Hmmm....

[SPEEDTRIPLE]

7 minutes ago, PCL023 said:

I agree with CambridgeCabby, there is far too much emphasis put on “over land” speed. I was always told 5mph should not cause enough wash to rock a dinghy. Common sense, followed by a bit of thought for others wouldn’t go  amiss, even if this is just to start with... 

Always check over my shoulder just to make sure we are never putting out a too higher wash, making sure to slow down for moored craft etc. 

That extra 1-2 mph the owner is gaining in the opening post equates to what, a 2-3 minute gain at destination depending on the start point? Its really not worth the noise and extra fuel... 

Cheers

Paul 

Hi PCL,

Your point about "over land speed" is very relevant in that the BA now like to measure your speed against the land instead of over surface of a continuously changing moving surface. Unlike a road which is constant reference, a tidal river is not a constant in that water moves everywhere, not just up or down river, but also side to side. Add to that the effect of wind, and a boat coming around a bend, and the hand held cameras the BA prefer to favour (that the police were banned from using doe to wildly inaccurate reading due to an unsteady hand) give a wildly inaccurate reading. Given the way speed is now measured on the Broads, people are perfectly within their rite to do 6-8 mph through Gt Yarmouth against a fast ebbing tide, a speed that could cause a huge wash that could possibly cause severe damage to a boat, or worse still, a person. It's a scenario that could be very difficult to judge bearing in mind someone may not have been breaking the (over land) speed limit. Yes, wash is an important issue, but until they change the system of measuring speed to a more relavant and reasonable system, this is going to be an ongoing issue which will be very difficult to judge in possible insurance claims. 

[grendel]

3 hours ago, SPEEDTRIPLE said:

people are perfectly within their rite to do 6-8 mph through Gt Yarmouth against a fast ebbing tide, a speed that could cause a huge wash that could possibly cause severe damage to a boat, or worse still, a person

The problem I see here is that under certain circumstances they could be being swept backwards and heading for the bridges while still doing these speeds, so a modicum of common sense has to prevail, safety over speed limits, conversely if you were being swept down with the tide, you could barely have steerage way and still be exceeding the speed limits on the same stretch, which I believe is the main reason for aiming for slack water at yarmouth, to avoid the worst of the flood, as such it seems to me you are better off arriving late for the tide than too early.

[SPEEDTRIPLE]

14 minutes ago, grendel said:

The problem I see here is that under certain circumstances they could be being swept backwards and heading for the bridges while still doing these speeds, so a modicum of common sense has to prevail, safety over speed limits, conversely if you were being swept down with the tide, you could barely have steerage way and still be exceeding the speed limits on the same stretch, which I believe is the main reason for aiming for slack water at yarmouth, to avoid the worst of the flood, as such it seems to me you are better off arriving late for the tide than too early.

That's exactly right. On several occasions we've had to up the revs going through GT Yarmouth, purely to maintain steerageway. Reedham is another place where you can get caught out if you don't maintain enough revs.

The ideal theme is as you say, a modicum of common sense an common courtesy goes a long way. But as we all know, the problem with common sense is it's none too common.