MauriceMynah

What's so magical about 16? Given the discussion on another thread about Micro Scooters. anything with wheels who's primary function is to convey carbon based life forms should be taxed and insured... even bloody prams if you like!!!!!

This thread, like so many others has wandered off a bit, I have to admit I'm thinking of starting another, just to highlight the most important aspect of where this has gone. We want stuff. All broads users want things. Things cost money. Somebody has to pay that money, so ... Whoi should pay for what and when? Boaters want moorings. Fishermen use those moorings to fish from, walkers trundle along them and twitchers stand on them to... twitch I suppose! That's just one example, there are more and certainly better ones. I do not have the answer to this conumdrum, nor I suspect does the BA, the Environment agency, or even Peter Weller (well ok, he just might ) but our not having the answers, does not make the questions go away. Moorings, Waste disposal, speeding boats, weird algea blooms wot I can't spell, tidal surges, and on and on and on. The list is almost endless. So ladies and gentlemen,I put it to you that we should all consider the prospect, the implications and the practicalities of Forty two.

Something I've NEVER been accused of.

I await their reply with abated breath.

I tend to agree, it was a bit of a pain. My system rebooted itself but hung within the reboot. I left it about 3 hours before I risked turning it off and on again. All was pretty much straight forwards after that. I had almost all friday without the pooter !

Not a criticism Andy but a genuine question. Wouldn't it make more business sense if 'out of season' you opened at weekends but closed Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday? Surely with so many private boats around, weekends are the time your services are most needed.

Much my thought !

and if I read Timbo's most excellent explanation correctly.................................It'd be a bloody miracle

Sorry Mr Q sir, I cannot agree with that. If there is enough force to strain a cleat, how much force is being exerted on the mudweight? It cannot possibly hold. The further away the mudweight is from the bow the more effective it might be stopping forward/aft movement (as long as the water level doesn't change) but the less effective it will be to stop port/starboard movement. I accept that in places like Womack Water where the mud is deep, sticky and luscious, a mudweight dropped straight down will have an effect. This is proven by how much of a b*****d it is to get it back up in the morning, perhaps Ranworth is similar, but I can think of no other stern mooring where the mudweight serves any other purpose than bringing sludge on board.

Mudweighting the bow at a stern on mooring has always struck me as a complete waste of time, but I do wonder... am I correct in this ? First lets take a tidal mooring. Should the weight be deployed at the high water or at low water? At high, it will just go slack (thus doing nothing) as the water goes down. If thrown over the bow at low water, it will drag up (but work a bit) until high water, when it will just go slack. throwing it out as far as one can makes only a marginal difference, On non tidal water, think about what you are asking the weight to do. To hold several tons of boat still from a side wind. Yeah, like it's going to do that !!! Please advise !

Love it

I strarted having broads holidays in the 1960s, the water is far clearer almost everywhere than it used to be. Less toilet paper too. I'm sure the drop in boating traffic has much to do with the improving clarity.

THe Broads Authority tide table says that at high water on a normal tide (whatever that is) Potter Heigham bridge has 6' 6" clearance! Yeah right !!!!!

Andrew, For as long as "no win no fee" lawers exist, waving £1000's under the noses of anyone who hurts thenselves, Land owners will be reluctant to let the general public have access to their land. For as long as public libility insurance costs an arm and a leg, Land owners will be reluctant to let the general public have access to their land. For as long as there are people out there who know how to "play the law game" Land owners will be reluctant to let the general public have access to their land. These days we have people who will bump into your boat and sail off into the sunset without so much as an acknowledgement, let alone an apology. What level of respect do you think they will proffer to the land on which they moor? Do you imagine they will take their litter home? Who will pay for the damage done? What a delightful thought! and what level of social responsibility are you expecting from the general public? What sort of behaviour can the land owner expect. Until such time as society encourages... no, demands that people act in a socially acceptable way land owners will not welcome the general public onto their land. It's a sorry state of affairs but that's how it is. Blame society as a whole, not the land owners.

Nah Tim... no "but"s

Clive very rarely posts here these days as he didn't get on well with the newish format when the site updated itself some months back. Thus his silence should not be misunderstood.

In fairness that's not quite true. Had I not had a mobile phone between 2006 and 2013 I'd not have been able to visit my boat, not have had a holiday and not have seen the broads in that period. I was my parents live-in carer. Frances (my sister) took over whilst I was away but needed me to be contactable. Thank God for mobile phone technology! I do see Speedtriples point, but it's far from as black and white as his post implies. I needed it for important things, but as I had it, lesser things also got done. More technology will come, but what is actually needed is more self dicipline on when to use it, more self control on how dependent you are on it and more common sense on evaluating it's importance. It also needs managers to recognise the stupidity of sending someone off on holiday, then making them work whilst they are away. For the selfemployed,...reread the fourth paragraph..... unless you are away on holiday, in which case read it when you come back!

I'll second that !

Nah, I was just driving near the place, saw the road sign and thought up that little ditty.

If you find yourself in Basingstoke and you haven't any money, Other people start to laugh, but you won't think its funny, So you go along to Barclays Bank, and their 'hole that's in the wall' but the ruddy things been vandalized and gives no dosh at all. That's when you start to kick yourself for being so damn fool rash for going all the way to Basingstoke without your sodding cash!

Yep, In London it's called Downing Street.

Just to clarify one or rather two small points, King Arthur wasn't in Norfolk or indeed Suffolk,and certainly not Cornwall or Devon as is so often implied.. He was in Surrey for most of his time, further there was no "Round table" There was of course a table but it was of the standard rectangular shape being made of a wooden frame covered in pig skin. Yes it is true that he and his knights (who were, as Tim so rightly states, a bunch of bully boys and thugs,) would meet 'round' this table to discuss where to go next to raise monies for the various campaigns that were to be embarked upon. In the event of disagreement between the knights, Arthur would slam his fist down on this table causing the pig skin so sound off like a large bass drum. It was the constrution of this table that caused this often misquoted legend when the good people of Surrey would talk about King Arthur and the Knights of the rind table. . . . . . . My turn to get my coat!

Hmmm. It's been on the Jeremy Kyle show and it's been in the EDP. I guess it must be true then!

If the moorings go up too much, they won't reach the water!

I have often wondered about fixing a piece of angle iron right across the stern within the outboard mounting transom to b****r up any chainsaw blade.