.png.5ff10cca1d0967e44a17e4a2edde2a80.png)
dom
-
Posts
682 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
4
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Articles
Posts posted by dom
-
-
23 minutes ago, grendel said:
even scarier is when you see the news that status quo are just departing for their 2024 tour and that they have been performing for as long as I have been alive
It took me several minutes to work out why that sounded odd. I was sure one of Quo had died, but their Wikipedia entry hides Rick Parfitt's name away a bit.
I can't say I'd rush out to see Quo, unless it was with a guest appearance from Maddy Prior. Her and Francis Rossi was one of those strange, random duos which added something special to the performances of both.
-
1
-
-
18 minutes ago, CambridgeCabby said:
There was a discussion not that long ago that to qualify for the fuel duty relief boats were going to have to be retro fitted with a separate tank for heating fuel I believe
There was an issue in Northern Ireland along those lines, but I know rules were introduced in that case which allowed reduction whilst still retaining a single tank.
-
1
-
-
9 hours ago, oceandawn said:
We have an extensive Furuno navigation system. Does anyone know if a camera could be integrated into this?
Video uses too much bandwidth to run over the NMEA and CAN-Bus protocols used for most connections. It's possible the unit may have dedicated camera input(s) but Furuno don't seem to make installation manuals available, so hard to tell. It might be worth looking at the back of the display, or on any hide-away boxes for an RCA socket (often yellow for video). If it hasn't got one, probably give up on the idea. If it has, it may be worth trying to track down an install guide.
-
1
-
-
42 minutes ago, grendel said:
not got hot water either on this engine- I do charge the batteries
...and a terribly inefficient charging system. Must take easily 40% of your fuel keeping the batteries topped up
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Bikertov said:
And to be fair to the marinas, they are not selling anywhere near as much as a roadside forecourt, so won't get the same bulk discounts.
I'm not sure if they even sell fuel these days but a while back, prices at Hermitage Marina in Earith used to be substantially cheaper than prices on the Broads. I can't imagine they would have been selling more fuel than the typical Broads yard either.
What you've just said about Jones Boatyard goes some way towards confirming what I suspect, ie.that RGO yards are probably all routinely offering the reduced split.
Obviously, there are 3 likely situations - the yard does it by default, they do it if you ask, or they say they don't want the admin. I was just curious to see what the current status is, as there's a link in the menu to a page (now extremely out of date, and prices that we probably all wish for!), which only shows a small number of places doing 60/40.
-
9 minutes ago, ExSurveyor said:
I understand they are a vintage vocal ensemble.
Scarily so. It's quite disconcerting when you're of similar age and remember them from their peak.
-
1
-
1
-
-
17 minutes ago, Islander said:
Schottky diodes would be better with a lower forward voltage drop.
I may well be over-thinking the drop and in reality, it'd probably only lose you a short amount of running time.
Just seems like such an elegant solution to me. Ordinarily, it'll draw from the higher voltage bank, or share the load across both. In a critical situation, it'll use all the capacity in both banks.
-
1
-
-
Excuse the hasty sketch, but can anyone with an electrical understanding see why this isn't feasible?
You'd probably want to use germanium diodes or whatever the latest option is these days to minimise drop.
-
12 minutes ago, ExSurveyor said:
I would tend to go for the domestic bank as it is usually larger.
That tends to be the best option in many cases, and the batteries generally have better deep cycle resistance than the engine battery.
The flip side is, left for longer periods, you're going to kill more batteries with most domestic banks if the pump runs the batteries too low.
The "best" option is on any bank with support from a mains charger, or solar panel. With a 100w solar panel, simplistically speaking, you'll add roughly two hours pump running for an hour of sunlight.
-
1
-
-
It's far from a numpty question. It's a bit of a perpetual debate, with no definitive answer.
Do you have a mooring wth shore power? And is there a float charger on either/both banks?
-
1
-
-
10 minutes ago, marshman said:
They appear good value as, in my experience, they often seem to find a way not to pay out!!!! The cynic in me suggests that that keeps premiums low!!!!
I think that's a universal statement with insurance these days, irrespective of market.
It was meant more as "if you're not pleasantly surprised at the premium, try someone else"!
-
Posting here, in case it becomes another drawn out discussion, but I noticed a comment on another thread earlier about buying diesel and it costing within a few pence of garage prices.
What's the availability of reduced duty diesel used for heating these days? I know there were some changes in 2022 but, as I understand it, it's still perfectly feasible to claim a 60/40 propulsion/heating split and to get lower duty on the 40% and many places on the canals support this principle.
Are many suppliers on the Broads supporting this now? I think a while back, the number was fairly small, but that could have changed in either direction?
-
1
-
-
For insurance, try Haven Knox-Johnston or Craftinsure.
Marine insurance is generally quite good value compared to cars. If in doubt, it's probably worth sharing your quote on here.
-
1
-
-
46 minutes ago, Hylander said:
I know we can all be wise after the event but hopefully (God forbid this should ever happen) we would always cut the throttle immediately, never mind about other boats of anything else, just cut that engine.
I think it's also a good opportunity to reiterate something to private owners. If you've not got a throwing line on board, please consider getting one. If someone goes overboard when you're under way, it makes it far easier to recover them from the water without having to resort to propulsion.
-
7
-
-
1 hour ago, Vaughan said:
Come off it, old chap. Isn't this getting overly officious?
Possibly. Unfortunately, certain events in my past make me someone who's not necessarily risk averse - but very keen to ensure people know the risks they're taking, or the rules they're breaking.
I do also struggle to reconcile how and when people think it's acceptable to bend the rules. If it's OK to bend the rules on children because it's disagreeable, is it OK to break the ones on speed if you've got a train to catch? If you want to buy a boat, but it's 47ft long, can you bend the rules and use it on the Ant? Do we really need to buy insurance when it's so expensive? Where does the line stop?
1 hour ago, Vaughan said:If you know all about this new bye-law, perhaps you can tell us how many people, since 1995, have actually been prosecuted by the BA for teaching their grandchildren how to drive a boat?
29 years old (assuming it wasn't already in existence) isn't exactly new (https://www.broads-authority.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/180631/Navigation_Byelaws_1995-1.pdf), and it's entirely possible it's never been used. If you really wanted to know, you could make an FOI request. Obviously, past inactivity is no guarantee it won't be used though.
1 hour ago, Vaughan said:Have you never read "Coot Club"?
Several times, the last a few weeks ago. When they made the film, one of my friend's mothers actually tried to get several of us from Horning in as extras, but without success. Sadly, she's no longer with us, but the crew did well to get her to take no for an answer!
I presume the question relates to bending rules with the Margoletta. If so, I think there's a fundamental difference between bending the rules to prevent wanton damage to nature, and bending them because they're inconvenient or disagreeable.
Unfortunately, as often seems to be the case with discussions like this, I think people are also missing the line between my playing devil's advocate and my actual views. I think the byelaw is stupid and wants revision. Whether people choose to comply with it is up to them. I don't however think it's particularly well advised to openly recommend breaking it, particularly when someone has invited BA to the thread.
-
I saw that one a week or two back. She's very lucky to have come out of it, as it bears a marked resemblance to the GY yacht station incident.
The bit which I find more than a little disconcerting is at 7:00 in the video where he says "ever since, I've been wondering if I could have handled the situation better". There is no if about it. His response was wrong and, harsh as it may sound, he needs to recognise as much. The response to someone overboard should always be to cut the throttle (and possibly the engine) until you're certain of the exact situation.
-
3
-
-
36 minutes ago, Troyboy said:
You can't legislate for the lowest common denominator, as you have phrased it.
But that's exactly what all law does.
An F1 driver could drive safely on a motorway at ridiculous speeds. They're still subjected to the same speed limits as everyone else. A lot of people can handle substantial amounts of alcohol, but they're still subjected to the same drink drive limits as everyone else. Just because your grandchild is sensible and well behaved, doesn't mean the rules should be written accordingly. There are some pretty horrid and monstrous kids around - rules obviously need to be able to curb their behaviour.
I'm not saying that the byelaw is correct - far from it, I think it's joyless and draconian. I was also helming solo below 14 (although possibly pre-dating the byelaw). All I'm trying to do is highlight the rules so people aren't inadvertently breaking them without knowledge or due consideration.
I'd also suggest openly advocating that Kate continues without giving the point at least some thought is slightly irresponsible. If she happened to get stopped and fined this afternoon, are you going to pay the fine?
6 minutes ago, Gracie said:By allowing a child the opportunity to helm a boat properly, they are the responsible river users of the future
Absolutely. Unfortunately, the rules by which we all operate, in order to protect us and the waterways say this can only start at the age of 8. We're all free to break the law and face the consequences as we see fit - but, ultimately, if you find the byelaw objectionable, it'd probably be better to ask RYA, NSBA, etc to lobby to have it revised.
-
28 minutes ago, CambridgeCabby said:
I see literally hundreds of similar helming practices throughout a season, and I must add , often far more sensibly and considerately helmed than many so called adults
There's another issue highlighted by this. If those "so called adults" have kids below 8, would you want them helming under supervision?
The difficult with laws is that they're addressing the lowest common denominator, not those who behave in an exemplary manner.
-
2 hours ago, Vaughan said:
How old is that bye-law by the way? I have not heard of it.
I believe it was enacted April 1995.
In general, I think the byelaws are fairly well written - whenever an unusual situation arises, there's usually something within them to ensure that action can be taken in a sensible manner. This one though seems a bit ill-conceived.
The irony is, an 8 year old at the helm of a large and heavy vessel might make a mistake and, by the time the supervisor takes action, they could have ploughed into numerous moored vessels (technically, if coasters were still around, an 8 year old could take the helm of one). Yet a 7 year old can't drive a dayboat, even when sat on an adult's lap.
Obviously, it's down to people's own discretion and common sense how to deal with the situation. There are however a few things to be mindful of:
- BA currently get attacked from every angle. Expecting rangers to use discretion may be ill-advised, particularly with a new head of safety recently recruited. A ranger might well take the view that, if caught on camera turning a blind eye, they might lose their job.
- An additional offence is committed if you allow a child under 14 to helm at speed above 6mph ground speed, which might be the case crossing Breydon
- Section 30(7) "No person shall cause or permit another person to be at the helm of a power-driven vessel" might potentially mean an owner or boatyard could also be prosecuted if you're caught
- A fine of up to £1k could be applied.
There is obviously also an argument that, if we choose to bend this rule, why can others not bend, say, the rules on speed, or navigating under the influence of drugs?
-
32 minutes ago, YnysMon said:
If you were sat behind him the whole time and therefore in overall control of the boat how could any bylaws have been broken?
Byelaw 30 - Navigation by Minors
(1) Subject to paragraphs (2) (3) and (4) no person below the age of 14 years shall be at the helm of a power-driven vessel.
(3) Subject to paragraph (5) a person who has reached the age of 8 years but is below the age of 14 years may be at the helm of a power-driven vessel other than a vessel as described in sub-paragraphs (2) (a) and (b) provided that the following conditions are satisfied:
(a) That person is under the supervision of a person who is in the vessel and who has reached the age of 18 years; and
(b) The person who is providing supervision remains at all times close to the helm so as to be able immediately to take the helm in the event of necessity; and
(c) The person who is providing supervision maintains at all times a proper navigational watch.So an adult can supervise a child 8-14, but below 8 is not permitted under any circumstances.
God knows who thought that one was a good idea - or why the age needs to be there. The byelaw demands that the adult can access the helm, so I can't see any reason why above or below 8 makes much difference.
-
4
-
-
3 minutes ago, Vaughan said:
Perhaps when it is a beautiful wooden classic Broads Broom design, but considered "too late" to join in a little toddle up the river to Surlingham and back?
Don't you find that rather sad?
The only model I can think of with surviving examples and missing from the club's list is the Robb. Not sure if that's a wilful omission or simple oversight though?
-
32 minutes ago, marshman said:
And people complain about the facilities on the Broads and the high tolls!! Puts it all in perspective a bit!!
Unfortunately, EA and BA are now starting to use each other's tolls to justify rises. If EA go 10%, BA will probably follow suit.
-
4 hours ago, TheQ said:
The forecast is beginning to firm up
Rain or dry do you think? I'm tempted to head up to spectate, but can't decide if it's worth the drive given the gamble with the weather.
-
6 hours ago, Vaughan said:
When is a Broom not a Broom?
I suspect that's the dilemma the owner's club faces. If it has a Broom build plate, it's hard to argue it's not one. If however it doesn't have a plate, how can you differentiate between that and a similar moulding built elsewhere? You'd need to have access to all the old build records, but presumably they're still an asset being included in the ongoing sale of the yard.
I'd imagine in cases like the AF42, Broom probably viewed the arrangement as being "white label" and didn't add plates, but you might know otherwise. I would have thought if they were attaching their name (and reputation) to the builds, the cost for the build plate would probably be fairly substantial and not something a hire yard would have much reason to pay?
-
1
-
Reversing Cameras
in General Discussion
Posted
And another great Norfolk boatbuilder, who did his apprenticeship at Windboats I believe?
Presumably his boat would either be stunnning and fabulously maintained, or, like plumbers with leaky taps, horribly neglected, because everyone else was always calling on his talents with their boats so he never got time to spend on his own!