Princess crashes into Richmond Bridge

[Searush]

Yes indeed. As long as the batteries (dedicated batteries probably) are up to delivering the power and the system can handle the current without blowing the fuse. Hydraulic thrusters avoid that of course but from the sound of it this boat didn't have them.

Also, prolonged use of thrusters, especially both together, makes a fair bit of noise (sounds worse from the boat) and if (as skipper) you're struggling to keep control, particularly with an audience watching, you will shy away from drawing attention to your plight by making a lot of noise.

I feel a lot of sympathy for the skipper in this case - I've found plenty of ways to get things wrong on the boat handling side of things - but that is no reason for anyone to be in any doubt that what was attempted here, and the way it was attempted, was, imo, extremely ill-advised. It didn't need much to go wrong (and it did) to end up in a really bad place with no good way of getting out of it.

Isn't that the very essence of risk assessment? What was to gain by attempting it? Not a lot I suspect. But the high probability of failure (unless very skilled at handling your boat in a current) and the high cost of failure make it a crazy risk to take.

As I said elsewhere, a triumph of supreme confidence over competence. Mind you, on the positive side, the owner is now a Global Internet sensation.

 

[savageseadog]

It would have been better to lie up on the bridge once it went wrong

 

[blueglass]

the level of childlike gleeful reaction exhibited on the same subject over on the "other" forum is something to behold.

 

[Hurricane]

Isn't that the very essence of risk assessment? What was to gain by attempting it? Not a lot I suspect. But the high probability of failure (unless very skilled at handling your boat in a current) and the high cost of failure make it a crazy risk to take.

As I said elsewhere, a triumph of supreme confidence over competence. Mind you, on the positive side, the owner is now a Global Internet sensation.

I've been thinking about WHY
If you look at his Radar Arch you will see that all the gubbins has been removed and a temporary cover put over the hole.
That mainly why I didn't recognise it as a P67 in the first place.
P67's have wing shaped moulding on the top of the radar arch
The scanner and GPS mushrooms and steaming/anchor lights are then fitted to a short mast on top of that.
It would be a complicated long job to remove all this kit (inc the win shaped moulding) if all you wanted to do was to "pop upstream"
So, it seems to me that it was important to get the boat through the bridge - it doesn't seem to me to have been just a "day out on the river"

Also, I'm not an expert on that part of the river but isn't it partially tidal there.
If so, he may have picked his time carefully so as to get the least amount of flow and still have enough air draft.

If nothing else, though, I think I'd still have fendered it up beyond recognition and the crew would have has specific jobs to do.

 

[gjgm]

Isn't that the very essence of risk assessment?

Perhaps he couldnt find his clip board.

 

[jfm]

I've been thinking about WHY
If you look at his Radar Arch you will see that all the gubbins has been removed and a temporary cover put over the hole.
That mainly why I didn't recognise it as a P67 in the first place.
P67's have wing shaped moulding on the top of the radar arch
The scanner and GPS mushrooms and steaming/anchor lights are then fitted to a short mast on top of that.
It would be a complicated long job to remove all this kit (inc the win shaped moulding) if all you wanted to do was to "pop upstream"
So, it seems to me that it was important to get the boat through the bridge - it doesn't seem to me to have been just a "day out on the river"

Also, I'm not an expert on that part of the river but isn't it partially tidal there.
If so, he may have picked his time carefully so as to get the least amount of flow and still have enough air draft.

If nothing else, though, I think I'd still have fendered it up beyond recognition and the crew would have has specific jobs to do.

Mike the birds eye pictures in post #10 clearly show that he had a hinge-down mechanism installed, so that the wing and the radar stub mast fold down. When he hit the bridge they were hanging beneath the arch, in "folded down" mode. Nothing at all temporary about this, therefore this boat must be a regular Thames boat

 

[Observer]

Isn't that the very essence of risk assessment? What was to gain by attempting it? Not a lot I suspect. But the high probability of failure (unless very skilled at handling your boat in a current) and the high cost of failure make it a crazy risk to take.

Yes. I don't think that formal risk assessments need to come into play every time we have a trip on a boat but ownership and use of a piece of equipment of that value and potential to do harm should be accompanied by a reasonable overall awareness of the risks inherent in its use and the principal challenges of operating it competently. Getting sideways on to wind or tide/current and being set onto something you don't want to hit is a typical novice error. It's a bit surprising to see it done with a boat of that size and value.

Even so, there must be many of us who have made a careless, even negligent, mistake but managed to come though with nothing worse than a bit of a scare.

The lesson (or one of them) is that the boundary between an innocuous afternoon's pleasure and a disaster (this one could easily have ended worse) can be very easy to cross. Take as an example the Milly RIB incident.

If this skipper had thought about what could go wrong (assuming he had enough knowledge and experience to do that), he would have taken a different course.

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

IMO, this guy was too dependent on his thrusters - it almost seems that he was trying to turn the boat using them just before he hit the bridge

Agreed. The problem with bridges like this is that the supports obstruct the flow so the flow through the arches is going to be accelerated. If you get the boat a bit sideways just before the arch, you're going to need very powerful thrusters to correct it and obviously those in this P67 were not up to it. Yes the Thames is very much tidal at Richmond; its a long time since I've boated on the Thames but IIRC, the flood tide gets delayed by the flow of the river so the ebb lasts a much shorter period. When the tide does ebb, it is very fast flowing compared to the flood so this is another factor which may have caught out the helmsman. In retrospect, it was very unwise to attempt to squeeze under the bridge on a fast ebbing tide but I'd be fairly sure that all of us have damaged boats due to misjudgements so there for the grace of God go we. I've certainly taken a chunk out of a boat myself by misjudging the flow of the Thames but thankfully not as publically as this

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

Mike the birds eye pictures in post #10 clearly show that he had a hinge-down mechanism installed, so that the wing and the radar stub mast fold down. When he hit the bridge they were hanging beneath the arch, in "folded down" mode. Nothing at all temporary about this, therefore this boat must be a regular Thames boat

Well spotted. Probably from Chelsea Harbour or St Kats and therefore really should have known better

 

[Just_sayin']

isn't it partially tidal there.

Enough:ambivalence:

 

[Hurricane]

Mike the birds eye pictures in post #10 clearly show that he had a hinge-down mechanism installed, so that the wing and the radar stub mast fold down. When he hit the bridge they were hanging beneath the arch, in "folded down" mode. Nothing at all temporary about this, therefore this boat must be a regular Thames boat

Oh dear - wrong again
I agree - that makes it a regular thing for the boat to do then.
They even seem to have a purpose made canvas to cover the hole

For those interested - this is the wing thingy on our P67

 

[misterg]

Humiliating experience.

I am very experienced but mostly at sea, but not so with dealing with a rivers tidal flows.

The yacht makes 5 Kts over SOG with both engines in gear, though from Teddington to Richmond the boats port or stbd engines were only engaged, fwd and astern, to keep her positioned.

The necessary tidal height calculations were completed and a phone call to the PLA boys in the area informed me that I should expect and increase of half a metre on listed tidal heights, this was also taken into consideration. As you could see once I had extracted myself from the bridge I squeezed through as with enough headway backing up my initial precaluculations.

The problem I encountered was aligning the yacht up to the centre line of the arch as the arch has rather steep drop offs from the centre line. Once astern thrust had been engaged, the strong tidal flow started to push the stern to the starboard rather rapidly. This caught me unawares as the yacht obviously has a lot of power to hand, but not enough to stem the tide.

I've certainly learnt a harsh lesson in coping with strong tidal currents, and narrow bridge arches.

My sympathies.

(As a New User, your posts take ~24h to show.)

 

[U4]

I've certainly learnt a harsh lesson in coping with strong tidal currents, and narrow bridge arches.

Very harsh lesson indeed, and I hope you get your boat repaired with the mimimum of fuss.

Fair play for coming on here to talk about it......

 

[Chris_d]

My sympathies.

(As a New User, your posts take ~24h to show.)

+1. all the above forum regulars seem to have missed that the owner has come on here and fessed up!

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

I soon as I went astern the tide caught the stern and pushed it to starboard, took me completely by surprise the strength of the flow

Brave man for sticking your head above the parapet. Sorry I have to ask but how much damage was done and why didn't your crew appear to be on deck with fenders?

 

[No Regrets]

So what's the answer?

How about turning round before the bridge, and reversing through with the engines going forward?
That would give him time to stem the flow and inch through very slowly.
Or am I missing something?

Nope. Thats the only sane option in this case. Perfect control all the way through, and the option to bottle it at any point...

 

[Nick_H]

I soon as I went astern the tide caught the stern and pushed it to starboard, took me completely by surprise the strength of the flow

Thanks for coming on here and letting us know what happened. I hope the repairs aren't too extensive and you'll be back on the water soon.

 

[Observer]

Humiliating experience.

I am very experienced but mostly at sea, but not so with dealing with a rivers tidal flows.

The yacht makes 5 Kts over SOG with both engines in gear, though from Teddington to Richmond the boats port or stbd engines were only engaged, fwd and astern, to keep her positioned.

The necessary tidal height calculations were completed and a phone call to the PLA boys in the area informed me that I should expect and increase of half a metre on listed tidal heights, this was also taken into consideration. As you could see once I had extracted myself from the bridge I squeezed through as with enough headway backing up my initial precaluculations.

The problem I encountered was aligning the yacht up to the centre line of the arch as the arch has rather steep drop offs from the centre line. Once astern thrust had been engaged, the strong tidal flow started to push the stern to the starboard rather rapidly. This caught me unawares as the yacht obviously has a lot of power to hand, but not enough to stem the tide.

I've certainly learnt a harsh lesson in coping with strong tidal currents, and narrow bridge arches.

Hello Skinner56. Commiserations and congratulations on coming and posting on here.

I hope you haven't found us (me) too unsympathetic. It is easy to be critical with hindsight but I think this was "a bridge too far". As you said, the profile of the arch made it critical to get lined up and stay dead centre. The following stream made that very difficult without making a speed over ground that would be be uncomfortable because of the limited height clearance and in excess of the speed limit anyway.

The answer really had to be not to attempt it in those conditions.

I was really sorry to see (and hear) the damage to your boat. I hope it is not too severe and is fixed soon. Where were you headed for anyway?

 

[Skinner56]

Brave man for sticking your head above the parapet. Sorry I have to ask but how much damage was done and why didn't your crew appear to be on deck with fenders?

Unfortunately I was the only crew member, the others were guests. Considerable damage to the radar arch, may need replacing if Princess still have the mold

 

[capsco]

I don't understand how only 2 previous posters understand how to do this safely, as they both said, round up, pointed end into the stream then go through astern under complete control, if it does go wrong, which is unlikely then you simply drive away going ahead rather than attempting to reverse a flat transom into the flow.
I learned this on the fast running tidal rivers (Trent and particularly River Ouse at Selby.)