(Yet) Another Trent Question

[Tony Dunkley]

Not sure where you are getting your figures from Tony.

 

https://www.tidetimes.org.uk/hull-albert-dock-tide-times-20140925

 

http://tides.mobilegeographics.com/calendar/month/2671.html

 

http://www.visitmyharbour.com/tides/119/uk-tables/hull-albertdock-tide-tables

 

http://www.ukho.gov.uk/easytide/easytide/ShowPrediction.aspx?PortID=0175&PredictionLength=7

 

None of which show you 8.6m.

 

ABP Hull . . . out of their Tide book.

[Naughty Cal]

You have not taken account of the chart datum have you?

 

As noted in the tide book and ABP Humbers website!

 

The tide heights you are quoting are over the cill at Albert Dock!

 

Come on Tony. Poor show for someone supposed to be so fluent in the workings of the Trent!

[Tony Dunkley]

You have not taken account of the chart datum have you?

 

As noted in the tide book and ABP Humbers website!

 

The tide heights you are quoting are over the cill at Albert Dock!

 

Come on Tony. Poor show for someone supposed to be so fluent in the workings of the Trent!

 

Yes that's right . . . I put (Outer Sill - Albert Dock) at the side of the figures on the Post.

For Hull, ABP now publish tide heights as Depth on Outer Sill at all three docks and the same at Immingham and Grimsby. Only at Goole do they still relate depth on the outer sill to Chart Datum, which is 2.4m above the Outer Sill at Ocean Lock and 2.3m at Victoria Lock.

Earlier on you said "By contrast the last big tides were over 9m" . . . so that would be around when there was the biggest predicted tide for the year which was 9.7m over the Outer Sill at Albert Dock on Thursday 11 Sept. Chart Datum is 1.2m above the Outer Sill at Albert Dock so the height of that tide would have been 8.5m above Chart Datum. So, when you mentioned tides over 9m you were, in fact, quoting the depth on Albert Dock Outer Sill and not the tide height above Chart Datum . . . there's nothing wrong with expressing tide height that way for the purpose of comparison, but I think you should try to be a little more consistent when choosing the basis for yet another helping of your so very incisive criticism.

[peterboat]

Well they aint huge are they?

 

7.5m for the morning tide at Hull which isn't a big tide by any stretch. Getting smaller for the evening tide to 7.4m.

 

By contrast the last big tides were over 9m!

Last Year we were let out late a good hour and a half late we arrived at Torksey between 4.5 and 6 hours later that was a party of 5 boats we all turned right and went for it! I have to say it was hard work not having that early push also the wind was bad as well

 

Peter

[Naughty Cal]

Last Year we were let out late a good hour and a half late we arrived at Torksey between 4.5 and 6 hours later that was a party of 5 boats we all turned right and went for it! I have to say it was hard work not having that early push also the wind was bad as well

 

Peter

I have no worries about my pay packet.

 

3.5 hours in a narrowboat is just not going to happen

 

Yes that's right . . . I put (Outer Sill - Albert Dock) at the side of the figures on the Post.

For Hull, ABP now publish tide heights as Depth on Outer Sill at all three docks and the same at Immingham and Grimsby. Only at Goole do they still relate depth on the outer sill to Chart Datum, which is 2.4m above the Outer Sill at Ocean Lock and 2.3m at Victoria Lock.

Earlier on you said "By contrast the last big tides were over 9m" . . . so that would be around when there was the biggest predicted tide for the year which was 9.7m over the Outer Sill at Albert Dock on Thursday 11 Sept. Chart Datum is 1.2m above the Outer Sill at Albert Dock so the height of that tide would have been 8.5m above Chart Datum. So, when you mentioned tides over 9m you were, in fact, quoting the depth on Albert Dock Outer Sill and not the tide height above Chart Datum . . . there's nothing wrong with expressing tide height that way for the purpose of comparison, but I think you should try to be a little more consistent when choosing the basis for yet another helping of your so very incisive criticism.

Erm. No. I was quoting tides from the same chart datumn.

 

So Tony. Which charity isnt going to be getting my wages?

 

We can pretend and go with your phantom 8.4m tide if you wish. They still wont get to Torksey in 3.5 hours. Your 10am deadline was never going to happen. They will have missed the first part of the tide. They will run out of help from the tide well before they arrive at Toksey so sustaining an average speed of 8mph is never going to happen.

 

Even the quickest of narrowboats would struggle to sustain that pace (if able to achieve it at all) without the help from the tide.

Last Year we were let out late a good hour and a half late we arrived at Torksey between 4.5 and 6 hours later that was a party of 5 boats we all turned right and went for it! I have to say it was hard work not having that early push also the wind was bad as well

 

Peter

Tony will no doubt come along now and say that is utter rubbish and cant possibly happen

[nigel carton]

 

 

So Tony. Which charity isnt going to be getting my wages?

 

Nigel Carton beer n curry fund :-(

[Timleech]

Last Year we were let out late a good hour and a half late we arrived at Torksey between 4.5 and 6 hours later that was a party of 5 boats we all turned right and went for it! I have to say it was hard work not having that early push also the wind was bad as well

 

Peter

 

Surely if you left Keadby 'late', you would have an early push, but it would run out of stem before you got to Torksey?

 

First time I went out at Keadby, the tide was flying up as we left. It was 39 years ago, I'm struggling to remember much more detail of the trip. We were going up to Girton to load sand as ballast, then back to Torksey.

 

Tim

[Tony Dunkley]

I have no worries about my pay packet.

 

3.5 hours in a narrowboat is just not going to happen

Erm. No. I was quoting tides from the same chart datumn.

 

So Tony. Which charity isnt going to be getting my wages?

 

We can pretend and go with your phantom 8.4m tide if you wish. They still wont get to Torksey in 3.5 hours. Your 10am deadline was never going to happen. They will have missed the first part of the tide. They will run out of help from the tide well before they arrive at Toksey so sustaining an average speed of 8mph is never going to happen.

 

Even the quickest of narrowboats would struggle to sustain that pace (if able to achieve it at all) without the help from the tide.

Tony will no doubt come along now and say that is utter rubbish and cant possibly happen

 

I'm really starting to get a bit worried about you now . . . you're obviously having a lot of difficulty despite the new moon tonight . . . right now you should be at your best.

[Naughty Cal]

So which charity is it Tony?

 

Its not me Im worried about. Its you.

 

But we will see at 10am in the morning who is right.

[Victor Vectis]

Arrived at Keadby about an hour ago.

 

Chatted to the lockie. He suggested that as its a spring tide tomorrow we take advantage of it and push through to Cromwell. Said it should take us about 7.5 hours.

 

Not wanting to spoil others' sport I'll do a time check as we go past Torksey and let you know how we get on.

 

SAM

[Naughty Cal]

Lockies timings are more like it but i still reckon optimistic!

 

Its 16 miles from Torksey to Cromwell another 28 from Keadby to Torksey total journey of 44 miles. To do it in 7.5 hours you would need to average 5.8mpg all the way even after you have lost the push from the tide, which you will do in the upper reaches.

 

Lockies estimate would put you at Torksey for about 11.30am-midday which is more like it.

[John V]

I suspect there will be a lot of interest in this thread tomorrow morning

[Naughty Cal]

I have got some eyes along the way to check his progress

[John V]

No booby traps please....keep it clean

[Victor Vectis]

Wow. Never thought I would be a runner or a rider.

 

Ladees and genlemen............Place your bets now for the 'Red Wharf' stakes.

 

[John V]

No nerves when you get to "under starters orders"

[Tony Dunkley]

Arrived at Keadby about an hour ago.

 

Chatted to the lockie. He suggested that as its a spring tide tomorrow we take advantage of it and push through to Cromwell. Said it should take us about 7.5 hours.

 

Not wanting to spoil others' sport I'll do a time check as we go past Torksey and let you know how we get on.

 

SAM

The lockeeper is correct in what he has told you about tomorrows tides and there is some merit in the suggestion to push on to Cromwell, but if you don't know the river well enough there is the possibility that you could find yourself in the situation I outlined Post 10. There is very little chance of you coming to any real harm, but I don't think you would enjoy it very much. If you do ground somewhere short of Cromwell and can't get moving again before the water level starts to fall, you could be floating off on the next tide late at night, in the dark, with no moon and in a river that I don't think you're familiar with. The Friday morning tide is predicted to be the same as tomorrows, so if you do stop overnight at Torksey and leave on the very first of the flood on Friday morning you will have a quick easy run up to Cromwell with a rising river level all the way.

 

PS. If you do stop at Torksey, swing as soon as you get there, before you tie up, so there's plenty of water under you in the Cut, and you're doing it while the tide's still rising, but under no circumstances at or close to HW time . . the level drops the first foot or so very quickly and suddenly. If you then put a Post on here, I'll tell you how to work out the time to get underway on Friday morning.

Edited September 24, 2014 by tony dunkley

[Victor Vectis]

The lockeeper is correct in what he has told you about tomorrows tides and there is some merit in the suggestion to push on to Cromwell, but if you don't know the river well enough there is the possibility that you could find yourself in the situation I outlined Post 10. There is very little chance of you coming to any real harm, but I don't think you would enjoy it very much. If you do ground somewhere short of Cromwell and can't get moving again before the water level starts to fall, you could be floating off on the next tide late at night, in the dark, with no moon and in a river that I don't think you're familiar with. The Friday morning tide is predicted to be the same as tomorrows, so if you do stop overnight at Torksey and leave on the very first of the flood on Friday morning you will have a quick easy run up to Cromwell with a rising river level all the way.

 

PS. If you do stop at Torksey, swing as soon as you get there, before you tie up, so there's plenty of water under you in the Cut, and you're doing it while the tide's still rising, but under no circumstances at or close to HW time . . the level drops the first foot or so very quickly and suddenly. If you then put a Post on here, I'll tell you how to work out the time to get underway on Friday morning.

Thanks indeed for that advice. The more I think about it the more I reckon Torksey is our best bet, we're not in too much of a hurry after all.

 

I was wondering how to work out what time to leave Torksey for the run to Cromwell, so yes please.

 

Not sure what t'internet will be like in the cut there though. Might have to keep the punters in suspense for a while!

 

SAM, drinking tea before dawn at Keadby.

 

BTW Why has nobody mentioned the bl00dy awful noise the trains make going over the sliding bridge? (And I like trains!)

[Naughty Cal]

Internet is rubbish in Torksey. They do have WiFi in the Swan though.

 

Ask the lockie for advice on times to leave rather than some random on a forum who spends his time tied up at a lock!

 

Well I suppose the challenge is on. As of 6.45am it's still dark here in Sheffield. Stay safe.

[John V]

 

 

BTW Why has nobody mentioned the bl00dy awful noise the trains make going over the sliding bridge? (And I like trains!)

 

When I stayed there, the rain was coming down so hard that you couldn't hear anything else!!!

[Naughty Cal]

Can't say it's ever bothered us either!

 

We're you moored right at the end of the moorings? We tend to moor a bit further up. Closer to the chip shop

[John V]

I thought it the most miserable place I moored during my whole circuit of Northern waters......no pub (1 closed the other burned down) toilet block in an 'orrible state with a month old notice on the hot water saying "waiting for part", it peed down the whole time I was there as well....Yep! fond memories of Keadby.

 

 

Just thought....I'll take some of that back...just remembered Ferrybridge!

Edited September 25, 2014 by John V

[Naughty Cal]

I thought it the most miserable place I moored during my whole circuit of Northern waters......no pub (1 closed the other burned down) toilet block in an 'orrible state with a month old notice on the hot water saying "waiting for part", it peed down the whole time I was there as well....Yep! fond memories of Keadby.

We have in the past had some great nights in what was the Old South Yorkshire, the pub that burnt down. That and the chip shop were Keadby's only redeeming features. Now the pub has gone its just the chip shop!

 

A walk across the bridge doesnt really reveal much more to get excited about.

[matty40s]

Ask the lockie for advice on times to leave rather than some random on a forum who spends his time tied up at a lock!

 

Someone who pays for a home mooring at a lock according to CRT data lists.

You can be a real arse (most) sometimes.

Edited September 25, 2014 by matty40s

[Naughty Cal]

Someone who pays for a home mooring at a lock according to CRT data lists.

You can be a real arse (most) sometimes.

So would you take advice on tide times from a lockie, who's job it is, or some random bloke who moors at a lock many miles upstream on the non tidal river and doesn't ever go anywhere?

 

I know where I would turn.

 

Oh and looks like my wages are safe with the current rate of progress