Drinking and boating

[Dave Payne]

I enjoy a couple of ales whilst cruising, but usually at the end of the day when I am close to mooring up, never if I have locks to get through though.

 

If I do fancy a third or fourth then the Mrs takes over and I kick back.

 

I tripped at a lock once whilst rushing and although I didn't get near to going in, it did make me think, plus all the photos of boats sunk or stuck on the cill have made me realise that for the sake of a few beers I wouldn't want to risk losing my home.

[Geo]

I would challenge that statement too. Crossing the road drunk is MUCH more dangerous.

 

Please give an example of a badly steered narrow boat causing injury to innocent observers.

There are dangers associated with canal boating, but the melodramatic focus and language here does nothing to highlight or mitigate them. Why do people feel the need to be so melodramatic?

 

My fellow travellers all donned life jackets for the tidal stretch of the Thames - then took them off at Teddington. I did point out that the non-tidal water was just as deep and wet...

 

Yes why on a river or tidal stretch and not other waterways. Also how often do we get in the sweep of the tiller and if the rudder got caught could sweep us overboard. Suspect the reason is because we know it won't happen to us. If it won't happen to us there would be no accidents, drownings etc. So maybe wearing a life jacket should become the norm not the exception.

 

Interesting thought all the professionals that I know that work around water always wear a life jacket, and have done since before HSE came into effect.

 

ed spolling

Edited September 6, 2016 by Geo

[pquinn]

 

That's just poor planning. If he wanted to hang onto the can, he could have let the tiller go once the boat had entered the lock, and then used that hand to put the throttle in reverse.

Dont know about planning but it certainly shows a high level of commitment.

[Captain Pegg]

Yes why on a river or tidal stretch and not other waterways. Also how often do we get in the sweep of the tiller and if the rudder got caught could sweep us overboard. Suspect the reason is because we know it won't happen to us. If it won't happen to us there would be no accidents, drownings etc. So maybe wearing a life jacket should become the norm not the exception.

 

Interesting thought all the professionals that I know that work around water always were a life jacket, and have done since before HSE came into effect.

I am sure that if we had canal carrying companies today their steerers would be required to wear life jackets and alcohol would be prohibited on duty; and yes good employers deploy safer working practices before enforcement agencies make them.

 

The fact is that for any single canal boat trip - or even a lifetime of trips - the risk of a significant safety incident is very low. The consequences are also more stacked toward damage to property rather than damage to people. That's why people judge it's OK to have a small drink or to not wear a life jacket.

 

For a private company the odds and the potential consequences are different. They have to look at it from the perspective of the likelihood of an incident happening to someone at sometime which of course is a different scale of risk.

 

If I was asked by an innocent newcomer for a black and white answer to 'should I wear a life jacket?' and 'am I OK to have a drink while cruising?' the answers would be 'yes' and 'no' respectively but who in truth adheres to both of those all the time? Possibly a few but very much the minority. Because thankfully the real world is full of shades of grey.

 

JP

[cuthound]

I think some perspective if needed regarding alcohol and reaction times, and the likely outcome of a collision at 60 mph vs a collision at 3 mph.

 

Car doing 60 mph (near but not at the maximum speed limit) travels 88 feet per second, so with a typical 0.3 second reaction time will have travelled just over 26 feet.

 

Boat travelling at 3 mph (near but not at the maximum speed limit) travels just over 4 feet.

 

So if we assume that drinking to the legal BAL doubles reaction times (don't know if this is true but I haven't found anything on Google that states anything other than "alcohol imparts reaction time", nothing stating how much alcohol is needed to double reaction times).

 

So is taking corrective action some 8-9 feet later really going to make much difference.

 

If we compare the kinetic energy of a 2000kg car travelling at 60 mph with a 15000 kg boat travelling at 3 mph we find the car carries over 53 times the kinetic energy.

 

I think that providing people drink sensibly whilst boating, a pint or two perhaps, then the increased risk is barely perceptible.

 

Working locks, however is a different matter as the likey outcome of a fall could result in death.

 

Edited to remove a letter "c" pretending to be a space.

Edited September 6, 2016 by cuthound

[DHutch]

Car doing 60 mph (near but not at the maximum speed limit) travels 88 feet per second, so with a typical 0.3 second reaction time will have travelled just over 26 feet. Boat travelling at 3 mph (near but not at the maximum speed limit) travels just over 4 feet.

 

If we compare the kinetic energy of a 2000kg car travelling at 60 mph with a 15000 kg boat travelling at 3 mph we find the car carries over 53 times the kinetic energy.

 

 

Fits with my thoughts in the main, in that the risk of drinking while in charge of a narrowboat very much exists if you are drunk, a second pint of canal side ale in the afternoon is unlikely to make a serious collision more likely, certainly not to the experienced helm.

 

Similarly, while if your staggering all over the place, have a thick head, etc working a lot is not going to be safe, being say twice the drink drive limit for the UK roads is not likely to be an issue.

 

Other risks include the ability to sort out an issue if it does develop. Are you able to get yourself away from harm even if its going wrong, and is there at least one person on board who could deal with an incident such as tackling a small fire, engine failure, or co-coordinating the emergency services.

 

On our boat we also have the added responsibility of who ever is in charge of the steam plant to remain in a state where they are able to do so safely, again not only in normal practice, but if it is going wrong.

 

 

At which point, I am careful that if I am in charge of a boat I am in a state I fell happy to be able to do it, that if I am in charge of a boat none of the others on board are at a state where they are a liability to themselves or others due to drink, and that if I am on a boat someone else in in charge of that I am not a liability to themselves or others due to drink.

 

 

As far as I am aware there is no legal directive over recreational boats on inland waterways, certainly not for boats under 20m (65.6ft), and I expect so long as there is not reason to change that it will remain unchanged. That said, I expect if you where at worse case to cause death by your actions while under the influence your condition would be recorded and taken into account.

 

 

Daniel

[magnetman]

 

Fits with my thoughts in the main, in that the risk of drinking while in charge of a narrowboat very much exists if you are drunk, a second pint of canal side ale in the afternoon is unlikely to make a serious collision more likely, certainly not to the experienced helm.

 

Similarly, while if your staggering all over the place, have a thick head, etc working a lot is not going to be safe, being say twice the drink drive limit for the UK roads is not likely to be an issue.

 

Other risks include the ability to sort out an issue if it does develop. Are you able to get yourself away from harm even if its going wrong, and is there at least one person on board who could deal with an incident such as tackling a small fire, engine failure, or co-coordinating the emergency services.

 

On our boat we also have the added responsibility of who ever is in charge of the steam plant to remain in a state where they are able to do so safely, again not only in normal practice, but if it is going wrong.

 

 

At which point, I am careful that if I am in charge of a boat I am in a state I fell happy to be able to do it, that if I am in charge of a boat none of the others on board are at a state where they are a liability to themselves or others due to drink, and that if I am on a boat someone else in in charge of that I am not a liability to themselves or others due to drink.

 

 

As far as I am aware there is no legal directive over recreational boats on inland waterways, certainly not for boats under 20m (65.6ft), and I expect so long as there is not reason to change that it will remain unchanged. That said, I expect if you where at worse case to cause death by your actions while under the influence your condition would be recorded and taken into account.

 

 

Daniel

Must say I thought recreational boat skippers were subject to the same law as road drivers except that it is never (or rarely) enforced. Perhaps I am confusing it with commercial skippers.

Transport act or something like that

[gazza]

Fits with my thoughts in the main, in that the risk of drinking while in charge of a narrowboat very much exists if you are drunk, a second pint of canal side ale in the afternoon is unlikely to make a serious collision more likely, certainly not to the experienced helm.

 

Similarly, while if your staggering all over the place, have a thick head, etc working a lot is not going to be safe, being say twice the drink drive limit for the UK roads is not likely to be an issue.

 

Other risks include the ability to sort out an issue if it does develop. Are you able to get yourself away from harm even if its going wrong, and is there at least one person on board who could deal with an incident such as tackling a small fire, engine failure, or co-coordinating the emergency services.

 

On our boat we also have the added responsibility of who ever is in charge of the steam plant to remain in a state where they are able to do so safely, again not only in normal practice, but if it is going wrong.

 

 

At which point, I am careful that if I am in charge of a boat I am in a state I fell happy to be able to do it, that if I am in charge of a boat none of the others on board are at a state where they are a liability to themselves or others due to drink, and that if I am on a boat someone else in in charge of that I am not a liability to themselves or others due to drink.

 

 

As far as I am aware there is no legal directive over recreational boats on inland waterways, certainly not for boats under 20m (65.6ft), and I expect so long as there is not reason to change that it will remain unchanged. That said, I expect if you where at worse case to cause death by your actions while under the influence your condition would be recorded and taken into account.

 

 

Daniel

All that said, Dibnah reckoned you needed to be half cut to numb the pain of driving the road roller, he managed to keep 10 ton of iron running and the family in tow on the public road Edited September 6, 2016 by gazza

[DHutch]

Must say I thought recreational boat skippers were subject to the same law as road drivers except that it is never (or rarely) enforced. Perhaps I am confusing it with commercial skippers.

Transport act or something like that

 

Maybe, could be wrong.

 

I know there was talk about the implications of the change in maritime rules/laws effecting 20m+ narrowboats at the time, but with an amount of tongue in cheek if only due to the unlikeliness of it being policed.

 

http://www.rya.org.uk/knowledge-advice/current-affairs/Pages/alcohol-and-boating.aspx

Alcohol and boating law in the UK Merchant Shipping Act 1995

Boaters may be prosecuted under the Merchant Shipping Act 1995 if their actions on the water are seen to be endangering other vessels, structures or individuals and they are under the influence of alcohol.

Harbour byelaws

Locally, most harbour authorities have harbour byelaws under which they can prosecute if boaters are found to be under the influence of alcohol when in charge of a vessel.

Railways and Transport Safety Act 2003

A law to introduce drink driving offences (including specific alcohol limits) for non-professional mariners was included in the Railways and Transport Safety Act 2003. This provision has not been brought into force.

 

Daniel

[W+T]

Must say I thought recreational boat skippers were subject to the same law as road drivers except that it is never (or rarely) enforced. Perhaps I am confusing it with commercial skippers.

Transport act or something like that

 

 

i thought it was also commercial skippers etc. leisure not a bother.

 

As always it it down to common sense and how you cope with a few pints, i am fine after 2 or 3 pints but the next person may well be sloshed.

 

ah but then many folk dont have common sense.

[Geo]

I think some perspective if needed regarding alcohol and reaction times, and the likely outcome of a collision at 60 mph vs a collision at 3 mph.

 

Car doing 60 mph (near but not at the maximum speed limit) travels 88 feet per second, so with a typical 0.3 second reaction time will have travelled just over 26 feet.

 

Boat travelling at 3 mph (near but not at the maximum speed limit) travels just over 4 feet.

 

So if we assume that drinking to the legal BAL doubles reaction times (don't know if this is true but I haven't found anything on Google that states anything other than "alcohol imparts reaction time", nothing stating how much alcohol is needed to double reaction times).

 

So is taking corrective action some 8-9 feet later really going to make much difference.

 

If we compare the kinetic energy of a 2000kg car travelling at 60 mph with a 15000 kg boat travelling at 3 mph we find the car carriescover 53 times the kinetic energy.

 

I think that providing people drink sensibly whilst boating, a pint or two perhaps, then the increased risk is barely perceptible.

 

Working locks, however is a different matter as the likey outcome of a fall could result in death.

 

Sounds good. Now I don't know how good my maths is today. 4 mph = 1760 x 4 x 3 feet/hour / 3600 = feet per second = 5.866 feet per second

 

So that 9 feet is going to disappear in about 1.5 seconds with a person who is relax on the stern of a slow boat. Reaction times are probably going to be between 0.7 secs and 3 sec. Accident investigators tend to use 1.5 seconds. So before anything happens on a boat it has gone another 8.8 feet and hit that problem feet away.

 

So begs the question how long does it take to stop a boat dead from 4 mph. I suspect the average narrow boat takes about 1 1/2 times its length. say for a 50 foot boat maybe 75 feet. So including reaction time say 84 feet to stop. The average stopping distance for a car at 30mph is 75.3 feet according to the driving test figures. So it appears that a boat at 4mph takes a greater distance to stop than a car at 30 mph and the boat probably takes longer stop. Just a thought or two

[StephenA]

A few years ago now (actually it might be more than that) we were working the lock near Beeston Castle. It was a hot day and we'd decided to have a bottle of rather nice cold lager. There were some youngish kids by the lock - I think they were on some sort of organised walk from school. One of the kids looked at my friend and said "I'm going to report you to the police... and you'll go to prison for a very long time".

 

Nothing wrong with enjoying a drink when boating but its got to be in moderation...

[Geo]

 

Maybe, could be wrong.

 

I know there was talk about the implications of the change in maritime rules/laws effecting 20m+ narrowboats at the time, but with an amount of tongue in cheek if only due to the unlikeliness of it being policed.

 

http://www.rya.org.uk/knowledge-advice/current-affairs/Pages/alcohol-and-boating.aspx

 

Daniel

 

I think the 1965 bylaws include one about under the influence, could be wrong

[cuthound]

Sounds good. Now I don't know how good my maths is today. 4 mph = 1760 x 4 x 3 feet/hour / 3600 = feet per second = 5.866 feet per second

 

So that 9 feet is going to disappear in about 1.5 seconds with a person who is relax on the stern of a slow boat. Reaction times are probably going to be between 0.7 secs and 3 sec. Accident investigators tend to use 1.5 seconds. So before anything happens on a boat it has gone another 8.8 feet and hit that problem feet away.

 

So begs the question how long does it take to stop a boat dead from 4 mph. I suspect the average narrow boat takes about 1 1/2 times its length. say for a 50 foot boat maybe 75 feet. So including reaction time say 84 feet to stop. The average stopping distance for a car at 30mph is 75.3 feet according to the driving test figures. So it appears that a boat at 4mph takes a greater distance to stop than a car at 30 mph and the boat probably takes longer stop. Just a thought or two

Interestingly you have upped the speed of the boat by 25% to 4 mph, (yet I would say that speed is impossible to achieve on a significant part of the system, due to lack of depth), and reduced the speed of the car by 50%, despite the majority of roads in this country being "single carriageway desrestricted" thus subject to a 60 mph speed limit.

 

Average human reaction time is generally accepted as 0.3 seconds, with anything longer being the result of a distraction, which is not possible to scientifically evaluate due to the variability.

 

Why have you ignored the effects of kinetic energy, as this is what will cause any physical damage?

 

Even at 30mph a 2000 kg car has 13.33 times the kinetic energy of a boat at 3 mph.

 

My boat (16 tonnes) will stop in about one boats length during an emergency stop, (but not necessarily in a straight line.

 

Nevertheless, the point I was making is that drinking in moderation has an insignificant effect on increasing the chances of having a boating accident, and this is why there is no statutory penalty for it.

 

Anyway it is time to take my dog for his weekly training class, so will not post again tonight.

 

Edited to add the last sentance.

Edited September 6, 2016 by cuthound

[Phil Ambrose]

We had an incident last September which was sobering (excuse the pun). While moored and getting ready to visit the local pub for a meal, a boat attempted to moor ahead of us. It was single handed and the steerer was a rather rotund gentleman around 55. He fell in without anyone noticing him for a couple of minutes, but he managed to grab one of his fender ropes (his engine was fortunately in neutral). I eventually noticed him and ran out with the aluminium rescue ladder , a boathook and a lifebelt. He was already incapable of doing too much to help himself but I managed to hook him with the boathook and dragged him to the bank which was sheet piled. He was incapable of climbing the ladder because he was already very cold and unresponsive and it took the combined efforts of me and three passers-by to eventually drag him out. An ambulance was called and he was taken to hospital.

 

When things had calmed down I went on board his boat to make sure it was securely moored etc and in the cockpit was a nearl;y empty bottle of wine which he had been drinking as he cruised along.

 

Now, I am not a kill joy and I can quite see the attraction in enjoying a beer etc. while cruising, but please remember what effect alcohol can have if the unexpected happens and you have to deal with a sudden emergency. The incident I mention certainly was a good object lesson for those who cant see any harm in drinking while cruising. Personally, I would suggest that most responsible people would not dream of driving a car while having a beer and I think the same thought process should apply when cruising, whether on the canals or on lumpier waters.

 

Howard

Bit of an assumption that the chap had consumed almost a whole bottle of wine, it may have had a glass left in it from the previous day/night. We often find we have a drop left over and so finish it the next day.

Was there anything to suggest he was drunk? or was he merely suffering from being submerged in cold water?

Phil

Edited September 6, 2016 by Phil Ambrose

[FadeToScarlet]

Without a doubt alcohol does negative stuff to your abilities. Hopefully nobody is going to argue that point.

I don't know, my singing, dancing, and conversational abilities seem much improved after a few ciders!

[Geo]

Interestingly you have upped the speed of the boat by 25% to 4 mph, (yet I would say that speed is impossible to achieve on a significant part of the system, due to lack of depth), and reduced the speed of the car by 50%, despite the majority of roads in this country being "single carriageway desrestricted" thus subject to a 60 mph speed limit.

 

Average human reaction time is generally accepted as 0.3 seconds, with anything longer being the result of a distraction, which is not possible to scientifically evaluate due to the variability.

 

Why have you ignored the effects of kinetic energy, as this is what will cause any physical damage?

 

Even at 30mph a 2000 kg car has 13.33 times the kinetic energy of a boat at 3 mph.

 

My boat (16 tonnes) will stop in about one boats length during an emergency stop, (but not necessarily in a straight line.

 

Nevertheless, the point I was making is that drinking in moderation has an insignificant effect on increasing the chances of having a boating accident, and this is why there is no statutory penalty for it.

 

Anyway it is time to take my dog for his weekly training class, so will not post again tonight.

 

Edited to add the last sentance

 

I am not sure where you get the reaction time of 0.3 second. The accepted figures I am aware of for RTC investigations are 0.7 sec to 3 seconds. Most investigators use 1.5 seconds as the average.

 

Quite honestly I am not interested in comparing the kinetic of a car which is designed to absorb the energy and cushion anyone it hits. Whereas a boat trapping someone between the boat and an obstacle even at 1 mph will do the person great harm. I suspect it will do more harm that a modern car will do if it hits someone at 20 mph.

 

So your boat is out of control if you do an emergency stop. Where it is going to end up is an unknown, it could end up hitting a boat, bank,bridge or lock gate etc not part of the original problem. How far would it take your boat to stop in a straight line?

 

Maybe a look at the Bylaws , 44 in particular: Intoxicated persons

44. No person shall navigate any vessel on any canal or take any part in the navigation, mooring or handling of any vessel on the canal whilst under the influence of drink to such an extent as to be incapable of having proper control of the vessel.

Now it all depends on what the courts take as the amount of drink that would make a person incapable of having proper control

I hope your dog had an enjoyable evening.

Edited September 6, 2016 by Geo

[Rufford]

I'm equally capable of making a mess or a tight bend with or without a drink. . .

[magnetman]

 

 

I am not sure where you get the reaction time of 0.3 second. The accepted figures I am aware of for RTC investigations are 0.7 sec to 3 seconds. Most investigators use 1.5 seconds as the average.

 

Quite honestly I am not interested in comparing the kinetic of a car which is designed to absorb the energy and cushion anyone it hits. Whereas a boat trapping someone between the boat and an obstacle even at 1 mph will do the person great harm. I suspect it will do more harm that a modern car will do if it hits someone at 20 mph

But. One thing to bear in mind is that you will never (thank god or was it Jesus ) get pedestrians crossing the canal in front of you.

 

Ok so you may get a person in the water and you would probably see them enter the water but it is toweringly unlikely compared with the very real probability of a person walking on road surface which is standard behaviour for example in the case of zebra crossings.

[howardang]

Bit of an assumption that the chap had consumed almost a whole bottle of wine, it may have had a glass left in it from the previous day/night. We often find we have a drop left over and so finish it the next day.

Was there anything to suggest he was drunk? or was he merely suffering from being submerged in cold water?

Phil

I am perfectly capable of telling the difference and the signs were that he had been drinking. Thanks, however for your coments.

 

Howard

Edited September 6, 2016 by howardang

[billS]

A few years ago now (actually it might be more than that) we were working the lock near Beeston Castle. It was a hot day and we'd decided to have a bottle of rather nice cold lager. There were some youngish kids by the lock - I think they were on some sort of organised walk from school. One of the kids looked at my friend and said "I'm going to report you to the police... and you'll go to prison for a very long time".

 

I wonder if that sanctimonious kid recently joined this forum

[magnetman]

[quote name="Geo" post="1878571" timestamp="1473189 Whereas a boat trapping someone between the boat and an obstacle even at 1 mph will do the person great harm. I suspect it will do more harm that a modern car will do if it hits someone at 20 mph.

 

 

Afaik usually when a car hits a pedestrian there is no crushing just an impact of a fast moving wheeled vehicle whereas is there was a person in the water and you collided with them there would be no crushing risk unless they went under the boat (possible) or there was a solid surface directly in front of your boat which you were unable to avoid (this would definitely indicate a lack of attention at the helm)

 

I wonder if that sanctimonious kid recently joined this forum

Lol I thought might be CP ?

[gazza]

I am perfectly capable of telling the difference and the signs were that he had been drinking. Thanks, however for your advice.

Howard

Tell tale signs like a big red nose, ruddy complexion, bloodshot eyes, pot belly, that sort of thing?

[Guest]

Some people on this thread really do need to get themselves a life....

 

Boating while completely trollied is quite clearly stupid and dangerous.

 

None of the posters who have suggested it's OK to boat after a couple of drinks have said otherwise for goodness sake.

 

I wonder if those who condemn boating after a couple of drinks are free of the influence of drugs including prescription ones?

Edited September 6, 2016 by MJG

[rasputin]

It would appear I am at liberty to drink more than most boaters as my boat boat weighing just over a ton has less kinetic energy than most.