So You Can Go Swimming!

[batrabill]

I have literally nothing to do with this event, nor does anyone else here. Hence asking her to post. 

[Guest]

29 minutes ago, vanessan said:

This is something Mel Holland wrote in her first message. So swimmers will stick to the starboard (right) side of the river. Somebody seems to have forgotten that the ‘food and drink stops’, as they are called on the swim website, are on the opposite side of the river when heading towards Beccles. That means then that possibly up to 50 swimmers will suddenly change direction and head across the river. Or will they wait for oncoming or overtaking boats to pass? Somehow I don’t think so. Maybe one of the members who are keen on this happening could explain how this will work? (I am still assuming that the moorings which will be made available are North Cove and Worlingham, I can’t think of any others.)

Those are the only 2 BA  Mooring's on that stretch and yes they are in the wrong side , why has this place been chosen when there are so many pitfalls in its safety ? I can hardly believe that BA knowing the rivers and mooring locations actually think this is a smart move tourism or not , its literally playing with peoples lives and opens up BA to being sued should there be a serious accident , utterly ridiculous location IMO , the event even though some seem to think so I'm not against given its in a safe area for ALL .

[vanessan]

1 hour ago, Bound2Please said:

One glaring question that niggles me here. Are the WRC allowing the start there for a financial gain ?... If so is that gain worth it to their customers camping, moored, staying in rooms and yurts etc. Has thought been given to all these people?

It may be that the WRC will benefit quite considerably due to the swim starting there. Some participants and their families may want accommodation there plus of course there is the day boat aspect. I wonder how many they will be able to hire out to people wanting to follow their relative or friend up the river all the way. 

[dnks34]

Thats another pretty severe risk I hadnt considered, spectators or relatives following in day boats....

[Cockatoo]

I did wonder where spectators are going to watch from

[Guest]

This is what Mel actually wrote:

"that the event adheres to river by-laws. E.g. swimmers are to stick close to edge of the river. That being said, any other river user will also need to adhere to the rules when overtaking".

Where did she say right hand side? so if swimmers are going to be close to the edge on both sides of the river on the narrower stretches how much of a gap is left in the middle?

Unless the swimming channel is buoyed, whilst "stick to edge" is good advice it does not significantly reduce the risk of a collision between a swimmer and a motor boat.

[Bound2Please]

10 minutes ago, Ricardo said:

utterly ridiculous location IMO , the event even though some seem to think so I'm not against given its in a safe area for ALL .

I would have been  less against it had it been advertised as a commercial event at the outset, that said I'm not against it set in the correct place. That correct place in my view is at Whitlingham, its isea in 99% of the needs, except the LTD Company will have to shell out ££££. You dont run any business without overheads, so quite why this one shoul;d expect to is beyond me.

THIS WHOLE EVEN IT ABOUT £££££££££ if like I said that was made clear at the outset, this would have been less stomach.

[Guest]

7 hours ago, vanessan said:

If the BA had announced on its website, Broadsheet or whatever, that the River Waveney would be closed to all boats on Sunday 1st July between 8.30am and 1.30pm, what do people think the general response would have been?

At last iv a little time to give my view to this , for onectgey will have to go a lot further than just announce it on the website etc not everyone checks that for information , all hire yards would need contacting as would all forums , other than that they have another tool the press and local signage , all this expense is at a cost to who ? , it would ridiculous if this stretch of river was used as the Mooring's going to be used ( not by toll payers ) are on the other side of the river from the line of swimmer's given that they stay on the correct side and give others half a chance of avoiding them .

There are much better stretch's of river for this event far more suitable and let's face it BA know that or certainly should do .

As for the financial side of things yes the organisers should pay BA's costs regarding closure and information of river user's that part and parcel of organising an event In the first place though safety wide I'm yet to be convinced they have covered all the base's .

There is no place for arrogance in the safety of others .

[Bound2Please]

4 minutes ago, Philosophical said:

is good advice it does not significantly reduce the risk of a collision between a swimmer and a motor boat.

Not just motor boats.

 

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, Bound2Please said:

I would have been  less against it had it been advertised as a commercial event at the outset, that said I'm not against it set in the correct place. That correct place in my view is at Whitlingham, its isea in 99% of the needs, except the LTD Company will have to shell out ££££. You dont run any business without overheads, so quite why this one shoul;d expect to is beyond me.

THIS WHOLE EVENT IS  ABOUT £££££££££ if like I said that was made clear at the outset, this would have been less to stomach.

Spot on , that's it in a nutshell .

[Guest]

11 minutes ago, SteveDuk said:

I did wonder where spectators are going to watch from

Helicopter rides...another profit opportunity. 

[dnks34]

I can take about 16 up the river.....for a small fee per head......

[vanessan]

16 minutes ago, Philosophical said:

This is what Mel actually wrote:

"that the event adheres to river by-laws. E.g. swimmers are to stick close to edge of the river. That being said, any other river user will also need to adhere to the rules when overtaking".

Where did she say right hand side? so if swimmers are going to be close to the edge on both sides of the river on the narrower stretches how much of a gap is left in the middle?

Unless the swimming channel is buoyed, whilst "stick to edge" is good advice it does not significantly reduce the risk of a collision between a swimmer and a motor boat.

That’s a good point. So the swimmers could be on either side of the river, or both. Hmmm, even more interesting! The more I think about it, the more it appears like a bad idea. 

[Cockatoo]

Are there by-laws that say where swimmers should be positioned? Or is it taken to be like the roads where pedestrians are advised to face the traffic?

[Guest]

15 minutes ago, SteveDuk said:

Are there by-laws that say where swimmers should be positioned? Or is it taken to be like the roads where pedestrians are advised to face the traffic?

They probably take as much notice as rowers and canoeists to be honest I fear I may wear my horn out in July , + they have to cross the river to get to the 2 BA allocated Mooring's , utterly stupid its the wrong location completely .

[vanessan]

18 minutes ago, SteveDuk said:

Are there by-laws that say where swimmers should be positioned? Or is it taken to be like the roads where pedestrians are advised to face the traffic?

The BA doesn’t like swimming in the rivers so I doubt there are any bye laws. Probably no rules or regualtions at all. I’m sure somebody will tell us otherwise if there are.

[vanessan]

5 minutes ago, Ricardo said:

They probably take as much notice as rowers and canoeists to be honest I fear I may wear my horn out in July , + they have to cross the river to get to the 2 BA allocated Mooring's , utterly stupid its the wrong location completely .

Does that mean you are intending to be somewhere on the Waveney on 1 July?

[donnygeoff]

BA OFFICIAL WEB SITE, AUGUST 2018......

Due to the overwhelming support and success of the "River Swim" this year we can announce that next years swim will be even better, as we will have FULL NATIONAL PARK STATUS meaning no boats will get in the way of the swimmers. There will be no need to do a risk assessment on problems with boaters, as there will be none, and the entrance fee will only rise to £12,900 per swimmer, just to cover loss in revenue from tolls.

Hope to see you at next years event

BA promotional team.....

[Bound2Please]

9 minutes ago, donnygeoff said:

BA OFFICIAL WEB SITE, AUGUST 2018......

Due to the overwhelming support and success of the "River Swim" this year we can announce that next years swim will be even better, as we will have FULL NATIONAL PARK STATUS meaning no boats will get in the way of the swimmers. There will be no need to do a risk assessment on problems with boaters, as there will be none, and the entrance fee will only rise to £12,900 per swimmer, just to cover loss in revenue from tolls.

Hope to see you at next years event

BA promotional team.....

I laughed at this but  and a BIG BUT this could become the truth if certain people get there own ways on things

[grendel]

ooh that is wicked Donnygeoff, you could get in trouble talking like that. especially if they thought you were serious.

[JennyMorgan]

I note that Mel has suggested that if this year is a success then she hopes the event will grow, heaven forbid.

[Chelsea14Ian]

Yes try the north sea instead

[Cockatoo]

30 minutes ago, JennyMorgan said:

I note that Mel has suggested that if this year is a success then she hopes the event will grow, heaven forbid.

 Now you see I think that's the problem. If this had started as a small group of nutters, er, wild swimmers going from WRC to Beccles and then increased by a few each year, proving to people that they weren't an issue to safety, then I think people would have a slightly more sympathetic view.

[dnks34]

5 minutes ago, Chelsea14Ian said:

Yes try the north sea instead

Tons of space out there but I imagine the costs involved in putting on the safety support may be higher but then im only guessing. 

I doubt they would be allowed to send 200 swimmers across the channel in groups of 50 at once either!

[Chelsea14Ian]

I plead the 5th on that one