit what I wrote because you assumed that I knew the same thing. Stop trying to look like a smart-arse, you fail every time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, WotEver said:

And then felt the need to edit what I wrote because you assumed that I knew the same thing. Stop trying to look like a smart-arse, you fail every time. 

Oh dear me. I edited nothing.

 

I think the smart arse comment is well and truly at your door.

 

My mistake was to assume you appear to know stuff about electrics and stuff that you had at least a very very basic understanding of how certain things on the internet work. It appears you are not as clever as I thought................in an internet sense.

 

Often technical knowledge can cross genres. In this case it seems not. Fair enough.

 

 

Edited by The Happy Nomad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don’t get excited. The copy function does nothing . E.mail does give a link address but I can’t see a way of posting that on this site. I think the iPad does not have all the functions of a pc or Mac and the apps can be programmed differently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Dav and Pen said:

Don’t get excited. The copy function does nothing . E.mail does give a link address but I can’t see a way of posting that on this site. I think the iPad does not have all the functions of a pc or Mac and the apps can be programmed differently.

I had my doubts about copy working, hence my query. I use a couple of apps where copy doesn’t work as Mr Nomad claims it does.
 

However, if email gives the link address then you should be able to select that, copy it, then paste it into a post on here. :)

 

To copy on the ipad simply select the text and ‘copy’ should pop up as an option. Then click in the ‘reply’ box on here (you might have to click in it twice) and ‘paste’ should be an option. Give it a try :)


Basically the same way you’d copy/paste a web address. 

Edited by WotEver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Dav and Pen said:

Don’t get excited. The copy function does nothing . E.mail does give a link address but I can’t see a way of posting that on this site. I think the iPad does not have all the functions of a pc or Mac and the apps can be programmed differently.

Unfortunately much of the telegraph's content is now paid for.

 

As a non subscriber one only gets a paragraph or so and then an invitation to subscribe.

 

I suspect that even if we could get the share link to work there would be limited benefit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Dav and Pen said:

Don’t get excited. The copy function does nothing . E.mail does give a link address but I can’t see a way of posting that on this site. I think the iPad does not have all the functions of a pc or Mac and the apps can be programmed differently.

Thanks very much for trying ......... and for drawing our attention to the Telegraph item. Too late for me/John Branford to get a copy but if anyone has a hard copy John would very much appreciate it for his archives which stretch back to when he first started carrying on Adamant nearly 60 years ago.

Share this post


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

Thanks very much for trying ......... and for drawing our attention to the Telegraph item. Too late for me/John Branford to get a copy but if anyone has a hard copy John would very much appreciate it for his archives which stretch back to when he first started carrying on Adamant nearly 60 years ago.

I would be pleased to post this to him if you let me have the address. Pm me if you would rather.

So pleased to see some commercial traffic again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Dav and Pen said:

I would be pleased to post this to him if you let me have the address. Pm me if you would rather.

So pleased to see some commercial traffic again.

PM sent. Thanks a lot!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 22/09/2020 at 22:23, TheBiscuits said:

Good bit of coverage really. 

 

Hopefully they can find a good workaround to the silting issue, ideally something which solves the underlying issues and therefore lasts but it is something of a challenge.

 

I know at Brunswick dock in Liverpool (tidal not river but similar challenges) they actually have a water jet system to reduce silting.

 

 

Daniel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 25/09/2020 at 12:06, DHutch said:

Good bit of coverage really. 

 

Hopefully they can find a good workaround to the silting issue, ideally something which solves the underlying issues and therefore lasts but it is something of a challenge.

 

I know at Brunswick dock in Liverpool (tidal not river but similar challenges) they actually have a water jet system to reduce silting.

 

 

Daniel

Indeed yes. The Trust's survey team will be looking at the two problem areas which are about half a mile below Lemonroyd lock to the lock, especially the last 400 yards or so, and Thwaite Mill to Knostrop,  as soon as possible.  We have a Navigation Advisory Group dredging sub-group meeting on 7th October so hopefully will have an update then.

Cheers

 

David L

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 letters in today’s Telegraph including spin from Parry. If anybody with more knowledge of the True situation wants to reply the e.mail address is 

dtletters@telegraph.co.uk. They ask for name and telephone number.

459B08A6-821E-4E20-854F-8C425050FA94.jpeg

  • Greenie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eight Barges a week is a positive step, if it happens.

 

Richard Parry mentions traffic on the Sheffield & South Yorkshire waterway. It would be nice to see what traffic he referred to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Heartland said:

Eight Barges a week is a positive step, if it happens.

 

Richard Parry mentions traffic on the Sheffield & South Yorkshire waterway. It would be nice to see what traffic he referred to.

One oil barge!

 

500 ton barges running light at 350 tons due to lack of dredging just isn't going to cut it on the A&C. John Branford will be loading a 350 ton load at Hull tomorrow which is all that will get through the  6'9" depth below Lemonroyd and sections of the canal Lemonroyd to Knostrop, as we discovered to our cost last week! Because of his dedication and commitment to carrying by water, John will persevere for a while but clearly there is no profit in loads of this size. It's now all down to how quickly CRT can give a reliable minimum 8' 2" draught throughout the navigation as per the advertised depth.

 

They would appear to be currently in contravention of their obligations under the 1968 Transport Act (amended 2102) Section 105 which states:

 

105 Maintenance of F1... waterways.

 

(1) With a view to securing the general availability of the commercial and cruising waterways for public use, it shall be the duty of the Waterways Board [F2and of Canal & River Trust, in relation to the waterways comprised in their respective undertakings], subject to the provisions of this section—

(a) to maintain the commercial waterways in a suitable condition for use by commercial freight-carrying vessels; and ............

 

 

Oh, and just for the record (taken from their website):

 

Canal & River Trust published dimensions Goole to tail of Leeds Lock: 

 

Length: 200’ 2”

Beam: 20’ 0”

Headroom: 11’ 9”

Draught: 8’ 2” – cill of Leeds Lock

 

Castleford Lock is limiting due to the curve of the lock chamber. Heck Road Bridge is now lower than Stubbs Bridge (investigations underway), which was previously limiting. A height of 3.6m (11ft 9") at Heck should be seen as maximum at the crown during normal water. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Heartland said:

Eight Barges a week is a positive step, if it happens.

 

Richard Parry mentions traffic on the Sheffield & South Yorkshire waterway. It would be nice to see what traffic he referred to.

Exol Lubricants have base oil delivered from Hull to the canal side depot in Rotherham, one or two deliveries a week, by Exol Pride which is owned and operated by Mainmast Ltd.   They generally take around 400 tonnes or so which is the maximum that can get to the Exol wharf shown in the attached photo. (Sorry I don't recall who to credit). This is on the un-modernised section of the waterway above Rawmarsh Road bridge. (The canal bed is rock so cannot be dredged). 

exol-barge-960.jpg

  • Greenie 1

Share this post


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

One oil barge!

 

500 ton barges running light at 350 tons due to lack of dredging just isn't going to cut it on the A&C. John Branford will be loading a 350 ton load at Hull tomorrow which is all that will get through the  6'9" depth below Lemonroyd and sections of the canal Lemonroyd to Knostrop, as we discovered to our cost last week! Because of his dedication and commitment to carrying by water, John will persevere for a while but clearly there is no profit in loads of this size. It's now all down to how quickly CRT can give a reliable minimum 8' 2" draught throughout the navigation as per the advertised depth.

 

They would appear to be currently in contravention of their obligations under the 1968 Transport Act (amended 2102) Section 105 which states:

 

105 Maintenance of F1... waterways.

 

(1) With a view to securing the general availability of the commercial and cruising waterways for public use, it shall be the duty of the Waterways Board [F2and of Canal & River Trust, in relation to the waterways comprised in their respective undertakings], subject to the provisions of this section—

(a) to maintain the commercial waterways in a suitable condition for use by commercial freight-carrying vessels; and ............

 

 

Oh, and just for the record (taken from their website):

 

Canal & River Trust published dimensions Goole to tail of Leeds Lock: 

 

Length: 200’ 2”

Beam: 20’ 0”

Headroom: 11’ 9”

Draught: 8’ 2” – cill of Leeds Lock

 

Castleford Lock is limiting due to the curve of the lock chamber. Heck Road Bridge is now lower than Stubbs Bridge (investigations underway), which was previously limiting. A height of 3.6m (11ft 9") at Heck should be seen as maximum at the crown during normal water. 

That is absolutely correct though the Minister can change that obligation, I think by Order in Council.  In practice BW have always tended to maintain the commercial waterways to match demand;  there would clearly be no point in regularly dredging the river below Lemonroyd (or any other waterway) for non-existent traffic.  (Interestingly there is no requirement in the 68 Act to maintain a commercial waterway for leisure traffic and vice versa).  Unfortunately the last time a return of traffic was expected (to Fleet Lane Woodlesford in, I think, 2018) the Trust spent a considerable sum dredging for it, then the traffic didn't materialise.  It's a bit 'chicken and egg' but once there was a clear commitment on the part of the customer to take deliveries at Knostrop then at fairly short notice the Trust mobilized its very experienced contractor who, in good faith, was confident he'd provided us with the depth needed at Lemonroyd , though the limiting depth is below Knostrop lock which is related to flood damage etc.  As the Trust's survey team are busy on the River Soar and to save time another team is being brought in to look at the two sections that need attention.  I may know more after I attend the next national dredging meeting, a week on Wednesday.

Kind regards

 

David L

Edited by fanshaft
  • Greenie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well that's 1100 tons delivered to Knostrop Wharf in three loads. John Branford has had instructions from CRT not to load more than 6' 6" (representing 350 tons) which certainly knocks the gilt off the gingerbread in more ways than six. It also removes any profit from the operation.  Bit of finger pointing going at the moment with CRT maintaining that there was an 'incident' on the first trip up the canal involving a rowing skiff below Knostrop Lock, close to the Leeds Rowing's Stourton Boathouse. As we crept by loaded, a boat had to move out of the channel and the crew hold onto the trees beside the bank. On our return, we had similar experiences on four separate occasions, but these have not been labelled 'incidents'!

 

The cynical might see this as a way of CRT diverting attention away from the dredging issues, while others might question the wisdom of establishing a rowing club with its launching pontoon sticking way out into the deep water channel on the approach to Knostrop Lock: an area that will be required for winding once Stourton Wharf is established just downstream. Whilst I'm all in favour of CRT broadening its appeal to a diverse selection of waterway users, there remains a question in my mind as to whether 500 ton barges and flimsy rowing skiffs are compatible ............ and should they be sharing the same stretch of commercial waterway? Shades of canoes and tunnels methinks!

  • Greenie 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These vessels do not suddenly appear, there is usually ample time to clear their route and take precautions if you are keeping a look out.  But you still see cyclists arguing with articulated lorries, so obviously not everone understands the big will always win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Detling said:

These vessels do not suddenly appear, there is usually ample time to clear their route and take precautions if you are keeping a look out.  But you still see cyclists arguing with articulated lorries, so obviously not everone understands the big will always win.

Tell that to Goliath.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Up-Side-Down said:

Well that's 1100 tons delivered to Knostrop Wharf in three loads. John Branford has had instructions from CRT not to load more than 6' 6" (representing 350 tons) which certainly knocks the gilt off the gingerbread in more ways than six. It also removes any profit from the operation.  Bit of finger pointing going at the moment with CRT maintaining that there was an 'incident' on the first trip up the canal involving a rowing skiff below Knostrop Lock, close to the Leeds Rowing's Stourton Boathouse. As we crept by loaded, a boat had to move out of the channel and the crew hold onto the trees beside the bank. On our return, we had similar experiences on four separate occasions, but these have not been labelled 'incidents'!

 

The cynical might see this as a way of CRT diverting attention away from the dredging issues, while others might question the wisdom of establishing a rowing club with its launching pontoon sticking way out into the deep water channel on the approach to Knostrop Lock: an area that will be required for winding once Stourton Wharf is established just downstream. Whilst I'm all in favour of CRT broadening its appeal to a diverse selection of waterway users, there remains a question in my mind as to whether 500 ton barges and flimsy rowing skiffs are compatible ............ and should they be sharing the same stretch of commercial waterway? Shades of canoes and tunnels methinks!

That is a fair point about the rowing clubs (Leeds University and Row UK) and there was considerable discussion within and outside CRT as to the merits (and otherwise) of establishing  a rowing station at that location.   Row UK are very supportive of freight and Port Leeds, and didn't see an issue once all the parties got used to the situation.   They said that rowing clubs are established all over the UK and Europe on much busier waterways, and of course the tanker passes a rowing club on the South Yorkshire without incident on a regular basis.   But the other club was more cautious and wanted assurances as to how it would work - they were thinking there would be barges going by every few minutes. (if only!).    A protocol was established and agreed in that the week's schedule of barge movements would be given to the clubs so that they can ensure they are safely out of the way each day. In these early days with only one barge a week the clubs are being informed as each trip is planned but on the occasion of the incident the barge was not expected (as it was out of course, to use a railway expression)  and so met the rowers in the narrowest part of the waterway as luck would have it.  A witness on the bank was able to describe what happened and the incident is now closed.

The pontoons below Knostrop Lock can be moved if necessary to allow the largest barges (61 metres) to turn but I have turned Fusedale (55 metres)  there easily without it being necessary.

On dredging I'm told that the survey (by Randalls) has already been completed, from Shan House Bridge to Knostrop depot. The findings will be given to the dredging contractor who tells me he's keen to start as soon as possible. EA permission may be required if there is any contamination - let's hope not!

No loading next week as there are ships in Albert Dock all week.

Best regards David L

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

878525805_FusedaleH.jpg.2cace5ee57a3a9484c5b233f32cfc7fe.jpg

Humber Barges' Fusedale H started on the run last Monday with the aim of meeting the 700 ton per week demand at Leeds.

 

So that's currently two vessels on the run – each part loaded at 350 tons – to accommodate the reduced depth of the Air & Calder Navigation until dredging undertaken Lemonroyd through to Knostrop.

Share this post


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

878525805_FusedaleH.jpg.2cace5ee57a3a9484c5b233f32cfc7fe.jpg

Humber Barges' Fusedale H started on the run last Monday with the aim of meeting the 700 ton per week demand at Leeds.

 

So that's currently two vessels on the run – each part loaded at 350 tons – to accommodate the reduced depth of the Air & Calder Navigation until dredging undertaken Lemonroyd through to Knostrop.

Good, if not perfect, news.

Have they got a private industrial railway there too? The red thing in the background looks like a diesel shunter, though I guess it could be a boat's superstructure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Athy said:

Good, if not perfect, news.

Have they got a private industrial railway there too? The red thing in the background looks like a diesel shunter, though I guess it could be a boat's superstructure.

It's the wheelbox of another barge. That location is just west of Viking Marine as the A&C enters Goole. Tends to be a resting place for old barges. The bow of Lafarge's old barge Battlestone is against the stern of Fusedale. I think the area is known as Dog & Doublet but it would be good to have confirmation (or otherwise).

  • Greenie 1

Share this post


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.