March of the Widebeams

[MtB]

4 minutes ago, Stroudwater1 said:

Yes I was replying to the comment that it will be quiet due to the closure at the cutting. However as the marina traffic will now move generally Braunston way it won’t be much quieter than usual. Assume the hire boats and boat sharers will also all now be going up and down this section.
 

Apart from the section round Willoughby wharf it’s not too tricky visibility wise tbf. Seeing a wide beam occupying the cutting towards Dunchurch isn’t terrible helpful though 😔

 

 

 

Rather than issuing unhelpful three-day-long 'Notices' warning of fatty movements on the stretch (as a result of the flawed decision to permit a wide marina entrance on a narrow canal), might it be a better idea to constrain the fatty movements to a specific time, not impose on the legitimate narrow traffic for such long periods? 

 

For example, fat boat transits to and from the marina may take place only on the first Monday morning of each month? 

[Lady M]

That would mean any that went cruising would have to stay out for a whole month before returning to their marina.  It would make sense to limit wide beam movements to, perhaps, one morning per week and try to choose the quietest day.

[MtB]

Just now, Lady M said:

That would mean any that went cruising would have to stay out for a whole month before returning to their marina. 

 

 

That is the whole point. Fatties are not supposed to be 'out cruising'. The dispensation for fatties to use that stretch of narrow canal was originally given for transit of boats to remain permanently in the marina. Not for them to be going out cruising. AIUI. 

[Lady M]

Surely the original dispensation was CRT not challenging at the planning permission stage.

[ditchcrawler]

1 hour ago, Lady M said:

That would mean any that went cruising would have to stay out for a whole month before returning to their marina.  It would make sense to limit wide beam movements to, perhaps, one morning per week and try to choose the quietest day.

I mean, lets face it, they are going back and forth 6 days a week at the moment, its so busy with it that when two of them meet there are 6 stacked up behind them. Do you really need to allocate a day a week for it

[cuthound]

On 16/02/2024 at 15:01, john6767 said:

I thought the CRT said there was no widebeam mooring on the narrow North Oxford when accessing the marinas there, but this booking is to spend two nights on the canal while making the passage.  I know the North Oxford is shut further north so there will not be a lot of traffic, but seems a bit off.

 

 

Oxford Canal
Location: Wide beam passage, Braunston to Dunchurch Pools
Starts At: Bridge 93/94, Braunston Junction
Ends At: Bridge 81, Borstal Bridge

Sunday 18 February 2024 09:00 until Tuesday 20 February 2024 10:00

Type: Advice 
Reason: Information

---

 

Original message:

 

Please be advised a wide beam boat will be passing through Braunston to Dunchurch Pool from Sunday 18th February to Tuesday 20th February morning.

We kindly remind boating customers to be aware of the wide-beam boat and take extra care whilst passing through this section of the canal.

 

I've been forced to follow really slow widebeams in that area a couple of times, but fortunately none travelling that slowly...

 

[Sea Dog]

1 minute ago, cuthound said:

 

I've been forced to follow really slow widebeams in that area a couple of times, but fortunately none travelling that slowly...

 

I'd crash in those circumstances. My seaman's eye gets very offended and won't let me stare at one for very long. 

[Jonny P]

4 hours ago, ditchcrawler said:

I mean, lets face it, they are going back and forth 6 days a week at the moment, its so busy with it that when two of them meet there are 6 stacked up behind them. Do you really need to allocate a day a week for it

 

Are they really? I don't think I've ever encountered a moving wide beam on that section. Just the one that used to moor at Willoughby before mooring of wide beams was prohibited.

[PaulJ]

 

4 hours ago, ditchcrawler said:

I mean, lets face it, they are going back and forth 6 days a week at the moment, its so busy with it that when two of them meet there are 6 stacked up behind them. Do you really need to allocate a day a week for it

 

35 minutes ago, Captain Pegg said:

 

Are they really? I don't think I've ever encountered a moving wide beam on that section. Just the one that used to moor at Willoughby before mooring of wide beams was prohibited.

Think DC was being a little tongue in cheek- at least thats why I gave him a greenie..😀

 

 

 

 

[Jonny P]

2 hours ago, PaulJ said:

 

 

Think DC was being a little tongue in cheek- at least thats why I gave him a greenie..😀

 

 

 

 

Clearly my humour detecting senses are conditioned to go into sleep mode when I log on to this site.

[matty40s]

Moored as close to the winding hole as possible, hope I didnt disturb their sleep...its quite difficult to get the front end round when you have a south easterly..

 

..and this one as close to the water point as possible...almost 4 months CCing around the Stowe Hill ring now..blacking looks good though..

 

[matty40s]

Absolutely ridiculous mooring on the apex of the bend here by 14ft fatty. Strong river flow comes in from the right directly opposite his boat, no doubt he will complain when boats get pushed into him.

[matty40s]

Widebeams everywhere in MK, moored in all sorts of inconvenient places, as near to bridge holes as possible,

on bends or opposite overhanging trees.

This one, passing Balhalla on the far side of Campbell Park Marina...

 

Then proceeded to moor up actually sticking out over the other side of the entrance...

[blackrose]

If you can't get past those boats and through those bridges there's something wrong with your steering.

Edited March 30, 2024 by blackrose

[Momac]

On 29/03/2024 at 08:31, matty40s said:

 

 

..and this one as close to the water point as possible... 

 

This picture  appears  to show ample room for another boat to get water assuming the bollard is the water point.  Nothing  apparently wrong with that.

 

 

 

 

[matty40s]

1 minute ago, Momac said:

This picture  appears  to show ample room for another boat to get water assuming the bollard is the water point.  Nothing  apparently wrong with that.

 

 

 

 

Nothing other than the boat has been hanging around the same 1/2 mile stretch for 4 months on a CC licence (other than when he returned to Whilton for coating repairs)

 

59 minutes ago, blackrose said:

If you can't get past those boats and through those bridges there's something wrong with your steering.

One boat going through isnt the problem, 2 boats meeting, especially if one of those happens to be widebeam will.cause a problem or collision.

I know you have a widebeam Mike, but there is a new breed of owners who really dont care about anyone else on the canal except themselves.

[Momac]

30 minutes ago, matty40s said:

Nothing other than the boat has been hanging around the same 1/2 mile stretch for 4 months on a CC licence (other than when he returned to Whilton for coating repairs)

Thank you for confirming the boat in question is moored appropriately.

 

[matty40s]

1 hour ago, Momac said:

Thank you for confirming the boat in question is moored appropriately.

 

The boat is moored appropriately, however, he is moored opposite other boats who are moored on Waterside Moorings(CRT moorings) and has already complained several times on here about mooring with boats moored officially on the offside.....

 

[matty40s]

Ah, what happens when you go away for a weekend...come home and there are 2 boats moored across the marina entrance, one a widebeam. Apparently it appeared yesterday, was asked not to moor over the marina and just ignored requests. Both pins were pulled out within hours of mooring up and kind people re-tied the ropes as the fatty was vacated as soon as it arrived. 

The small boat moved 200 yards further down when asked, the fatty has been dragged back as far as it can go, and retied securely to the piling.

I didnt plant the nettles.

[Alan de Enfield]

30 minutes ago, matty40s said:

The small boat moved 200 yards further down when asked, the fatty has been dragged back as far as it can go, and retied securely to the piling.

 

Tightly, on very short lines ?

[Bristolfashion]

There are a couple of wide beams in Cardiff Bay - now that's a limited cruising area. 

 

At least one came down from Sharpness - the mind boggles!

[ditchcrawler]

While looking for something else I came across this Complaints - a Freedom of Information request to Canal & River Trust - WhatDoTheyKnow

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

I’ll be sure to highlight ‘wide beam’ in the title of any future complaints,

 

 

[Mike Todd]

39 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

While looking for something else I came across this Complaints - a Freedom of Information request to Canal & River Trust - WhatDoTheyKnow

Demonstrates that using FoI is a skill in itself and not that simple process some assume that it is (should be?) 

 

Similar to the issues involved in using databases - you have to ask the right question to get the right answer! Sources like Google have helped somewhat by using fuzzier logic  to select information but even so (as recent AI based searches have demonstrated) can still have 'interesting' results.

 

I am not sure what outcome the original request expected. (Or wanted) I am conflicted about whether this is a responsible use of a right that needs to be protected and hence used sensibly. Otherwise it will be lost. I would have thought that a less confrontational (and yes, FoIs are all too often that) might have permitted a better engagement. Whatever happened to writing a friendly letter?

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

2 hours ago, Mike Todd said:

Demonstrates that using FoI is a skill in itself and not that simple process some assume that it is (should be?) 

 

Similar to the issues involved in using databases - you have to ask the right question to get the right answer! Sources like Google have helped somewhat by using fuzzier logic  to select information but even so (as recent AI based searches have demonstrated) can still have 'interesting' results.

 

I am not sure what outcome the original request expected. (Or wanted) I am conflicted about whether this is a responsible use of a right that needs to be protected and hence used sensibly. Otherwise it will be lost. I would have thought that a less confrontational (and yes, FoIs are all too often that) might have permitted a better engagement. Whatever happened to writing a friendly letter?

 
letters/emails should always be courteous but I don’t expect they teach letter writing in schools any more ?

Perhaps I’ll try corresponding with CRT with a hand written letter and see if they are able to reply.