Anchors Aweigh!

[Chewbacka]

40 minutes ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

Now we are getting back to the point. Which weir, an can you post up a photo of it please?

I contend there are no weirs on The Thames you'll be able to get anywhere close to, with or without a running engine.

I was not talking specifically about the Thames, but querying the general comment "what is the point of carrying an anchor if you choose not to wear a life jacket?" that had been made.

[WotEver]

If we believe Darwin then we're all descended from fishes anyhow. So how come we can't breath water? That wasn't a very clever bit of evolution was it?

[rusty69]

3 minutes ago, WotEver said:

If we believe Darwin then we're all descended from fishes anyhow. So how come we can't breath water? That wasn't a very clever bit of evolution was it?

Cos we don't have gills. However gill do make buoyancy aids (not sure about lifejackets) 

[Neil2]

1 hour ago, Chewbacka said:

I was not talking specifically about the Thames, but querying the general comment "what is the point of carrying an anchor if you choose not to wear a life jacket?" that had been made.

I was philosphising about the nature of risk.  My argument goes something like this;

If you choose to carry an anchor, you are presumably concerned about risk, in this case the risk of being carried downstream out of control.

Logically, if you are concerned about a minor risk such as this, you would also be concerned about a more likely risk, such as falling overboard. 

You would therefore wear a life jacket.

So, if you don't wear a life jacket, no point in having an anchor. 

 

 

[WotEver]

1 hour ago, rusty69 said:

Cos we don't have gills. However gill do make buoyancy aids (not sure about lifejackets) 

Wouldn't it have been better if we'd kept them?  Silly Darwin. 

[rusty69]

1 minute ago, WotEver said:

Wouldn't it have been better if we'd kept them?  Silly Darwin. 

Maybe. But then maybe not. Tis after all one more thing to go wrong and not much use If you never go near water. 

[Sir Nibble]

A boat drifting down the river, weir or not is a danger to life and property. In the absence of an anchor maybe just hoist two black balls to signal that your vessel is not under command. Causing danger and possibly instigating an emergency rescue situation for the lack of an anchor is gross negligence and one should be mindful of ones responsibilities as master of the vessel.

[bizzard]

Here lies the body of Norman Smalls who forgot to hoist up two black balls.

[rusty69]

If you deploy your anchor, should you hoist one black ball? 

[Scholar Gypsy]

3 hours ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

Going round in circles here. Which weir, exactly?

I contend they are all securely barraged off to protect idiot boaters from going over them. Do you know of one that isn't?

I'd be reasonably confident if the boat was aligned along the line of the wooden piles that protect most Thames weirs - it is likely that one would catch the bow and one the stern.

But if you are moving at right angles to the piles then I would not be 100% confident that the chain would hold a narrowboat moving at a knot or two. And some of the wooden piles look at bit rickety as well - they might well give way if smacked head on by a NB .... 

(PS - not relevant to this thread - the floating barrages on other rivers have led to a boat sinking, eg the incident at Ditchford on the Nene a few years ago. That was not an engine failure, and I suspect an anchor would not have helped then)

 

Edited April 6, 2017 by Scholar Gypsy

[rusty69]

2 minutes ago, Scholar Gypsy said:

(PS - not relevant to this forum - the floating barrages on other rivers have led to a boat sinking, eg the incident at Ditchford on the Nene a few years ago. That was not an engine failure, and I suspect an anchor would not have helped then)

Probably relevant to the forum, not so much the thread, which I suspect is what mtb keeps banging on about. 

[Scholar Gypsy]

11 minutes ago, rusty69 said:

Probably relevant to the forum, not so much the thread, which I suspect is what mtb keeps banging on about. 

I am sure I typed thread not forum ... That is what I meant, anyway!

[MtB]

1 hour ago, Scholar Gypsy said:

I'd be reasonably confident if the boat was aligned along the line of the wooden piles that protect most Thames weirs - it is likely that one would catch the bow and one the stern.

But if you are moving at right angles to the piles then I would not be 100% confident that the chain would hold a narrowboat moving at a knot or two. And some of the wooden piles look at bit rickety as well - they might well give way if smacked head on by a NB .... 

(PS - not relevant to this thread - the floating barrages on other rivers have led to a boat sinking, eg the incident at Ditchford on the Nene a few years ago. That was not an engine failure, and I suspect an anchor would not have helped then)

 

 

Which wooden piles look rickety, exactly?

I'll check them out next time I'm passing, but I've never seen a pile on the Thames that looks anything worse than brand new and immaculately maintained. Further, I can't actually bring to mind any weir barrages on wooden pilings. Most if not all the weir barrage pilings are steel. 

[Iain_S]

3 hours ago, rusty69 said:

If you deploy your anchor, should you hoist one black ball? 

Only once you've stopped ...

[Neil2]

I think when this thread finally ends I am going to be psychologically damaged.

Can I just remind one or two people that the OP's boat is a stonking great widebeam which must weigh around 35 tons.  Some comments seem to have assumed it's a relatively sylph-like narrowboat.   

[rusty69]

1 minute ago, Iain_S said:

Only once you've stopped ...

Is that right or a windup ? I know it applies at sea. 

[howardang]

6 minutes ago, rusty69 said:

Is that right or a windup ? I know it applies at sea. 

Make sure you shine a light on the ball during the hours of darkness!

 

Howard

[Murflynn]

if I fall overboard from my boat on the Thames above a weir and knock myself unconscious, would I be safer:

     (a) if I was wearing a lifejacket, causing me to float down towards the weir,

     (b) if I was not wearing a lifejacket, causing me to sink to the bottom, or

     (c) if I was wearing a lifejacket to which I had thoughtfully attached 10 metres of rope, 5 metres of chain, and a 10KG danforth anchor?

well, after doing the appropriate risk assessment the answer is obviously (c).  I expect all habitual lifejacket wearers on the Thames to equip themselves accordingly.

[Alan de Enfield]

8 minutes ago, rusty69 said:

Is that right or a windup ? I know it applies at sea. 

     In accordance with Rule 30 (a) (Anchored vessels and vessels aground), a vessel at anchor shall exhibit where it can best be seen:
(i) in the fore part, one ball.    

[rusty69]

1 minute ago, Alan de Enfield said:

     In accordance with Rule 30 (a) (Anchored vessels and vessels aground), a vessel at anchor shall exhibit where it can best be seen:
(i) in the fore part, one ball.    

Yes, I understand the point from the COLREGS, but do they apply to inland waterways and if not, where is the demarcation line? 

[Alan de Enfield]

4 minutes ago, howardang said:

Make sure you shine a light on the ball during the hours of darkness!

 

Howard

When giving advice it is usual to ensure that it is correct - in this case it is not.

[rusty69]

5 minutes ago, howardang said:

Make sure you shine a light on the ball during the hours of darkness!

 

Howard

Mmmm 

V Good

Just now, Alan de Enfield said:

When giving advice it is usual to ensure that it is correct - in this case it is not.

I assumed he was joking

[Alan de Enfield]

3 minutes ago, rusty69 said:

Yes, I understand the point from the COLREGS, but do they apply to inland waterways and if not, where is the demarcation line? 

I don't think many boats would anchor on the canals (except in an emergency when being swept over a weir).

[rusty69]

1 minute ago, Alan de Enfield said:

I don't think many boats would anchor on the canals (except in an emergency when being swept over a weir).

No. The question was regarding the Thames, but could equally apply to other rivers tidal or not. 

[rusty69]

21 minutes ago, Murflynn said:

if I fall overboard from my boat on the Thames above a weir and knock myself unconscious, would I be safer:

     (a) if I was wearing a lifejacket, causing me to float down towards the weir,

     (b) if I was not wearing a lifejacket, causing me to sink to the bottom, or

     (c) if I was wearing a lifejacket to which I had thoughtfully attached 10 metres of rope, 5 metres of chain, and a 10KG danforth anchor?

well, after doing the appropriate risk assessment the answer is obviously (c).  I expect all habitual lifejacket wearers on the Thames to equip themselves accordingly.

How do you stop Murflynn from drowning......... 

 

Take your foot off his head