dibden bay-cruising association

[dieselhead]

I am a Solent sailor and I
couldn't understand why the Cruising Association was making such a fuss at
the Dibden Bay inquiry last Autumn about the present 'dangers' of ship/yacht
incidents in the Brambles and Calshot area. This was their reason for
fighting the Dibden development, saying they didn't want to see more ships
in the Solent! The local association of Solent Clubs (SCRA), saw no problem
and refused to get involved with the Inquiry.

Now I've heard that ABP have conducted a formal risk assessment and have
found the risk of serious incident is minimal, and that no additional
controls are needed. Thank heavens for that! I've been sailing around there
for years; Busy? Yes at times...Dangerous? Not if you follow the rules and
keep a good look-out.

Can this be a lesson to the big national clubs to listen to
the locals before 'crying wolf'?



<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Twister_Ken]

I can understand perfectly why it objected. Sailing form Hamble last season, we frequently had to modify our route because of shipping in Southampton Water and the area of concern. The problem seems particularly severe at about HW +/-2h. At current levels of traffic, the problem is no more than a nuisance and a good exercise in judging speed and distance.

The Dibden Bay proposal is, more or less, going to double the amount of large shipping transiting that area. If it happens, It will make that central part of the Solent pretty much a no-go area for four hours every tide cycle. Apart from the area of concern, I can also see that getting from one side of Southampton Water to the other is going to become a bit like playing chicken on a motorway. A quick dash at right angles, with your fingers crossed. Things could get a bit tight in other areas too, like off of Ryde, through the forts, etc. In fact, if Dibden goes ahead, maybe ABP should establish buoyage inshore of No Mans Land fort, to provide an official small craft channel.

All this of course sets aside the increased risk of big ship to big ship collisions in these narrow waters, of groundings, and of the associated pollution and disruption to one of the UK's most important recreational areas, and the effect that such an incident might have on those working in the infrastructure that supports yachting and boating.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[dieselhead]

My reading of the ABP traffic forecasts was that the daily movements of
vessels over 150m through the Area of Concern will rise from 10 (current) to
23 (2011).

Each vessel carries a Moving Prohibited Zone of, say, 1225 metres (ie 1000m
+ its own length), which at say, 8.6 knots will mean a closure time for any
yacht crossing the MPZ of 4minutes 36 seconds.

Given the Single Vessel Occupancy rule for vessels in excess of 183m in the
Thorn Channel, given that most movements will take place at hw+/-2hrs, and
given that there are two tides per day, this means that the average yacht
will have a 25% chance of being held up for 5 minutes or so in the 4 hours
around high water, and very much less during the 8 hours around low water.
Also, if you monitor VTS at Southampton, you will enough warning to speed
up, or maybe choose a different track to cross the Thorn Channel, so you can
even save that precious 5 minutes. Hardly a big deal for the cruising
yachtsman!



<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[jimi]

On Sunday I was sailing up Soton Water, a large oil tanker was berthing on the Esso jetty, another ship was crawling past, a Car Carrier was coming in and the IoW ferries were dotting about the place, only available safe water was almot aground at the North of the Shell Jetty. Highly inconvenient yes .. but not only that in summer probably also highly dangerous for someone!

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[coachone]

Interesting statistics,it would seem churlish and unreasonable for yotties to object on danger/inconvienience issues on this basis. No wonder the mid solent and hamble clubs were "relaxed" about the issue.

<hr width=100% size=1>