Meantime

We can but dream!!

Apart from the sheer cost, I can imagine the RSPB having something to say about it, never mind the way it would change the aesthetic of the area. Lets please remember that Breydon Water is enjoyed by the many people who walk or jog along either side, who enjoy the open scenery, who go there to bird watch or paint or take pictures. Breydon is much more than just boating. It was John Cressey who placed signs on the posts near the bottom end of Breydon to direct boats into the channel. These proved to dramatically reduce the number of grounding on Breydon. They were deemed such a good idea that eventually the BA put some more permanent ones on the posts. It is in that same area that the missing posts are now causing issues I believe. The answer therefore has to be to replace those posts as soon as possible and increase the signage. Perhaps use a VERY temporary set of buoys strung together to close the gap. Lets remember that the BA wanted to take over control of Breydon Water. IF a proper annual check was carried out of all the posts and their condition and any that were deemed to be near end of life replaced there should be no missing posts apart from the odd one or two that maybe get knocked over. Although if properly installed and in good condition it should be difficult to knock one over. A missing post should be a rare occurrence. Currently there is two or three missing all next to each other in an area that is notorious for boats going the wrong way. Surely it is not beyond the capabilities of the BA and rescue authorities to plot where each grounding takes place and then to increase the number of posts and signs in those such areas. Another common area used to be coming down the Yare past the Berney Arms, boats carrying straight on towards where there used to be a pub, which never had water access, but many tried. New signage there has improved the situation there over the last year or two. Finally the last bit has to be about education, especially of hirers. Lets face it, whilst it is not unknown for private boats to stray outside the channel, it is far more common for hire boaters. Perhaps it needs to be a standard part of the handover that the hirer is asked whether they want to cross Breydon or not. If the answer is yes they get an extra bit of tuition and a copy of the tide tables and a temporary permit that acknowledges they have had the extra tuition and understand the albeit minimal, but extra risk of crossing Breydon. Anyone crossing Breydon without the permit pays the cost of any recovery. In fact why not put a 2 or 3 page crossing Breydon Water leaflet and a copy of the current tide tables on the BA tolls website and ask toll payers to tick a declaration that they have downloaded and read it as a part of the tolls renewal process in the same way as the insurance declaration, that would then cover all the privateers as well.

Your so glad you bought a green car. OH! you didn't. He didn't want it to blend in with the boat.

I think that's a bit of a harsh statement. The pro's EMS know where the channel is and were only outside the channel to rescue a stranded boat. Every rescue carries a risk. That's why everything should be done to minimise the number of rescues needed.

I'm sure you could purchase one of these for your cat. I guess if your mate really wanted to, he could always have a handle sewn onto one of these to make recovery easier!!

You'd be surprised at what people shop for!!!

By all accounts it was!

Low water was at 22:23 on Saturday. The incident was called in on Saturday afternoon and they were airlifted off at 4:50am Sunday morning as the tide was falling again, so they had already been through a high tide cycle. If it was thought that the boat wouldn't refloat on a high tide I would have thought they would have been lifted off the evening before.

You know the full facts that they were first timers then?

Not really, because as I said in my first post, I went through at 11:05am a fraction after low slack water, so the tide had already turned. They couldn't have caught the end of slack water. However had they have done I'm sure an easier rescue could have been made. Not wishing to speculate further I can add the following facts. One of the boats was at the yacht station at 11:05 and looking back from the far side of Breydon, nothing else had followed us across Breydon. We also passed The Spirit of Breydon at The Berney Arms as it turned to go across Breydon. So yes the next bit is speculation, but I wouldn't have thought The Spirit of Breydon would leave a cruiser stuck on the mud IF the cruiser had left an hour or so after we passed the yacht station.

The BA took over responsibility for Breydon from Peel Ports who I think were only to happy to see the back of it. There was then some specialists contractors employed to replace a number of posts and to give training to some of the BA staff who were then going to be getting some new toys and doing the maintenance in future. It looks like the buoys have been placed in pairs where the missing posts were. However to the uninitiated looking at the posts and then the low buoys and then the posts again, it could look like it's marking the channel straight onto the mud. The channel bears left just where those posts are missing, so it could be easily assumed that you continue straight between the buoys.

Seems you won't have long to wait. Another is sitting on the mud and from the picture I've seen it looks to be in a very similar place to the missing Green posts I mentioned earlier. I fear there could be many more this year unless the BA pull their finger out.

Too many times I've seen the procession of boats all leaving Yarmouth between 9:30 and 10 punching the tide back towards Acle when it might perhaps be better to have waited a few hours for the incoming tide to help them. I don't think the pricing structure based around daytime and overnight mooring works there given the tide times are not static. A simple 25hr period from the time you arrive might be better? If you follow the advice and hopefully arrive at low water, you would be leaving at low water. As for the rest, well one of the boats was moored at Yarmouth when we went past, therefore it is not speculation that it left after low slack water and would either have gone aground on a rising tide, or on the falling tide just after high water, since the incident was called in on Saturday afternoon. The tide times are not speculation because we used them to pass Yarmouth at just after slack low water. I suspect EMS would confirm that it would have been easier to pull the boat off the mud on a rising tide, which would have been occurring pretty much from 10am to 4:30pm.

I might be tempted to wonder when the engine broke? Was it as a result of trying to get off the mud with a blocked intake? I went through Yarmouth yacht station at 11:05am on Saturday a fraction after slack low water and then crossed Breydon. At that point there were no stranded boats. I did notice two missing green posts at the lower end which had been replaced with 6 green buoys. From one of the pictures I'm fairly certain that's where they ran aground. To the uninformed it does looks slightly more confusing than normal there. From the reports it appears it was called in on Saturday afternoon, which would have been much closer to high water. We passed one of those boats moored up at Yarmouth Saturday morning. As has been said previously, following the advice and going across at slack low water may have helped them, and more to the point their rescuers if indeed there had been an engine failure before going aground. Going aground on a rising tide at 11am would have given EMS ample opportunity to tow them off to the yacht station. I make no apology for speculating, but a day out in Yarmouth and leave the yacht station before getting clobbered for the overnight mooring fee, means they would have been leaving just before high water, or perhaps just after high water once they had enough clearance under the bridge. I.E. late Saturday afternoon. I've said it before the mooring fee policy needs to be addressed at Yarmouth. Edited to add: There was a strong bitterly cold North Easterly on Saturday which lasted through the night. It wouldn't have been at all pleasant out on Breydon overnight.

It's slightly misleading. The graphic is for deaths within 28 days of a positive test. The text you highlight is actually a link which obviously you cannot get to in Hylanders screen grab. The link takes you to, as you might imagine, all the data in various different formats and with different parameters. It's actually about time they did away with the Covid dashboard as it has largely become meaningless. Since LFT test are no longer free for the majority of people testing has diminished dramatically skewing all the other figures. Thankfully it has also become a milder disease for the majority and the hospital admission figure has risen as a result of people being tested when they attend hospital for something else and being told, Oh by the way you have Covid as well!!.

That will be why Easter Sunday is so late this year then!!

Hope you feel better soon. With regard to your testing positive on day 10 still, this for me is part of the worrying thing. I seemed to get it and test negative fairly quickly, days 6 and 7, but a friend who got it at the same time also tested positive up to day 10. Current Government advice is to try and stay at home for 5 days!!!! In my friends case he still has a cough even though he has tested negative for 2 weeks. He most certainly would have been spreading it had he followed the 5 day advice. I had a really good day yesterday and felt able to tackle quite a few jobs that needed doing, but really paid for it last night and today. Over tired and couldn't sleep, and today felt like I run a marathon yesterday.

The Germans were working on a solution to that problem, but not sure how far it has progressed. It also needed the right geography. The idea was to place the wind farm on high land next to a large reservoir and also have a reservoir on lower ground. With strong winds the wind farm would supply the grid, but with some of the power used to pump water from the low reservoir up into the higher one. When the wind dropped below a certain level the pumping would stop and dam gates opened to allow water to flow from the higher reservoir down into the lower one powering hydro electric generators. The idea was to try and smooth our or make the supply of electric more predictable and use the excess wind to restock the higher reservoir as a backup source of electric on less windy days.

I'm not sure which world you live in? but in my world I see people starting to buy electric cars and hybrid cars. I drive around and see solar panels on house roofs. Keeping it on topic just about, one of Richardson's roofs is virtually completely covered in the things. Whenever I drive up to Norfolk from Essex I see more and more onshore wind generators and there is heavy investment in offshore wind generators. It may not be happening quickly enough, but every KWh generated by those methods is a KWh not generated by burning oil, gas or coal. So yes we have done something about it, and are continuing to do so, but arguably it could be speeded up. Wanton destruction of property and needless disruption to peoples lives is not the answer.

It should be remembered that whilst it is no longer a legal requirement to self isolate if you have Covid, the official guidance is still to "try" and stay at home. You would imagine the NHS would be one of the last department to flout official Government advice. Oh and take a look at the rising death figures and hospitalisations, this thing may be milder, but it is still killing and it is still very unpleasant. Having managed to avoid it for 2 years I finally caught a bout three weeks ago. I was doubled jabbed and boosted and the initial infection came and went within about 5 days, but the lingering after effects of fatigue and shortness of breath are still with me. I did self isolate until I'd had three successive negative tests and then still wore a mask when I went to the supermarket to protect others. I wouldn't want this again and would urge everyone where possible to follow the Government advice and stay at home if possible if you get it. I didn't like having it and would certainly not wish to pass it on to anyone if I could avoid it.

I think you'll actually find that the price came down due to a lot of the world being in lockdown and closing down production facilities and therefore the demand for oil fell of a cliff. The rules of supply and demand, no demand, the price comes down. With the easing of Covid restrictions and the world rushing to catch up with lost production of goods, suddenly the demand returned and exceeded previous levels hence the price rising steadily even before the Ukraine war which has caused the perfect storm in energy prices.

Now I apologise in advance if this is seen as controversial but it's all in the public domain. Most of The Broads companies are run as Limited companies, it is perhaps significant that the one that has been the main subject of this thread is run as a Limited Liability Partnership, a company structure more normally used for professional services companies such as accountants or solicitors.

So we appear to be going full circle here. If I read you right you appear to be saying that large yards run by accountants are done so to extract maximum profit from the customer for the shareholders or owners, at the expense of the boats looking a bit more shabby. One has to wonder if the bean counters take or encourage the same approach when it comes to maintenance or making those ageing batteries last another year than they really should.

Why? I've never understood this logic. There are only so many hours in a day. If it takes one lad / yard hand an hour to clean a hull, a yard such as Bridgecraft probably need 3 or 4 to clean all their fleet. If another yard is 10 times bigger, it just needs 10 x as many lads / yard hands. It's the same equation whether its mechanics or cleaners for the inside of the boat. Personally I would say its easier for the larger yards as they have more staff available to redeploy to cover for illness / staff absence.

I suspect this has more to do with the other topic of running engines at moorings, than rising water levels and health and safety. People have complained in the past about being told off for not being "quiet" at the quiet moorings and I along with many others have defended the owners of the quiet moorings and their right to enjoy their properties in peace and quiet without listening to the throbbing of boat engines on moorings that they are providing and then being abused when they ask people to turn off their engines. You reap what you sow and now even those who knew what quiet moorings meant, are going to pay for the loss of this facility!!