MauriceMynah Posted February 21, 2020 Author Share Posted February 21, 2020 13 hours ago, rightsaidfred said: Without getting into the whys and wherefores my boat regularly went under Potter Heigham and always Wroxham, now I havn`t been through Potter since I cant remember when and rarely get through Wroxham without the worry of getting back, South side and Wayford Bridge I have no problems at all so make of that what you will. Fred Good point Fred, for which I put this possible reason. If we compare the distance "up river" of those 3 bridges the nearest is Potter Heigham (PHB), then we have Wroxham and Wayford at roughly the same. However there is Ludham bridge to put in the equation. Ludham acts as a bit of a "choke" on the Ant. The result is that Wayford Bridge isn't tidal. it has no discernible rise and fall, Wroxham has a small rise and fall with PHB having the largest (Not sure what the rise and fall is at Ludham Bridge, hopefully someone can furnish us with that information. Question... Has the clearance at Ludham Bridge reduced as much as PHB? ... I am well aware that as far as boats are concerned the shape of those two bridges makes a great deal of difference in regards to craft going under them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rightsaidfred Posted February 21, 2020 Share Posted February 21, 2020 15 minutes ago, MauriceMynah said: Good point Fred, for which I put this possible reason. If we compare the distance "up river" of those 3 bridges the nearest is Potter Heigham (PHB), then we have Wroxham and Wayford at roughly the same. However there is Ludham bridge to put in the equation. Ludham acts as a bit of a "choke" on the Ant. The result is that Wayford Bridge isn't tidal. it has no discernible rise and fall, Wroxham has a small rise and fall with PHB having the largest (Not sure what the rise and fall is at Ludham Bridge, hopefully someone can furnish us with that information. Question... Has the clearance at Ludham Bridge reduced as much as PHB? ... I am well aware that as far as boats are concerned the shape of those two bridges makes a great deal of difference in regards to craft going under them. Hi MM firstly I don't think there is and have never noticed a great deal of difference in the amount of rise and fall between PH and Wroxham on average tides just that water level has risen on most tides over recent years I do agree that Wayford remains static and is to me the same as it has been for years suggesting the water table hasn't risen as such unless affected by rainwater much the same as Coltishall, what I have noticed more and more in recent Years both at Potter and Horning is tide locking where there is no ebb tide just a flood with short periods of slack, what that suggests I have no idea as I am no expert on these matters just observant particularly as an angler. Fred. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MauriceMynah Posted February 21, 2020 Author Share Posted February 21, 2020 14 minutes ago, rightsaidfred said: Hi MM firstly I don't think there is and have never noticed a great deal of difference in the amount of rise and fall between PH and Wroxham If I understand you correctly, that surprises me greatly and no disrespect but I'd like to read some other members opinions on that. 17 minutes ago, rightsaidfred said: I do agree that Wayford remains static and is to me the same as it has been for years I wonder how the normal clearance there compares with what the BA states in their tide tables. I must find one and look! 20 minutes ago, rightsaidfred said: what I have noticed more and more in recent Years both at Potter and Horning is tide locking where there is no ebb tide just a flood with short periods of slack, I must look more carefully when I next moor at Horning or Cockshoot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rightsaidfred Posted February 21, 2020 Share Posted February 21, 2020 8 minutes ago, MauriceMynah said: If I understand you correctly, that surprises me greatly and no disrespect but I'd like to read some other members opinions on that. This is just an observation for both PH and Wroxham where I have at different times seen a rise and fall of anywhere between 3" a 6" but generally around 4", that observation is not intended as a definitive fact just that the tidal affect would seem to be about the same but varies on the strength of tide and amount of water coming downstream. Fred Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Islander Posted February 21, 2020 Share Posted February 21, 2020 You may find these interesting. Have a look at the other stations around the broads. https://flood-warning-information.service.gov.uk/station/6217?direction=u https://www.ntslf.org/data/realtime?port=Lowestoft If you look at the tidal range for Brundall it would seem the tide is able to flood and ebb quite freely so not much requires dredging. Now if the tide was able to flood the same in the northern rivers with say 2ft range then this surely be both above and below the existing levels. Great, at low tide there will be more clearence under the bridges but then at high tide the riverside properties will be flood. Imagine what another foot of water on existing tides would do to wroxham. These are my own thoughts and at no time are they to be considered those of the management. Happy theorising everyone. Colin 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.