Reedham Ferry

[Meantime]

16 minutes ago, alexandlorna said:

Having read eyewitness accounts on other places where said "trial" is taking place, it appears the ferry  left when the boat was approx 30m from the chains .

Assuming this was correct ,at that point , I would say the ferry was at fault ,however the fact that ,its also stated that the helmsperson ( cant assume or assign gender ,heaven forbid) then speeded up to make it through.

Again assuming these witnesses are no lying or mistaken , then the ultimate mistake must surely be attempting to continue on course ,over/through two high tensile steel chains ????

Personally I never pass unless the ferry docked , and have never had any issue while doing so 

I merely make observations here and do not judge anyones guilt or otherwise .

I can only hope I have not upset anyone , infringed any forum regulations or upset any sacred cows with this post .

I'm not going to speculate on this particular episode, other than to repeat what I said earlier, which is that I have experienced the ferry set off, when I've been beyond the advisory signs. I was pushing the current so no real hardship. I did have to back off a little though. Now it might be that the operator on the day had made a judgement call and knew that despite me being past the sign, it would be easy for me to ease off and because I was pushing the tide, to have waited for me would have taken a minute or so. He might have seen I was a private boat and therefore assumed I knew what I was doing. Possibly another dangerous assumption.

Now here's a thought! Yes we all know about the byelaws etc, but how about if the advisory signs were replaced with simple stop and go lights and some flashing amber ones on the ferry. When the ferry is docked the lights are green. When the ferry sets off the lights go red. As a helmsmen you do not pass the red light. In the marginal case where you might be level with and not see the light, the amber lights flash as soon as the ferry starts to move. This could all be interlocked to the controls of the ferry so that all the lights work automatically as soon as the ferry starts to move. As far as I can see problem solved, other than perhaps force the ferry owner to install CCTV on the roof of the pub that could be referenced in the event of an incident to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt blame.

[ZimbiIV]

ECIPA, I agree with you, I have often thought the ferry should have some form of lighting displayed when in motion and off when docked.

Yes it is easy to see when it is moving but when the lights come on you know it is about to move.

I always helm past the ferry, yacht or bridge. Jill says it is easier for her that I do it!

I would also like signs at the narrow bridges to give way to boats travelling with the tide.

paul

[Wussername]

A wherry and a ferry is a wondrous thing
Do not challenge for a  point to make.
Or bring.
Just pass on by with a cheery wave.
Avoid the risk of being proud
And brave.

Edited July 28, 2018 by Wussername

[Hylander]

16 minutes ago, EastCoastIPA said:

I'm not going to speculate on this particular episode, other than to repeat what I said earlier, which is that I have experienced the ferry set off, when I've been beyond the advisory signs. I was pushing the current so no real hardship. I did have to back off a little though. Now it might be that the operator on the day had made a judgement call and knew that despite me being past the sign, it would be easy for me to ease off and because I was pushing the tide, to have waited for me would have taken a minute or so. He might have seen I was a private boat and therefore assumed I knew what I was doing. Possibly another dangerous assumption.

Now here's a thought! Yes we all know about the byelaws etc, but how about if the advisory signs were replaced with simple stop and go lights and some flashing amber ones on the ferry. When the ferry is docked the lights are green. When the ferry sets off the lights go red. As a helmsmen you do not pass the red light. In the marginal case where you might be level with and not see the light, the amber lights flash as soon as the ferry starts to move. This could all be interlocked to the controls of the ferry so that all the lights work automatically as soon as the ferry starts to move. As far as I can see problem solved, other than perhaps force the ferry owner to install CCTV on the roof of the pub that could be referenced in the event of an incident to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt blame.

May be out of all of this will come some good and as you suggest better signage or lights may be the answer.

[Wussername]

Surely lights and CCTV is a knee jerk reaction. A ferry has been on this site since the seventeen hundreds in one shape or another. Indeed there were somewhere in the region of twenty ferries on the river Yard at one time, the majority being rowing boats for passengers only but some would take a horse and cart.

As for incidents, as of now, very few and far between and I can see no justification whatsoever in escalating this matter into a major incident. 

In conclusion stay clear of the thing, that is all that is needed.

 

Andrew

[dnks34]

I can see that point of view but in this age I also think it is prudent to make dangerous things as fool proof as possible.

Not a comment on who is at fault here but anything that requires human input can inevitably result in mistakes and accidents.  

[Meantime]

14 minutes ago, Wussername said:

Surely lights and CCTV is a knee jerk reaction. A ferry has been on this site since the seventeen hundreds in one shape or another. Indeed there were somewhere in the region of twenty ferries on the river Yard at one time, the majority being rowing boats for passengers only but some would take a horse and cart.

As for incidents, as of now, very few and far between and I can see no justification whatsoever in escalating this matter into a major incident. 

In conclusion stay clear of the thing, that is all that is needed.

 

Andrew

I can understand that viewpoint to a degree, however we have a ferry that has been there for some considerable time. People know it's location, it's marked on maps for newbies to the area and the operators one must assume go through training before operating the ferry. Likewise it looks like an experienced helm has come to grief with the ferry. I have no idea why and I'm not going to speculate, however when Martin Broom had a coming together with the ferry there was a review and I believe the "improved" "advisory" signage was the result.

Accidents maybe few and far between, but that doesn't stop us learning and reviewing and if there is a simple fix to stop another one from happening, then why wouldn't you?

If I owned that location then CCTV mounted on the front of the pub would be top of my list of things to do and in this day and age, cheap and efficient.

[Islander]

Should a safety/warning device be deemed necessary then a simple flashing Amber light that comes on when both ramps are up and a notice not to pass while lit.

I've had no problem passing the ferry but sometimes holding station with high winds and a following tide can be fun.

Colin 

[Wussername]

CCTV would not stop it happening. Who would operate it. Who would be responsible for maintaining the copies of recordings that would be required. Who would be allowed to view the recordings.

There is a whole raft of legislation governing public surveillance cameras. Finally do you wish for your holiday experience to be recorded throughout your journey. It could come to that.

[Meantime]

1 minute ago, Wussername said:

CCTV would not stop it happening. Who would operate it. Who would be responsible for maintaining the copies of recordings that would be required. Who would be allowed to view the recordings.

There is a whole raft of legislation governing public surveillance cameras. Finally do you wish for your holiday experience to be recorded throughout your journey. It could come to that.

Most modern CCTV does not need an operator, it just records to a hard disk, eventually overwriting the oldest recording. In the event of an accident the owner would just save certain files from being over written. The use of CCTV in public places is not a crime, look at the various webcams that broadcast from around The Broads already. I'm not saying that a webcam is needed at this location though.

My car is fitted with a dashcam and records for about four hours before over writing the oldest recording. The ferry could even have similar with one pointing up and one pointing down river. My dashcam has already saved its cost. I would recommend them to anyone in this day and age.

Most of us already appear in peoples holiday photo's whether you want to or not. How many times have you passed a trip boat on the river and seen people leaning over taking pictures on cameras or phones of anything that moves. Part of modern life I'm afraid.

[Vaughan]

I think I seem to have been afflicted by a form of forum dis-enchantment in the last few days. Apathy, disillusionment - choose your own name for it. This may explain my "colère" of yesterday. (Pardon my French!).  I am going to be busy over the next couple of days with visiting friends, so maybe that is just as well.

Some time quite soon, you are all going to have to think very carefully about how you see the future of this forum. We will soon have to decide on a new constitution to bring it up to date and we are advised that it cannot simply stay as it is. And yet, reading back over our discussions about it, on several threads, I see introspection and I see heads buried in the sand.

I also feel that there is an increasing atmosphere of "Facebook" style communication which has been migrating across from our own Facebook page. I wonder how soon it will be before the tail is wagging the dog? I am not a member of Facebook but Susie has been made one, so she reads it but never posts. She tells me that there are subjects there, such as local news events and even holiday blogs and videos, which never make it as far as this forum. Meantime the posting on this Reedham event, which she has just shown me, is a disgraceful example of the lax rules which apply there. 

Personally, I can't see how we are going to progress this forum into a respectable platform of informed opinion if we still have to have Facebook around our neck, like a millstone.

I hope we are not getting to the point of asking - which is the dog? And which is the tail?

 

[JennyMorgan]

I don't know if the motor cruiser went behind or ahead of the Ferry but I do know that going behind is almost as risky as ahead as when a tide is running the chains can be bar taut. 

If the gap so to speak was only 30m then if I were the Ferry owner I would be having a quiet natter with the Ferry skipper. At fifty meters an oncoming boat really should be able to  hold water or turn around. Still, this is all hearsay & guesswork so no conclusions. As for me, I long ago lost count of the times that I have crossed on the Ferry or gone past it on the river,  and I've yet to encounter any problems.

[JennyMorgan]

6 minutes ago, Vaughan said:

I think I seem to have been afflicted by a form of forum dis-enchantment in the last few days. Apathy, disillusionment - choose your own name for it. This may explain my "colère" of yesterday. (Pardon my French!).  I am going to be busy over the next couple of days with visiting friends, so maybe that is just as well.

Some time quite soon, you are all going to have to think very carefully about how you see the future of this forum. We will soon have to decide on a new constitution to bring it up to date and we are advised that it cannot simply stay as it is. And yet, reading back over our discussions about it, on several threads, I see introspection and I see heads buried in the sand.

I also feel that there is an increasing atmosphere of "Facebook" style communication which has been migrating across from our own Facebook page. I wonder how soon it will be before the tail is wagging the dog? I am not a member of Facebook but Susie has been made one, so she reads it but never posts. She tells me that there are subjects there, such as local news events and even holiday blogs and videos, which never make it as far as this forum. Meantime the posting on this Reedham event, which she has just shown me, is a disgraceful example of the lax rules which apply there. 

Personally, I can't see how we are going to progress this forum into a respectable platform of informed opinion if we still have to have Facebook around our neck, like a millstone.

I hope we are not getting to the point of asking - which is the dog? And which is the tail?

 

Some real wisdom there, Vaughan. My quick thought is that NBN rules so to speak should be of equal weight across the board. Like you I am surprised at some of the venom exhibited on Facebook.

[JennyMorgan]

21 minutes ago, Vaughan said:

I think I seem to have been afflicted by a form of forum dis-enchantment in the last few days. Apathy, disillusionment - choose your own name for it. This may explain my "colère" of yesterday. (Pardon my French!).  I am going to be busy over the next couple of days with visiting friends, so maybe that is just as well.

Some time quite soon, you are all going to have to think very carefully about how you see the future of this forum. We will soon have to decide on a new constitution to bring it up to date and we are advised that it cannot simply stay as it is. And yet, reading back over our discussions about it, on several threads, I see introspection and I see heads buried in the sand.

I also feel that there is an increasing atmosphere of "Facebook" style communication which has been migrating across from our own Facebook page. I wonder how soon it will be before the tail is wagging the dog? I am not a member of Facebook but Susie has been made one, so she reads it but never posts. She tells me that there are subjects there, such as local news events and even holiday blogs and videos, which never make it as far as this forum. Meantime the posting on this Reedham event, which she has just shown me, is a disgraceful example of the lax rules which apply there. 

Personally, I can't see how we are going to progress this forum into a respectable platform of informed opinion if we still have to have Facebook around our neck, like a millstone.

I hope we are not getting to the point of asking - which is the dog? And which is the tail?

 

I think that I'll open a thread and ask what I think is a very reasonable question, what might we reasonably expect of the Norfolk Broads Network, forum AND facebook.

[Wussername]

A reasonable question is why do we need Facebook. I would have thought that the forum is perfectly adequate for most peoples needs.

Andrew

[Wussername]

1 hour ago, EastCoastIPA said:

Most modern CCTV does not need an operator, it just records to a hard disk, eventually overwriting the oldest recording. In the event of an accident the owner would just save certain files from being over written. The use of CCTV in public places is not a crime, look at the various webcams that broadcast from around The Broads already. I'm not saying that a webcam is needed at this location though.

My car is fitted with a dashcam and records for about four hours before over writing the oldest recording. The ferry could even have similar with one pointing up and one pointing down river. My dashcam has already saved its cost. I would recommend them to anyone in this day and age.

Most of us already appear in peoples holiday photo's whether you want to or not. How many times have you passed a trip boat on the river and seen people leaning over taking pictures on cameras or phones of anything that moves. Part of modern life I'm afraid.

I have not quite got it clear in my mind as to what exactly such a camera would achieve. 

Andrew

[dnks34]

I think Facebook has had its day and Im no longer a member.

I used it to keep in touch with people I hadnt seen since my school days but once the novelty wore off I began to question why I needed to know what was going on in other peoples lives at any given minute of the day, decision made my account was deleted.

The only time I might miss it is at times like this purely out of curiosity but Im not reactivating my account to find out!

[JennyMorgan]

2 minutes ago, Wussername said:

I have not quite got it clear in my mind as to what exactly such a camera would achieve. 

Andrew

Evidence, who is or was to blame, same as 'dash cams' on cars. Actually quite a good idea, I think.

[Meantime]

Just now, Wussername said:

I have not quite got it clear in my mind as to what exactly such a camera would achieve. 

Andrew

Whilst it may not avoid such incidents, it would help to much quicker establish what happened, who was to blame, and whether lessons could be learnt. The pictures that are currently on Facebook prove nothing, and there is lots of speculation about what happened. I'm sure there will be three versions of what happened. 1. The version from the helm of the boat concerned. 2. The version from the ferry operator. 3. Everybody else's expert opinion.

If I was David Archer I would much rather be in the position of going to my office and replaying the video to see exactly what happened, when and what distances were involved.

[alexandlorna]

I would agree and say that the forum went downhill when it went on facebook

However , re the forum becoming a "respectable platform ......etc" - I have seen many forums which allow far more leeway for debate and discussion without draconian moderation 

This forum has recently seemed to be heading towards becomming so politically correct ,that all discussion which does not follow s certain "accepted tone " is stifled

Purely my personal opinion ..

[CambridgeCabby]

No need for additional signage , just wait and pass astern of the ferry (where the chains are slack) and follow the ferry operators hand signals , sometimes patience is more than a virtue it is a necessity 

[Smoggy]

I look at the angle of the chains at the stern of the ferry and the flow rate, if the angle looks shallow wait till it's docked, if the angle looks steep pass in the centre of the gap, if the ferry is way off line wait till docked.

If you are close by on a running tide you can't simply stop and wait if the ferry takes off, getting past quick is probably the best option but hitting the throttle usually pushes the spinny bits lower towards the chains.

[Guest]

Please, no more signage around the Norfolk Broads. It seems, in my time, to have become an absolute eyesore in many places. I realise of course, that some signs are required for safety reasons and have no problem with that. But, as on our roads, I'm of the opinion that the amount of signage is becoming excessive nowadays...

[Wussername]

46 minutes ago, EastCoastIPA said:

Whilst it may not avoid such incidents, it would help to much quicker establish what happened, who was to blame, and whether lessons could be learnt. The pictures that are currently on Facebook prove nothing, and there is lots of speculation about what happened. I'm sure there will be three versions of what happened. 1. The version from the helm of the boat concerned. 2. The version from the ferry operator. 3. Everybody else's expert opinion.

If I was David Archer I would much rather be in the position of going to my office and replaying the video to see exactly what happened, when and what distances were involved.

Looking at records going back some 25 years I can see no mention of any serious incident at Reedham Ferry ( although I do except that an incident may have occurred but not recorded but I doubt it)

A webcam would give you an indication of events but would not be able to record the tidal flow or wind speed, all relevant to establishing who was to blame and what lessons could be learnt - if any.

I doubt if Mr Archer would gain much by looking at footage if he was indeed inclined to do so. 

I can see no value whatsoever in installing a web camera or indeed a surveillance camera. For a civil court case perhaps, does anybody really care who was to blame except perhaps the poor ferry man or the cruiser helm.

I suspect that there are more important matters to attend. 

[Poppy]

13 minutes ago, Wussername said:

Looking at records going back some 25 years I can see no mention of any serious incident at Reedham Ferry ( although I do except that an incident may have occurred but not recorded but I doubt it)

A webcam would give you an indication of events but would not be able to record the tidal flow or wind speed, all relevant to establishing who was to blame and what lessons could be learnt - if any.

I doubt if Mr Archer would gain much by looking at footage if he was indeed inclined to do so. 

I can see no value whatsoever in installing a web camera or indeed a surveillance camera. For a civil court case perhaps, does anybody really care who was to blame except perhaps the poor ferry man or the cruiser helm.

I suspect that there are more important matters to attend. 

I understand that we're not permitted to post links to 'elsewhere' on the NBN. I did see one or two interesting posts, however .