Narrow Boat World Article About Our Incident at Hillmorton on 25th August

[Graham.m]

Amy thing on this forum is in the public domain. If you had to be a member using a username and password to read the contents whether or not it is in the public domain is arguable.

 

Maybe that is something for members to remember.

[cuthound]

I think that's why the EA is withdrawing the availability of fire extinguishers on the Thames Locks as their employees have not been trained in their use

It's probably due to the cost of testing or replacing them, as they are not a mandatory requirement.

 

When I worked for BT I was responsible for several fuel bowsers amongst other things. Those towing them and their vehicles came within the ADR regulations and the vehicles had to carry fire extinguishers. Because of the diverse locations, it was cheaper to replace the extinguishers rather than pay for someone to travel and test them.

[alan_fincher]

I'll ask again, what, for you personally, is a successful outcome to this incident?

 

Paul,

 

I am aware you keep asking the same question.

 

I initially typed up a full response to it, but Cath and I have then both read it through it, to see if our case is helped or hindered by posting it here, (knowing CRT will undoubtedly be following this).

 

We have come to the conclusion that it just restated more or less exactly what we have already told CRT we want to happen, and that as we have somebody already picking up everything we say, and reusing it in a way that seems not to be helping our current situation, I am unhappy to provide them with any more "copy" at this stage.

 

I'm sorry if this frustrates some reading the thread(s), but I guarantee that when we do eventually feel that we have reached the point where we have reached any kind of closure, that we will say what the situation is.

[Graham.m]

Allan_f, do I take it that you would refuse to abide by any confidentiality clause that CRT might attempt to impose.

 

From phone

[alan_fincher]

Allan_f, do I take it that you would refuse to abide by any confidentiality clause that CRT might attempt to impose.

 

From phone

I'd prefer not to speculate about anything until it actually happens. Why do you think they might wish to impose one?

[bassplayer]

 

I did, however, not make any mistake on this occasion.

 

The volunteer lock keeper at the time did not suggest I, or any member of my crew, had make a mistake, and indicated he was happy we had done nothing wrong. If he had thought we were doing anything at all wrong, why on earth would he reach agreement with us that we should try and do exactly the same operation with no modification?

 

Nobody at the time has suggested we made a mistake, nor has any response from CRT in more than two months following the incident has anybody suggested we made any mistake.

 

So, do you as someone who didn't witness this incident have something that suggests that there was any mistake made on our part? No you do not, of course!

 

I really do not know why I am bothering to engage you, because it is clearly getting me nowhere, but actually you are making me feel really rather angry. If I cock up I am usually willing to put my hands up and admit it, but on this occasion neither I nor any member of my crew cocked up in any way at all, and it is unhelpful for you to suggest there is anything we could have done to mitigate what happened.

Yes but did you shout to get the paddles shut? Were you looking at the bow ready to engage reverse gear?

 

It all smells of blaming the lockie for not observing what was going on your end. You're right I wasn't there but someone who has now left the forum, due to the thread you started about this, does know the lockie. Why not engage the lockie about it before starting a court hearing on here? That would be the polite thing to do surely?

[nicknorman]

Yes but did you shout to get the paddles shut? Were you looking at the bow ready to engage reverse gear?

It all smells of blaming the lockie for not observing what was going on your end. You're right I wasn't there but someone who has now left the forum, due to the thread you started about this, does know the lockie. Why not engage the lockie about it before starting a court hearing on here? That would be the polite thing to do surely?

I think you need to read the original thread on the matter, where all your points were covered.

[Paul C]

 

Paul,

 

I am aware you keep asking the same question.

 

I initially typed up a full response to it, but Cath and I have then both read it through it, to see if our case is helped or hindered by posting it here, (knowing CRT will undoubtedly be following this).

 

We have come to the conclusion that it just restated more or less exactly what we have already told CRT we want to happen, and that as we have somebody already picking up everything we say, and reusing it in a way that seems not to be helping our current situation, I am unhappy to provide them with any more "copy" at this stage.

 

I'm sorry if this frustrates some reading the thread(s), but I guarantee that when we do eventually feel that we have reached the point where we have reached any kind of closure, that we will say what the situation is.

 

Ok no worries, I understand you're in a bit of a tricky situation here, what with the cat being half let out the bag by NBW. I'll await the due process and its natural conclusion.

[Guest]

Yes but did you shout to get the paddles shut? Were you looking at the bow ready to engage reverse gear?

 

It all smells of blaming the lockie for not observing what was going on your end. You're right I wasn't there but someone who has now left the forum, due to the thread you started about this, does know the lockie. Why not engage the lockie about it before starting a court hearing on here? That would be the polite thing to do surely?

 

I guess you must be unfamiliar with or are having difficulty using the forum search facility.

 

Allow me.

 

http://www.canalworld.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=78798&p=1637512

[bassplayer]

I think you need to read the original thread on the matter, where all your points were covered.

I did read the original thread and parcipated in it. If I've missed something feel free to point me to it. As I said, I do make mistakes..

[nicknorman]

I don't know why I am replying to this, but I suppose it is just to save Alan the irritation.

Yes but did you shout to get the paddles shut? Cath did. She was the appropriate one to do so since she could see what was going on, being near the bow. Were you looking at the bow ready to engage reverse gear? Alan was at the back of a 70'+ boat so he would be unable to see the bow. The boat had very little spare room so engaging reverse would likely just cill the boat.
It all smells of blaming the lockie for not observing what was going on your end. You're right I wasn't there but someone who has now left the forum, due to the thread you started about this, does know the lockie. Why not engage the lockie about it before starting a court hearing on here? As explained in the thread you seem to have forgotten about, there was an extensive discussion with the lockie after the incident. That would be the polite thing to do surely? That is why it was done.

Edited November 3, 2015 by nicknorman

[MtB]

 

<Quote edited out following Nicks removal of his comment>

 

 

Alan stated a few posts back that the FLAMINGO is 71ft 8in. So only inches of spare space to play with in that lock. Mr Bassplayer seems to have missed this fact.

Edited November 3, 2015 by Mike the Boilerman

[Catrin]

I was at the bottom gate, Alan was steering the boat, and making sure that it was clear of the cill.

 

I was watching the bow, since it is not easy to see it from the back of the boat. I twice told the VLK to drop the paddles because the boat was hung, which he declined to do, because he appeared to think that the boat would 'sort itself out'.

 

He finally wound the paddles down, not dropped, wound, when our son emerged from the boat, and shouted loudly to put the paddles down, while rushing to the top gate to open a paddle.

 

The fact that the VLK did not act immediately on my instructions, is the key point to us.

 

 

Yes but did you shout to get the paddles shut? Were you looking at the bow ready to engage reverse gear?

 

It all smells of blaming the lockie for not observing what was going on your end. You're right I wasn't there but someone who has now left the forum, due to the thread you started about this, does know the lockie. Why not engage the lockie about it before starting a court hearing on here? That would be the polite thing to do surely?

Thank you to those who have pointed bassplayer at the facts. As shown above, I did reply to your question, but perhaps you were only expect Alan to reply?

[alan_fincher]

 

I don't know why I am replying to this, but I suppose it is just to save Alan the irritation.

 

 

Thank you!

 

Throwing a 71' 8" boat into reverse in a rapidly emptying lock that only just accommodates a 71' 8" boat between bottom gates and cill is not usually a recommended action!

 

That would be a mistake, so perhaps "bassplayer" wishes I had done this to support his argument that we must have made some?

 

It's totally frustrating that those that seem unwilling to understand the issue are still very content to suggest what we should have done, even if those suggestions are clearly unsound.

[Paul C]

 

 

Thank you to those who have pointed bassplayer at the facts. As shown above, I did reply to your question, but perhaps you were only expect Alan to reply?

 

Ironically.....much like the VLK did!

[MtB]

 

Ironically.....much like the VLK did!

 

Which I took to be Cath's point in making the comment...

[Tuscan]

Allowing the boat to get hung in the first place was a mistake , but it happens and is rarely a problem if the paddles are dropped.

 

I've seen much shorter boats cill or get a fender caught again if the helm/crew are alert not a problem . The problem surely is having someone on the side with a windless and a CRT uniform not understanding the situation and taking no action.

 

If he had not been there and the situation been the same would the situation have been resolved faster or slower.

[Graham.m]

Yes but did you shout to get the paddles shut? Were you looking at the bow ready to engage reverse gear?

 

It all smells of blaming the lockie for not observing what was going on your end. You're right I wasn't there but someone who has now left the forum, due to the thread you started about this, does know the lockie. Why not engage the lockie about it before starting a court hearing on here? That would be the polite thing to do surely?

 

I am not sure how much boating experience you have but may I suggest that engaging reverse gear and trying to rip the bows of a boat, even shorter that nearly 72 feet off of a hangup on a gate would not have been good practice. The gate could have been damaged, the boat damaged just by pulling her off, the boat could be shunted uncontrollably back at the top gate and damaged it, as part of dropping back into the water the water displaced would set-up a wave which could move the boat about the lock uncontrollably.

 

No best practice and safest was to drop the paddles, refill the lock gently and float the boat off the obstruction. That needed the paddles to be dropped instantly.

[Graham.m]

I'd prefer not to speculate about anything until it actually happens. Why do you think they might wish to impose one?

 

It is not unknown for CRT to try and impose confidentiality when maybe the have to say sorry

[mango]

Unless my memory is playing tricks, there used to be far more protruding objects on lock gates than we see nowadays and I was either warned or learned to avoid catching the boat or fenders on them when going through locks. When on the paddles I keep watch for anything that might cause a problem. The volunteer lock keeper seems to have received a lot of criticism but might the problem have been avoidable? Have there been any other boats caught since 25th August?

[nicknorman]

Unless my memory is playing tricks, there used to be far more protruding objects on lock gates than we see nowadays and I was either warned or learned to avoid catching the boat or fenders on them when going through locks. When on the paddles I keep watch for anything that might cause a problem. The volunteer lock keeper seems to have received a lot of criticism but might the problem have been avoidable? Have there been any other boats caught since 25th August?

 

Can't comment on your first sentence, but do we really have to keep repeating the same thing over and over again? Cath was on one side, she WAS watching for anything that might cause a problem, she DID see the problem and she DID call for the paddles to be dropped in a timely manner. The volockie on the other side did not comply.

 

The volockie is not being criticised for being a bad person, nor for deliberately endangering the boat. In fact I'm not sure he is being personally criticised at all. What is being criticised is a system that authorises people lacking experience to operate locks without drumming into them that if anyone calls for the paddles to be dropped, you comply first and ask questions afterwards.

[Allan(nb Albert)]

Unless my memory is playing tricks, there used to be far more protruding objects on lock gates than we see nowadays and I was either warned or learned to avoid catching the boat or fenders on them when going through locks. When on the paddles I keep watch for anything that might cause a problem. The volunteer lock keeper seems to have received a lot of criticism but might the problem have been avoidable? Have there been any other boats caught since 25th August?

Regarding your first sentence, I don't think it is your memory. The situation improved dramatically after BW introduced Customer Service Standards quite a few years ago, particularly with regard to fendering between tops of gates and balance beams (a common cause of hang-ups) -

 

CSS 2.d.3 - Lock chambers and gates are free of protrusions / indentations that could snag boats. Gates to be fendered.

 

I believe that this part of the CSS is still in force as part of CaRT's minimum safety standards.

 

This was one of the two areas in which I felt that Alan should have made a complaint.

 

[MtB]

 

Ironically.....much like the VLK did!

 

 

As an aside, may I suggest we use the abreviation "VLA" instead of "VLK" in future?

 

"Volunteer Lock Assistant" is a more suitable title than "Volunteer Lock Keeper" for the volunteers who assist boaters at locks.

[bassplayer]

Alan stated a few posts back that the FLAMINGO is 71ft 8in. So only inches of spare space to play with in that lock. Mr Bassplayer seems to have missed this fact.

I did note that, and even more reason to keep ones eyes peeled I would have thought.

 

Picking up on NickNormans points....Cath making the call is not the same as the skipper (who the lockie is supposed to take commands from according to CRT's guidelines). Point taken about trying to reverse once the boat starts to hang, it's probably too late for that.

 

To clarify my view about discussing it with with the lockie first, I'm just suggesting it would have been better to engage with him before dragging him through a public forum. Ironically this thread is about Alan's family being mentioned on a public blog without his approval. I wonder if Alan asked the lockie if it was Ok to reference him on this forum before starting the initial thread. I know it!s not quite name and shame but I doubt any of us would be happy about it.

[MtB]

(In my opinion, that is.)