Safe Use of Hire Boats
Dave Goulbourne
morning - a very tragic day for all those involved and a horrific
reminder to us all of the danger that lurks for the
unaware/innattentive.
I have never hired a boat, being lucky enough to have my own, and I have
always wondered - just *how much* tuition is given by the operators and
by what method? - in the boatyard? at a lock? by video? and with what
content?
I’m not seeking to point blame in any particular area, after all we’ve
all seen steerers with poor eye/hand co-ordination, kids climbing all
over the roofs or dangling arms, torsos etc over the side, and truth to
tell, we’ve probably ourselves done at some time (what in hindsight are)
silly things.
Having recently cruised the Leicester ring ( passed Normanton on 1st Aug
*MISSING* the GIG ,but meeting some GIGgers, --- leave already booked,
grrrr!) and during this time had the opportunity to speak to the crew of
a hire boat who HAD been made aware of avoiding the cill BUT where oh
where are those lockside white lines? Have BW stopped painting these in?
I haven’t seen a clear one for some time.
Is it possible to make boating any safer for the novice?
Dave the (genuinely concerned) boater
NB Sir Edmund Hillary
‘on the bottom road’
Mark Wickett
> own, and I have always wondered - just *how much* tuition
> is given by the operators and by what method? - in the
> boatyard? at a lock? by video? and with what content?
Silsden Boats have said (according to the T&A) that they always give
basic safety advice and tuition on how to work locks, etc. and use a
model of a lock at their base to illustrate it.
Also the hirers in the accident had been hiring from Silsden for a
number of years - so they were not novice boaters.
Mark
Pete Sykes
>Also the hirers in the accident had been hiring from Silsden for a
>number of years - so they were not novice boaters.
That makes it all the more frightening!
Pete Sykes
Brighton, England
Dave Goulbourne
>
> > I have never hired a boat, being lucky enough to have my
> > own, and I have always wondered - just *how much* tuition
> > is given by the operators and by what method? - in the
> > boatyard? at a lock? by video? and with what content?
>
> Silsden Boats have said (according to the T&A) that they always give
> basic safety advice and tuition on how to work locks, etc. and use a
> model of a lock at their base to illustrate it.
>
> number of years - so they were not novice boaters.
>
As Pete says this makes it even more frightening. However, the question,
whilst prompted by this unfortunate incident, is more of a countrywide
one, rather than to specifically comment on this. Only the subsequent
enquiries will reveal the truth of the matter and the level of the
crew's experience.
This is essentially the question:- How can any hire company maximise the
safety knowledge of the experienced into a new or novice 'crew', given
the ?time? available and without actually demonstrating the potential
problems?
Are there any guidelines issued by the relevant authorities?
Generally, what guidance is given and can it be improved upon?
Dave the (genuinely concerned) boater
NB Sir Edmund Hillary
'on the bottom road'
Barry Wickett
Mark Wickett <URL:mailto:ma...@dsequifax.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> > I have never hired a boat, being lucky enough to have my
> > own, and I have always wondered - just *how much* tuition
> > is given by the operators and by what method? - in the
> > boatyard? at a lock? by video? and with what content?
>
> Silsden Boats have said (according to the T&A) that they always give
> basic safety advice and tuition on how to work locks, etc. and use a
> model of a lock at their base to illustrate it.
>
> Also the hirers in the accident had been hiring from Silsden for a
> number of years - so they were not novice boaters.
>
actually on board in the lock which seems a little bizarre. If this is
true then I would have thought this was rather dangerous practice in
itself.
Barry
MartinP
Dave Goulbourne wrote:
> Mark Wickett wrote:
> >
> > > I have never hired a boat, being lucky enough to have my
> > > own, and I have always wondered - just *how much* tuition
> > > is given by the operators and by what method? - in the
> > > boatyard? at a lock? by video? and with what content?
> >
> > Silsden Boats have said (according to the T&A) that they always give
> > basic safety advice and tuition on how to work locks, etc. and use a
> > model of a lock at their base to illustrate it.
> >
> > Also the hirers in the accident had been hiring from Silsden for a
> > number of years - so they were not novice boaters.
> >
> > Mark
>
> As Pete says this makes it even more frightening. However, the question,
> whilst prompted by this unfortunate incident, is more of a countrywide
> one, rather than to specifically comment on this. Only the subsequent
> enquiries will reveal the truth of the matter and the level of the
> crew's experience.
>
> This is essentially the question:- How can any hire company maximise the
> safety knowledge of the experienced into a new or novice 'crew', given
> the ?time? available and without actually demonstrating the potential
> problems?
>
> Are there any guidelines issued by the relevant authorities?
>
Well we could go for the French-German-Italian approach. Nobody touches a
boat until they are fully qualified. But in the meantime the hire companies
will go broke so they would have to make endless exceptions like the French
did and we are back to square one.
I could imagine an intermediate stage with a compulsory theoretical exam,
like the Dutch do, which you could study for and complete in a winter. The
RYA exams could be adapted to this PLUS X hours practical training before
being allowed to go off by yourself in a charter vessel.
Mike Casswell
>I have never hired a boat, being lucky enough to have my own, and I have
>always wondered - just *how much* tuition is given by the operators and
>by what method? - in the boatyard? at a lock? by video? and with what
>content?
I have hired on numerous occasions. The norm is half an hour's
chat from an instructor, who may be a spotty youth who helps out
on Saturdays or a veteran with a lifetime on the water. The chat
usually covers the boat itself, engine maintenance etc. plus lock
working and perhaps something about the route. I can't really
comment on the safety aspect, since in my experience at least,
once you say that you have hired before it's assumed that you
know. This in itself can cause a problem, since it's easy to
develop a 'know it all' attitude. I have certainly been guilty of
this in the past, I now try to learn as much as I can.
Another problem is that the instruction is normally given to one
or perhaps two of the crew. The theory is that it is passed on to
the others, but I doubt very much that this often happens in
practice.
The entire situation is not conducive to good training/learning.
The boatyard often have to get many boats away with limited staff
and all the hirers want to do is get away as soon as possible and
start their holiday.
I have thought previously that there would be little extra work
or cost in a classroom session for all hirers an hour or two
before departure. I would suggest that the yards don't do this
because the last thing they want is a lot of people hanging about
and pestering them while they're trying to turn the boats round.
I've often wondered what it feels like watching a couple of
hundred grand's worth of investment disappearing for a week in
the hands of people you don't know at all.
Do we have any hire boat operators/employees/ex-employees lurking
here?
--
|
| Mike Casswell Leek, Staffordshire, England
|
| mi...@casswell.u-net.com and often @ The Wellington Inn
Jeff Dennison
>Well we could go for the French-German-Italian approach. Nobody touches a
>boat until they are fully qualified. But in the meantime the hire companies
>will go broke so they would have to make endless exceptions like the French
>did and we are back to square one.
>I could imagine an intermediate stage with a compulsory theoretical exam,
>like the Dutch do, which you could study for and complete in a winter. The
>RYA exams could be adapted to this PLUS X hours practical training before
>being allowed to go off by yourself in a charter vessel.
No No No No No PLease. We are regulated enough no matter how much
training you give people accidentrs will happen even the Titanic sank
when it was described as unsinkable. Regulation does not achieve the
goals it just covers the backs of the administratrors. We train all
drivers on the roads but we still go on killing people why shoiuld
training boat steerers mean thant there will be less accidents? What
evidence is there for this, none to my knowledge.
What has happened is a tragedy it could probably have been avoided but
how many people actully die each year in boating accidents on the
canals? Very few as a society we quite happliy live with thousands
of deaths on the roads without batting an eyelid. You can;t regulate
for every possibility.
Regards
Jeff
Songs of the Waterways - compact disc "They're coming back to the water"
Web site http://www.pipemedia.net/users/jeffd/index.htm
Telephone: 01203 615582 Mobile 07970 281553
If you ain't makin' waves, you ain't kickin' hard enough!
Pete Sykes
<mi...@casswell.u-net.com> writes
>
>I have hired on numerous occasions. The norm is half an hour's
>chat from an instructor, who may be a spotty youth who helps out
>on Saturdays or a veteran with a lifetime on the water. The chat
>usually covers the boat itself, engine maintenance etc. plus lock
>working and perhaps something about the route. I can't really
>comment on the safety aspect, since in my experience at least,
>once you say that you have hired before it's assumed that you
>know. This in itself can cause a problem, since it's easy to
>develop a 'know it all' attitude. I have certainly been guilty of
>this in the past, I now try to learn as much as I can.
Me too. I reckon I was taught pretty well in the late 70's but I've
learnt more from this group over the past few years that I'd care to
admit.
--
Pete Sykes
Brighton, East Sussex, England
Pete Sykes
folk...@pipemedia.co.uk> writes
>On Thu, 20 Aug 1998 18:23:49 +0200, you wrote:
>
>>Well we could go for the French-German-Italian approach. Nobody touches a
>>boat until they are fully qualified. But in the meantime the hire companies
>>will go broke so they would have to make endless exceptions like the French
>>did and we are back to square one.
>>I could imagine an intermediate stage with a compulsory theoretical exam,
>>like the Dutch do, which you could study for and complete in a winter. The
>>RYA exams could be adapted to this PLUS X hours practical training before
>>being allowed to go off by yourself in a charter vessel.
>
>No No No No No PLease.
Agreed but if I ran a hire fleet I'd offer a discount for those with,
say, a Helmsman's Certificate.
The thing that makes this accident frightening for me is that the crew
were apparently all experienced (including those who died) having had
several similar holidays - even on the same boat.
A moment or two's lapse of concentration and this *could* probably
happen to any of us!
Harald Joergens
>A moment or two's lapse of concentration and this *could* probably
>happen to any of us!
Seconded. Enjoying a boat trip, the peace and tranquility, relaxing,
is not exactly the same as beeing aware of a possibly lethal danger.
And neither BW nor the hire boat operators would advertise
"Boating may be dangerous to your health".
This has been a horrific accident, and should rise security awareness
in lock operation.
BUT we all use cars, public transport of any kind, ferries, air
planes,
beeing aware of the possible dangers, and IMHO boating on the UK
is still much safer than any of the above.
Regards
Harald
Nick Cooke
wrote:
> I could imagine an intermediate stage with a compulsory theoretical exam,
> like the Dutch do, which you could study for and complete in a winter. The
> RYA exams could be adapted to this PLUS X hours practical training before
> being allowed to go off by yourself in a charter vessel.
>
>
canlas in the last 10 years compared with on the roads where there are
already tests both practical and theoretical.
Keep the legislation down and keep alert. I rather think that if the
steerer had been concentrating on the behaviour of the boat concerned he
would have noticed that the bow had been caught before any water had been
shipped and action could have been taken in good time.
What we don't want is a lot a knee jerk legislation as has happened in the
handguns world.
Nick
Richard Lucas
from Pe...@fship.demon.co.uk (Pete Sykes) contains these words:
> Me too. I reckon I was taught pretty well in the late 70's but I've
> learnt more from this group over the past few years that I'd care to
> admit.
I'd have to go along with this.
I wouldn't like to see everybody having to pass some kind of test,
but people leading parties of children, disabled people etc., really
should have to prove their competence. It's very hard to be too
careful with other people's kids. I never cease to be amazed at a
lot of parent's total lack of curiosity about plans for camps, etc
for my Cub Scout Pack. A lot of them just tell me that getting
little Billy off their hands for a weekend for £20 or whatever is a
good deal, and hand over the cheque.
Nobody ever asks if I'm qualified to lead Cub camps (I am, actually),
they just assume so, if it crosses their minds at all.
--
Richard Lucas
MartinP
Jeff Dennison wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Aug 1998 18:23:49 +0200, you wrote:
>
> >Well we could go for the French-German-Italian approach. Nobody touches a
> >boat until they are fully qualified. But in the meantime the hire companies
> >will go broke so they would have to make endless exceptions like the French
> >did and we are back to square one.
> >I could imagine an intermediate stage with a compulsory theoretical exam,
> >like the Dutch do, which you could study for and complete in a winter. The
> >RYA exams could be adapted to this PLUS X hours practical training before
> >being allowed to go off by yourself in a charter vessel.
>
> No No No No No PLease. We are regulated enough no matter how much
> training you give people accidentrs will happen even the Titanic sank
> when it was described as unsinkable. Regulation does not achieve the
> goals it just covers the backs of the administratrors. We train all
> drivers on the roads but we still go on killing people
If you have ever driven in Belgium where no one took a driving test until 1967,
you will notice the difference a little training makes.
> why shoiuld
> training boat steerers mean thant there will be less accidents?
because that what's education is all about, learning from otheres experience via
the fast track.
> evidence is there for this, none to my knowledge.
>
> What has happened is a tragedy it could probably have been avoided but
> how many people actully die each year in boating accidents on the
> canals? Very few as a society we quite happliy live with thousands
> of deaths on the roads without batting an eyelid. You can;t regulate
> for every possibility.
but you can provide a minimum training. I am not talking about regulating I am
talking of training people before letting them loose with a large boat. Jeff, I
am sure that you learnt your boating by travelling with more experienced people
first?
Martin
Andy Clarke
wrote:
<snip>
>I have thought previously that there would be little extra work
>or cost in a classroom session for all hirers an hour or two
>before departure. I would suggest that the yards don't do this
>because the last thing they want is a lot of people hanging about
>and pestering them while they're trying to turn the boats round.
Or perhaps an informative video sent out a few weeks prior to the
holiday?
>I've often wondered what it feels like watching a couple of
>hundred grand's worth of investment disappearing for a week in
>the hands of people you don't know at all.
ISTR a great feeling of relief that another Saturday was over.
>Do we have any hire boat operators/employees/ex-employees lurking
>here?
I'm an ex- turnround lad, assistant engineer, hire fleet engineer,
assistant manager, manager.
Now, thankfully, self employed!
Andy Clarke
--
BMS, Canal Wharf, Lower Heyford, South Oxford Canal, UK. Mobile:0860 577480
bmser...@btinternet.com - http://www.btinternet.com/~bmservices/bms/
Engine info, Boat Safety Scheme Q&A, Boats 'n Stuff For Sale & Wanted
New: Special offer on winter work, see website for details
MartinP
Nick Cooke wrote:
> In article <35DC4D95...@consunet.nl>, m.pat...@consunet.nl (MartinP)
> wrote:
> > I could imagine an intermediate stage with a compulsory theoretical exam,
> > like the Dutch do, which you could study for and complete in a winter. The
> > RYA exams could be adapted to this PLUS X hours practical training before
> > being allowed to go off by yourself in a charter vessel.
> >
> >
> Lets get this into proportion folks. How many deaths have there been on the
> canlas in the last 10 years compared with on the roads where there are
> already tests both practical and theoretical.
>
> Keep the legislation down and keep alert. I rather think that if the
> steerer had been concentrating on the behaviour of the boat concerned he
> would have noticed that the bow had been caught before any water had been
> shipped and action could have been taken in good time.
>
> What we don't want is a lot a knee jerk legislation as has happened in the
> handguns world.
I was suggesting training NOT banning.
Martin, who woyuld be happier if there were no handguns at all.
Richard Lucas
from m.pat...@consunet.nl (MartinP) contains these words:
> > What we don't want is a lot a knee jerk legislation as has happened in the
> > handguns world.
> I was suggesting training NOT banning.
> Martin, who woyuld be happier if there were no handguns at all.
I don't think knee-jerk legislation is the problem. IMHO there is
plenty of law to prevent under-qualified people taking groups on
activities. I am more concerned that there will shock-horror
newspaper stories about the threat to life and limb posed by canals,
and that these will affect the public view of waterways
Hireboat owners must be feeling very uneasy tonight, with visions of
next year's bookings evaporating. This is not the sort of publicity
the waterways movement needs at present. Big restoration schemes are
seeking public support and funds. If the Great Bitish public begin
to see canals as a threat to life, the restorers might find they are
playing a very poor hand.
I wish people would stop dragging guns into the argument. I can't
see a parallel at all. I had a colleague who lost her grand-daughter
at Dunblane. There is a world of difference between wickedness with
lethal weapons and a tragic accident. The better parallel could be
drawn with cars, which society feels able to tolerate, despite the
accidental death toll motor traffic exacts.
--
Richard Lucas
Michael Houlston
<davegou...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> I was’nt aware of the L & L accident until I’d logged in at work this
> morning - a very tragic day for all those involved and a horrific
> reminder to us all of the danger that lurks for the
> unaware/innattentive.
>
> always wondered - just *how much* tuition is given by the operators and
> by what method? - in the boatyard? at a lock? by video? and with what
<> content?
We used to hire from Red Line on the Mon and Brec.
Its two or three days cruising before you get near a lock.
By which time you should have read the manual on how to use a lock.
Most hire companies just do a quick, this is what to to with the engine etc,
before you leave the marina.
Then five or ten minutes up the canal with you to make sure you know which
end is the front.
Bye bye see you in one/two weeks.
We have a few of the very wide Bruce Trust boats on the K&A, mosstly used by
people with wheel chairs as far as I can see.
From what we have seen, and comments from users, the instructions for them
are not much better.
Mike
--
Mike Houlston. Wilderness Beaver "KESTON"
Canals are more fun than working !!.
mhou...@argonet.co.uk
Jackie Lewis
Dave Goulbourne wrote in message
>This is essentially the question:- How can any hire company maximise the
>safety knowledge of the experienced into a new or novice 'crew', given
>the ?time? available and without actually demonstrating the potential
>problems?
I've only got experience of two hire companies and I don't want to knock
them in any way because I think there's a simple factor involved here; how
much do the hirers take in and listen to, when they pick up the boat?
There's the excitement involved, which is bound to affect concentration, and
the speed in which it's done.
I think, at Norbury, where I hired first time, the guy actually started and
moved the boat around which probably gave - 1/4 hour? At Haywood, the guy
spent about ten minutes on board, saying things by rote - but in fairness to
him, I walked off and left him and Terry to it!
The thing is, I don't think you remember it anyway.
Wasn't there a magazine article recently saying that one hire company uses a
model of locks? That would work well because it's easier to remember
something you've seen.
The thing I think would help most is to have instruction handouts on the
boat for you to look at and read as you're going along - it's only once the
holiday starts 'proper' that you realise you haven't a clue what to do at
that lock up ahead!
It's boaters who give you the real information and their helpfulness is
nothing short of amazing.
Best wishes,
Jackie
Niall
wrote:
>In article <35dc5a18...@pop3.pipemedia.net>, Jeff Dennison <jeff-
>folk...@pipemedia.co.uk> writes
>>On Thu, 20 Aug 1998 18:23:49 +0200, you wrote:
>>
>>>Well we could go for the French-German-Italian approach. Nobody touches a
>>>boat until they are fully qualified. But in the meantime the hire companies
>>>will go broke so they would have to make endless exceptions like the French
>>>did and we are back to square one.
>>>I could imagine an intermediate stage with a compulsory theoretical exam,
>>>like the Dutch do, which you could study for and complete in a winter. The
>>>RYA exams could be adapted to this PLUS X hours practical training before
>>>being allowed to go off by yourself in a charter vessel.
>>
>>No No No No No PLease.
>
Just to add my 2p worth. No No No No! Notwithstanding recent events,
the accident/ incident rate in no way justifies any such action.
The politicians and civil servants would just love any excuse to
introduce such things at vast cost and to no useful effect.
No doubt the RYA would be there offering the appropriate courses and
certificates for the usual consideration.
>Agreed but if I ran a hire fleet I'd offer a discount for those with,
>say, a Helmsman's Certificate.
>
Sadly increasingly common but the incompetence and downright stupidity
I've seen from paper laden yotties tells me it's a mistaken decision.
--
Niall
Drascombe Coaster - Tangram
http://www.btinternet.com/~niallcw/sailing
Peter Brown
<BMSer...@btinternet.com> writes
>
>Or perhaps an informative video sent out a few weeks prior to the
>holiday?
>
just sent us the Hoseason's Handbook (28 pages, perhaps a third of which
is safety-related issues) and have lent us the BW video, The Waterways
Code for Boaters, which is about 20 minutes long.
I think both are good, though in truth I hadn't read the booklet until a
few minutes ago ('Well, I know it all, don't I') and when Quita & I
watched the video the other night it was more a game of 'Where's that
lock?' and 'Isn't the husband being patronising to his little wifey'.
On the specific point about the dangers of being caught up in locks,
both mention cills and the booklet mentions getting caught when locking
uphill. Neither mentioned the same thing could hapen going downhill.
Only the booklet says what to do if the boat does start to tip (in the
context of the cill).
However, I appreciate that the more points that are made, the less
likely it is that any one will be remembered. The booklet and the video
have so much information that the inexperienced person could feel
overwhelmed, and the experienced person may be under the illusion that
they've nothing to learn.
Most people learn best by doing, anyway.
--
Peter Brown
(nb 'Maggie Lynch')
Mark Wickett
> company uses a model of locks?
Gargrave use just that method.
Mark
MartinP
Niall wrote:
If I was an insurance broker, I would think twice about offering coverage to
someone with zero experience.
How do charter companies obtain coverage?
Brian L Dominic
Wickett) wrote:
IF the first lock in each direction is near the yard, why not have a
helper/advisor there to see boats through? (I know, no good on the
Ashby........)
Brian
Web Sites
(Golden Valley Light Railway) http://www.proweb.co.uk/~dominicfam/
(Canals) http://www.proweb.co.uk/~dominicfam/boat.htm
Richard Lucas
from domin...@proweb.co.uk (Brian L Dominic) contains these words:
> IF the first lock in each direction is near the yard, why not have a
> helper/advisor there to see boats through? (I know, no good on the
> Ashby........)
When I first hired from Alkvechurch, that was exactly what was done.
Shire Cruisers at Sowerby Bridge asked if I wanted such assistance
when I hired from them two years ago.
--
Richard Lucas
Mark Annand
Richard Lucas wrote:
> > IF the first lock in each direction is near the yard, why not have a
> > helper/advisor there to see boats through? (I know, no good on the
> > Ashby........)
>
> When I first hired from Alkvechurch, that was exactly what was done.
Didn't think there were that many locks in Holland ... oh no, sorry, I see
where you mean ...
MartinP
Mark Annand wrote:
There are plenty but all the big ones are professionally operated. The rise
and fall is a few inches, with a few exceptions mainly at the sea locks. A not
to be muissed experience is to shoot the rapids through the A'dam locks, when
they leave both top and bottom gates open to flush the silt out.
John Bennett
><SNIP>
>We used to hire from Red Line on the Mon and Brec.
>Its two or three days cruising before you get near a lock.
>By which time you should have read the manual on how to use a lock.
>Most hire companies just do a quick, this is what to to with the engine etc,
>before you leave the marina.
>Then five or ten minutes up the canal with you to make sure you know which
>end is the front.
>Bye bye see you in one/two weeks.
To be fair there is little else they can do other than provide a good
safety instruction book if there are no locks anywhere near. Sadly
instruction books are often not read until after the holiday! However I
do know of hire companies based a couple of minutes drive from locks who
still don't help and instruct their hirers through them.
It can be quite nerve wracking meeting up with boats coming out of their
first lock after only 10 minutes cruising. I have seen a boat coming
out of a lock, hitting moored boats broadside on (as they hadn't quite
mastered which way to turn the tiller yet) and more often to my
annoyance they will close the gates against you even when you are
actually in the channel waiting to come in (proving the "instructions"
have obviously sunk in!) The vast majority, however, manage fine, are
keen to boat safely and correctly and willingly take advice from more
experienced boaters.
I've not seen the BW safety video but by the sound of it it could do
with a re-think and actually show more graphically exactly how serious
accidents happen. Perhaps it should be compulsory for a copy to be sent
to all hirers a couple of weeks before they start their holiday? I can
see no reason (except financial and in extreme cases distance) why it
shouldn't also be compusory for hire boatyards to supervise hirers
through their first lock as well.
>We have a few of the very wide Bruce Trust boats on the K&A, mosstly used by
>people with wheel chairs as far as I can see.
>From what we have seen, and comments from users, the instructions for them
>are not much better.
>
There have been some recorded incidents recently of bad boatmanship on
Bruce Trust boats and I have myself seen one of them speeding past
moored boats (the pathetic excuse on this occasion from the skipper of
their brand new boat was "the bow thruster's broken")! Wide beam boats
do have a tendency to think they rule the canal but I always assumed
that the Bruce Trust crews would have been properly trained and
certificated, rather than just be casual volunteers?
Cheers John
--
John Bennett nb "Jake B"
Cheddar Bradford-on Avon
Somerset UK
Mark Wickett
> >> company uses a model of locks?
> >
> >The hire company who own the boats involved in the tragedy at
> >Gargrave use just that method.
> >
a
> helper/advisor there to see boats through? (I know, no good on the
> Ashby........)
From this particular boat yard, it's the first of the Gargrave flight
uphill (10 miles or so) or a few miles in the other direction is
Bingley Five Rise. At least Barry will help you down there...
Mark
Malcolm Nixon
L Dominic) wrote:
>.On 21 Aug 1998 08:15:29 -0000, mwic...@decisionsolutions.com (Mark
>.Wickett) wrote:
>.
>.>> Wasn't there a magazine article recently saying that one hire
>.>> company uses a model of locks?
>.>
>.>The hire company who own the boats involved in the tragedy at
>.>Gargrave use just that method.
>.>
>.IF the first lock in each direction is near the yard, why not have a
>.helper/advisor there to see boats through? (I know, no good on the
>.Ashby........)
>.
Don't some canal societies and other organisations still have
experienced volunteers manning locks near hire company bases ?. I
have seen this and it seems to work well. Maybe this sort of
scheme could be developed into a more structured activity
covering as many locks near boatyards as possible. Clearly the
hire industry need to help - but I am sure there would be many
volunteers to give up an afternoon by a lock once every six weeks
or so ?.
--
Malcolm,
-spam goes in the bin
-remove the later to email
Andrew Cormack - COMPG
hired from Chas Hardern, one of the family came onboard as I drove down
to the winding hole, indicated the correct place to turn, got the boat
of the mud (!), and accompanied us up through the first lock (ok, so
it's only 20 yards from the boatyard, but still). Last year, as an
"experienced" hirer, Badger Boats sent us a copy of the safety video a
few weeks before the hire and accompanied us out onto the water to check
we could steer (and put them back on the bank!). After hearing about a
gang of my colleagues who went with one of the "brochure" companies, and
were effectively given the key and left to get on with it, I decided that
little bases, which are only trying to turn around a handful of boats on
a Saturday afternoon, have a lot going for them.
I'd agree that the video takes the "if you do this you'll be safe" approach,
rather than going into much detail about the likely hazards, but if you go
too far, then you risk scaring people off canal boating before they've even
started. On that particular trip, the greatest threat was hypothermia,
which none of the videos, books, etc. mention. On the other hand, blizzards
in mid-May are not a common hazard!
Andrew
Richard Lucas
from m.an...@bathspa.ac.uk (Mark Annand) contains these words:
> Richard Lucas wrote:
> > > IF the first lock in each direction is near the yard, why not have a
> > > helper/advisor there to see boats through? (I know, no good on the
> > > Ashby........)
> >
> > When I first hired from Alkvechurch, that was exactly what was done.
> Didn't think there were that many locks in Holland ... oh no, sorry, I see
> where you mean ...
Sorry, the fingers keep getting ahead of the brain! Alvechurch, of
course, and they took us through Tardebigge top lock.
--
Richard Lucas
Brian L Dominic
Nixon) wrote:
>Don't some canal societies and other organisations still have
>experienced volunteers manning locks near hire company bases ?. I
>have seen this and it seems to work well. Maybe this sort of
>scheme could be developed into a more structured activity
>covering as many locks near boatyards as possible. Clearly the
>hire industry need to help - but I am sure there would be many
>volunteers to give up an afternoon by a lock once every six weeks
>or so ?.
>
Sounds like an excellent idea - I know I would offer, if there was a
hire yard near me........
Pete Sykes
<nia...@btinternet.com> writes
>>say, a Helmsman's Certificate.
>>
>Sadly increasingly common but the incompetence and downright stupidity
>I've seen from paper laden yotties tells me it's a mistaken decision.
Way out of my experience that but I suppose I'm not surprised. Maybe
I'd qualify it to mean a certificate taken on the canals and in a
narrowboat.
Niall
>
>
>Niall wrote:
>
>>
>> >Agreed but if I ran a hire fleet I'd offer a discount for those with,
>> >say, a Helmsman's Certificate.
>> >
>> Sadly increasingly common but the incompetence and downright stupidity
>> I've seen from paper laden yotties tells me it's a mistaken decision.
>
>If I was an insurance broker, I would think twice about offering coverage to
>someone with zero experience.
Yes but the absence of a collection of RYA certificates does not
neccesarily imply zero experience.
The only one I've got is a VHF cert. which is not where I learned to
use a radio. If I couldn't handle a boat I wouldn't be here today.
>How do charter companies obtain coverage?
>
They do require a degree of experience depending on the boat and
sailing waters, but in general do *not* insist on paper
qualifications, although there is a (regrettable IMO) trend in this
direction.
MartinP
Brian L Dominic wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Aug 1998 14:16:55 GMT, mal.m...@dial.pipex.com (Malcolm
> Nixon) wrote:
>
> >Don't some canal societies and other organisations still have
> >experienced volunteers manning locks near hire company bases ?. I
> >have seen this and it seems to work well. Maybe this sort of
> >scheme could be developed into a more structured activity
> >covering as many locks near boatyards as possible. Clearly the
> >hire industry need to help - but I am sure there would be many
> >volunteers to give up an afternoon by a lock once every six weeks
> >or so ?.
> >
> Sounds like an excellent idea - I know I would offer, if there was a
> hire yard near me........
How about providing amateur lock keepers with a stick with a line and a
clog attached to the end of it, like the Dutch do and everyone puts a
quid in the clog as they pas through.
Better than cleaning windows at traffic lights, they could sell cold
beers ices etc. too.
Malcolm Nixon
wrote:
>.>How do charter companies obtain coverage?
>.>
>.They do require a degree of experience depending on the boat and
>.sailing waters, but in general do *not* insist on paper
>.qualifications, although there is a (regrettable IMO) trend in this
>.direction.
I'm struggling with this one.
We have discussed training before, and I really do understand
many people hereabouts who are resisting more paperwork and
officialdom.
But - would you let your young children go off to school where
teachers had no real qualifications - they had just picked it up
as they went along - would you let your young children go away on
a youth camp with climbing or walking on the moors / hills or
canoeing on the sea - if you were not sure that the people who
were looking after them were up to the job - qualified or
whatever.
I think the general thread here is that many agreed that people
who take groups of children / adults onto boat should have some
formal training.
Back to hire boats - would you let your child go away on holiday
on a boat with their friend and family if you thought the other
parent was untrained in the use of the boat.
Where do we draw the line - ?
What is wrong with good training ?
Charles Lyne
>
> >We have a few of the very wide Bruce Trust boats on the K&A, mosstly used by
> >people with wheel chairs as far as I can see.
> >From what we have seen, and comments from users, the instructions for them
> >are not much better.
> >
> There have been some recorded incidents recently of bad boatmanship on
> Bruce Trust boats and I have myself seen one of them speeding past
> moored boats (the pathetic excuse on this occasion from the skipper of
> their brand new boat was "the bow thruster's broken")! Wide beam boats
> do have a tendency to think they rule the canal but I always assumed
> that the Bruce Trust crews would have been properly trained and
> certificated, rather than just be casual volunteers?
>
I can put the record straight here about the Bruce Trust, as we hired
their smallest boat, The Rachel, for a week last September to take a
friend with MS out on the Kennet & Avon.
All the Bruce Trust boats are specially designed to take wheelchairs
(hence they are all wide beam as it wouldn't be practical to fit full
size wheelchairs in a narrow boat) but they don't limit the boat's use
to disabled people and their carers. All sorts of groups are welcomed
by the Trust, including: "disabled, disadvantaged or elderly people".
Re. training of crews, to quote from their web page and literature:
"The Trust prides itself in the high standard of boat handling by the
hirers. Group Leaders without considerable experience of canal cruising,
must successfully complete a residential training course with the
Trust prior to the holiday."
We weren't obliged to go on their course as both Barbara and myself
had just completed the Berkshire Youth & Community Service Narrowboat
Handling Course earlier that year, which teaches you, not only how to
handle a narrow boat on canal and river navigations, but also how
manage a crew of often well-intentioned, but usually inexperienced
children or similar groups. The Bruce Trust accepted this and many
years of other boating experience as meeting their criteria for
safe operation of their boat.
Obviously, I can't disagree that some crews may have been less than
considerate, but I think that will always be the case that no matter
how experienced crews are, but certainly, the Bruce Trust themselves
do try to make as certain as they can that their boats shouldn't be
involved in any unfortunate accidents, especially as the physically
handicapped people that often occupy their boats would be very
difficult to rescue in an emergency situation.
As to wide beam boats 'ruling the canal'. I suppose it's a bit like
cars and lorries on the road. Wide beam boats are bigger, heavier
and generally less manoeuverable than ordinary narrow boats, so in
the same way that you expect to give a 40 ton artic a bit more space
on the road, these boats need a bit more space in the canal and can't
move as far away from the centre of the channel as a narrow boat.
I particularly remember one narrow reedy stretch of the summit,
where we literally filled the whole available navigable part of
the canal. An oncoming narrow boat on realising this, clearly
had a bit of a fright and did an emergency stop in order to move
himself in to one of the few passing places on that stretch. It was
just as well, as The Rachel's bow thruster was not working either
(is this typical of all bow thrusters or are the Bruce Trust just
unlucky?) so I wouldn't have been able to reverse very far if he
hadn't pulled in. But I certainly wouldn't have just barged my
way through had he not, and thanked him as we passed, even though
realistically, he had little option other than to give way to us.
As it happened, we had a bit of an emergency ourselves on The Rachel
last year when, having moored for the night I became aware of the
boat listing slightly. Investigations showed that the bank side of the
boat was aground, which it hadn't been when we moored, and the water
level in the canal had dropped several inches since we'd tied up.
I must admit to starting to panic a little, as I couldn't push
the boat back into the water, once I'd loosened the mooring ropes,
and if the water level dropped significantly, the boat could capsize.
With Jane aboard, who is completely confined to her wheelchair and
barely able to hold a cup, she is completely dependent on helpers
for being moved, and the boat was already at an angle that would have
made it difficult to get her wheelchair safely out of the cabin onto
the deck and via ramps onto the towpath.
Having been held up previously in our holiday by a serious breach in
the canal below the Caen Hill flight, I had visions of another breach
draining our section of canal, but not before The Rachel had capsized
with Jane still aboard. I asked at the nearest house if they knew
of any problems, and it turned out that the person there was a BW
employee who said he'd phone his boss.
I still don't know exactly what had gone wrong, but the level did
stop falling quite soon afterwards when the pumps for that section
were turned on. It seemed that water is moved around various parts
of the K&A (back-pumped) and they started pumping water out of that
part before it was being refilled from lower down. After that, I
treated it more like a river navigation, and moored to allow for
some variation in the water level.
To conclude what I'm afraid has turned out to be a bit of a
mammoth e-mail, I have nothing but praise for the many people who
run and help with the Bruce Trust boats. They put in many hours of
unpaid work to clean, service and repair the boats in order to
give many people the pleasure of a waterborne holiday, who wouldn't
be able to experience the canals in any other boat.
Regards, Charles (nb SAROS 1/12th + coracle Alphi)
-- -
From the ageing-hippy, born-again-biker, Acorn-computer-using,
morris-dancing, shared-narrow-boat-owner and coracle builder!
http://www.aardvark.force9.co.uk/
Niall
wrote:
>In article <35dcbb7e...@news.btinternet.com>, Niall
><nia...@btinternet.com> writes
>>On 20 Aug 1998 19:30:45 -0000, Pe...@fship.demon.co.uk (Pete Sykes)
>>wrote:
>>>Agreed but if I ran a hire fleet I'd offer a discount for those with,
>>>say, a Helmsman's Certificate.
>>>
>>Sadly increasingly common but the incompetence and downright stupidity
>>I've seen from paper laden yotties tells me it's a mistaken decision.
>
>Way out of my experience that but I suppose I'm not surprised. Maybe
>I'd qualify it to mean a certificate taken on the canals and in a
>narrowboat.
...but they're incompetent on the sea with certificates issued for sea
work so there's no reason to suppose that canal based certificates
would be any guarantee of canal competence.
And anyway, as said elsewhere in the thread(s); the accident rate
simply doesn't justify any change to the present system.
Niall
Nixon) wrote:
>
>We have discussed training before, and I really do understand
>many people hereabouts who are resisting more paperwork and
>officialdom.
>
>But - would you let your young children go off to school where
>teachers had no real qualifications - they had just picked it up
>as they went along
If you mean qualifications in teaching as such then it wouldn't bother
me as long as they knew the subject they were supposed to be
imparting. I have always found that the best teaching comes from
people who have been actively involved in their subject in the real
world and are apparently living in it than from career teachers many
of whom seem to be part of a self referential clique with no
connection to anything else.
> - would you let your young children go away on
>a youth camp with climbing or walking on the moors / hills or
>canoeing on the sea - if you were not sure that the people who
>were looking after them were up to the job - qualified or
>whatever.
No, but I would place a greater value on my own assesment of their
general competence and common sense rather than blindly accepting any
certificates they might posess.
The evidence from the news reports is that the paper qualified ones
are just as capable of cockups and stupidity.
It's like the mountain rescue always encouraging the belief that they
spend all their time rescuing ill equipped and inexperienced people.
Watch the reports closely and you see that although they are urging
people not to go unprepared, the particular case being reported
usually involves experienced people fully equipped.
>
>I think the general thread here is that many agreed that people
>who take groups of children / adults onto boat should have some
>formal training.
>
Yes but there were also suggestions that we should *all* be suitably
certificated before venturing out.
>Back to hire boats - would you let your child go away on holiday
>on a boat with their friend and family if you thought the other
>parent was untrained in the use of the boat.
>
Again if I knew them to be competent resourceful people no problem.
There are blithering idiots with Yachtmaster tickets I wouldn't
consider for a moment.
This is not to say that some people with such qualifications aren't
sensible and competent, there are many; but there is no hard
relationship.
>Where do we draw the line - ?
>
>What is wrong with good training ?
>
Nothing, if it's actually neccesary, but the UK authorities are good
at placing great value on the paper results of very bad and
unneccesary training.
Jeff Dennison
>All the Bruce Trust boats are specially designed to take wheelchairs
>(hence they are all wide beam as it wouldn't be practical to fit full
>size wheelchairs in a narrow boat) but they don't limit the boat's use
>to disabled people and their carers.
Snip of lots of good stuff.
There are a number of narrowboats adapted to take wheel chair users on
holiday. Our boat in Coventry is called Lady Godiva and is run by a
charitable trust it has been in operation since 1981.
She is fitted with specially desigened ramps to allow access to the
foredeck from which an hydraulic lift enables wheel chair users access
to the saloon. All narrow boat acommodation has to be a compromise
and the problem on Godiva is that wheel chair useres can't access the
galley. We employ a permanent boatman who has a Boatmasters
certificate, is an ex RN Chief Petty Officer with a British Empire
Medal. All parties/families using the boat must supply care
staff/family members to see to the needs of the passengers with
disability.
Regards
Jeff
Songs of the Waterways - compact disc "They're coming back to the water"
Web site http://www.pipemedia.net/users/jeffd/index.htm
Telephone: 01203 615582 Mobile 07970 281553
If you ain't makin' waves, you ain't kickin' hard enough!
Jackie Lewis
Malcolm Nixon wrote in message
>But - would you let your young children go off to school where
>teachers had no real qualifications - they had just picked it up
>as they went along
Teachers can now qualify 'on the job'. Whether a school will take them on
with no prior teaching experience, is another matter.
>Back to hire boats - would you let your child go away on holiday
>on a boat with their friend and family if you thought the other
>parent was untrained in the use of the boat.
Do we need to keep this in perspective? How many deaths are there in
narrowboating compared to the number of first-timers each year? Where would
boating come on a list of 'high risk' in comparisons of 'Adventure
Holidays'? - surely it would be much lower than, say, climbing or
horse-riding.
>Where do we draw the line - ?
>What is wrong with good training ?
The cost, in this case. Unless it was going to be the responsibility of the
hire company - and then, presumably, they'd increase the cost of the
holiday. I thought that in this particular tragedy, the people involved did
have boating experience anyway?
Best wishes,
Jackie
MartinP
Niall wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Aug 1998 22:42:10 GMT, mal.m...@dial.pipex.com (Malcolm
> Nixon) wrote:
>
> >
> >We have discussed training before, and I really do understand
> >many people hereabouts who are resisting more paperwork and
> >officialdom.
> >
> >But - would you let your young children go off to school where
> >teachers had no real qualifications - they had just picked it up
> >as they went along
> >Back to hire boats - would you let your child go away on holiday
> >on a boat with their friend and family if you thought the other
> >parent was untrained in the use of the boat.
> >
> Again if I knew them to be competent resourceful people no problem.
competent in what?I think he didn't mean formally trained, he meant
untrained i,e ignorant about boats.
Would you let your kids go with a parent who had never been in a boat in
his life and knew nothing about boats?
> There are blithering idiots
and there are blithering idiots without a Yachtmaster ticket, they are
everywhere :O)
> with Yachtmaster tickets I wouldn't
> consider for a moment.
> This is not to say that some people with such qualifications aren't
> sensible and competent, there are many;
I would say that the vast majority are not. It takes a lot of effort and
motivation to do a Yachtmasters ticket, why should a large proportion be
b. idiots.
> but there is no hard
> relationship.
>
> >Where do we draw the line - ?
> >
> >What is wrong with good training ?
> >
> Nothing, if it's actually neccesary, but the UK authorities are good
> at placing great value on the paper results of very bad
for example
> and
> unneccesary training.
Why is boat training unnecessary
If nothing else training teaches you the possibilities and the right ways
of doing a job, whether you are capable of using this training is another
matter, this applies to all sorts of training.
I took a formal course after 40 years of sailing, much to my surprise I
learnt things I didn't know. Especially the local rules, which I only had
a superficial knowledge of.
It doesn't take up a lot of time and if you do it in winter, it keeps you
in touch with boating.
I don't know if you have done a course yourself Niall, but just because
there are some qualified pillocks in UK doesn't mean the system is bad.
Despite everything there always seem to be some pillocks, who qualify well
in any subject.
The RYA courses, I admit I haven't done one, but I have used the course
material, seem rather good to me, certainly the books that have been
produced as a by-product are superb compared to the crap that was around
in the sixties.
People seem to be frightened of taking boats exams, I think
unjustifiably. If you are already an expert, then I think you will have no
problem. If you are not, you might learn something.
I noticed that Sunsail offer a few days initial tuition as part of some
of their sailing holidays, why can't Nb charterers do the same?
For example, on day one could do an RYA helmsman's course.
I am certain that eventually everyone will have to take an exam, at least
for large and fast boats. I think the insurance companies will eventually
insist on it.
MartinP
Malcolm Nixon wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Aug 1998 21:18:01 GMT, nia...@btinternet.com (Niall)
> wrote:
>
> >.>How do charter companies obtain coverage?
> >.>
> >.They do require a degree of experience depending on the boat and
> >.sailing waters, but in general do *not* insist on paper
> >.qualifications, although there is a (regrettable IMO) trend in this
> >.direction.
>
> I'm struggling with this one.
>
> We have discussed training before, and I really do understand
> many people hereabouts who are resisting more paperwork and
> officialdom.
>
> But - would you let your young children go off to school where
> teachers had no real qualifications - they had just picked it up
> as they went along - would you let your young children go away on
> a youth camp with climbing or walking on the moors / hills or
> canoeing on the sea - if you were not sure that the people who
> were looking after them were up to the job - qualified or
> whatever.
>
> I think the general thread here is that many agreed that people
> who take groups of children / adults onto boat should have some
> formal training.
>
> Back to hire boats - would you let your child go away on holiday
> on a boat with their friend and family if you thought the other
> parent was untrained in the use of the boat.
>
> Where do we draw the line - ?
>
> What is wrong with good training ?
Malcom,
I agree witheverything you say, but we are definitely a
very small minority.
It's clear that the training has to be appropriate and not aimed at a
round the world passage using a sextant etc.
Certificates are required in most of Europe for anything longer than 15
metres and/or faster that 20Km/hr
If I look at the number of sailing schools in UK there must be many
thousands (hundreds of thousands?) passing certificates every year.
40,000 take boat certificate tests in Holland every year most of them on
a voluntary basis with no obligation to have a certificate for the boat
they own.
I think people are frightened of failing exams? it's better to get exam
taking over now, when there is no obligation than later when it is
enforced. That's the attitude my wife and I took anyway.
Martin
MartinP
Niall wrote:
There's been at least one or more fatalities every weekend this summer in
Holland, most have been due to breaking rules and stupudity.It's not only
fatal accidents, it's all the prats having silly accidents, that put MY
insurance premiums up and up every year.
MartinP
Jeff Dennison wrote:
> Our boat in Coventry is called Lady Godiva and is run by a
> charitable trust it has been in operation since 1981.
>
> She is fitted with specially desigened ramps to allow access to the
> foredeck from which an hydraulic lift enables wheel chair users access
> to the saloon. All narrow boat acommodation has to be a compromise
> and the problem on Godiva is that wheel chair useres can't access the
> galley. We employ a permanent boatman who has a Boatmasters
> certificate, is an ex RN Chief Petty Officer with a British Empire
> Medal.
This is the right way to go about it Jeff. It's more or less the same way
the Dutch run their sailtraining ship, except theirs is a much bigger boat.
They have a skipper and a full time "bosun" who manages the ship, two
professional cooks to look after the food and volunteer professional seamen
(all with master's tickets, mainly merchant navy) to provide a nucleus of
expertise and a volunteer medical doctor. All the volunteers go free, so
they get a holiday (busmans?) out of it as well, as filling key jobs.On the
trip I did with them it worked extremely well, no RN type bull, nobody
screaming at the crew; voluteers to go up the mast, when needed.
The year I went the skipper was the head of the navigation school in
Rotterdam, the professionals were skippers of supertankers and the skipper
of a large Dutch dredger operating in the Gulf. I have never seen people
moor with such precision and ease. We had 6 medical doctors on board as well
as the volunteer. Just by chance.
Their boat is used for paying holidays in the winter months, it operates
from the Canaries in winter and from Scheveningen in the summer.
MartinP
Jackie Lewis wrote:
> Malcolm Nixon wrote in message
>
> >But - would you let your young children go off to school where
> >teachers had no real qualifications - they had just picked it up
> >as they went along
> Teachers can now qualify 'on the job'. Whether a school will take them on
> with no prior teaching experience, is another matter.
>
> >Back to hire boats - would you let your child go away on holiday
> >on a boat with their friend and family if you thought the other
> >parent was untrained in the use of the boat.
>
> Do we need to keep this in perspective? How many deaths are there in
> narrowboating compared to the number of first-timers each year?
If it was your relative, one death would be one too many.I think the problem is
not just first timers it is so called experienced users, (second timers?) who
are not competent
> Where would
> boating come on a list of 'high risk' in comparisons of 'Adventure
> Holidays'? - surely it would be much lower than, say, climbing or
> horse-riding.
or sky diving or becoming an astronaut BUT all thes people undergo training
otherwise their accident rates would be even higher.
>
>
> >Where do we draw the line - ?
> >What is wrong with good training ?
> The cost, in this case.
Trivial compared to hire fees and boat ownership. I think that people, who did a
helmsmans certificate in spring mentioned UKP80.
BTW it would be interesting to hear their opinion of the course, if it was
useful, especially if they learnt anything they didn't know already.
> Unless it was going to be the responsibility of the
> hire company - and then, presumably, they'd increase the cost of the
> holiday. I thought that in this particular tragedy, the people involved did
> have boating experience anyway?
I think the question is did they have boat training? You can survive by luck and
claim years of experience and still be totally incompetent and a natural born
pillock :O)
I have sailed with peope with decades of experience, who are so incompetent,
one wonders how they have survived.
If you learn in isolation by experience, every accident adds to your
experience.
I am sure these four have learnt a lot and maybe others too! but most on this
ng knew the risks and how to avoid such an accident already.
Malcolm Nixon
wrote:
>.
>.
>.Malcolm Nixon wrote:
>.
>.> What is wrong with good training ?
>.
>.Malcom,
>. I agree witheverything you say, but we are definitely a
>.very small minority.
>.
snip
>.
>.I think people are frightened of failing exams? it's better to get exam
>.taking over now, when there is no obligation than later when it is
>.enforced. That's the attitude my wife and I took anyway.
Oh I agree with you there - and I would include myself to some
extent - but when I have wanted to do something that needed tests
I overcame those feelings ( I have been a civvy and ATC gliding
instructor - the later involved tests with the RAF Central Flying
School bosses - which were quite enjoyable which I found
surprising).
It's over twenty years ago that I did any formal instruction on
boats - and I have done a lot of boating since - including
skippering a full size narrowboat on the tidal Thames ) - but I
am seriously contemplating doing the Helmsman or even the Masters
course - seems like a fun way to spend a winters weekend to me -
in the company of others who want to be around boats - and
messing about on water.
Maybe a group of us could go together and make a mini GIG of it
<g>
I have just found this - and NO I don't work or have any
connection with Willow.
http://www.canaljunction.com/WillowWren/training.htm#boatm
Jackie Lewis
MartinP wrote in
(I wrote)>
>> Where would
>> boating come on a list of 'high risk' in comparisons of 'Adventure
>> Holidays'? - surely it would be much lower than, say, climbing or
>> horse-riding.
>
>or sky diving or becoming an astronaut BUT all thes people undergo training
>otherwise their accident rates would be even higher.
Not in the examples I gave. Presumably, almost all people who have car
crashes have been trained. Courses give confidence but it's still true that
'Best safety lies in fear'.
>> The cost, in this case.
>
>Trivial compared to hire fees and boat ownership. I think that people, who
did a
>helmsmans certificate in spring mentioned UKP80.
But that's still on top of those other fees.
>BTW it would be interesting to hear their opinion of the course, if it was
>useful, especially if they learnt anything they didn't know already.
I'm sure it is useful and I'm also sure that many people would want to take
it. I thought the point here was whether people should be forced to take it
before being allowed to use a narrowboat. Many people do use narrowboats
without accidents and many of the accidents wouldn't be avoided by
training - a windlass slipping out of your hand, for instance.
>I think the question is did they have boat training? You can survive by
luck and
>claim years of experience and still be totally incompetent and a natural
born
>pillock :O)
Yes, I'm sure you can, Martin.
> I have sailed with peope with decades of experience, who are so
incompetent,
>one wonders how they have survived.
And the same with drivers who hold a full licence.
Jackie
Jackie Lewis
Malcolm Nixon wrote in message
>Maybe a group of us could go together and make a mini GIG of it
><g>
>
>I have just found this - and NO I don't work or have any
>connection with Willow.
>
>http://www.canaljunction.com/WillowWren/training.htm#boatm
>
That was quick, Malcolm - apparently they only went on the web this morning!
I've phoned to see about booking for three of us - anyone else? ;-)
Best wishes,
Jackie
MartinP
Jackie Lewis wrote:
Ha! a convert, I knew you were infallible after all Jackie!
Faith in Jackie's common sense restored :O)
What do they mean by "in the season"
What dates do you have in mind? Like Malcom said we could make a mini Gig out of
it.
How do they give a course that results in an ICC without covering rules, I am
not trying to be critical, just curious. I am a bit doubtful if it is still
true. The Dutch won't recognise Dutch nationals qualifications if they obtain
them via this route in UK, because of the lack of rules content. On the other
hand most of what is covered in this course is missing from the Dutch course.
stick the two together and you cover the lot.
I could send Francoise (my wife) on the Diesel maintenance course, surprise Xmas
present?
MartinP
Jackie Lewis wrote:
> MartinP wrote in
>
> (I wrote)>
> >> Where would
> >> boating come on a list of 'high risk' in comparisons of 'Adventure
> >> Holidays'? - surely it would be much lower than, say, climbing or
> >> horse-riding.
> >
> >or sky diving or becoming an astronaut BUT all thes people undergo training
> >otherwise their accident rates would be even higher.
>
> Not in the examples I gave.
I naively thought that in your examples climbing and horse riding people are
trained.
> Presumably, almost all people who have car
> crashes have been trained.
and the vast majority who don't too!
> Courses give confidence but it's still true that
> 'Best safety lies in fear'.
>
> >> The cost, in this case.
> >
> >Trivial compared to hire fees and boat ownership. I think that people, who
> did a
> >helmsmans certificate in spring mentioned UKP80.
> But that's still on top of those other fees.
but only once.
>
>
> >BTW it would be interesting to hear their opinion of the course, if it was
> >useful, especially if they learnt anything they didn't know already.
> I'm sure it is useful and I'm also sure that many people would want to take
> it. I thought the point here was whether people should be forced to take it
> before being allowed to use a narrowboat.
My opin ion is that nobody should be in charge of a narrow boat or other
large/fast boat without any training or any experience. At the moment this is
possible.
> Many people do use narrowboats
> without accidents and many of the accidents wouldn't be avoided by
> training - a windlass slipping out of your hand, for instance.
or cutting yourself opening a can of worms? :O)I did have formal training in
dinghy sailing, but almost everything else I picked up by reading and boating
with more experienced people. I have also learnt a lot from this newsgroup, it's
full of experts, with years of real experience. It's like an OU canal course
some days. (click on the button to print your Helsmans Certificate, coming
soon?)
I still learnt stuff from a formal course.
Of course, if you think know everything already, why trouble, I guess that is
the general attitude.
> > I have sailed with peope with decades of experience, who are so
> incompetent,
> >one wonders how they have survived.
> And the same with drivers who hold a full licence.
I only travel with that sort once!
Martin, the survivor
MartinP
Malcolm Nixon wrote:
> Maybe a group of us could go together and make a mini GIG of it
> <g>
>
That seems like a good idea, I am interested.
> I have just found this - and NO I don't work or have any
> connection with Willow.
>
> http://www.canaljunction.com/WillowWren/training.htm#boatm
>
>
>
Mike Casswell
>>here?
>
>I'm an ex- turnround lad, assistant engineer, hire fleet engineer,
>assistant manager, manager.
So, Andy, if we invent a typical hire fleet operator, Mr Hirem,
what do you think his viewpoint will be on training and safety?
What will be the most important factors for him? Time, cost, what
the competition is doing?
--
|
| Mike Casswell Leek, Staffordshire, England
|
| mi...@casswell.u-net.com and often @ The Wellington Inn
Niall
<jal...@dircon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>MartinP wrote in
>
>>> The cost, in this case.
>>
>>Trivial compared to hire fees and boat ownership. I think that people, who
>did a
>>helmsmans certificate in spring mentioned UKP80.
>But that's still on top of those other fees.
>
For us that would cover slip fees in and out, diesel for the truck,
petrol for the outboard and food for 2 for a week. That's a week's
cruise, assuming we anchor every night and don't eat out (Which can
happen depending on the weather). I know which I'd rather do!
John Kellett
> Do we need to keep this in perspective? How many deaths are there in
> narrowboating compared to the number of first-timers each year? Where would
> boating come on a list of 'high risk' in comparisons of 'Adventure
> Holidays'? - surely it would be much lower than, say, climbing or
> horse-riding.
>
> >Where do we draw the line - ?
> >What is wrong with good training ?
> The cost, in this case. Unless it was going to be the responsibility of the
> hire company - and then, presumably, they'd increase the cost of the
> holiday. I thought that in this particular tragedy, the people involved did
> have boating experience anyway?
>
Good training should not be an ADDITIONAL cost. Good training should be the
norm. A lack of training may well be a COST SAVING, but at whose risk! It would
appear that in this tragic accident experience was not enough.
Regards,
John the architect
nb "Spanielle"
John Kellett
> >I think the general thread here is that many agreed that people
> >who take groups of children / adults onto boat should have some
> >formal training.
> >
> Yes but there were also suggestions that we should *all* be suitably
> certificated before venturing out.
>
> >Back to hire boats - would you let your child go away on holiday
> >on a boat with their friend and family if you thought the other
> >parent was untrained in the use of the boat.
> >
> Again if I knew them to be competent resourceful people no problem.
> There are blithering idiots with Yachtmaster tickets I wouldn't
> consider for a moment.
> This is not to say that some people with such qualifications aren't
> sensible and competent, there are many; but there is no hard
> relationship.
>
> >Where do we draw the line - ?
> >
> >What is wrong with good training ?
> >
> Nothing, if it's actually neccesary, but the UK authorities are good
> at placing great value on the paper results of very bad and
> unneccesary training.
>
This argument is in danger of severe entanglement. In some professions is
it illegal to practice without paper qualifications: medicine for example.
Others allow anybody to practice: the design of buildings for example. The
medical profession is well respected and any failings dealt with through
'striking off' etc. Although only a suitably qualified person can call
themselves an architect, poor design of buildings is always placed on our
shoulders! It is important to realize that only properly regulated job
functions (rather than job titles) are effective.
'Paper' qualifications, in matters of public safety, are a starting point.
The competent time served experienced operator should not have a problem
obtaining such qualifications, the merely 'lucky so far' should not be in
business. If all hire operators, particularly those operating 'skippered'
services, were required to conform to a code (voluntary or otherwise) that
had the power of exclusion the safety record of the industry, although
very good, would improve.
Jackie Lewis
MartinP wrote in message <35DEC7E5...@consunet.nl>...
>
>
> Ha! a convert, I knew you were infallible after all Jackie!
>Faith in Jackie's common sense restored :O)
LOL! I *thought* you only read posts to see what inane comments you could
insert. I asked for recommendations about these courses weeks ago. Having
preferences yourself doesn't mean you *have* to force them on to everyone
else!
Jackie
Jackie Lewis
John Kellett wrote in message <35DEF12D...@virgin.net
>Good training should not be an ADDITIONAL cost. Good training should be the
>norm. A lack of training may well be a COST SAVING, but at whose risk! It
would
>appear that in this tragic accident experience was not enough.
Hang on, John, you don't know if these people were trained or not. Without
further information, I'd find it extremely unlikely that they *weren't*
trained and in receipt of certificates.
The original point of this thread, I thought, was that oridnary people
shouldn't be allowed to go onto a boat until they had qualified.
Best wishes,
Jackie
Malcolm Nixon
<jal...@dircon.co.uk> wrote:
>.
>.Malcolm Nixon wrote in message
>.
>.>Maybe a group of us could go together and make a mini GIG of it
>.><g>
>.>
>.>I have just found this - and NO I don't work or have any
>.>connection with Willow.
>.>
>.>http://www.canaljunction.com/WillowWren/training.htm#boatm
>.>
>.
>.That was quick, Malcolm - apparently they only went on the web this morning!
>.I've phoned to see about booking for three of us - anyone else? ;-)
>.
>.Best wishes,
>.
>.Jackie
Well with all the talk here - I thought I would do a search of
the web and what a surprise - just on queue.
I haven't booked yet - but I did send them an email about the
Masters three day weekend course but they haven't responded yet.
I'd better phone tomorrow before everyone here books them up
solid.
Yes I'm definitely game for a group booking / mini GIG - when -
they start in October ?.
.
Richard Lucas
from "Jackie Lewis" <jal...@dircon.co.uk> contains these words:
> Malcolm Nixon wrote in message
> >Maybe a group of us could go together and make a mini GIG of it
> ><g>
> >
> >I have just found this - and NO I don't work or have any
> >connection with Willow.
> >
> >http://www.canaljunction.com/WillowWren/training.htm#boatm
> >
> That was quick, Malcolm - apparently they only went on the web this morning!
> I've phoned to see about booking for three of us - anyone else? ;-)
> Best wishes,
> Jackie
I'll be going next year some time, I've asked to have the course as
my birthday present next spring. I won't be doing (sob!) any boating
between noiw and then, so that'll be soon enough.
Having read Martin in Nederland's posts on this topic, I think I'm
beginning to share his point of view about boating, training and insurance.
I have always felt that in group activities, leaders should be as
well trained as possible, and as I hope that one day soon I will be
involved in Scout boating on the Scottish lowland canals, I'd better
get myself certified!
--
Richard Lucas
Wallace Venable
> Hang on, John, you don't know if these people were trained or not.
I believe that the reports on the BBC web page said they were
described by the police as "experienced." They had previous
experience with boats from that yard. Even if not "trained" they
would therefore probably have had any training requirement waived, in
absence of a legal requirement for a certificate.
I think we can assume that they were "trained" in the everyday use
of the term.
Wallace Venable
> From: michae...@juno.com (Michael B Holt)
> Perhaps, as a minimum, a hiring firm might have all hirers demonstrate
> that they, unaided, can take the boat through a lock.
Because many fleet bases are not near a lock, for some operators this
would mean turning the boat over to the hirers and meeting them an
hour or two later (perhaps even the following day) for the "practical
demonstration. Alternatively, it would require riding along for an
hour or more, then finding transport back to base.
It's sort of like suggesting a car rental (hire) firm go out with
you to see how you handle the Interstate (Motorway) before they
release a motor car.
In both cases, sometimes the owner would rather NOT watch you put the
first scratches on the paintwork.
Mike Clarke
>teachers had no real qualifications - they had just picked it up
>a youth camp with climbing or walking on the moors / hills or
>canoeing on the sea - if you were not sure that the people who
>were looking after them were up to the job - qualified or
>whatever.
>
>who take groups of children / adults onto boat should have some
>formal training.
>
>on a boat with their friend and family if you thought the other
>parent was untrained in the use of the boat.
>
>
>What is wrong with good training ?
There's too little of it, and too much bad training replacing it. Whoever
said 'A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing' certainly knew what
they were talking about. You're beginning to know a subject when you know
how little you know!
na zdrowie
Mike Clarke, 41 Fountain St, Accrington, UK, BB5 0QR
tel & fax: +44 (0)1254-395848
http://www.zen.co.uk/home/page/mike.clarke/home.htm
MartinP
Wallace Venable wrote:
> > From: michae...@juno.com (Michael B Holt)
>
> > Perhaps, as a minimum, a hiring firm might have all hirers demonstrate
> > that they, unaided, can take the boat through a lock.
>
> Because many fleet bases are not near a lock, for some operators this
> would mean turning the boat over to the hirers and meeting them an
> hour or two later (perhaps even the following day) for the "practical
> demonstration. Alternatively, it would require riding along for an
> hour or more, then finding transport back to base.
>
> It's sort of like suggesting a car rental (hire) firm go out with
> you to see how you handle the Interstate (Motorway) before they
> release a motor car.
No it's not quite. To rent a car you need to be over 21-25 depending on the
hire company, and to have held a valid driving LICENSE for three years. Do
you see where this is leading, it's the way a politician sees the situation.
MartinP
Jackie Lewis wrote:
> MartinP wrote in message <35DEC7E5...@consunet.nl>...
> >
> >
> > Ha! a convert, I knew you were infallible after all Jackie!
> >Faith in Jackie's common sense restored :O)
>
> LOL! I *thought* you only read posts to see what inane comments you could
> insert.
I deserve that.
Sometimes they deserve it :O)
> I asked for recommendations about these courses weeks ago.
I didn't really think you had suddenly seen the light.
>
I don't understand why you seemed so strongly against courses, maybe I
misunderstood?
> Having
> preferences yourself doesn't mean you *have* to force them on to everyone
> else!
>
sorry, I feel quite strongly about it.
What about the point that Brian makes about there validity elsewhere? Back to
Marian Martin of PBO for clarification?
or does someone know who to contact in the RYA?
The whole situation gets more and more confused.
I don't really care as I have my Dutch certificate(s) that the other good
Europeans recognise.
John Kellett
> John Kellett wrote in message <35DEF12D...@virgin.net
>
> >Good training should not be an ADDITIONAL cost. Good training should be the
> >norm. A lack of training may well be a COST SAVING, but at whose risk! It
> would
> >appear that in this tragic accident experience was not enough.
>
> Hang on, John, you don't know if these people were trained or not. Without
> further information, I'd find it extremely unlikely that they *weren't*
> trained and in receipt of certificates.
I did not intend to imply that the people in this specific case were not
trained. I was responding to a general statement about training. The above
comment was aimed at those who suggest that training would be too costly.
> The original point of this thread, I thought, was that oridnary people
> shouldn't be allowed to go onto a boat until they had qualified.
>
A few years ago the numbers of people cruising the waterways was relatively
small and accidents rare. There is now far more traffic and IMHO the possibility
of some form of boating proficiency test should be at least considered. It would
not prevent accidents but it might improve the already good safety record.
Regards,
John the architect
John Kellett
> > From: michae...@juno.com (Michael B Holt)
>
> > Perhaps, as a minimum, a hiring firm might have all hirers demonstrate
> > that they, unaided, can take the boat through a lock.
>
> Because many fleet bases are not near a lock, for some operators this
> would mean turning the boat over to the hirers and meeting them an
> hour or two later (perhaps even the following day) for the "practical
> demonstration. Alternatively, it would require riding along for an
> hour or more, then finding transport back to base.
>
> It's sort of like suggesting a car rental (hire) firm go out with
> you to see how you handle the Interstate (Motorway) before they
> release a motor car.
>
Of course it isn't. Any car hirer has to prove that they have a licence to
drive a car though.
A few years ago when I was hiring boats the companies concerned did
demonstrate how to steer a boat and negociate locks etc., or at least check
that you had previous experience and watched the boat leave to make sure
that the boat was in capable hands. I would be suprised if they no longer
did so.
Of course, boat hiring in the U.S.A. might be different but I have no
experience of that.
Regards,
John the architect
John Kellett
> > Hang on, John, you don't know if these people were trained or not.
>
> I believe that the reports on the BBC web page said they were
> described by the police as "experienced." They had previous
> experience with boats from that yard. Even if not "trained" they
> would therefore probably have had any training requirement waived, in
> absence of a legal requirement for a certificate.
>
> I think we can assume that they were "trained" in the everyday use
> of the term.
I seem to have become misrepresented here. My posting was not intended
to imply that I thought the people concerned untrained, far from it.
Training and experience are a fine thing but they are not going to
prevent accidents.
Regards,
John the architect
nb "Spannielle"
Glen Peckett
wrote:
Having stayed out of this thread so far, I couldn't have put it better
myself!
We hired twice on the canals. The first time was from Anderson Boats
at Middlewich. They had it (relatively) easy, we passe dtrough the
first three locks with their tuition, also the person with us added a
few comments and tricks which I still use today.
Our second hire boat was from Heritage on the Macclesfield. They asked
about our locking experience, and would have insited we watch the
video. Between booking the boat and going I had bought the first
cruiser (a long story for another time), coupled with our apparent
attitude the yard were obviously undecided - either we really knew
what we were doing or only thought we did! The "old boy" who set of
with us was soon convinced when Bruce slowed down nicely for the first
broken-down bridge-hole, at which point he stepped of and wished us a
nice trip!
So I can only say that the two yards we hired from gave peltiful
instruction, and assured themselves that we were competent.
Jeff Dennison
>There's too little of it, and too much bad training replacing it. Whoever
>said 'A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing' certainly knew what
>they were talking about. You're beginning to know a subject when you know
>how little you know!
I do so agree MIke. Why aren't we using the older boaters who remain
around our waterways often looking wistfully over bridges to train
people how to boat. These guys have forgotten more about boating than
most so called trainer will ever know. . What's more if you take the
time to talk to them and gain their confidence they like nothing more
than a day out with you on your boat where you can then really learn
about boat handling and the rules of the road.
Regards
Jeff
Songs of the Waterways - compact disc "They're coming back to the water"
Web site http://www.pipemedia.net/users/jeffd/index.htm
Telephone: 01203 615582 Mobile 07970 281553
If you ain't makin' waves, you ain't kickin' hard enough!
Jeff Dennison
>A few years ago the numbers of people cruising the waterways was relatively
>small and accidents rare. There is now far more traffic and IMHO the possibility
>of some form of boating proficiency test should be at least considered. It would
>not prevent accidents but it might improve the already good safety record.
No matter how much you regulate something accidents will happen.
This means that someone will get hurt or killed. One of the few
freedoms left is to mess about in boats on the inland waterways
without being regulated. Over the past few years this freedom is
rapidly disappearing. We have seen the introduction of an
unnecessary Boat Safety Scheme which has cost many of us a
considerable amount of cash to get through. The scheme was introduced
on little or no evidence that it was needed nor that SAFETY was to be
improved. The accident rate on the canals had never to my knowledge
been published let alone analysed.
The RYA recently introduced a scheme on boat handling what is
happening we are getting cries of all boaters should have the same
basic teaching. Thanks to good marketing we move father down the line
of the nanny state. This scheme is about jobs not about training,
I've never heard on anyone failing the RYA course, if this as I
suspect is the case what is its value other than another profit making
enterprise? Does it really train or does just paying the fee and
turning up on the day for a days boating and lunch automatically
qualify you for the certificate?
Architects are trained yet sometimes their buildings fall down.
Social workers are trained and sometimes a child dies and then the
self righteous media which seems to specialise in titivation rather
than news carries out a witch hunt. Drivers are trained and yet
tonight local paper informs me that child deaths on the pavements
caused by drivers has doubled from 9 to 18 killed this past year.
Training will not necessarily improve matters as it can and often does
induce a sense of complacency * I've got my ticket* so I'm qualified
to be a complete prat.
So lets not have a knee jerk reaction to one terrible tragedy. Lets
not liken the incident to the tragedy of Dunblane and IMHO the
sensible banning of hand guns. Let us keep the situation as it is
without further regulation and the ensuing expense. Let us not loose
another of our freedoms.
Malcolm Nixon
(Jeff Dennison) wrote:
>.
>.I do so agree MIke. Why aren't we using the older boaters who remain
>.around our waterways often looking wistfully over bridges to train
>.people how to boat. These guys have forgotten more about boating than
>.most so called trainer will ever know. . What's more if you take the
>.time to talk to them and gain their confidence they like nothing more
>.than a day out with you on your boat where you can then really learn
>.about boat handling and the rules of the road.
>.
I fully agree with these points Jeff - when I was young I met
"Chocolate" Charlie Brown on the lockside watching boats - and
got into conversation with him. That very informative chat was
sufficient encouragement to help a teenager ( me ) take a serious
interest in learning more about boating and to join WRG to help
restore canals.
Yes these older boatmen and women have much to offer - but as you
say they are usually either rather modest, or too shy to step
forward to help.
John Lee
>The thing I think would help most is to have instruction handouts on the
>boat for you to look at and read as you're going along - it's only once the
>holiday starts 'proper' that you realise you haven't a clue what to do at
>that lock up ahead!
We hired a nb from Oxford Cruisers earlier this year. Apart from some
instruction ( probably shortened when the instructor was satisfied
that we were familiar with river cruisers), there was a comprehensive
manual on board.
John
Remove x from e-mail address to reply
John Lee
>In article <35dcbb7e...@news.btinternet.com>, Niall
><nia...@btinternet.com> writes
>>Sadly increasingly common but the incompetence and downright stupidity
>>I've seen from paper laden yotties tells me it's a mistaken decision.
>Way out of my experience that but I suppose I'm not surprised. Maybe
>I'd qualify it to mean a certificate taken on the canals and in a
>narrowboat.
I think there is some sense in this. I've been using boats of many
sorts on the Thames for a long time, but I've never handled a boat on
a canal until this year - and then only for half a day on the North
Oxford. I found it a lot different from the river, although on the
river, the nb was really just another boat, subject to the same
natural laws as any boat. I've learnt a lot from this ng.
Jackie Lewis
Malcolm Nixon wrote in message
>Well with all the talk here - I thought I would do a search of
>the web and what a surprise - just on queue.
>
>I haven't booked yet - but I did send them an email about the
>Masters three day weekend course but they haven't responded yet.
I think you'll find they won't read it in the short term. Someone else
(called Paul) created the web site for them and the woman I spoke to hadn't
even see it. She was amazed when I said I'd been reading the details on the
net, and she said it wasn't even due to go on yet.
>I'd better phone tomorrow before everyone here books them up
>solid.
Have you got their number? 01788 562183
Incidentally, for anyone who might have been interested in the two-day
course - it's a mistake!
Best wishes
Jackie
Jackie Lewis
>Wallace Venable wrote:
>>> I believe that the reports on the BBC web page said they were
>> described by the police as "experienced." They had previous
>> experience with boats from that yard. Even if not "trained" they
>> would therefore probably have had any training requirement waived, in
>> absence of a legal requirement for a certificate.
Well, I doubt this; not because of the hire company but because of social
services. They're very sensitive to adverse publicity and would already
have thought, 'What would happen 'If'...?' In my experience of this kind of
work, at least one person on that boat would have had a full certificate.
Jeff and Richard probably have more info?
Best wishes,
Jackie
Jackie Lewis
Malcolm Nixon wrote in message
>(Jeff Dennison) wrote:
Why aren't we using the older boaters who remain
>>.around our waterways often looking wistfully over bridges to train
>>.people how to boat.
>I fully agree with these points Jeff - when I was young I met
>"Chocolate" Charlie Brown on the lockside watching boats - and
>got into conversation with him. That very informative chat was
>sufficient encouragement to help a teenager ( me ) take a serious
>interest in learning more about boating and to join WRG to help
>restore canals.
Me too, and this is one of the things that legislation would take away.
What you would exchange it for, is someone with my current knowledge of
boating, going on a quick course and then being qualified train others...
'Those who can' and all that! ;-)
Best wishes,
Jackie
Jackie Lewis
John Lee wrote in message >
>We hired a nb from Oxford Cruisers earlier this year. Apart from some
>instruction ( probably shortened when the instructor was satisfied
>that we were familiar with river cruisers), there was a comprehensive
>manual on board.
I can't remember any being on ours, but I had taken several with us,
fortunately. You saying that your instruction was probably shortened
because you were experienced is why I hesitate to criticise hire companies.
They have to assess you at that time to the best of their ability.
One thing that I do, criticise AW at Gt Haywood for, is that they told us
that the Four Counties Ring was 'dead easy' to do in a week. It wasn't, not
for two people. And it wasn't a throwaway remark because I made a special
visit to ask them if they were sure about this. I think that something like
this can be dangerous because it forces you to rush and, sometimes, to have
to make up time - and that can lead to mistakes.
Best wishes,
Jackie
Richard Lucas
from "Jackie Lewis" <jal...@dircon.co.uk> contains these words:
> ell, I doubt this; not because of the hire company but because of social
> services. They're very sensitive to adverse publicity and would already
> have thought, 'What would happen 'If'...?' In my experience of this kind of
> work, at least one person on that boat would have had a full certificate.
> Jeff and Richard probably have more info?
This isn't really my line anymore. I worked with children in care
for nearly 14 years, but it's been a while since I left that line,
and I've been hanging about in Courts and prisons for the last seven years!
I'm afraid I don't share your faith in the wisdom of local
authorities, Jackie. In my experience, voluntary bodies like the
Scouts think these things through far better.
When I worked as a child care officer, I could have hired a boat for
a holiday for kids, and none of my managers would have batted an
eyelid (except at the cost!), because they wouldn't have known what
questions to ask, or even that there were questions to ask. As I
have already stated, I couldn't do the same thing as a Scouter,
without proof of competence, and without submitting a clear plan of
what I proposed to my Scouting superiors.
Dave Mayall's message in the thread "Safe Boating-groups" clearly
explains the Scout Association position. I doubt whether any Social
Work Dept. in Britain has a policy half as well formulated.
--
Richard Lucas
Bob Griffith
<m.pat...@consunet.nl> writes
>> If you mean qualifications in teaching as such then it wouldn't bother
>> me as long as they knew the subject they were supposed to be
>> imparting. I have always found that the best teaching comes from
>> people who have been actively involved in their subject in the real
>> world and are apparently living in it than from career teachers many
>> of whom seem to be part of a self referential clique with no
>> connection to anything else.
Ouch - I have to disagree with you here - I have both business and
teaching experience and often the worst teachers are those who have non-
teaching experience and think that this is enough to qualify them to
teach. It is *not* enough to know a subject to be able to teach it.
Teaching requires ability to help others to understand and learn about a
subject and is a totally separate skill - and usually a damn sight
harder than just going out and doing something.
Regards
BobG
------------ ** Remove spamguard before replying ** --------------------
Bob Griffith "The Earth is but one country
nb "Dormouse" and mankind its citizens"
Bob_Gr...@spamguard.bigfoot.com - Baha'u'llah
Ray Dunford
----------
> From: Jeff Dennison <jeff-f...@pipemedia.co.uk>
> To: can...@blacksheep.org
> Subject: Re: Safe Use of Hire Boats
> Date: 23 August 1998 00:19
>
> On Sat, 22 Aug 1998 22:54:21 +0100, you wrote:
>
> >Lots of very interesting and relevant stuff snipped.
I would like to add just three events that may ( or may not ) be of
importance.
1. Is the paper qualification a guarantee of a persons competence ?. When I
sold 'Ellington' the surveyor who examined the boat on behalf of the buyer,
and had loads of initials after his name, and widely advertised his
services in the waterways press, had (a). Never ever seen a Russell Newbery
engine. (b).Was not aware of the name Les Allen and Sons as a canal
boatbuilder. (c). Suggested cutting holes in the side of the hull, approx
4" above the waterline to increase low level ventilation, which IMHO was
positively lethal and would have resulted in the boat sinking if we
encountered six inch waves. BTW the boat had previously been passed by with
full flying colours by Jim McDonald. (d). When I pointed this out to him he
told me it would not be allowed on waters with waves of that height ! There
were many other comments that he made which I felt are too ridiculous to
believe.
2. In Feb, 1969 I was one of the first five people in the country who had a
Board of Trade 'Boatman's Licence' for operating on British Waterways, with
'Jason and Serpens'. The examiner checked our eyesight, and asked how long
the business had been operating and if there had been any accidents. When
we replied that the boats had carried thousands of people with no problems.
He then asked what a 'Butty Boat' was, and told us all that we knew far
more than him on operating on the canals, and consequently we were all
certified !
3. Even the professionals have accidents, I can recall the very sad
drowning of two BWB Lock keepers in the last 35 years on one flight of
locks - The Buckby flight.
I am sure all of us have own way of boating which we consider 'safe and
sensible' but surely we are all still learning of the potential dangers.
Cheers,
Ray Dunford.
John Kellett
Jeff Dennison wrote:
> No matter how much you regulate something accidents will happen.
> This means that someone will get hurt or killed. One of the few
> freedoms left is to mess about in boats on the inland waterways
> without being regulated. Over the past few years this freedom is
> rapidly disappearing. We have seen the introduction of an
> unnecessary Boat Safety Scheme which has cost many of us a
> considerable amount of cash to get through. The scheme was introduced
> on little or no evidence that it was needed nor that SAFETY was to be
> improved. The accident rate on the canals had never to my knowledge
> been published let alone analysed.
Safety can always be improved. It's the degree to which you take matters such as
training. You wouldn't argue that a driving test was not not necessary, or would you?
:-)
> The RYA recently introduced a scheme on boat handling what is
> happening we are getting cries of all boaters should have the same
> basic teaching. Thanks to good marketing we move father down the line
> of the nanny state. This scheme is about jobs not about training,
> I've never heard on anyone failing the RYA course, if this as I
> suspect is the case what is its value other than another profit making
> enterprise? Does it really train or does just paying the fee and
> turning up on the day for a days boating and lunch automatically
> qualify you for the certificate?
The cycling proficiency test (which was also difficult to fail) reduced cycle
accidents involving children . The purpose of such training is simply that, training.
> Architects are trained yet sometimes their buildings fall down.
> Social workers are trained and sometimes a child dies and then the
> self righteous media which seems to specialise in titivation rather
> than news carries out a witch hunt. Drivers are trained and yet
> tonight local paper informs me that child deaths on the pavements
> caused by drivers has doubled from 9 to 18 killed this past year.
I can't speak for your chosen career but buildings designed by architects very very
rarely fall down. Buildings designed by unqualified people on the other hand.......
> Training will not necessarily improve matters as it can and often does
> induce a sense of complacency * I've got my ticket* so I'm qualified
> to be a complete prat.
Don't be ridiculous. "often" would imply that the world would be a better place if
there was no education at all, which is clearly nonsense.
> So lets not have a knee jerk reaction to one terrible tragedy. Lets
> not liken the incident to the tragedy of Dunblane and IMHO the
> sensible banning of hand guns. Let us keep the situation as it is
> without further regulation and the ensuing expense. Let us not loose
> another of our freedoms.
Come off it Jeff, yours is the knee jerk reaction. Of course canal accidents are not
to be likened to Dunblane. Dunblane wasn't an accident! The banning of hand guns is
exactly the knee jerk / nanny state reaction you seem to be so against.
Regards,
John the architect
nb "Spanielle"
Jeff Dennison
>The question is whether the canals would be any safer without at any measure of
>a persons competence being available. I think not.
Taking your views to their logical conclusion you are in favour of
compulsory training before you can steer a boat on the Inland
waterways.
Well we'll just have to disagree. The logical conclusion will be that
all boaters will have to go to more expense with no guarantee of safer
boating. Kids won't be able to steer a boat and learn form their
carers. Canoeists, skullers, punters will all of course have to take
especially designed RYA/ BCU courses a whole new rake of experts will
be created most of whom won't know one end of a butty from the other.
Why do you want everyone to be so regulated?
Regards
Jeff
Songs of the Waterways - compact disc "They're coming back to the water"
John Kellett
The question is whether the canals would be any safer without at any measure of
a persons competence being available. I think not.
Regards,
brian holt
> Subject: Re: Safe Use of Hire Boats
>
> On Sat, 22 Aug 1998 22:54:21 +0100, you wrote:
>
> >A few years ago the numbers of people cruising the waterways was
relatively
> >small and accidents rare. There is now far more traffic and IMHO
the possibility
> >of some form of boating proficiency test should be at least
considered. It would
> >not prevent accidents but it might improve the already good safety
record.
>
> No matter how much you regulate something accidents will happen.
> This means that someone will get hurt or killed. One of the few
> freedoms left is to mess about in boats on the inland waterways
> without being regulated. Over the past few years this freedom is
> rapidly disappearing. We have seen the introduction of an
> unnecessary Boat Safety Scheme which has cost many of us a
> considerable amount of cash to get through. The scheme was introduced
> on little or no evidence that it was needed nor that SAFETY was to be
> improved. The accident rate on the canals had never to my knowledge
> been published let alone analysed.
>
> The RYA recently introduced a scheme on boat handling what is
> happening we are getting cries of all boaters should have the same
> basic teaching. Thanks to good marketing we move father down the line
> of the nanny state. This scheme is about jobs not about training,
> I've never heard on anyone failing the RYA course, if this as I
> suspect is the case what is its value other than another profit making
> enterprise? Does it really train or does just paying the fee and
> turning up on the day for a days boating and lunch automatically
> qualify you for the certificate?
>
> Architects are trained yet sometimes their buildings fall down.
> Social workers are trained and sometimes a child dies and then the
> self righteous media which seems to specialise in titivation rather
> than news carries out a witch hunt. Drivers are trained and yet
> tonight local paper informs me that child deaths on the pavements
> caused by drivers has doubled from 9 to 18 killed this past year.
>
> Training will not necessarily improve matters as it can and often does
> induce a sense of complacency * I've got my ticket* so I'm qualified
> to be a complete prat.
>
> So lets not have a knee jerk reaction to one terrible tragedy. Lets
> not liken the incident to the tragedy of Dunblane and IMHO the
> sensible banning of hand guns. Let us keep the situation as it is
> without further regulation and the ensuing expense. Let us not loose
> another of our freedoms.
>
> Regards
> Jeff
> Songs of the Waterways - compact disc "They're coming back to the
water"
> Web site http://www.pipemedia.net/users/jeffd/index.htm
> Telephone: 01203 615582 Mobile 07970 281553
> If you ain't makin' waves, you ain't kickin' hard enough!
>
Jeff.
I would like to support every word you have written above. I don't
profess to be perfect but I try my hardest and to that end if the
possibility of some good training come up I may well take it. But,
that will be my decision unless I am forced to have a qualification.
==
Brian from sunny Suffolk by the River Hundred
brian...@bigfoot.com
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Jeff Dennison
>Safety can always be improved. It's the degree to which you take matters such as
>training. You wouldn't argue that a driving test was not not necessary, or would you?
>:-)
I can certainly say that driving standards have declined since I took
my test, what's more they seem to be getting worse rather than better.
>The cycling proficiency test (which was also difficult to fail) reduced cycle
>accidents involving children . The purpose of such training is simply that, training.
Fine but it's not compulsory unless you want to ride your bike to
school.
>I can't speak for your chosen career but buildings designed by architects very very
>rarely fall down. Buildings designed by unqualified people on the other hand.......
Ronan point, the Wood End Estate in Coventry, vast housing estates in
Glasgow, many tower blocks in Birmingham. All designed by architects
all with structural defects.
>Don't be ridiculous. "often" would imply that the world would be a better place if
>there was no education at all, which is clearly nonsense.
No I believe in education but not all of it has to be compulsory.
>Come off it Jeff, yours is the knee jerk reaction. Of course canal accidents are not
>to be likened to Dunblane. Dunblane wasn't an accident! The banning of hand guns is
>exactly the knee jerk / nanny state reaction you seem to be so against.
Bullsh*t no one needs a handgun in fact few people need firearms at
all. The fact that some people have a love affair with these
instruments of death and that Governments make fortunes selling
weapons and peddling fear is not a reason to keep making them. My
reference to Dunblane in this context was deliberately used as someone
else mentioned it earlier in this debate.
Regards,
Jeff Dennison
>Jeff.
>I would like to support every word you have written above. I don't
>profess to be perfect but I try my hardest and to that end if the
>possibility of some good training come up I may well take it. But,
>that will be my decision unless I am forced to have a qualification.
>==
Thanks Brian
That's exactly the point training should be available for those who
wish to avail themselves of it but it should not be compulsory. Nor
should we allow Insurance Companies who will get out of their
liability on the flimsiest pretext to dictate what we should and
shouldn't have.
Regards
John Kellett
Jeff Dennison wrote:
> >The question is whether the canals would be any safer without at any measure of
> >a persons competence being available. I think not.
>
> Taking your views to their logical conclusion you are in favour of
> compulsory training before you can steer a boat on the Inland
> waterways.
I never once mentioned the word 'compulsory'. The cycling proficiency test was not
compulsory either. There is, as yet, no need for compulsory testing. My point is
that training is not a BAD thing. I am sure most people receive training of some
sort before they first steer a boat (from hire company, parent, 'carer', or
whatever). I presume that even you had tuition of some sort.
> Well we'll just have to disagree. The logical conclusion will be that
> all boaters will have to go to more expense with no guarantee of safer
> boating. Kids won't be able to steer a boat and learn form their
> carers. Canoeists, skullers, punters will all of course have to take
> especially designed RYA/ BCU courses a whole new rake of experts will
> be created most of whom won't know one end of a butty from the other.
The formalisation of such training, should it prove necessary in the future, could
easily lead to a reduction in costs not an increase (insurance premiums for
example).
> Why do you want everyone to be so regulated?
You're not reading my postings. I have no desire for the waterways to be 'so'
regulated. My point is that without training / tuition etc. the waterways are less
safe. For example we must guard against the idiots in noddy boats who have blown
themselves up refilling a petrol tank adjacent to a warm (or even running) engine,
in a lock with cabin doors open to the pilot lights of gas appliances. Or would you
rather they be permitted to continue to menace the rest of us.
Regards,
John the architect
John Kellett
Jeff Dennison wrote:
> >Safety can always be improved. It's the degree to which you take matters such as
> >training. You wouldn't argue that a driving test was not not necessary, or would you?
> >:-)
>
> I can certainly say that driving standards have declined since I took
> my test, what's more they seem to be getting worse rather than better.
That may be so but they would be infinitely worse without a driving test
>
>
> >The cycling proficiency test (which was also difficult to fail) reduced cycle
> >accidents involving children . The purpose of such training is simply that, training.
>
> Fine but it's not compulsory unless you want to ride your bike to
> school.
Who said that training in canal boat handling had to be compulsory at the present time. It
wasn't me. A voluntary system would be fine. I am sure that the prospect of reduced
insurance premiums would be sufficient incentive for most people to get their experience
formalized.
> >I can't speak for your chosen career but buildings designed by architects very very
> >rarely fall down. Buildings designed by unqualified people on the other hand.......
>
> Ronan point, the Wood End Estate in Coventry, vast housing estates in
> Glasgow, many tower blocks in Birmingham. All designed by architects
> all with structural defects.
Not that one again :-)
1 - Structural defects are not the sole responsibility of the architect. There are
Structural Engineers, Contractors, Suppliers, Clients, Politicians etc. as well.
2 - Name the architects. Very little housing in this country is designed by architects.
Tower blocks are often system built from designs by the manufacturers. House builders have
only recently started to use architects (in order to improve the quality of the product).
Much of the social housing of the immediate post war era was designed by 'time served'
local authority employees, often with little formal training.
> >Come off it Jeff, yours is the knee jerk reaction. Of course canal accidents are not
> >to be likened to Dunblane. Dunblane wasn't an accident! The banning of hand guns is
> >exactly the knee jerk / nanny state reaction you seem to be so against.
>
> Bullsh*t no one needs a handgun in fact few people need firearms at
> all. The fact that some people have a love affair with these
> instruments of death and that Governments make fortunes selling
> weapons and peddling fear is not a reason to keep making them. My
> reference to Dunblane in this context was deliberately used as someone
> else mentioned it earlier in this debate.
Admittedly only a few people need firearms. That's why its difficult to get a fire arms
certificate. I would suggest that legitimate uses include: pest control, anti terrorist
duties, national defence, target shooting as a sport, policing duties (hopefully rare).
Ideally weapons would not be necessary but, until such time as man has evolved into
something other than a 'hunter gatherer', I see nothing wrong in their use to deter
tyrants such as Saddam Hussein.
Jeff Dennison
>Jeff Dennison wrote:
>> I can certainly say that driving standards have declined since I took
>> my test, what's more they seem to be getting worse rather than better.
>
>That may be so but they would be infinitely worse without a driving test
That's a point that can't be examined
>> Fine but it's not compulsory unless you want to ride your bike to
>> school.
>
>Who said that training in canal boat handling had to be compulsory at the present time. It
>wasn't me. A voluntary system would be fine. I am sure that the prospect of reduced
>insurance premiums would be sufficient incentive for most people to get their experience
>formalized.
Perhaps I have missread what you have said previously if I have done
so I'm sorry but you did eem to be coming down on the side of greater
regulation. I'm not sure that Insurance Companies are such paragons
of virtue they will want the same premiums and complusory training.
>
>Not that one again :-)
Snip of the well worn argum,ents on both sides :-)
>Admittedly only a few people need firearms. That's why its difficult to get a fire arms
>certificate. I would suggest that legitimate uses include: pest control, anti terrorist
>duties, national defence, target shooting as a sport, policing duties (hopefully rare).
>Ideally weapons would not be necessary but, until such time as man has evolved into
>something other than a 'hunter gatherer', I see nothing wrong in their use to deter
>tyrants such as Saddam Hussein.
There are a few legitimate reasons for guns and target shooting isn't
one of them. National defence etc I automatically excluded from my
argument. The less guns there are the fewer people will be shot.
Err didn't we supply most of the weapons to Mr Hussein? IIRC we also
tried to send him a super gun until HM Customs cocked it up and broke
the news then the thing became a national scandal. :-)
Jeff Dennison
>I never once mentioned the word 'compulsory'. The cycling proficiency test was not
>compulsory either. There is, as yet, no need for compulsory testing. My point is
>that training is not a BAD thing. I am sure most people receive training of some
>sort before they first steer a boat (from hire company, parent, 'carer', or
>whatever). I presume that even you had tuition of some sort.
In that case we do agree my tuition came from Jack Monk, many older
boaters and lost of ordinary folk on the canals and hire boats on the
Broads . Sorry if have read something more into your postings than
you meant.
>The formalisation of such training, should it prove necessary in the future, could
>easily lead to a reduction in costs not an increase (insurance premiums for
>example).
I'm not sure that the altruistic insurance world are the right folk to
have any say in this matter. They are just the people who will be
pushing to make training compulsory and keep premiums the same.
>You're not reading my postings. I have no desire for the waterways to be 'so'
>regulated. My point is that without training / tuition etc. the waterways are less
>safe. For example we must guard against the idiots in noddy boats who have blown
>themselves up refilling a petrol tank adjacent to a warm (or even running) engine,
>in a lock with cabin doors open to the pilot lights of gas appliances. Or would you
>rather they be permitted to continue to menace the rest of us.
You will find idiots wherever you look you can't regulate for
everything. Opps this is where we came in. :-)
Tony Clayton
> In article <35DE8221...@consunet.nl>, MartinP
> <m.pat...@consunet.nl> writes
> >> If you mean qualifications in teaching as such then it wouldn't bother
> >> me as long as they knew the subject they were supposed to be
> >> imparting. I have always found that the best teaching comes from
> >> people who have been actively involved in their subject in the real
> >> world and are apparently living in it than from career teachers many
> >> of whom seem to be part of a self referential clique with no
> >> connection to anything else.
>
> Ouch - I have to disagree with you here - I have both business and
> teaching experience and often the worst teachers are those who have non-
> teaching experience and think that this is enough to qualify them to
> teach. It is *not* enough to know a subject to be able to teach it.
> Teaching requires ability to help others to understand and learn about a
> subject and is a totally separate skill - and usually a damn sight
> harder than just going out and doing something.
>
> Regards
>
> BobG
I disagree with Bob here - while there are good and bad teachers of both types
I believe that those with more background outside the profession generally
were able to make their subjects that bit more relevant.
But I would say that having gone into teaching after four years in industry!
I will say that doing my PGCE after two years of active teaching along with another
eight experienced teachers made the course very relevant (and kept our
lecturers on their toes - some had never had pupils who answered back!).
--
Tony Clayton
'Linton', Godalming Wharf
Home Page http://www.tclayton.demon.co.uk
... Make a decision based solely on money, you've made a bad decision.
Tony Clayton
In the Cadet Forces I was unable to take cadets on an official Cadet Force trip
on the boat without a great deal of course attendance to get the requisite
qualifications in boat handling.
I met two parties of boys on a pair of hire boats on the Wey yesterday - every single boy
had a life-jacket on. The adults i/c did not as far as I can recall.
--
Tony Clayton
'Linton', Godalming Wharf
Home Page http://www.tclayton.demon.co.uk
... Oh, I couldn't afford a whole new brain.
Jackie Lewis
Richard Lucas wrote in message
>When I worked as a child care officer, I could have hired a boat for
>a holiday for kids, and none of my managers would have batted an
>eyelid (except at the cost!), because they wouldn't have known what
>questions to ask, or even that there were questions to ask.
I worked on one of these narrowboats with kids in care and social services
were really pernickety - we had to get rid of the cat because it couldn't be
barred from the kitchen area! However, that could be just this county or
even just the individual s.workers. I found that every single decision was
based on a 'worst case' scenario... but then, we contracted to s.services.
Best wishes,
Jackie
Mike Snowden
Brian L Dominic wrote in message <35e0443e...@news.proweb.co.uk>...
>IF the first lock in each direction is near the yard, why not have a
>helper/advisor there to see boats through?
In this case, they were at least a day and a half from the yard (Silsden),
through quite a few locks by then.
Mike
MartinP
Bob Griffith wrote:
> In article <35DE8221...@consunet.nl>, MartinP
> <m.pat...@consunet.nl> writes
OH NO I DIDN'T. :O) another snip too far
I don't believe the situation is black and white, there are good trained
teachers and there are naturally good teachers without any training.
>> If you mean qualifications in teaching as such then it wouldn't bother
> >> me as long as they knew the subject they were supposed to be
> >> imparting. I have always found that the best teaching comes from
> >> people who have been actively involved in their subject in the real
> >> world and are apparently living in it than from career teachers many
> >> of whom seem to be part of a self referential clique with no
> >> connection to anything else.
>
> Ouch - I have to disagree with you here - I have both business and
> teaching experience and often the worst teachers are those who have non-
> teaching experience and think that this is enough to qualify them to
> teach. It is *not* enough to know a subject to be able to teach it.
but it does help, of course.
>
> Teaching requires ability to help others to understand and learn about a
> subject and is a totally separate skill - and usually a damn sight
> harder than just going out and doing something.
agreed, but some people have this without training, and many are trained and
don't have it.
Dr Sean Neill
> >how little you know!
>
> I do so agree MIke. Why aren't we using the older boaters who remain
> around our waterways often looking wistfully over bridges to train
> Regards
> Jeff
Given the popularity of (eg canal painting classes) by 'real' boat
painters, I'd have thought there was a strong case for (the waterways
museums?) organising demonstration / instruction by 'real boaters'.
Sean
Dr Sean Neill
> Training will not necessarily improve matters as it can and often does
It might be more to the point to have a booklet pointing out
'accidents can happen' as many of the dangers are non-obvious. I
don't think this applied to the L&L tragedy, but day-boat hirers
especially could do with this.
My experience has been that people who are not familiar with boats
tend to assume there are no dangers because there is not much water -
'non-boating' people seem to have an irresistable urge to sit of the
roof of my boat, often next to the safety valve, and when we're due
to go under a low bridge - for example at Shardlow over the w/e.
It was very noticeable at the GIG that *everyone* who came on board
was duly cautious and behaved safely.
> Regards
> Jeff
Sean
Dr Sean Neill
> that the Four Counties Ring was 'dead easy' to do in a week. It wasn't, not
> for two people. And it wasn't a throwaway remark because I made a special
>
>
IMHO hire companies should take the line 'if you have to ask, you
shouldn't be doing a ring'. Especially if the hirer is showing (a
proper level of) concern.
Sean