Jump to content

riverman

Full Members
  • Content Count

    65
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

84 Excellent

About riverman

  • Rank
    Full Member

Recent Profile Visitors

576 profile views
  1. Has anybody got any idea of the 'usual' water depth on hoveton little broad? I have been invited to take part in the 70th anniversary floatilla, however the vessel I will be using carries 3ft+ underwater. Slightly concerned I'll carry enough momentum to get on the broad, and then just beach myself. Any thoughts would be hugely appreciated.
  2. Although this is a good idea, I don't see it practically working. For this to work there would need to be an industry body, taking a mandatory and proportion toll off all boat owners so as to make it fair for all....isn't there already something like that? If just the boat yards paid for moorings, then there would be people mooring for 'free' or people being restricted from certain moorings. It would be a better idea for BA to allow managed expansion of the larger yards or reasonable devolpment by land owners in exchange for substantial river front 24hr moorings.
  3. Just my tuppence. There has been much talk about how the decline in moorings are a complex issue and this I can't dispute. However, to some extent this is self inflicted. Much in same way it's been said that farmers (land owners) can be too short sighted/greedy with regards to moorings, I would also argue that BA has the same issue. BA/Besl/BAM had the opportunity to increase moorings (wild or otherwise) when undertaking the flood alleviation work. They could have also had a lot of free dredging done but that's beside the point. They could also undertake there own mooring repairs, which would save money and they would get a better job *see hoveton viaduct current works **don't take a spirit level. BA tend to rub people up the wrong way, if they handled there relationships with land owners, farmers and boat yards in a better way, then there might not be so much of an issue regarding moorings. There has to be more give and less take, bearing in mind that these are for profit operations, that the broads is not natural, and that we can only go forwards in time not backwards.
  4. All a bit odd. No mention of prymnesium or how it emerges. Boats stir silt up but dredging doesn't? In fairness, it's a deeply strange project but that's par for the course.
  5. 'And Pete - what company goes around asking other people what to do before making decisions? Why should the BA be any different?' I think that's quite a strange comparison to make. In what way do BA behave the same as a private for profit company? Also from my experience, it's not uncommon at all to quietly consult your competitors when you're a bit stuck or trying to improve how you do something. Usually not the bosses asking each other mind you. But that is entirely beside the point, BA don't listen to anyone, not even their own staff. It's entirely correct that nobody is irreplaceable, however some are more cost effective to replace than others, something BA would understand if they were a business.
  6. The problem with elaboration in regards to a lot of information coming from within BA is that those at the top know exactly which members of staff such information would come from. I have no interest in making any of there staffs lives any more difficult. However I believe this is relatively common knowledge. There has been an agenda for some time to completely do away with crane dredging in favour of 360 excavators, even though it has a lower cost per m3. In regards to suction dredging/mud pumping, it's all about density. Equipment to pump high density mud is (probably) prohibitively expensive for a public operation like BA. A cutter suction machine like a Watermaster that will achieve 80% density is well in excess of a million per unit. Just a little context and the reason why I say 50000m3 isn't a lot. Our last large scale dredge, 4 men, 2 barges, a crane to load and a 5t 360 to unload was comfortably achieving 1000m3 per week. All this with a 2 1/2 mile return trip with the spoil. The equipment and barges are all at least half the size of BAs. The real answer, with the benefit the hindsight, would have been to make BAM remove spoil from the rivers whilst undertaking the flood alleviation works. Unfortunately that ship sailed. Please don't take any of this as BA bashing. I know plenty of people with years of knowledge and practical understanding of the broads that could help BA become more efficient, myself included. Unfortunately, they just don't want to know, probably because we don't have a degree.
  7. Not to further BA bash, but doing piling and dredging for a living gives me some insight. 50000 cube, for an operation on that scale is pathetic. Toll payers are already paying for an efficient dredging solution, however (and this is fact rather than just BA bashing) certain individuals within the authority have decided on a preferred method irrelevant of efficiency.
  8. Subsidence? They only repaired them in the summer? Speaks volumes.
  9. Not a problem at all. I would be more than happy to take a look, if you want to PM me your details. If I can't help, I can certainly point you in the direction of someone who can.
  10. To anyone looking to volunteer some labour, I personally think that's a much more worthy cause than BA. And from what I've seen Lori and the NWDCT lot really crack on.
  11. Difficult one without seeing it with my own eyes although a hole any lower than your front board shouldn't usually be there. I don't know about that, excellent advice, you'll be doing me out of a job. The only thing to really add to it would be if putting in decking, make sure your back supporting uprights are long enough. Quite often see boardwalk that's sunk at the back after dredgings have been put on a plot and it looks terrible. Also, wood waste, chippings, shreddings, all brilliant as backfill underneath a boardwalk. Light, gentle on the piling, easy to move, usually free. There's no point wasting good money on soil you'll never see again.
  12. In all seriousness, and without any spite towards my peers, you would probably be just as competent.
  13. I don't know the ins and out, but for some reason they don't seem to have the same quantity of manual volunteers as they used to. Possibly insurance, possibly the hand holding required when utilising volunteer labour.
  14. Shame, I quite liked it. I now also look like a crazy person
  15. Isn't there one buried in your yard at Statham?
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

For details of our Guidelines, please take a look at the Terms of Use here.