Minworth embankment repair

[frahkn]

2 hours ago, cuthound said:

I find the same. My theory is that as you get older, each day becomes a smaller percentage of your life. 

Alternatively; each day becomes a much bigger percentage of your remaining life.

Just saying.

Is that glass half empty?

[cuthound]

18 minutes ago, frahkn said:

Alternatively; each day becomes a much bigger percentage of your remaining life.

Just saying.

Is that glass half empty?

Lol, no I was merely trying to explain to Goliath why the days seem to pass quicker the older you get.

 

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

2 hours ago, frahkn said:

Alternatively; each day becomes a much bigger percentage of your remaining life.

Just saying.

Is that glass half empty?

 

the glass which now sits in front of me is half empty but I know I can look forward to buying another pint and start a fresh

 

[Mike Todd]

12 hours ago, BruceinSanity said:

I used to do huge long blogs every other day, now I do just a few paragraphs every afternoon, mainly so's family and friends can keep track. What amazes me are the bloggers who post loads of photos every day.

Don't know if you consider my quantity if pics (http://nbalchemy.blogspot.co.uk/) to be large or small but (a) I find that reviewing what I have taken is a good way of reminding oneself of the day (b)  also encourages me to be on the lookout for the quirky or unusual as well as the scenic and (c) a picture is worth a 1000 words so it would take an very much lengthier blog to do as well!

[hallmrh]

Is it now resolved to everyone's satisfaction ? There is no reference to aa problem on the C&RT stoppage website. I will be using this route in a couple of weeks.

[Ray T]

On 25/04/2018 at 16:04, cuthound said:

Lol, no I was merely trying to explain to Goliath why the days seem to pass quicker the older you get.

 

On a clock in Chester Cathedral by Henry Twells, Time Paces:

When as a child I laughed and wept, Time crept. When as a youth I waxed more bold, Time strolled. When I became a full grown man, Time RAN. When older still I daily grew, Time FLEW. Soon I shall find, in passing on, Time gone. O Lord! wilt Thou have saved me then? Amen.

 

Not quite sure what this has to do with Minworth Bank repair, but hey ho!

Edited April 30, 2018 by Ray T

[Boater Sam]

Following my request for full details about the Minworth rock problem I have now received a reply to at least part of my email.

There has been no response to my question as to whether the person responsible for leaving the rock in the canal is still employed byC&RT, I didn't really think I would.

The reply is as follows:-

 

 

"""""Apologies for delay in responding back.  The programme manager for these works has advised back:

 

Just to confirm that since this was raised, we have carried out a 4 day stoppage to address the problem at Minworth.  This was not a case of our contractors leaving their temporary works in the canal, in fact, it was a decision made by myself and project team to disperse the temporary ramp and access road within the bed of the canal to save significant money.  Unfortunately this was the wrong decision, for which I cannot apologise enough.  The recent 4 day stoppage has allowed us to remove all the stone and the channel is now navigable again.

Kind Regards

Sarah

Enquiries

West Midlands Waterway

Canal & River Trust  | Fradley Junction | Alrewas | Burton-on-Trent | DE13 7DN

Tel:  0303 0404040   

@CRTContactUs"""""

 

 

 So it would seem that the rock was deliberately spread out into the bank silt, not flung there by boat propellers. Perhaps now a line can be drawn under this item.

Sam.

Edited May 9, 2018 by Boater Sam
corrections

[Dr Bob]

1 hour ago, Boater Sam said:

Following my request for full details about the Minworth rock problem I have now received a reply to at least part of my email.

There has been no response to my question as to whether the person responsible for leaving the rock in the canal is still employed byC&RT, I didn't really think I would.

The reply is as follows:-

 

 

"""""Apologies for delay in responding back.  The programme manager for these works has advised back:

 

Just to confirm that since this was raised, we have carried out a 4 day stoppage to address the problem at Minworth.  This was not a case of our contractors leaving their temporary works in the canal, in fact, it was a decision made by myself and project team to disperse the temporary ramp and access road within the bed of the canal to save significant money.  Unfortunately this was the wrong decision, for which I cannot apologise enough.  The recent 4 day stoppage has allowed us to remove all the stone and the channel is now navigable again.

Kind Regards

Sarah

Enquiries

West Midlands Waterway

Canal & River Trust  | Fradley Junction | Alrewas | Burton-on-Trent | DE13 7DN

Tel:  0303 0404040   

@CRTContactUs"""""

 

 

 So it would seem that the rock was deliberately spread out into the bank silt, not flung there by boat propellers. Perhaps now a line can be drawn under this item.

Sam.

Good to hear that someone is taking responsibility and admitting they were wrong.

I am impressed what you guys on here have been able to achieve in getting CRT to react so quickly and sort the problem. Power to the people!?

[Boater Sam]

Yes, some of us are very good at getting results - instead of just bickering on the forum.

[jonesthenuke]

4 hours ago, Dr Bob said:

Good to hear that someone is taking responsibility and admitting they were wrong.

I am impressed what you guys on here have been able to achieve in getting CRT to react so quickly and sort the problem. Power to the people!?

 

I too am pleased that we have someone being clear on where the problem arose.  As to getting CRT to take action, this forum does have some impact when we continue to raise an issue. We should make sure we use this ability, but with due care about choosing appropriate issues to push.

[JamesWoolcock]

3 hours ago, jonesthenuke said:

 

I too am pleased that we have someone being clear on where the problem arose.  As to getting CRT to take action, this forum does have some impact when we continue to raise an issue. We should make sure we use this ability, but with due care about choosing appropriate issues to push.

The postings on here have indeed been so useful.

But we all need to report problems to CRT. And talk to then nicely! That's where the power to get things done lies.

This and with the help of Sue Cawson (CRT Navigations Advisory Group & HNBC Navigations Officer) did a lot to get Minworth sorted and open (?) to boats like this.

Tomorrow I'm going up Minworth and will report.

As well as posting on here, for best results Email problems to Customer Services and copy to Waterways Manager.

Yesterday I sent an email to CRT Customer Services about CRT work boats on Visitor Moorings (and over the Bank Holiday!) and copied it to the Waterways Manager.

Within 3 minutes Ian Lane replied that CRT shouldn't be doing this and he would deal with it.

Excellent.

Thank you Ian.

 

James

[BruceinSanity]

An excellent result indeed, assuming there is now decent depth, of course. Well done to all forumites involved.

 

This would make an excellent case study in a project management course – in the False Economy module.

[nicknorman]

8 hours ago, JamesWoolcock said:

The postings on here have indeed been so useful.

But we all need to report problems to CRT. And talk to then nicely! That's where the power to get things done lies.

This and with the help of Sue Cawson (CRT Navigations Advisory Group & HNBC Navigations Officer) did a lot to get Minworth sorted and open (?) to boats like this.

Tomorrow I'm going up Minworth and will report.

As well as posting on here, for best results Email problems to Customer Services and copy to Waterways Manager.

Yesterday I sent an email to CRT Customer Services about CRT work boats on Visitor Moorings (and over the Bank Holiday!) and copied it to the Waterways Manager.

Within 3 minutes Ian Lane replied that CRT shouldn't be doing this and he would deal with it.

Excellent.

Thank you Ian.

 

James

Ian is particularly good. Unfortunately not all regional waterways managers are like minded!

[BWM]

8 hours ago, JamesWoolcock said:

The postings on here have indeed been so useful.

But we all need to report problems to CRT. And talk to then nicely! That's where the power to get things done lies.

This and with the help of Sue Cawson (CRT Navigations Advisory Group & HNBC Navigations Officer) did a lot to get Minworth sorted and open (?) to boats like this.

Tomorrow I'm going up Minworth and will report.

As well as posting on here, for best results Email problems to Customer Services and copy to Waterways Manager.

Yesterday I sent an email to CRT Customer Services about CRT work boats on Visitor Moorings (and over the Bank Holiday!) and copied it to the Waterways Manager.

Within 3 minutes Ian Lane replied that CRT shouldn't be doing this and he would deal with it.

Excellent.

Thank you Ian.

 

James

A couple of days ago I was watching in disbelief at contractors, accompanied by Crt staff dredging an area in advance of piling work. Using a digger mounted on a work boat, they were scooping bricks and other debris and then dropping it right in the middle of the adjacent bridgehole. This is one that I have scraped over obstacles passing through, I went over and stated this to one of the workers and assumed that they would dispose of the spoil on the offside bank, but no, they just moved the boat further from the bank and sneakily shook the waste alongside the craft. It seems absurd to effect a repair and to then create a new problem in the process. 

[jonesthenuke]

12 minutes ago, BWM said:

A couple of days ago I was watching in disbelief at contractors, accompanied by Crt staff dredging an area in advance of piling work. Using a digger mounted on a work boat, they were scooping bricks and other debris and then dropping it right in the middle of the adjacent bridgehole. This is one that I have scraped over obstacles passing through, I went over and stated this to one of the workers and assumed that they would dispose of the spoil on the offside bank, but no, they just moved the boat further from the bank and sneakily shook the waste alongside the craft. It seems absurd to effect a repair and to then create a new problem in the process. 

This has reminded me that when passing through the Penkridge area on the Staffs and Worcs the other day, a section of canal is being dredged with new galvanised sheet piling being installed. This connects at both ends to existing piling. The strange thing is that the new piling is 6 inches or so lower than the existing with angled sections where the height difference occurs at each end. This is not a big issue in itself except that the new piling has expensive hardwood railing fitted along the top and its so low that its permanently in the water which will presumably accelerate rot? The approach seemed very odd to me but appears very deliberate.

 

I greatly appreciate the effort of piling and dredging as this section of canal needs it, but am completely puzzled at the way it has been done. Maintaining the existing piling height would seem much more appropriate, keeping the wood out of the water and allowing the bank to be raised more - thus giving more capacity for dredged material. Given the expense of doing the work, why do it like this?

 

[nicknorman]

26 minutes ago, BWM said:

A couple of days ago I was watching in disbelief at contractors, accompanied by Crt staff dredging an area in advance of piling work. Using a digger mounted on a work boat, they were scooping bricks and other debris and then dropping it right in the middle of the adjacent bridgehole. This is one that I have scraped over obstacles passing through, I went over and stated this to one of the workers and assumed that they would dispose of the spoil on the offside bank, but no, they just moved the boat further from the bank and sneakily shook the waste alongside the craft. It seems absurd to effect a repair and to then create a new problem in the process. 

Video and post on YouTube!

[Boater Sam]

Its so you can't moor with pile hooks, seen this happening at places all over the system. If they lay a hard cycle path then we have to hammer pins in to it? I think not.

[Dartagnan]

10 hours ago, JamesWoolcock said:

The postings on here have indeed been so useful.

But we all need to report problems to CRT. And talk to then nicely! That's where the power to get things done lies.

This and with the help of Sue Cawson (CRT Navigations Advisory Group & HNBC Navigations Officer) did a lot to get Minworth sorted and open (?) to boats like this.

Tomorrow I'm going up Minworth and will report.

As well as posting on here, for best results Email problems to Customer Services and copy to Waterways Manager.

Yesterday I sent an email to CRT Customer Services about CRT work boats on Visitor Moorings (and over the Bank Holiday!) and copied it to the Waterways Manager.

Within 3 minutes Ian Lane replied that CRT shouldn't be doing this and he would deal with it.

Excellent.

Thank you Ian.

 

James

I totally agree.  Shouting, kicking and screaming together with abuse achieves absolutely zilch!  I thought the original letter by @nicknorman was polite whilst detailing and highlighting the issue and his concerns.  In addition I was particularly pleased to see the person who made the relevant decision acknowledge that the decision was flawed and that she apologised for the error.  She deserves credit for that.  As they say ‘a man (woman) who never made a mistake never made anything’

[BWM]

1 hour ago, jonesthenuke said:

This has reminded me that when passing through the Penkridge area on the Staffs and Worcs the other day, a section of canal is being dredged with new galvanised sheet piling being installed. This connects at both ends to existing piling. The strange thing is that the new piling is 6 inches or so lower than the existing with angled sections where the height difference occurs at each end. This is not a big issue in itself except that the new piling has expensive hardwood railing fitted along the top and its so low that its permanently in the water which will presumably accelerate rot? The approach seemed very odd to me but appears very deliberate.

 

I greatly appreciate the effort of piling and dredging as this section of canal needs it, but am completely puzzled at the way it has been done. Maintaining the existing piling height would seem much more appropriate, keeping the wood out of the water and allowing the bank to be raised more - thus giving more capacity for dredged material. Given the expense of doing the work, why do it like this?

 

The sceptical side of me wonders if it is built in obsolescence, as with depositing rubble in the channel-a future dredging job is in the pipeline..

1 hour ago, nicknorman said:

Video and post on YouTube!

I did take a fairly distant video, you have to study it to see what's going on. I have never put anything on YouTube and wouldn't know where to start!

[David Mack]

23 hours ago, Boater Sam said:

This was not a case of our contractors leaving their temporary works in the canal, in fact, it was a decision made by myself and project team to disperse the temporary ramp and access road within the bed of the canal to save significant money.  Unfortunately this was the wrong decision, for which I cannot apologise enough.  The recent 4 day stoppage has allowed us to remove all the stone and the channel is now navigable again.

 

That still doesn't really acknowledge that CRT allowed the situation where the canal was reopened in an unnavigable condition.

CRT publish dimensions for every one of their waterways, and it should be standard practice to ensure that on completion of any stoppage or other work that, as a minimum, the channel meets these dimensions. And if that cannot be achieved, then a restriction should be posted on the Stoppage page of the website to notify users, and proposals to remove the restriction at the earliest opportunity should be developed.

[ditchcrawler]

3 hours ago, jonesthenuke said:

This has reminded me that when passing through the Penkridge area on the Staffs and Worcs the other day, a section of canal is being dredged with new galvanised sheet piling being installed. This connects at both ends to existing piling. The strange thing is that the new piling is 6 inches or so lower than the existing with angled sections where the height difference occurs at each end. This is not a big issue in itself except that the new piling has expensive hardwood railing fitted along the top and its so low that its permanently in the water which will presumably accelerate rot? The approach seemed very odd to me but appears very deliberate.

 

I greatly appreciate the effort of piling and dredging as this section of canal needs it, but am completely puzzled at the way it has been done. Maintaining the existing piling height would seem much more appropriate, keeping the wood out of the water and allowing the bank to be raised more - thus giving more capacity for dredged material. Given the expense of doing the work, why do it like this?

 

Maybe canoe access, that is one of the in things now

[cuthound]

1 hour ago, ditchcrawler said:

Maybe canoe access, that is one of the in things now

 

  Or a place where wildlife that has fallen into the cut can climb out?

[JamesWoolcock]

On 10/05/2018 at 00:10, JamesWoolcock said:

The postings on here have indeed been so useful.

But we all need to report problems to CRT. And talk to then nicely! That's where the power to get things done lies.

This and with the help of Sue Cawson (CRT Navigations Advisory Group & HNBC Navigations Officer) did a lot to get Minworth sorted and open (?) to boats like this.

Tomorrow I'm going up Minworth and will report.

As well as posting on here, for best results Email problems to Customer Services and copy to Waterways Manager.

Yesterday I sent an email to CRT Customer Services about CRT work boats on Visitor Moorings (and over the Bank Holiday!) and copied it to the Waterways Manager.

Within 3 minutes Ian Lane replied that CRT shouldn't be doing this and he would deal with it.

Excellent.

Thank you Ian.

 

James

As promised:

 

I arrived at Minworth Bottom Lock around 10am (10 April) to find the water level on weir.

We were two boats so this would have had some effect on levels thereafter, although this is a quarter mile pound, albeit shallow and therefore not holding that much water for it's length..

After Forge Lane Bridge I started to scrape on what felt like fairly small hard items the boat rode over.

At the site of the recent embankment repairs progress was very slow with much graunching from under the boat.

I came to a complete standstill twice.

I had a much shallower draft modern boat behind me crewed by close friends so I knew I wouldn't have to call CRT and that they would rescue me and snatch me of if all else failed.

But after much effort I was free and made very slow progress was made to the middle lock.

I telephoned and reported the issue to Sue Cawson.

I soon received an email copy from Sue of one she sent to Jane Marriot, the engineer who oversaw the remedial works.

And one from Ian Lane copied to Sue and Jane, to tell me that they are organising a full survey, and asking Jane to liaise with me.

I will email Jane over the weekend and appraise her of my experience here, copying to both Sue and Ian, but tomorrow it's the Daw End Canal and the Wyrley and Essington so I expect to be rather busy with the shunters' pole!

 

James

[Tuscan]

Thank you for posting. It would appear that this has still not be resolved for deep drafted boats, hopefully your experience will lead to further remedial work to ensure safe navigation 

[PeterG]

Excellent report, sounds like more remedial works will be required, obviously Marquis is not the shallowest so was a good test.