Vaughan

I have used this sort of control with Locaboat (again!) and you are quite right. When you come to a helm station you have to "command" control by holding a button down until it beeps. When you are using the lever, there is a delay of almost two seconds between selecting the gear and engaging it. You also have to hold the revs at tickover while this is happening, or when you actually engage, it takes off like a bull at a gate! The electronic interface between the wires to the controls and the cables to the engine, is a big black box which can only be set up right or adjusted by a trained technician. And yes, they do fail fairly often. In the circumstances we are talking of on the Broads, they would only make matters worse.

for **** read K N O B.

The modern Morse changeover junction box already has an electric circuit which prevents the engine being started unless the two gear levers are in neutral. This could easily be used for a servo mounted at the injector pump operated by a twist control on the dash, like a volume **** on a radio. If you are not in neutral, there is no power to the circuit. If the circuit fails, then it fails safe. The interaction between the servo and the accelerator cable at the injector pump can be done by using a slider against a return spring. Exactly the same thing as on the old Ford 4D engines. Nothing new!

Anything can be done, technically, we all know that. In this case it may not have been thought necessary before, so no-one has felt the need to think it through.

Another possibility would be simply to have dual station boats fitted with the "side mount" control and not the "top mount". On the side mount, you have to physically pull out a separate button to disengage the gears, so the risk of doing it by mistake, or by clumsy operation of the lever, is very much less.

Just going back on topic for a moment . . . I have been used to dual controls on hire boats here for many years now and sort of take them for granted. We don't have any major "issues" with them but then again, they don't need the neutral acceleration feature for starting and they don't need to charge batteries on moorings as they have the engine running all day, even when in locks. Perhaps on the Broads we are not so used to them, and their type of use is different. I am wondering whether dual station boats could be fitted with a separate hand throttle (like a tractor) for use when starting, or when wanting a steady speed in neutral for charging. This could be interlocked, so that the gears cannot be engaged on the main controls unless the hand throttle is closed. Equally, the hand throttle could not be opened when a gear is engaged. In this way, the "pull out for neutral" feature on the Morse control could be disabled and could no longer cause any confusion or danger of being operated by mistake. You would still have to effect a manual change-over between stations, but then, surely, the station in use must still be the one with the helmsman sitting at it? You can't have the boat being driven by two people at the same time, from separate positions. Knowing what I do about Morse controls, I don't think a hand throttle feature would be difficult to design.

I have a saying which I always use at the end of a trial run to novice hirers : Please don't forget that I cannot teach you how to handle a boat. I can only show you the methods to follow and the rest is all practice. Half the fun of your holiday will be learning how to do it. Does that describe the first time experience for other members of this forum, who now have graduated to owning their own boats? How many years did it take you to learn how to drive your boat as well as you do now? Could you bring a boat stern on into the Maltsters quay perfectly, on your first evening out from Stalham, or Potter? Of course not. So why do you think that more documentation and registration on a boatyard, is going to improve that? I once said here, that when I get on board a boat to give a trial run, I reckon I can tell within about 20 seconds whether the party have been before or not. Wussername's reply was : "No it's 2 seconds. I just look at their shoes".

Sorry, I didn't answer the question. I had best speak for our own operation in France, as all companies' policies are perhaps not the same. On our bases I tried to have it so that each instructor did no more than 4 or 5 in an afternoon. Trouble is, we were doing them in three main languages (French English and German) so I am afraid we were sometimes doing 7 or more each. It takes an awful lot longer now as boats are so much more sophisticated. When I first ran a big base in France in 1983, we were churning them out at 10 trial runs per man, on a Saturday!

Absolutely. Again, said before, but the trial run is a personal, hands-on interaction between the instructor and the customer. It cannot just be read out off a check sheet with boxes to tick. This is what I meant by an overload of documentation, which is the usual result of official safety reviews. In my personal opinion, the box ticking check list is just an anti-litigation cop-out. It just means "don't blame us, because you signed to say you were happy to take over the boat". Also, I am afraid that, no matter how many boxes are ticked, you just cannot teach anyone anything unless they themselves are willing to LISTEN.

In fairness, this paragraph could have been written about the 50s and 60s just as easily (if not more so) as it can about 2 weeks ago. Let me make my personal position abundantly clear. I will defend the boatyards against unfair and untrue allegations made by those who do not understand the realities and base their "judgement" on little more than what they have heard in the pub. I do have the courtesy however, to give detailed and accurate replies to such allegations for the benefit of the forum as a whole. I am also very well aware, from bitter personal experience, of how bad publicity and indeed, gratuitous muck-raking, can damage the business and therefore, the Broads navigation itself. I see it as biting the hand that feeds you. That said, and as you can see at the moment, I am well prepared to criticise the yards when I see a need to do so. Yes, the trial run is absolutely vital to the safe operation. I have never said otherwise. Yes, I think that some modern designs are potentially dangerous, in-appropriate for inland waterways cruising and sometimes even just plain silly. I have also said this before and long before this latest accident happened. It is nothing new though! I remember back in the 60s when my mother first saw one of Eastick's River Ant class boats out on the river. She called it a "dipsomaniac's dream"! One thing I can promise you - when I do criticise the business, it is based on fact and long experience, rather than bank-side supposition. By the way these comments are NOT aimed at you personally.

I can see where you are "coming from"! First thing is, that a large proportion of trial run instructors on yards already, are weekend "casuals". All the same, they are trained by the yard and employed by them. I am sure the yards would much prefer it that way. I think the danger here is that if you employ "journeymen" retired instructors to help out (like me, perhaps) they become a bit of a law unto themselves and act more like character tour guides (think Beefeaters) than serious instructors. There is also the big question of responsibility. In the event of an accident, was it the yard who did a bad job, or the "Beefeater"?

I have been sitting here, thinking about how I normally give a trial run and how I train personnel to do trial runs. Training the staff is every bit as important as training the customers! Apart from the boat handling part, the description of the dual control Morse system takes longer to describe than any other part of the boat's equipment. I have just talked myself through the usual "spiel" that I go through with first time novice customers and timed it. It takes 7 minutes. Plus the time taken for all the questions they ask. Not much time left then, out of a short handover. A full trial run to novices takes a minimum of 45 minutes. If you have to repeat some of the handling manoeuvres, it will usually take about one and a half hours. So boatyards have to assess the experience of their regular customers, who don't need the full instruction, particularly the boat handling part. This has to be done, or there just wouldn't be enough time in a turnround afternoon. As more and more Broads hire boats have top decks with dual controls, is there something to be learned from this?

It is all very well to talk of how strong the current is in Yarmouth but it is fine if you time it right! Boatyards have always told their hirers (and I am sure still do) when going south, to pass the yacht station about a half hour after slack water low. This means you have generous clearance under bridges and also have the start of the flood against you, so you can easily moor straight in at the yacht station against a mild current and without any need to turn round. You can also stop easily if something happens to another boat in front of you. This means if you pass Acle Bridge at the time given for low water in the yacht station, you will time it right. It is as easy as that. All you then need to do is manage to persuade people to actually listen to such advice, which is available wherever you look for it.

Sorry, I didn't notice you had said that in your post - I was actually thinking of the report, where it was mentioned as a suggestion.

I didn't say that - I simply doubted that changes to the installation would necessarily make it safer. I also mentioned the trial run and the importance of precise explanation of the controls. Safety is about the safe installation of the equipment and the training of the operator to use it safely. I could suggest (as I do on a trial run) that the change-over should only be made when the boat is moored up. That is the safe and proper way to use the equipment. Hirers will later totally ignore this advice and indeed, I do so myself! To do so is potentially dangerous all the same.

Perhaps it is worth discussing handrails and things, and their use on the Broads. There are no specific inland waterways building standards in Europe or the UK, so those countries use ERCD cat.D as a minimum standard. Most production cruiser designs are built to cat C, so that they can be sold as offshore versions but on the Broads they are on a cat D navigation. The standards used to depend on distance offshore but nowadays they relate to wave height and wind strength. I seem to remember that cat D is waves of half a metre and winds of force 4, which is not much! Cat D says that all hull openings, etc, must be a minimum 40cm above the waterline, so these modern designs with the aft "bathing platform" deck will be at the minimum height allowed. They would certainly not pass cat C, either for the deck height or the aft French window type access door. Pulpit rails (around the edge of the bow) are used at sea when handling anchors and of course, when handling sails. They are not appropriate on the Broads as they get in the way when getting on and off with mooring ropes. On some boats they prevent this altogether and you have to get off from the stern! Same applies to a "pushpit" rail across the stern, which is just an encumbrance when mooring stern on. What is needed on the Broads is a "pilot" rail, which goes around the cabin top at the inboard side of the deck, so that you always have a rail to hold on to, but you don't have to clamber over it to get off. Same principle applies to the aft deck, where handrails should be provided on the inboard side of the deck. In my opinion, if the design of the narrow, low, aft platform deck is such a potential hazard that it needs an aft guardrail, this is more akin to treating the symptoms, but not the illness. I am also very concerned that a lot of these designs are such that anyone standing on the narrow aft platform cannot be seen by the helmsman from either of the helm positions. An example of a pilot rail, on a boat with single level, generous side decks with handrails over the entire length, at the same height all round. What I call a safe and practical inland waterways design. Built incidentally, to cat C.

I am not opposed to their installation but I am rather sceptical about their actual practical usefulness. Any more so, than I think an accident might have been prevented if the stop button were painted red instead of black. Surely, when a boat is under way, the lever which is in forward gear is the one which is selected. If you go to a control which is in neutral and cannot move the lever forward, then you know that station is not selected. It doesn't need to be more complicated than that. In Crown Blue Line I have operated literally hundreds of hire boats with Morse dual steering, over 25 years and we have had little or no problem with it. Hirers do get in a muddle with it sometimes but I cannot recall us having a serious accident caused by confusion in its use. It does, however, need precise explanation to hirers during the trial run. There is no doubt of that!

Something important I forgot to mention : dual station Morse controls can only be changed over when both gear levers are in neutral. So changing position when under way means slowing right down, putting the gear lever in neutral and then working the change-over lever. Naturally this is not recommended, when under way, but I think we all do it, sometimes!

Yes, I said I would talk about Morse controls. First thing to appreciate is that single lever controls have been with us ever since hydraulic gearboxes made them possible. Morse have always put safety features in them that are designed to prevent the sort of confusion that we see in this case. But we also know sadly, that the very best of safety features can sometimes be defeated by circumstances. There are two types of control: The top mount, (as in this case), means that when in neutral you can pull the whole lever out sideways in order to rev up the engine when starting. This feature has to exist as some old engines will not start without revving up. You may also want some revs for charging batteries when moored up. Problem with the top mount is that you can grab the handle a bit sideways when in a hurry (or panic) and pull out the whole lever, so when you pull it astern you are not actually engaging the gear, just revving the engine. The side mount control is perhaps safer here, as you have to physically pull out a button to disengage the gears. The thing about Morse dual controls is that they can only be used in one place at one time. The actual change-over, however, is only effected on the gear cables, but not on the throttle cables. There are two separate junction boxes and the throttle one is arranged so that one cable is in neutral, which allows the other one to "rev up". It is possible however, to disengage the gear on the box not in use, and moving that lever will then rev the engine up further. This could also mean that you then cannot slow down the engine on the box which is "in use". This can only happen, however, if the lever on the box not in use, has been deliberately dis-engaged. The report talks about an indication of which box is in use and this already exists, as an optional extra. It is a small dashboard panel with red and green lights, shaped like arrows, which point up or down to indicate which box is engaged. There is also an electric interlock on the most modern boxes, which prevents the engine being started unless both controls are in neutral. The report mentions that they had an engine failure prior to the accident and then could not re-start. This probably had something to do with the interlock, which has in fact proved too complicated and confusing and in most cases they are dis-connected by the boatyard. Starting in gear is very rare and not a problem, as you are moored up at the time and will soon notice! There is no Morse control that I know, which can be worked from both stations at once but there is another system used well by Locaboat (I forget the name of it) which has both levers connected by a bicycle chain running over pulleys, with the bottom lever connected to the engine by morse cables in the normal way. So both levers move together and can be controlled from either place.

Meantime, I am not singling you out personally by quoting you! There is bound to be criticism of the boatyards and it might come from me as well! There are clearly lessons to be learned and I hope they will be the right ones, rather than just another overload of documentation and boxes to tick. The report says that changes have already been made to handover procedure but I don't know what these are. I shall have to phone some friends! I have been very closely involved in boat safety all of my career, especially as chairman of the technical committee of Blakes, when we were actually writing the first Broads regulations. Long before the BSS, but they were certainly the ancestors of the BSS. It is well known by those involved in safety, that in almost all industries, safety regulations have only been put in place due to lessons learned after accidents. So I hope the hire industry "take aboard" whatever there may be to learn from this latest, but thankfully extremely rare, accident.

Not sure I understand the instructions fully, as this report is published in the public domain. It is also almost 2 years since the accident itself. If they can post comments in the EDP I don't see the difference here. What concerns me are aspects of the accident which would also concern members with private boats and should be discussed on a Broads forum, concerned with boat safety. For me, these are : 1/. The safe procedure for changing over dual station Morse controls and the interlocking attachments which can be installed on them. 2/. The need for all boats to have a recognised skipper. 3/. The need for visual and audible communication between helm positions, when more than one person is driving the boat. 4/. My first comments on the design of the aft deck on some modern boats were made on the forum well before the accident, and are still valid. I have to go out this afternoon but will post some more info about Morse controls this evening.

Yes, out of a wish to clear the course. A hire boat could just as easily have stayed there, on the public mooring. The mooring itself could have been reserved for the day, I grant you that! My concern was not for my own boat but to give the competitors more room to tack. Live and let live, as they say.

I think you have made your point, by now! From your point of view, of course. Most of the holidaymakers I have ever met would regard something like that as the high point of their adventure holiday (which is what it is) and dine out on the story for years afterwards.

I have raced in the 3RR but rather a long time ago, with Tom Percival in the River Cruiser "Swallow". The main point of the race is the order in which you decide to take the various legs, in order to make best use of the tides and the expected weather conditions. In this way it is totally unique to Broads, as far as I know. Without the leg up the Ant, the whole race would require a different planning and strategy.

Personally I doubt that either HSC or the competitors would wish to see that happen, to such a traditional river event. They would probably see it as the thin end of the wedge. Next, we would see the Thurne closed for Thurne mouth open regatta, or the Yare closed for the YNR. Next thing we know, the Ant will be closed for a fishing match or God forbid, a paddle board race. We have already seen the Waveney effectively shut down by a swimming race.