Interesting New Sign

[Guest]

1 minute ago, MauriceMynah said:

I'm in total agreement with Vaughan in that the problem is wash, and that wash is governed purely by speed through water and not speed over land. We also know that different hulls create different levels of wash, so all your "sat navs" and other gismos are a total waste of time as far as the actual problem is. Even the measured 1/4 mile posts don't give the skipper the needed information.

Gentlemen, I have the solution, and although it's simple, it will be next to impossible to police. thus making it perfect for the Broads.

Sadly it can only work on boats with Rev counters, but that's not a problem any greater than those we already have.

Firstly each  boats rev counter will be marked off with colour coded zones we shall say green, amber, red, and black. these "zones" will be tailored to each boat and will be based on the amount of wash which that boat generates when at those revs.

Instead of speed limits being displayed as numbers, they would be displayed as colours and called "Wash limits"

HOWZAT !!!

What if your colour blind 

[TheQ]

You know what would happen, each boat yard would end up with different colours schemes, like the fat content on packaged foods or the different coloured waste bins round the country..

[Malanka]

Seen plenty of boats planing a beautiful pearl 40 something out on a demo last week. Water skiers outside the pub in Brammerton which we go to watch as they are very good. 

Does anyone know what the speed limits are officially recorded as? 

The reason i ask is that in my work I deal with national authorities and the issue of rounding on a daily basis. Technically for me if the limit is stated in the documents as 5 rather than 5.0 then anything up to 5.5 is not really outside the limit as stated. Plus how many speed recorders on boats are actually that accurate. They are that precise of course but precision and accuracy are not the same. Ask any engineer. 

Personally I am more concerned with wash than speed. Why not have wash limited boats ( within reason) we don't leave any wash at all short of 5 mph. Unless we tow our sailing tender in which case it's much bigger.  A guy actually came up to me and said they knew something about wash in the fifties didnt they last week. I had to agree. 

Having witnessed one of Timbos encounters ( I had just put the video camera down) with simply appalling boat handling and heard seen and fealt the sickening crunch resulting from a pivoting 42 footer slamming the corner of the boat into the side of RT  opposite the Swan. I can honestly opine from experience that my major concern is boat handling not speeding or wash. Where were the authorities when RT was struck such a blow. Having been told after being struck five times ( yes five) by a large cruiser attempting to moor with tide and wind ( yes it was pointed out they should come in the other way) at Acle bridge that and I quote " it's ok dear that's what insurance is for", by the harpie masquerading as a boater it beggars belief it really does. 

Make the hand over an hour for new hirers and less for more experienced people and have a short test or skill demonstration to the insurers before they insure privateers. Companies won't insure folks with no driving license and I would suggest some vessels are insured for considerably more than their owners car.

Sick boat owner rant over. 

 

M

[MauriceMynah]

To Jayfire,

If you are colour blind, you display a red, green and white stick from your bow (or a blue fender), you slow right down and stop at all pubs.

To Mr Q,

I'm sure the BA could set a standard, how about "National Parks Blue",  "National Parks Green", "National Parks Amber" and "Jenny Morgan Red". 

[LondonRascal]

It could be the case that the chap who moors at this particular section choose the site based upon the pub being almost next door, a lovely wide vista to wake to each morning and the likely reasonable price charged for a bankside mooring. 

After getting increasingly frustrated with the wash of passing boats he might have gone through the usual channels with the Broads Authority - providing them with the boats name, registration number, time and location of the incident. It happened time and again and little was ever done.  Now increasingly frustrated he took actions into his own hands how he saw fit, the video camera.  Now the reporting was followed with video clips of the offending boats - but the Broads Authority still could do little about it "We will get Frank to spend an hour next week with his speed gun there" might have been a response.

Now furious he has made his own signage in a desperate attempt to warn boaters to slow down and justify his filming actions 'Don't you come having a go at me about this did you not see the sign' type of thing.

I get it - I could well imagine that it could get annoying sat on your boat day after day hearing the approach of a boats engine, the water from the bow wave cascading down and as it passes waiting for the inevitable rocking and splashing over and over day after day.  But the chap decided to live (or at least spend a great deal of time) on his boat, on a main river side mooring  he must expect this sort of thing to happen.

Now back in the day there was far more focus on wash I remember the photo in the booklet from Hoseasons: Watch your wash! Don't make waves. There was also talk about how wash effected the river banks, nesting birds and moored boats.  It was this that caused me and my family to always make sure we slowed a little when passing moored boats even if we were within the speed limit.  I think that a larger campaign about wash would be more effective than speed limit enforcement.

As for the chap in question, I've got to be honest if I were to make some cheeky signs at least make them 'probable' this means something like the Broads Authority themselves might do (but as I have mentioned in the past they have no uniform signage style or typeface even). 

[Vaughan]

I didn't realise the speed/wash discussion was still going on, as I was thinking of posting a suggestion.

"In my day" all the river inspectors' launches had calibrated rev counters, which they did by running over the measured quarter miles. This was their only way of telling the speed of another boat, by following it and matching its speed. So for them, the limit was judged on boat speed, not speed "over the ground"

My local inspector was Tony Webster, who was already a friend as he was an ex owner of the wherry Dragon, when she was in Thorpe. My yard at Womack was one of his coffee stops, and at the start of the season I would take one of my hire boats out on the Thurne with him and run alongside the launch at 5MPH and 7MPH. This gave me the exact readings on my rev counter at those speeds. What's more it was genuine "boat speed" which had nothing to do with any current.

Once I had one boat calibrated, I could then do all the rest by using the first one as the standard. So not only did the hirers have an accurate reading, but the River Commissioners knew I had done it, so if one of my boats was speeding, the hirer had no excuse! I know a lot of yards used to do this, and maybe they still do? I am sure that a private owner nowadays could ask the local ranger for a run alongside his launch to calibrate the rev counter, and the ranger would be pleased to oblige.

This is why, for me, the limits have to be based on "boat speed" since, after all, they are based on the wash you make, not your speed over the ground on the GPS.

[grendel]

I can still see the problem battling against the tide at great yarmouth where one might have the choice of make excess wash - or be going backwards towards those bridges.

[Guest ExMemberKingFisher]

With regards to the stretch of water past the yacht station in Yarmouth, I believe the speed limit is still 7 knots**, therefore wash is likely to be the problem far sooner than speed? In which case if pushing the tide a very slow walking pace should allow you to make progress whilst remaining the correct side of the wash byelaws.

** The stretch of the Bure past the yacht station used to be controlled by the Great Yarmouth port authority and therefore subject to it's 7 knots harbour limit. Since the BA have taken over that stretch of river, the speed byelaws and more specifically the boundaries have not been changed. This must mean that the stretch is either now speed limit exempt? or still subject to the 7 knots limit, even though the GYPA no longer control that stretch. I guess the only way the BA can police speed on this stretch is vis it's wash byelaw?

[LondonRascal]

Since the Bure and Breydon now falls within the control of the Broads Authority (I think until Haven Bridge) the actual speed limit past the Yacht Station is 5 MPH.

There is signage to this effect opposite the moorings as I have show below from one of my videos.  If I am punching an ebbing current here, regardless of the speed limit shown by GPS I always slow to reduce speed and wash as otherwise your likely get a telling off from one of the guys manning the Yacht Station.

 

[Guest ExMemberKingFisher]

19 hours ago, LondonRascal said:

Since the Bure and Breydon now falls within the control of the Broads Authority (I think until Haven Bridge) the actual speed limit past the Yacht Station is 5 MPH.

There is signage to this effect opposite the moorings as I have show below from one of my videos.  If I am punching an ebbing current here, regardless of the speed limit shown by GPS I always slow to reduce speed and wash as otherwise your likely get a telling off from one of the guys manning the Yacht Station.

 

I would be interested in the legality of that sign! On a strong ebb tide I have gone through Yarmouth at 6.5mph just to maintain some steerage with not even a ripple of wash. On a strong ebb or flood it is impossible to go safely through at 5mph.

As you say Londonrascal, the Lower Bure and Breydon now falls within the control of the Broads Authority and it has byelaws in place to regulate how it controls the area. The 1995 Navigation byelaws define the area covered by the byelaws and state that there are effective down to a line drawn across the Bure between grid references TG5190 1009 and TG 5193 1012. The map for guidance shows this as the upriver end of Port of Yarmouth Marina, or what is now left of the derelict Marina Quays. The 1992 Speed byelaws define the speed limits along all the area covered by the BA and the last section on the Lower Bure is as follows, 6mph Stracey Arms to Great Yarmouth - From 402 metres downstream of the Stracey Arms projecting quay to a point where the boundary between Caister Parish and Great Yarmouth crosses the left bank of the River Bure. That location as you would expect matches the one given in the 1995 Navigation Byelaws.

The 2009 Broads Act allowed for the eventual transfer of the Lower Bure, lower Waveney, New Cut, Breydon Water and Mutford Lock to the Broads Authority and effectively extended the powers of the 1995 Navigation Byelaws to cover those areas upon transfer. There was no update to the Speed Byelaws or re-designation of the speed limits within the areas transferred which means they are either still classified as per old legislation or now effectively there is no speed limit that is enforceable.

To the best of my knowledge, all the speed zones and signage still matches exactly the very detailed zones as defined by the 1992 Speed Byelaws. Interestingly The New Cut always had a speed limit covered by the BA Speed Byelaws. To this day the first speed limit sign you see as you come off Breydon is still at the boundary of the area originally covered by the BA under the 1995 Navigation Byelaws.

I'm sure it's a task that The BA have on the back burner to get around to one day.  Probably after someone successfully challenges a prosecution for speeding through Yarmouth.

Edited to add that the Speed Byelaws 1992 stated that the Speed Byelaws repealed the Great Yarmouth Port and Haven (River Speed Limits) (Vessels) Byelaws 1989. The Broads Act 2009 made no such reference relating to the transferred areas to the BA.

 

[LondonRascal]

As far as my memory serves, the speed limit sign as you head up river passed the Yacht Station is not of the usual design, I think it is a red '5' on a white background with a red boarder. I wonder if this makes it non enforceable to begin.

The problem with speed and why the Broads are in MPH not Knots is because when the speed limits were first talked of the point was to make them ways for hirers to understand - so they would be in MPH just the same as the roads.

As means to detect speed has come - from radar to now laser speed guns then are used from a fixed location - a moor boat or the shore so speed over ground has become the measure to which the Broads Authority use even though it makes little sense especially at locations such as Reedham.  Furthermore when the speed limits as we've already discusses only came in as a means to control wash from boats. Going past the quay at Reedham with a fast flowing ebbing current would not make a blind bit of wash but coming the other way going against that same current flat out and you'd be causing a great deal. It all about keeping an eye for wash and so far it's stood me well over the years.

You could argue that it would be unsafe to navigate Great Yarmouth (through the Yacht Station area) at any time other than slack water - and then maintaining the speed limit would not be an issue, but that is not always possible. What I tend to do is once you pass the first advanced bridge gauge and the quay at the yacht station comes into view have a careful look along to see if any boats there look as if they might be departing because that can give crucial time to react if you have the current under you and someone lets go of their ropes and heads out across the river.

The most challenging time I have had personally is rounding the yellow post with a pretty strong flood tide behind me to be met by three yachts from Hunters desperately trying to get under Vauxhall Bridge with one then spinning sideways, just as a hire boat coming down stream ends up colliding with it and a right mess unfolding before me.  The yachts at that state of tide, with masts down and no other means of control or propulsion should never have been there (that is just my view) but I guess they underestimated the power of the current they were up against  trying to quant along against it.  Sure was interesting trying to hold station keeping a fair few revs on astern.

[grendel]

Just one thought, sort of on topic, but at a tangent really (arent they all) did I hear somewhere that wherries would come down with the tide with an anchor on the bottom from the stern to keep the boat heading down river, as they would not have steerage way.

( to me this sounds a great way to keep the channel dredged down that way).

[marshman]

The other way! Used to hang chains usually from the bow so they would steer in reverse!!

We still carry chains so this can be done, but tend not to even have them out for passages through Yarmouth these days but even a few years ago we used to range them out on the foredeck in an orderly fashion with a fishermans on the end. Bung over the fisherman's and then stand very well clear - I am sure several of the old boys would have gone over this way and it would not have been pleasant I guess.

I guess getting them back in would have been more difficult - you might even had to have used the winch!!

[Guest ExMemberKingFisher]

15 minutes ago, marshman said:

The other way! Used to hang chains usually from the bow so they would steer in reverse!!

We still carry chains so this can be done, but tend not to even have them out for passages through Yarmouth these days but even a few years ago we used to range them out on the foredeck in an orderly fashion with a fishermans on the end. Bung over the fisherman's and then stand very well clear - I am sure several of the old boys would have gone over this way and it would not have been pleasant I guess.

I guess getting them back in would have been more difficult - you might even had to have used the winch!!

You mention that you tend not to use the chains these days. Is that because generally speaking the flood and ebb don't seem as strong as they used to be? I do wonder how much the lack of dredging is affecting the upper reaches?

[Vaughan]

What Marshman describes is known as "dropping down" through Yarmouth and some of the older skippers on private yachts can still be seen doing it.

I hasten to explain that Marshman is not suggesting throwing a fisherman over the side of the wherry although some might feel that's not a bad idea!

He is referring to a fishermans anchor.  

[ranworthbreeze]

Some of the hire narrow boats on adjacent  canals to rivers such as the Seven & Trent still have anchors in their well decks for use on flooded rivers.

Regards

Alan

[Vaughan]

1 hour ago, KingfishersTime said:

You mention that you tend not to use the chains these days. Is that because generally speaking the flood and ebb don't seem as strong as they used to be? I do wonder how much the lack of dredging is affecting the upper reaches?

Your comment ought to be the subject of a new thread as there are many of us who consider that there is not enough dredging of the lower Bure these days. This has a serious influence on many things that we call "natural" such as tidal flow, water level (think Potter Heigham bridge) and the ability of the river basin to cope with surge tides as well  as local storm flooding. There are some who also believe this is affecting flora and fauna in the upper reaches, such as Hickling.

[marshman]

Kingfisher - the use of chains was in reality for unpowered craft. These days with modern technology and the more accepted use of engines, it is just something we do not do any more. I think some of our older skippers would like us to employ the old methods all of the time but we live in a real world, and if a more convenient, easier, method is available it will be used.

If wherrymen had had motors, no one would ever have dreamed up the method of going backwards with chains! I guess WYC may still use them on Hathor but to be honest, when we transit GY you are always considering risk, and generally at this time of year, the outboard and careful planning enable us to transit without much difficulty, given neap tides!

[LondonRascal]

Upon our recent trip to Beccles there was dredging going on not far from the beginning of the first set of posts that mark the shallows on the lower Bure. 

Sometime back there was a call from the Broads Authority to submit ideas for new innovative ways for dredging to be carried out – up for some EU funding too.  This was after a failed attempt at a Dutch system whereby you suck up mud and spew it back out into the water stream as the current runs at its fastest during the ebb.  Idea is the silt now suspended in the water is taken away from the river system.

I think what actually ended up happening was the current was never strong enough and lasted for sufficient time to succeed and the silt just ended up at the mouth of the Bure and Breydon more. 

So I got in touch with an innovative idea but never heard anything more.  Complicated and expense yes, but boy I bet it would do wonders (least I think it would). I have mentioned this before but will go over things in less detail again.

You have a large barge (or two) they cruise about the rivers continuously and at the front of the first barge a spade tool is lowed (think of a scoop) this is quite wide and ploughs into the muddy bottom of the river and as the silt slides up a large suction pipe takes it up.  This means the barge system can continue to proceed along the river.

The ‘solution’ that is effectively mud and water is then sent into a cyclonic system (think Dyson) which forces solids at high speed out to the edge and the liquid water and silt falls down the middle and from there is fed through what is effectively a ‘steam engines boiler’. 

This super heats the water/silt mix through a series of tubes and the steam produced is condensed and returns to the river as pure water. The heated slurry mix then is pushed out the end of the tubes and then is hydraulically compressed into ‘brickets’ (much the same consistency of ground coffee once it has been in an Espresso machine).

The resulting liquid that would come out of the chamber used to compress the slurry mix would simply be sent through a filter to remove the majority of the particles this ‘murky water’ is then returned to the river with a vast reduction in any sediment in it.

The brickets would then be taken to a waiting barge alongside  as an almost dry, easy to manage and transport ‘square load’ by conveyor. These could then be taken to use elsewhere, perhaps even sold as viable rich compost for growing crops with.

The whole system would be able to move up a river and down and up covering the entire width and length before moving on to the next.

 

 

[marshman]

That is what they did on CrossRail - the trouble is that the size of the "squishing" bit was huge!!

Would you suggest an application to the Lottery to fund it? Or just the Navigation budget?

[LondonRascal]

15 hours ago, marshman said:

Would you suggest an application to the Lottery to fund it? Or just the Navigation budget?

I have replied to this on the thread about the dredging of the lower Bure as thought this more appropriate place to dicuss this topic: