Kingston Reach Water Level

[dash300]

I have recently heard that the Teddington Lock to Molesey Lock stretch may occasionally be partially tidally influenced by a rise or fall of up to 8" due to a change of sluice protocol between Teddington and Molesey locks.
Can any one confirm whether this is just a rumour, or if fact, what the reasoning and details might be.

 

[teddington_lock]

It is true that the tide can affect the levels.

However , there has been no change of pulling order on the weir at Teddington. Molesey lock has had their paddles and rymers replaced with hand radials , but this will have no influence on tidal levels affecting our headwater. Their pulling order is essentially the same too , just when you would get to the paddle and rymer section on their pulling order , it has been replaced with hand radials.

If our headwater is 6 above for example ( summer levels ) , then when the tide ( a spring tide ) reaches 18' 6" on the tailwater it is the same level as the headwater.

If the tide then rises higher than 18' 6" on the tail ( headwater at 6 above ) it will push up over the weir and make our headwater rise.

What you have heard is sadly just one of those silly / malicious rumours that permeate the river community from time to time.

What makes you ask ?

 

[dash300]

Just curiosity really. Navigationally and mooring wise 8" rise and fall is not too much of an issue but anything more might be.
I was clearly living under the delusion that Richmond and Teddington Locks handled the tidal fluctuations between them and that above Teddington lock was for all intents and purposes non tidal.

 

[teddington_lock]

It is for 80% of the time. But on the big tides , the headwater can push up ....

There is only really a significant rise from Kingston downwards , even on the highest tides.

If you want to pop down to the lock when i am on duty , i can explain how it all works to you , it's much easier in person than trying to do it online.

 

[dash300]

Many thanks for your interesting input Teddington.I am much the wiser for your knowledge.Hope others find it interesting too.

 

[Andrew_Fanner]

I may well take you up on that Howard, I find it fascinating. I vaguely recall that in Roman times Staines was the ultimate point affected by the tide, which is why the Romans stuck their bridge there.

 

[Gavi]

I may well take you up on that Howard, I find it fascinating. I vaguely recall that in Roman times Staines was the ultimate point affected by the tide, which is why the Romans stuck their bridge there.

Yup, at Church Island no less. We had a Roman era hire boat here today, but that is a different story...

 

[TrueBlue]

Yup, at Church Island no less. We had a Roman era hire boat here today, but that is a different story...

Tease! DO tell....

 

[teddington_lock]

Was it a Maidboat ?

 

[Gavi]

Tease! DO tell....

I was being cheeky about rr_123's latest purchase...

 

[No Regrets]

I have recently heard that the Teddington Lock to Molesey Lock stretch may occasionally be partially tidally influenced by a rise or fall of up to 8" due to a change of sluice protocol between Teddington and Molesey locks.
Can any one confirm whether this is just a rumour, or if fact, what the reasoning and details might be.

Hahaaaa....'Noooo Beeee'

 

[Captain Coochie]

So for insurance purposes we need to add tidal waters if we go below Molsey lock ?

 

[teddington_lock]

No , and you'll probably find that your insurance will be ok between Tedders and Richmond too as it is only half tidal.

 

[dash300]

Hahaaaa....'Noooo Beeee'

What does your comment mean?

 

[Captain Coochie]

No , and you'll probably find that your insurance will be ok between Tedders and Richmond too as it is only half tidal.

Knowing how insurance companies will find any reason not to pay out "probably" isnt the word i want to hear If you tick non tidal on your policy and you sink three boats at Hampton court while the tide is just nipping over Teddington lock are you tidal or not ? I would say you are . Especially if i owned an insurance company and had to pay out
On another note where you on shift today around 11am ? I was pricing a job just across the water from you and the lock is looking very tidy

 

[No Regrets]

What does your comment mean?

'Newbie'

Always check out the wondrous stories here first, there are some right old salts lurking in the depths of this old joint

Who DID tell you that far fetched story by the way?

 

[Captain Coochie]

if you read the first line of post two on this thread you will see that Teddington lock has said " Yes it is true "

 

[No Regrets]

Astonishing!

Never see it do that there!?

 

[Gavi]

if you read the first line of post two on this thread you will see that Teddington lock has said " Yes it is true "

 

[dash300]

if you read the first line of post two on this thread you will see that Teddington lock has said " Yes it is true "

I do not wish to protract this thread(which i appreciate may be an old chestnut to this Forum) unecessarily but there is perhaps an area
of concern to be addressed.
Having been a riparian owner and user of the Thames tidal and non tidal for the past 30 years I have always taken the common sense and widely held view that the Thames above Teddington Lock to be non-tidal and I still do. However as has been correctly argued if there is any ambiguity as to fact, the insurance company will use this to its advantage and not ours. (for those with non tidal insurance.)
If due to tidal effect the headwaters above Teddington Lock are increased in depth does this make this section Tidal for the purposes of insurance cover.

I suggest the EA would be the final arbiter in this. Would they be categoric in stating the Thames above Teddington to be non-tidal?