Princess crashes into Richmond Bridge

[gjgm]

Incidentally, for those who dismiss "risk assessment" as time wasting form filling, I fear you simply don't get it. Risk assessment should be something you do every day & every decision. You do it at every junction & roundabout when driving a car. Anyway, you should be doing it if you want to stay alive. No need for forms, just some thought about the chance of failure & cost of failure.

I think you might find there is a bit more to the concept than your understanding, or maybe misuse of the term, but never mind.

 

[Hurricane]

Hold on a minute, I don't like to be critical but what do you mean you were the only crew member on board? It's a 67' motor yacht and you navigate single handed! Must be fun docking on your own. What does your insurance company make of that.

You were very close to getting it correct first time. People have quite rightly said had you backed up a little further you would have been fine. You have plenty of power on hand with I assume big MTU's and reasonably powerful thrusters.

Take it as a learning experience and you will do well. We have all had some prang at some point.

Some have suggested going through stern first, I wouldn't suggest this as you are wider at the back and there are blind spots from the flybridge. If the tide is running at 4 knots you have enough power to hold boat wherever you want it.

Good luck. Princess will be able to help with a moulding. You will be surprised what they can do. I know of a Princess 23m that was dropped. Oops. Fixed and as good as new.

I agree with Lozzer here
Firstly, IMO, you did the correct thing keeping the stern pointing into the stream "Hanging on the props" is the term I use.
Some people seem to recon you can control the bow if you point it into the stream - maybe they haven't driven a boat like this.

As Lozzer says, try and put it behind you
Look on the bright side - the radar arch is easier to fix that other parts of the boat.

BTW - On all the P67s, Princess fitted the radar arch outside the factory building - they were too big to build inside the shed with the radar arch so it was fitted later.
Maybe that will make the repairs easier

I often have visitors on our boat and I always get them doing things.
I make assessments as to their ability and give them jobs - and that is everyone on board.
The less capable visitors I have on the FB with me and I get them to watch out for things - not much help but it gets them involved
The more capable ones help my wife - usually on the foredeck - the simplest job is a roving fender - simple instructions - nothing risky
I doubt that fenders would have made any difference here but I would have involved your visitors more.
I'm sure I will get slated for that - but thats what I'd do.

Anyway - well done for sticking your head up on here
Thousands wouldn't have.
And, above all, don't get put off by it all
Learn and move on.

 

[jfm]

Yes the gearboxes are handed. Usually inward turning (I think) but can be outward.

Outward typically on a cruising boat including this P67 Observer. That exaggerates the prop kick effect making manoeuvring easier. Inward turning is only typical on race boats

Hello and welcome to Mr Skinner. GRP is eminently repairable so all will be back to tip top condition soon I hope. Don't you just love youtube eh?

 

[Jonmendez]

So sorry to see what happened, as someone who has most days of the week to try and dodge under the bridge on the Hamble often with a boat that is almost the size of the arch, I feel your pain, its not easy and manoeuvring in a lot of tide takes practise and confidence - you were pretty close, and when it goes wrong it happens so fast. lets hope Princess make it shinny again!

 

[Blueboatman]

Just popped over from the windy side. I think you were if anything a tad unlucky being over cautious..once the tide got the stern...?

Ah well, even the professionals get it wrong and you didn't break Battersea bridge like they did in 2005,eh!

Get back in the saddle, these things happen, might have to make or take a Radar arch mold but its fixable ( and I once put a bowsprit through a wheelhouse window, eeew, that took some explaining).

There will always be the odd, unable to empathise, glib nasty comments, there will always be schadenfreude!

 

[Mr Googler]

Somewhere else in the world you can be pretty sure there was another skipper getting a boat manoeuvre wrong at that exact same time. It just didn't find it's way onto YouTube!!! Anyone who says they have never got it wrong is a liar and the haters are probably miffed that life hasn't taken them to a point where they can have such a great boat

No one was hurt, anything can be fixed and life goes on. Good luck to you and enjoy the summer

 

[doug748]

I almost posted the same comment a couple of hours ago but wasn't in the mood for the potential row with the prolific posters glued to YBW all day.

The same couple of idiots have put me off YBW with their constant drivel.

Yep, always the same twerps.

Good luck to Skinner56. I made a downtide blunder a couple of years ago, once the tipping point is reached you are stuffed.

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

Some people seem to recon you can control the bow if you point it into the stream - maybe they haven't driven a boat like this.

Agree with you Mike. The idea of backing down into a bridge is not something I would want to do. It may be the best thing to do with a heavy single screw displacement boat but not IMHO with a light twin screw planing boat. The bow on most planing boats are so light that it would far too easy for the current or wind to push it to one side or another leaving you broadside onto the bridge and no way of extricating yourself. IMHO better to go in forwards because at least then you can keep control of the stern and back away from the bridge smartly if it looks like things are going wrong. With all due respect to Skinner56, I think the mistake he made was trying to control the boat with thrusters when it started to go wrong rather than backing away with the engines and realigning the boat. Maybe he felt too constricted by the boats behind to do that?

 

[Jegs]

I seem to remember an old saw: the man who never made a mistake, never made anything.

John G

 

[Observer]

Agree with you Mike. The idea of backing down into a bridge is not something I would want to do. It may be the best thing to do with a heavy single screw displacement boat but not IMHO with a light twin screw planing boat. The bow on most planing boats are so light that it would far too easy for the current or wind to push it to one side or another leaving you broadside onto the bridge and no way of extricating yourself. IMHO better to go in forwards because at least then you can keep control of the stern and back away from the bridge smartly if it looks like things are going wrong. With all due respect to Skinner56, I think the mistake he made was trying to control the boat with thrusters when it started to go wrong rather than backing away with the engines and realigning the boat. Maybe he felt too constricted by the boats behind to do that?

Except the rudder's not much help going astern, so backing out smartish in a straight line is not assured.

I can't say I've tried it and you're right that the heavy SD 42'er I was used to may be different to a 67' planing hull, but if you there is a (say) 4kt current and you can drive into at a steady speed of 3.5 kts, then you will be getting continuous flow over the rudder and an approach speed to the bridge of 0.5 kt. That gives you some degree of steering control (in addition to bow and stern thrusters) that is certainly more than either (a) just drifting with the current and no flow over the rudder at all, so relying entirely on thrusters; or (b) approaching with a positive forward speed in relation to the stream, to give rudder steering, which gives you a closing speed to the bridge arch of prehaps 7-8 kts.

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

Except the rudder's not much help going astern, so backing out smartish in a straight line is not assured.

I can't say I've tried it and you're right that the heavy SD 42'er I was used to may be different to a 67' planing hull, but if you there is a (say) 4kt current and you can drive into at a steady speed of 3.5 kts, then you will be getting continuous flow over the rudder and an approach speed to the bridge of 0.5 kt. That gives you some degree of steering control (in addition to bow and stern thrusters) that is certainly more than either (a) just drifting with the current and no flow over the rudder at all, so relying entirely on thrusters; or (b) approaching with a positive forward speed in relation to the stream, to give rudder steering, which gives you a closing speed to the bridge arch of prehaps 7-8 kts.

You won't be relying on rudders at all on approach to the bridge because as you say there won't be enough flow on them. The key to it is having twin engines and the fact that you always have far more control over the stern than the bow in a twin engined boat, at least of this type. If I understand Hurricane correctly and I agree with him on this, effectively you'd be drifting down on the bridge but using astern power on one engine or the other to stem the flow of the river, slow the boat down and align it with the arch. I certainly wouldn't advocate approaching the bridge at 7-8kts just so as to have flow over the rudders. The bow will take care of itself so long as you are using the engines to keep the stern of the boat aligned. IMHO this is a safer way of negotiating the bridge because backing down on it and pointing the bow into the stream just risks losing the bow to one side or another. Either way you try to do it, this is a very risky manouvre and perhaps the best advice would be to wait for slacker water and more height under the bridge

 

[Nick_H]

You won't be relying on rudders at all on approach to the bridge because as you say there won't be enough flow on them. The key to it is having twin engines and the fact that you always have far more control over the stern than the bow in a twin engined boat, at least of this type. If I understand Hurricane correctly and I agree with him on this, effectively you'd be drifting down on the bridge but using astern power on one engine or the other to stem the flow of the river, slow the boat down and align it with the arch. I certainly wouldn't advocate approaching the bridge at 7-8kts just so as to have flow over the rudders. The bow will take care of itself so long as you are using the engines to keep the stern of the boat aligned. IMHO this is a safer way of negotiating the bridge because backing down on it and pointing the bow into the stream just risks losing the bow to one side or another. Either way you try to do it, this is a very risky manouvre and perhaps the best advice would be to wait for slacker water and more height under the bridge

Doesn't the problem arise if you want to back out for any reason, as the skipper did in this case. The water is flowing faster at the side of the arch than in the middle (to get round the piers), so if you stray to one side you will have greater water pressure on one side of the stern than the other, which will swing the aft end round. Mr Skinner has told us that this is what happened. It can't be a good idea to go into any tricky situation where you can't safely back out, so on that basis I wouldn't want to go through forward, though i'm not sure i'd want to go through backwards either!

 

[Richard Shead]

I have commented on the other thread about this, I am local to this area and have taken a Princess 20m through a few years back.

I wont comment any more as the owner has but we have flood water coming down as well as a good tide racing under the bridge so its going to take a bit of bottle to do this.

Typically it was a hot day, a mid afternoon tide and the tow paths and pubs packed in Richmond. However had it been the downstream side there would have been far more people viewing and no doubt filming it.

 

[symondo]

Fair play to the owner for coming on here to explain!

Read a lot of this thread yesterday and watched the video. As a complete new comer to the whole motor boat handling i invisage a lot of 'oohhhh f...' moments
Hopefully with nothing but another go round being the result of them but if anything i found it kind of positive to see someone with experience get it wrong and how quickly it can go from 'in control' to 'oh dear'

I gues a bump is a bump - the difference is with something that size its just more £££ to sort. hopefully all doable with little fuss. - looks a lovely machine! (minus the new scuffs)

Im sure your not the first to give the bridge a nudge and wont be the last

 

[MapisM]

Misjudged the elevated tidal stream, should have passed through at first attempt as I had enough headroom

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.

Skinner, I can't think of any meaningful contribution to the matter which is being debated, but I would like to warmly welcome to the madhouse.
I've been around here for quite some years, but I really can't think of any new forumite whose first couple of posts were as honest and straightforward as yours - and under such unpleasant circumstances.
All the very best for the repairs. I for one I'm looking forward to your future thread "First cruise with my boat back in pristine conditions"!

 

[dom]

Thanks. Coming on here has only helped in dealing with this embarrassing episode. Most have been critical but justified, and I've learnt more than if I had gone into a melancholic stupor. Largest portion of the damage is to the radar arch, surveyor in transit. Day trip from Imperial Wharf to Teddington return. Was a fantastic day up to that point.

Sh!t happens to all of us and yours happened in a 4kt current with a thousand people around! Come to think of it, us yachties routinely attempt that particular stunt when rafts of us get jammed by the tide against a big metal turning buoy!

With the benefit of hindsight you might have got away with it you'd gunned the power/twirled your thrusters in the nick of time. But if you'd hit the bridge and got thrown off your station I shudder to think what the MAIB might now be investigating.

Then with the benefit of hindsight we would all agree that you should have done exactly what you did ...so respect, you should be proud of yourself.

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

Doesn't the problem arise if you want to back out for any reason, as the skipper did in this case. The water is flowing faster at the side of the arch than in the middle (to get round the piers), so if you stray to one side you will have greater water pressure on one side of the stern than the other, which will swing the aft end round. Mr Skinner has told us that this is what happened. It can't be a good idea to go into any tricky situation where you can't safely back out, so on that basis I wouldn't want to go through forward, though i'm not sure i'd want to go through backwards either!

My point was really that if the stern does swing round you have more chance of correcting it with the engines than you have of correcting a bow swing with the bowthruster. Also there's the point that if you back a flybridge cruiser into an arch you're going to have to get it absolutely spot on because you're leading with the radar arch and flybridge superstructure whereas if you go in with the bow you've got a bit more space to extricate yourself because of the low pointy bow if the boat gets out of shape. Either way its a really risky manouvre and not something that I would be confident about doing

 

[Observer]

You won't be relying on rudders at all on approach to the bridge because as you say there won't be enough flow on them. The key to it is having twin engines and the fact that you always have far more control over the stern than the bow in a twin engined boat, at least of this type. If I understand Hurricane correctly and I agree with him on this, effectively you'd be drifting down on the bridge but using astern power on one engine or the other to stem the flow of the river, slow the boat down and align it with the arch. I certainly wouldn't advocate approaching the bridge at 7-8kts just so as to have flow over the rudders. The bow will take care of itself so long as you are using the engines to keep the stern of the boat aligned. IMHO this is a safer way of negotiating the bridge because backing down on it and pointing the bow into the stream just risks losing the bow to one side or another. Either way you try to do it, this is a very risky manouvre and perhaps the best advice would be to wait for slacker water and more height under the bridge

I'll defer to your experience of the handling characteristics of the type. Mike. I completely agree with your assessment that it's risky either way and, as I said in post #22, I hope that I would have decided to moor up and wait for the level to drop off a bit.

Interesting to see Richard Shead's comments in this thread and the S/B one. He concludes that this was the return journey from the upstream side of the bridge with river and tide combining to create the flow seen (HW Richmond was 1502). I guessed this was the case but wasn't absolutely sure. So, possibly, there was some "gethomeitis" effect at work, which I imagine all of us have experienced to some extent.

[edit]I see Mr Skinner himself confirmed he was on the way home from Teddington.

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

Interesting to see Richard Shead's comments in this thread and the S/B one. He concludes that this was the return journey from the upstream side of the bridge with river and tide combining to create the flow seen (HW Richmond was 1502). I guessed this was the case but wasn't absolutely sure. So, possibly, there was some "gethomeitis" effect at work, which I imagine all of us have experienced to some extent.

Well as I said in a previous post IIRC the ebb tide runs a lot faster on the tidal Thames than the flood tide. Add the flow from an already bloated river and I guess you've got a very fast running stream at that point so easy to cock it up. Yup we've all been there, got the t shirt and the grp repair bills to prove it

 

[Andrew38]

Having spent many years based on The Thames I did this trip many times en route to St. Kats and the sea. My first reaction to the story was actually related to how did Mr Skinner get a P67 through Hammersmith bridge (twice) which is 2 metres lower than Richmond. There is no doubt that time was an issue as getting enough height under Hammersmith needs careful balance with having enough water to get through the shallow section between Richmond lock and Kew.

Ditch crawling in a larger boat is a definite skill of its own with tight bridges being a particular skill. It's one of the rare times when you don't pussyfoot with the throttles. If you feel you're off line to go straight through you put on a lot of power astern to get her out against the flow behind you. Equally when you are lined up, as your bow enters you put a lot of power on! This is scary but your stern will drop by about a foot, maybe more on something like a P67 and gives you the critical extra clearance all ways round on the bridge.

You need to be comfortable with the boat and your skills but it does work.

I think Mr Skinner had done most of the work needed in planning the trip as he must have done the planning to get there and, eventually back with the difficult timings needed to avoid problems at the other points. Few would have the nerve to power a £2m boat through a bridge with several knots behind you but it is an known and effective way of doing it!