Ludham Bridge Today

[Puddleduck2]

Typical jam at the bridge today when a sedan type stopped with the bows well under the bridge but then decided they couldn't make it, and reversed back upstream and moored.  I spoke to the hirers who said they needed 8'6 but the board showed 8',  whereas in reality there was 8'9 . They said they were first time hirers and they had had about 10 mins instruction, from the Stalham yard and little more than "this is forward, this is reverse, and off you go"...their words not mine. I helped them through, and also another sedan from the same yard which needed 8'8.  This subject has been raised many times before and I have to ask the question, do yards have a standard handover procedure or is it left to the individual member of staff as to decide what instruction to give ? Obviously something is lacking somewhere.

[MrBlueSky]

What is lacking is an accurate board at one of the busiest bridges on the network. 

[Cal]

What extra instruction do you think would have helped in this situation?

[MargeandParge]

2 hours ago, Puddleduck2 said:

Typical jam at the bridge today when a sedan type stopped with the bows well under the bridge but then decided they couldn't make it, and reversed back upstream and moored.  I spoke to the hirers who said they needed 8'6 but the board showed 8',  whereas in reality there was 8'9 . They said they were first time hirers and they had had about 10 mins instruction, from the Stalham yard and little more than "this is forward, this is reverse, and off you go"...their words not mine. I helped them through, and also another sedan from the same yard which needed 8'8.  This subject has been raised many times before and I have to ask the question, do yards have a standard handover procedure or is it left to the individual member of staff as to decide what instruction to give ? Obviously something is lacking somewhere.

Just so pleased they used the knowledge they had and erre'd on the side of caution. You can only respect the information you have been given. These people are just good boaters and we hope they enjoy The Broads for many years. Kindest Regards Marge and Parge 

[marshman]

Perhaps the need for caution is why the boards are as they are - if it  was closer more people may be encouraged to try - unsuccessfully!!!

[YnysMon]

Yes, they do sound sensible newbies. I hope they enjoy the rest of the week. 

[CambridgeCabby]

Thumbs up from me for erring on the side of caution too , too many times I have witnessed boaters (not just hire) saying “I think it will fit” and then trying , often having to abort as they haven’t the clearance needed .

Yes , those of us frequent visitors , some with our own boats know at what height we are safe , but those on hire boats should always go by the listed air draught of their hire boat and the clearance displayed by the bridge markers that way they know for certain that they can , or cannot, pass under the bridge.

[Cal]

5 minutes ago, CambridgeCabby said:

Thumbs up from me for erring on the side of caution too , too many times I have witnessed boaters (not just hire) saying “I think it will fit” and then trying , often having to abort as they haven’t the clearance needed .

Yes , those of us frequent visitors , some with our own boats know at what height we are safe , but those on hire boats should always go by the listed air draught of their hire boat and the clearance displayed by the bridge markers that way they know for certain that they can , or cannot, pass under the bridge.

I will admit that we did take a Richardsons hire boat through Ludham when the board said 7ft and the boat allegedly needed 7'8" with the screens folded.

But we are experienced boaters, it was quiet with plenty of time and space to abort the manoeuvre if required and conditions were still so we could edge up to the bridge to judge the clearance. 

As it happened we had loads of clearance. 

Good on these hirers though for not attempting the bridge when they were unsure if they would make it. They have done exactly the right thing.

Quite rightly the bridge gauge boards are pessimistic and the hire yards air draft figures are pessimistic to try to avoid too many bridge strikes.

[Ray]

I know that money is a rude word, but wouldn't it be a good idea to install 'go back' sensors like they do for oversize trucks on road bridges? 

[FlyingFortress]

1 hour ago, Cal said:

I will admit that we did take a Richardsons hire boat through Ludham when the board said 7ft and the boat allegedly needed 7'8" with the screens folded.

But we are experienced boaters, it was quiet with plenty of time and space to abort the manoeuvre if required and conditions were still so we could edge up to the bridge to judge the clearance. 

As it happened we had loads of clearance. 

Good on these hirers though for not attempting the bridge when they were unsure if they would make it. They have done exactly the right thing.

Quite rightly the bridge gauge boards are pessimistic and the hire yards air draft figures are pessimistic to try to avoid too many bridge strikes.

I fully agree with what you said above.

And also Cambridge Cabby above.

Truth is The Hire Yards and the BA have to err on the side of caution to avoid damage.

I know I am in cloud cookoo land with this one but I do wish there was some co ordination . Yes I am fortunate to have owned my current boat for 18yrs + so by now I know I need X showing on Wroxham and Y showing on Wayford or even Z showing on Potter. When I bought my current boat it had air draft 7'0" on the dashboard. Having had a similar design before I knew this was fantasy. The boat previous to that was a Calypso and run as a hire boat out of Thorpe with a declared air draft of 7'0".

My current Boat passes Thorpe Railway bridges with 6'2" showing.

My wish is that either Hire companies declare correct air draft OR The Bridge Gauges are accurate.

But then if wishes were fishes etc.

[Smoggy]

3 hours ago, CambridgeCabby said:

Thumbs up from me for erring on the side of caution too ,

Take note Ian....

[CambridgeCabby]

2 hours ago, Ray said:

I know that money is a rude word, but wouldn't it be a good idea to install 'go back' sensors like they do for oversize trucks on road bridges? 

It would not cost a lot of money to have a solar powered light beam across the river 30meters or so before the bridge which would  illuminate a Red Cross if the oncoming boats airdraft was too high 

[Ray]

1 minute ago, CambridgeCabby said:

It would not cost a lot of money to have a solar powered light beam across the river 30meters or so before the bridge which would  illuminate a Red Cross if the oncoming boats airdraft was too high 

I wondered how expensive it would be, in that case I wonder why BA don't do it. It wouldn't even need to be every bridge, just the usual suspects!

[CambridgeCabby]

If they can keep putting those ridiculous thank you speed signs in every village then the technology cannot be that expensive 

[RS2021]

26 minutes ago, CambridgeCabby said:

It would not cost a lot of money to have a solar powered light beam across the river 30meters or so before the bridge which would  illuminate a Red Cross if the oncoming boats airdraft was too high 

Great idea, but I bet BA would set it 6" low 'just in case'

[Broads01]

10 hours ago, Puddleduck2 said:

Typical jam at the bridge today when a sedan type stopped with the bows well under the bridge but then decided they couldn't make it

So your problem is what, exactly? If I was following a boat in this situation I would just wait my turn.

[Vaughan]

5 hours ago, Broads01 said:

So your problem is what, exactly? If I was following a boat in this situation I would just wait my turn.

It is up to each helmsman to use the Mark One Eyeball to check if they can get under or not.  What is known as seamanship.  When I grew up on the Broads there weren't any gauges on the bridges.

[RumPunch]

8 hours ago, Broads01 said:

So your problem is what, exactly? If I was following a boat in this situation I would just wait my turn.

..... if I slow too much I lose steerage - no prop wash as offset outboard

[marshman]

So what makes you think that punters would take any notice of such signs? They don't stop lorries, people still travel around after dark when they are supposed to be tied up, and try and navigate Breydon after dark. Not that that makes much difference when you cannot spot a buoy even in broad daylight!!!

[Ray]

I guess some will and some won't just as in your other examples. It's still worth helping the majority who want to get it right enjoy their holiday without mishap.

[marshman]

The majority, have managed to negotiate that bridge without real issue for years - they do not need the BA to spend more money on unnecessary electronic solutions - you have that available for free in your brain and your eyes as is evidenced by that majority!

[Ray]

43 minutes ago, marshman said:

The majority, have managed to negotiate that bridge without real issue for years

Can't argue with that... although I guess there's no reason the minority shouldn't be helped with an inexpensive system that would save boat damage, injuries, boat jams, frustrations and the loss of repeat customers and all no more intrusive than the sign saying lower your windscreen and sound your horn. Especially as river levels rise.

Having said all that, let's face it... it's never going to happen so not worth disagreeing about 🍺 🍺

[DAVIDH]

I like the idea of some sort of electronic warning, but think it wouldn't work as many boats have people standing on deck to judge the height, therefore raising the overall height of the boat. Also  there's the number of dual steer boats where people are sat atop. 

 

[annv]

On my previous boat i had a short pole on a spring on the pulpit rail at the height i needed,  if pole touched i just reversed well before superstructure would hit,  it also had a small flag to give wind direction and strength to assist when mooring. John

[addicted]

We've always had something similar on all our boats except for the last which having a 12' 6" airdraft would have meant a ridiculously long pole! Instead we had one that indicated clearance with the canopy, radar arch etc.  down but screens still up. We have one on our present boat with a couple of inches tolerance so if it touches slightly we know  we're still good to go. This is the way we've always done it and it's worked for the last 40+ years.

 

Carole