Water, water everywhere

Water, water everywhere

Post by li » Tue, 12 Nov 2002 22:35:18


As the annual "UK race-cancellation due to bad weather" fest, seems to
be upon us again, with the cancellation of the Marlow 4s head this
weekend. What are people's views on how soon before an event the
decision to cancel should be made?

Whilst recognising there are always going to be freak conditions which
lead to last minute cancellations (eg last year's women's head), it
would seem reasonable for organisers to at least give a confidence
rating a few days before hand.

Just raising this as we know Marlow is off but there's no info
available on the likelihood of Tiffin head going the same way...

Any thoughts???

liz

 
 
 

Water, water everywhere

Post by Andrew Bree » Wed, 13 Nov 2002 23:45:10

I know last year with Wallingford Head we left the decision as long as we
could - and were very lucky that it didn't rain significantly during the
week. I think that Marlow would have been looking at the weather forecast
and see rain forecast which I would have thought had made the conditions
unlikely to be raceable. But not impossible. I think a lot depends on the
time that has to be spent organising this week when you know that it is
looking unlikely. Having been on the back of two Wallingford Head
cancellations within the same month I know that I was sick fed up taking
entries for events that don't happen.

Would people rather that the decision is made at the last minute (even
en-route) and have the event cancelled when a small group of volunteers have
to spend a lot of time getting things ready.

Other than EA approval, the other implications could be on the land being
used for boating being in a bad stake.Wallingford Head was at risk last year
as the local council initially said no to using the car park last year, and
resulted in us having to guarantee to make good any damage done. Fortunately
everyone who came along helped push trailers into place and moved boats away
from the mud-park on arrival.

Andrew


Quote:
> As the annual "UK race-cancellation due to bad weather" fest, seems to
> be upon us again, with the cancellation of the Marlow 4s head this
> weekend. What are people's views on how soon before an event the
> decision to cancel should be made?

> Whilst recognising there are always going to be freak conditions which
> lead to last minute cancellations (eg last year's women's head), it
> would seem reasonable for organisers to at least give a confidence
> rating a few days before hand.

> Just raising this as we know Marlow is off but there's no info
> available on the likelihood of Tiffin head going the same way...

> Any thoughts???

> liz


 
 
 

Water, water everywhere

Post by Trevor Chamber » Thu, 14 Nov 2002 01:33:39

Quote:
> > Just raising this as we know Marlow is off but there's no info
> > available on the likelihood of Tiffin head going the same way...

Anyone know about Tiffin then? The website still has last year's draw on, which
gave me a shock until I worked it out by crossreferencing the results which do
declare the year: nice one guys); and no mention of the cancellation or
otherwise...

Trevor

Sudbury RC

 
 
 

Water, water everywhere

Post by Martin Gil » Thu, 14 Nov 2002 02:46:20

Trevor,

The draw is now out. Follow the links through to the draw page (which is
still showing last years as you say!). Now look in the side panel, where
there are two links for Draw - Div 1 and 2. Click these for Excel
spreadsheets. You will see that you are at the back of 19 S3 1xs, with lots
of London Boys at the front. And you are just in front of the AK Vet B
contingent. Not wishing to detract from your ability, but seeing as Mr
Taylor sculls Elite (and is not hideously off the pace) when Vet B is not
offered it casts a few questions over the start order.

But anyway....

As to whether it will happen - Lots of Red Boards upstream at the moment,
and water being as water is it is all heading to Kingston, which is under
amber boards at the moment, and forecast to get worse.

But we shall see.

To answer the previous point as to when to cancel, I would suggest the best
time is that at which you can avoid as many of the costs as possible in
organising the event (thus allowing a full refund without bankrupting
yourselves). Such a time should allow clubs to cancel any activities that
would bring costs, such as towing van hire, without penalty. This way people
get frustrated, but at least don't waste too much money.

Martin


Quote:
> > > Just raising this as we know Marlow is off but there's no info
> > > available on the likelihood of Tiffin head going the same way...

> Anyone know about Tiffin then? The website still has last year's draw on,
which
> gave me a shock until I worked it out by crossreferencing the results
which do
> declare the year: nice one guys); and no mention of the cancellation or
> otherwise...

> Trevor

> Sudbury RC

 
 
 

Water, water everywhere

Post by Christopher Ant » Thu, 14 Nov 2002 03:17:17

Quote:

> Just raising this as we know Marlow is off but there's no info
> available on the likelihood of Tiffin head going the same way...

> Any thoughts???

30mm of rain forecast for Oxford between now and Friday evening, would
seem to be above average for this time of the year so probably higher
than normal flows. Not good I would guess.
 
 
 

Water, water everywhere

Post by Stuart Jone » Thu, 14 Nov 2002 08:21:59

*sob* and the river's 12" higher than normal here at the moment too -
http://www.ourcs.org/regular/flag.html - has a plot of river height above
normal on it, and from what I recall, when it doesn't rain, it falls ~2" a
day, until it gets to 6" (which is apparently when Iffley sluices are still
fully open), then if the level's still falling the sluices may start to be
closed, red boards coming down a day or so later?


Quote:

> > Just raising this as we know Marlow is off but there's no info
> > available on the likelihood of Tiffin head going the same way...

> > Any thoughts???

> 30mm of rain forecast for Oxford between now and Friday evening, would
> seem to be above average for this time of the year so probably higher
> than normal flows. Not good I would guess.

 
 
 

Water, water everywhere

Post by Jon Anderso » Thu, 14 Nov 2002 08:46:44

Quote:

> *sob* and the river's 12" higher than normal here at the moment too -
> http://www.ourcs.org/regular/flag.html - has a plot of river height above
> normal on it, and from what I recall, when it doesn't rain, it falls ~2" a
> day, until it gets to 6" (which is apparently when Iffley sluices are still
> fully open), then if the level's still falling the sluices may start to be
> closed, red boards coming down a day or so later?

That's so tame compared to how it was a few years ago. In order not to
get my feet wet I had to clamber over a chair to get onto the stairs up
to Queens/Lincoln boathouse balcony.
It was tough in them days etc.

Jon
--


    [ All views expressed are personal unless otherwise stated ]

 
 
 

Water, water everywhere

Post by Stuart Jone » Thu, 14 Nov 2002 18:00:29


Quote:

> > *sob* and the river's 12" higher than normal here at the moment too -
> > http://www.ourcs.org/regular/flag.html - has a plot of river height
above
> > normal on it, and from what I recall, when it doesn't rain, it falls ~2"
a
> > day, until it gets to 6" (which is apparently when Iffley sluices are
still
> > fully open), then if the level's still falling the sluices may start to
be
> > closed, red boards coming down a day or so later?

> That's so tame compared to how it was a few years ago. In order not to
> get my feet wet I had to clamber over a chair to get onto the stairs up
> to Queens/Lincoln boathouse balcony.
> It was tough in them days etc.

> Jon

Well, yes, I know - compared to my first year it's tame (40+" above normal
at one point...) but the fact of the matter is the river's been red-flagged
for over a week already, and shows no sign of coming back down in the next 5
days :-(  Damn sluices.  Just close them, and flood places upstream of
Oxford, simple solution ;-)
 
 
 

Water, water everywhere

Post by Caroline Smit » Thu, 14 Nov 2002 22:14:02

Quote:
> Damn sluices.  Just close them, and flood places upstream of
> Oxford, simple solution ;-)

and let us run 6-lane side-by-side regattas on Port Meadow (common grazing
ground by the river north of oxford that floods beautifully) like we nearly
did 2 years ago!

And off the Oxford City stretch itself, Sandford Lock is red boards, and the
stretch between Sandford Lock and Abingdon Lock is, in a word, ming. And
rising every day. Another couple of inches and the Radley College
launches'll be floating over the big step they're normally moored to.
Normally the rafts are about 4 feet below the level of the bank. Down to 1ft
now and last nights rain'll still be coming through. All good fun.

 
 
 

Water, water everywhere

Post by Carl Dougla » Thu, 14 Nov 2002 22:01:53


Quote:

>> > *sob* and the river's 12" higher than normal here at the moment too -
>> > http://www.ourcs.org/regular/flag.html - has a plot of river height
>above
>> > normal on it, and from what I recall, when it doesn't rain, it falls ~2"
>a
>> > day, until it gets to 6" (which is apparently when Iffley sluices are
>still
>> > fully open), then if the level's still falling the sluices may start to
>be
>> > closed, red boards coming down a day or so later?

>> That's so tame compared to how it was a few years ago. In order not to
>> get my feet wet I had to clamber over a chair to get onto the stairs up
>> to Queens/Lincoln boathouse balcony.
>> It was tough in them days etc.

>> Jon

>Well, yes, I know - compared to my first year it's tame (40+" above normal
>at one point...) but the fact of the matter is the river's been red-flagged
>for over a week already, and shows no sign of coming back down in the next 5
>days :-(  Damn sluices.  Just close them, and flood places upstream of
>Oxford, simple solution ;-)

Ummm.  Not the socially-responsible rower speaking there ;^)

But you do know, don't you, why the river is red-boarded?

It is not because of the dangers of rowing in water flowing a bit, or
even a lot, faster than usual.  Any competent crew or sculler can handle
that situation perfectly well.  UK rowing insurers have no problem with
competent crews rowing during red board periods - *after a properly-made
risk assessment* which, having taken account of conditions, equipment &
abilities, judges that the crew can handle the conditions safely and is
aware of the areas of the river to avoid.  But, AFAIK, the ARA prefers
for its own reasons not to disseminate that agreed position.  So, many
non-tidal Thames clubs still think red boards forbid rowing.  Not so.

This is the real reason for red boarding:
At risk of getting boring (which I accept), just cast your mind a few
days back - to the weekend's tragic event at Culham, with the 12-year-
old in all probability going through those sluices to his death.

Why should the sluices kill?  Because the recirculating maelstrom which
forms behind the seemingly smooth & benign upstream face of each sluice
gate entraps & then beats the hell out of any human body or any other
buoyant object.  That is assuming that the person is not either
decapitated or bludgeoned to death by passing under the skimming or
submerged lower edge of the rising-sector sluice gate.

Anything even slightly less dense than water is entrapped in the rolling
vortices formed by the anti-scour geometry of the sluice outlet,
sometimes for many days.  It is sucked back & dashed repeatedly against
the walls & bottom of the sluice outlet, & the back of the gate, every
few seconds until, by chance or through alteration of flow, it is blown
downstream.

But, you may say, such a dangerous device should be provided with
efficient guards.  After all, the river is a public navigation & its
towpath is a public thoroughfare.  You wouldn't be allowed to leave an
unguarded hole, let alone a huge & unguarded mincing machine with intake
open & motor running, in the middle of a public highway, would you?  Of
course not!

But the management of the Thames, having installed these deadly but
functionally most efficient devices at about 3-mile intervals along the
Thames, and knowing that they kill, & kill regularly, refuses point-
blank to make them safer.

They could be provided with effective boom-guards which would give
inadvertent swimmers a good chance of escape (think Henley booms).
These guards would have a good chance of preventing crewed shells & all
other classes of boat from being sucked into the sluices (viz. Durham
Univ. women's eight at Hambledon a couple of years back - which was cut
in half by a solitary 'guard post', although they were all rescued by
the fortuitously prompt action of river staff before reaching the
sluices).  And they would provide a safe platform until rescue could
come.

It is an oddity that just a very few Thames sluices do have these booms.
But not the rest.  Not, for example, Penton Hook, near Staines, where 3
members of the local club went through & died 30 years ago.  The stroke
of that crew was killed but, still seated in the boat, passed the cox by
up to people above him on the sluice bridge just as he was being swept
into the sluice.  Nor at the huge Romney sluices, below Windsor bridge,
where a kayaker was killed 10 years ago & many others have also died.

But at Bell Weir sluices, Runnymede, they have a cheese-cutter 1"-thick
bar right across the river just above the sluices, held at surface-
skimming level by a system of buoys sliding on rods attached to guard-
posts.  That would probably kill a swimmer who hit it in a 4-kt stream &
would destroy a shell, but may keep any bigger boats it doesn't actually
sink from entering the sluices.

The excuses offered for refusal to attend to this glaring & IMO illegal
situation are many, various & ridiculous, & both current & past river
management have refused to discuss any of the issues.

The fall-back position of the Environment Agency, & its predecessors,
doubtless concerned that they might be sued, has increasingly been to
red-board the river whenever there is any kind of a flow.  And that, as
we saw this weekend and on many previous occasions, is of no possible
relevance or use to walkers, fishers & anyone who never though anyone
would litter a man-maintained river with huge death-traps.  Note here
that the original BBC report said that the condition of the towpath made
it unsafe to continue searching for the lost boy after dark.

As I said before, the ARA (& the British Canoe Union), both of which
have lost members in these sluices, frankly don't give a damn.  The ARA
won't even publish the report it supposedly prepared on the Hambledon
accident, which so nearly killed crew, coach & 2 rescuers.  Yet another
example of holding office being far more important to officials than
serving the members' interests.

Carl

Carl Douglas Racing Shells        -
    Fine Small-Boats/AeRoWing low-drag Riggers/Advanced Accessories
Write: The Boathouse, Timsway, Chertsey Lane, Staines TW18 3JY, UK

URLs:  www.carldouglas.co.uk (boats) & www.aerowing.co.uk (riggers)

 
 
 

Water, water everywhere

Post by Jon Anderso » Thu, 14 Nov 2002 23:37:20

Quote:

> But you do know, don't you, why the river is red-boarded?

> It is not because of the dangers of rowing in water flowing a bit, or
> even a lot, faster than usual.  Any competent crew or sculler can handle
> that situation perfectly well.  

The reason why it is red-boarded at Oxford is precisely because of the
lack of competent people in charge of boats.

Quote:
> This is the real reason for red boarding:
> At risk of getting boring (which I accept), just cast your mind a few
> days back - to the weekend's tragic event at Culham, with the 12-year-
> old in all probability going through those sluices to his death.

http://www.rowing.org.uk/sluice.html to remind people if they want more
info.

Jon
--


    [ All views expressed are personal unless otherwise stated ]

 
 
 

Water, water everywhere

Post by Stuart Jone » Thu, 14 Nov 2002 23:38:11


Quote:


> >> > *sob* and the river's 12" higher than normal here at the moment too -
> >> > http://www.ourcs.org/regular/flag.html - has a plot of river height
> >above
> >> > normal on it, and from what I recall, when it doesn't rain, it falls
~2"
> >a
> >> > day, until it gets to 6" (which is apparently when Iffley sluices are
> >still
> >> > fully open), then if the level's still falling the sluices may start
to
> >be
> >> > closed, red boards coming down a day or so later?

> >> That's so tame compared to how it was a few years ago. In order not to
> >> get my feet wet I had to clamber over a chair to get onto the stairs up
> >> to Queens/Lincoln boathouse balcony.
> >> It was tough in them days etc.

> >> Jon

> >Well, yes, I know - compared to my first year it's tame (40+" above
normal
> >at one point...) but the fact of the matter is the river's been
red-flagged
> >for over a week already, and shows no sign of coming back down in the
next 5
> >days :-(  Damn sluices.  Just close them, and flood places upstream of
> >Oxford, simple solution ;-)

> Ummm.  Not the socially-responsible rower speaking there ;^)

Hehe.  I'm getting withdrawl symptoms... :-(

Quote:
> But you do know, don't you, why the river is red-boarded?

Yep.  But at the moment, have to say I agree with it, the Isis running
through Oxford is going at jogging pace or faster at the moment, and booms
or no booms I wouldn't fancy it...  Makes the margin for error with steering
so much less (esp coming upstream)...  Do agree though, booms would make
things much better, and may even let us change our flag system slightly.
 
 
 

Water, water everywhere

Post by William Ganno » Fri, 15 Nov 2002 02:25:50

Quote:
> But, you may say, such a dangerous device should be provided with
> efficient guards.  After all, the river is a public navigation & its
> towpath is a public thoroughfare.  You wouldn't be allowed to leave an
> unguarded hole, let alone a huge & unguarded mincing machine with intake
> open & motor running, in the middle of a public highway, would you?  Of
> course not!

Hmmm... I'd never thought of it that way. It's a very interesting analogy, and
one that I may copy and put on our web-site (Abingdon Rowing Club) to deter the
foolhardy.

For our own part the Risk Assessment approach to safety is of little use since
there is no-one on-site to do such a thing before each outing. For a school
there is always a teacher on hand, or a live-in boatman, to perform the
assessment daily, and no doubt colleges have something similar.

At our club crews are given authorisation to use equipment on an ongoing basis
until told otherwise, and I don't agree with crews performing their own risk
assessments. Only the Captain can do that and it is too much to expect him to do
this on a daily basis. Hence this is why we obey the red-board system.

BUT, if the EA ever do get around to safeguarding their weirs and modifying the
flag system accordingly that would obviously be a benefit. But I wouldn't hold
my breath. Moreover, is a red-flag to a narrow-boat the same thing as a red-flag
to a coxed eight? We might need to have different categories of flag.... :-(
Better still, why don't the ARA issue their own flags solely for rowers? Answers
on a postcard please...

Bill.
--
=======================================================================
"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler."
                                                       - Albert Einstein
=======================================================================