Jump to content

(Yet) Another Trent Question

Victor Vectis

By Victor Vectis
in General Boating

 Share

Featured Posts

Naughty Cal Veteran II

Naughty Cal

Posted
Posted

OK, while you Trent 'experts' are gathered and the argument is subsiding, here's something else to ponder:-

 

We went up from Keadby to Cromwell a few weeks ago,leaving at the time given by the Keadby keeper, on what was I believe a moderately big tide.

We were in slack water for about the first hour, before the tide started to push us along. Total time between locks was just six hours.

Would we possibly have got there more quickly by leaving later, so that there was more tide with us where it has greatest effect?

The departure time was I assume based on an average narrow boat, one did leave in the same lock for the same destination, we are a little bit quicker than them but by no means in the Naughty Cal league.

 

It's not important, just something I had wondered about.

 

Tim

We leave at high water but that would be no good for you ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Timleech Veteran II

Timleech

Posted
Posted

We leave at high water but that would be no good for you wink.png

 

It was purely an academic/hypothetical question, it was 39 years since the last time I went up the tidal Trent and could easily be another 39 years before the next.....

 

...oh, hang on, there's a snag there...

 

Tim

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tony Dunkley Influencer

Tony Dunkley

Posted
Posted

OK, while you Trent 'experts' are gathered and the argument is subsiding, here's something else to ponder:-

 

We went up from Keadby to Cromwell a few weeks ago,leaving at the time given by the Keadby keeper, on what was I believe a moderately big tide.

We were in slack water for about the first hour, before the tide started to push us along. Total time between locks was just six hours.

Would we possibly have got there more quickly by leaving later, so that there was more tide with us where it has greatest effect?

The departure time was I assume based on an average narrow boat, one did leave in the same lock for the same destination, we are a little bit quicker than them but by no means in the Naughty Cal league.

 

It's not important, just something I had wondered about.

 

Tim

 

Can you remember the date, and the time you left Keadby?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tony Dunkley Influencer

Tony Dunkley

Posted
Posted (edited)

OK, while you Trent 'experts' are gathered and the argument is subsiding, here's something else to ponder:-

 

We went up from Keadby to Cromwell a few weeks ago,leaving at the time given by the Keadby keeper, on what was I believe a moderately big tide.

We were in slack water for about the first hour, before the tide started to push us along. Total time between locks was just six hours.

Would we possibly have got there more quickly by leaving later, so that there was more tide with us where it has greatest effect?

The departure time was I assume based on an average narrow boat, one did leave in the same lock for the same destination, we are a little bit quicker than them but by no means in the Naughty Cal league.

 

It's not important, just something I had wondered about.

 

Tim

It was certainly predicted to be a fairly big tide . . . 8.8m ( Albert Dock Outer Sill) . . . 0.2m more than yesterday morning, and you left Keadby about half an hour after flood. In those circumstances you would usually expect it to be running up well and giving a good push all the way from Keadby. Poor tides sometimes occur for various reasons, such as effects of strong winds or high pressure, and sometimes tides can be a lot later than predicted. Given that you started to to get a push after an hour and ended up at Cromwell in 6 hours, that would be the likely result of a tide that was very late and didn't make predicted height.

If that was the case on that particular day, it would have been a bit quicker journey in terms of running time if you had left Keadby later but I wouldn't think it would have made much difference to arrival time at Cromwell. I think the only real gain from leaving later would have been a small saving in fuel.

Edited by tony dunkley
Link to comment
Share on other sites
John V Veteran

John V

Posted
Posted

Tony

 

Do you get very large variations from prediction on the Trent?

On the Thames estuary here we quite often get 2,3 or sometimes even 4 points above or below prediction, as you say due to wind or pressure or sometimes because there is an "R" in the month

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Timleech Veteran II

Timleech

Posted
Posted

It was certainly predicted to be a fairly big tide . . . 8.8m ( Albert Dock Outer Sill) . . . 0.2m more than yesterday morning, and you left Keadby about half an hour after flood. In those circumstances you would usually expect it to be running up well and giving a good push all the way from Keadby. Poor tides sometimes occur for various reasons, such as effects of strong winds or high pressure, and sometimes tides can be a lot later than predicted. Given that you started to to get a push after an hour and ended up at Cromwell in 6 hours, that would be the likely result of a tide that was very late and didn't make predicted height.

If that was the case on that particular day, it would have been a bit quicker journey in terms of running time if you had left Keadby later but I wouldn't think it would have made much difference to arrival time at Cromwell. I think the only real gain from leaving later would have been a small saving in fuel.

 

OK, thanks for that. On reflection, I think we probably left the lock at about 09:15, it was about 09:00 into the lock. I didn't time the point where the tide 'caught' us, and it was very gradual to begin with, but I estimated it was about an hour before any real effect.

 

As I said before, it's of no real consequence, just something that gave me pause for thought.

 

Tim

Link to comment
Share on other sites
phill Collaborator

phill

Posted
Posted

Calling the arrival time over that distance for a boat and crew he's never seen or met is either a seriously jammy guess or some seriously detailed knowledge of that stretch of river. Either way, fair play Tony, impressive stuff.

Indeed so, if I'd been Mr Vectis, I would have been well pleased. I'm not sure ( but might be wrong) but I think he's still to thank Tony for the accurate answer to his question though one can hardly blame him for being bemused by the crap dumped on this thread by Rachel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Naughty Cal Veteran II

Naughty Cal

Posted
Posted

Tony

 

Do you get very large variations from prediction on the Trent?

On the Thames estuary here we quite often get 2,3 or sometimes even 4 points above or below prediction, as you say due to wind or pressure or sometimes because there is an "R" in the month

Yes you do.

Calling the arrival time over that distance for a boat and crew he's never seen or met is either a seriously jammy guess or some seriously detailed knowledge of that stretch of river. Either way, fair play Tony, impressive stuff.

Its 28 miles. Hardly to the end of the earth and back rolleyes.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Naughty Cal Veteran II

Naughty Cal

Posted
Posted

If I had prefaced my request with "Rachael" or "Naughty Cal" it would have been because I wished for YOUR opinions

 

However I prefaced my request with the word "Tony" as it was his knowledge I was interested in.

Im not so sure discussion forums work like that Jon.

 

(another one missed)

He made a fool of you, or more accurately you shot your mouth off and made a fool of yourself. You'd be doing yourself and everyone else a favour if you wound your neck in.

If he had made a fool of me I would be £2k plus out of pocket.

 

As it happens Im not.

 

No fool at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tony Dunkley Influencer

Tony Dunkley

Posted
Posted

Tony

 

Do you get very large variations from prediction on the Trent?

On the Thames estuary here we quite often get 2,3 or sometimes even 4 points above or below prediction, as you say due to wind or pressure or sometimes because there is an "R" in the month

Yes, same sort of variations John, and the amount of fresh in the river also has an effect on both height and timings.To some extent it is possible to anticipate the variations by taking into account wind strength and direction, and pressure on the day and relating it back to the effects it has had on predictions for the previous few days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
John V Veteran

John V

Posted
Posted

Yes, same sort of variations John, and the amount of fresh in the river also has an effect on both height and timings.To some extent it is possible to anticipate the variations by taking into account wind strength and direction, and pressure on the day and relating it back to the effects it has had on predictions for the previous few days.

 

We have been trying to relate it back to weather conditions or the like for years without much success, sometimes you can, but other times there seems to be no rhyme or reason.

A couple of guys down here reckon that if you get a particularly low tide during the day that you get a correspondingly high one that night (never found that convincing)

I wonder if the reason you can co-relate things is due to the way the Trent / Humber estuary is shaped where the Thames is wider and we get more effects from the sea.(the amount of fresh in the river here at the estuary makes very little difference)

Link to comment
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
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • 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.