Peppermint
New member
He's wrote to YM about yotties.
<hr width=100% size=1>
<hr width=100% size=1>
Someones really p***ed of the QHM Portsmouth
- Thread starter Peppermint
- Start date
sailbadthesinner
New member
did he call us yotties or wafis?
<hr width=100% size=1><font color=red>if guinness is good for you. i must be very very good</font color=red>
<hr width=100% size=1><font color=red>if guinness is good for you. i must be very very good</font color=red>
Twister_Ken
Well-known member
G\'wan, wotz he say? nm
`
<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.writeforweb.com/twister1>Let's Twist Again</A>
`
<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.writeforweb.com/twister1>Let's Twist Again</A>
Ohdrat
New member
wots the qhm portsmouth?
<hr width=100% size=1>
<hr width=100% size=1>
Col
New member
Queens Harbour Master.
<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.arweb.co.uk/argallery/colspics> Cols Picture Album</A>
<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.arweb.co.uk/argallery/colspics> Cols Picture Album</A>
BrendanS
Well-known member
Re: G\'wan, wotz he say? nm
Summary: yotties should not head through harbour entrance of busy port when 'Fog Routine' in operation, without radar, lights or sound signals, and even with children on board without lifejackets. Apparently several did on 28th May, and he's a bit peeved about it.
He does praise one yacht that called harbour master for visibility report, and stayed put, and another who requested permission to enter, and was slotted into the habour control plan
<hr width=100% size=1>Err, let me know if Depsol enters the forum, I'll go and hide
Summary: yotties should not head through harbour entrance of busy port when 'Fog Routine' in operation, without radar, lights or sound signals, and even with children on board without lifejackets. Apparently several did on 28th May, and he's a bit peeved about it.
He does praise one yacht that called harbour master for visibility report, and stayed put, and another who requested permission to enter, and was slotted into the habour control plan
<hr width=100% size=1>Err, let me know if Depsol enters the forum, I'll go and hide
l'escargot
New member
He's not too happy with Wightlink for knocking down one of the piles at Fishbourne. He even asked if the skipper would like to watch a recording of the radar and reconsider their version of events... and they tried to blame a local sailing club and bill them for £20000.
<hr width=100% size=1>
<hr width=100% size=1>
VicS
Well-known member
See <A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.qhmportsmouth.com>http://www.qhmportsmouth.com</A> for his website including an account of this situation
<hr width=100% size=1>
<hr width=100% size=1>
charles_reed
Active member
I, for one, sympathise with him.
How rash and stupid can yotties get?
<hr width=100% size=1>
How rash and stupid can yotties get?
<hr width=100% size=1>
colinF
New member
So do I
Can't help noticing that people on this forum fall over themselves to crticise the "idiots" they see doing silly things, not obeying colregs, exhibiting poor seamanship etc. So why all the fuss and ridicule when this man, who is doing a difficult job, criticises some of those same idiots, with obvious justification?
<hr width=100% size=1>
Can't help noticing that people on this forum fall over themselves to crticise the "idiots" they see doing silly things, not obeying colregs, exhibiting poor seamanship etc. So why all the fuss and ridicule when this man, who is doing a difficult job, criticises some of those same idiots, with obvious justification?
<hr width=100% size=1>
Twister_Ken
Well-known member
In defence of the indefensible
Can't say I would have wanted to sail out of Pompey in 50 yds viz, but:
Does QHM realise that many boats nowadays are fitted with GPS/chartplotters accurate to within a metre or two which would allow you to navigate in zero viz, let alone 50 metres. And a lot also have radar (look up the masts in a marina).
Plus, in Pompey there is a small boat channel to the west side of the entrance which bigger traffic doesn't come into.
Plus why are x-channel ferries and Wight link, and RN, and fast cats assumed to be able to navigate in poor viz, whereas we can't?
Plus, if it really was 50 mtrs, how did anyone see there were kids aboard not wearing lifejackets?
Stirring the pot!
<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.writeforweb.com/twister1>Let's Twist Again</A>
Can't say I would have wanted to sail out of Pompey in 50 yds viz, but:
Does QHM realise that many boats nowadays are fitted with GPS/chartplotters accurate to within a metre or two which would allow you to navigate in zero viz, let alone 50 metres. And a lot also have radar (look up the masts in a marina).
Plus, in Pompey there is a small boat channel to the west side of the entrance which bigger traffic doesn't come into.
Plus why are x-channel ferries and Wight link, and RN, and fast cats assumed to be able to navigate in poor viz, whereas we can't?
Plus, if it really was 50 mtrs, how did anyone see there were kids aboard not wearing lifejackets?
Stirring the pot!
<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.writeforweb.com/twister1>Let's Twist Again</A>
tony_brighton
New member
To quote from the relevant LNTM:
"Vessels under 20m in length including yachts are strongly advised not to move when Fog Routine is in force but may proceed at the skippers discretion. Such vessels are to proceed with extreme caution and are to keep well clear of the Main and Approach Channels of the harbour."
It does not make any mention of having to have radar on the go (if even fitted) or people wearing lifejackets. Personally I think that would be pragmatic but clearly the skippers concerned took a different view based on what they saw.
<hr width=100% size=1>
"Vessels under 20m in length including yachts are strongly advised not to move when Fog Routine is in force but may proceed at the skippers discretion. Such vessels are to proceed with extreme caution and are to keep well clear of the Main and Approach Channels of the harbour."
It does not make any mention of having to have radar on the go (if even fitted) or people wearing lifejackets. Personally I think that would be pragmatic but clearly the skippers concerned took a different view based on what they saw.
<hr width=100% size=1>
colinF
New member
Indefensible indeed!
I think it's most unlikely that the Harbourmaster does NOT know what equipment yachts carry these days! He may even have heard of GPS without SA
His account mentions the mandatory lights and signals for use in fog and the fact that many of the yachts of which complains were not using them. He also mentions that many did not have radar and talks of "close shaves" in the entrance (small boat channel or no) He goes on to say that the fog was forecast to clear, if the skippers concerned had been willing to wait.
I would think it is entirely reasonable to distinguish between commercial and military ship movements (by professionals, whatever criticism you may have of them) and private pleasure boat movements (largely by amateur weekenders of varying experience whose behaviour seems to have been entirely consistent with that status)
In fog, yachts and ships at close quarters are always bad news. Poor man. I don't envy his job.
<hr width=100% size=1>
I think it's most unlikely that the Harbourmaster does NOT know what equipment yachts carry these days! He may even have heard of GPS without SA
His account mentions the mandatory lights and signals for use in fog and the fact that many of the yachts of which complains were not using them. He also mentions that many did not have radar and talks of "close shaves" in the entrance (small boat channel or no) He goes on to say that the fog was forecast to clear, if the skippers concerned had been willing to wait.
I would think it is entirely reasonable to distinguish between commercial and military ship movements (by professionals, whatever criticism you may have of them) and private pleasure boat movements (largely by amateur weekenders of varying experience whose behaviour seems to have been entirely consistent with that status)
In fog, yachts and ships at close quarters are always bad news. Poor man. I don't envy his job.
<hr width=100% size=1>
Ohdrat
New member
Re: In defence of the indefensible
"Does QHM realise that many boats nowadays are fitted with GPS/chartplotters accurate to within a metre or two which would allow you to navigate in zero viz, let alone 50 metres. And a lot also have radar (look up the masts in a marina)."
Quite agree
What I don't understand if viz was 50 yards how'd they know yachties weren't lighting up? .. I have to say that I don't rate lights as any cop when it comes to fog.. least not the ones yachties use..
<hr width=100% size=1>
"Does QHM realise that many boats nowadays are fitted with GPS/chartplotters accurate to within a metre or two which would allow you to navigate in zero viz, let alone 50 metres. And a lot also have radar (look up the masts in a marina)."
Quite agree
What I don't understand if viz was 50 yards how'd they know yachties weren't lighting up? .. I have to say that I don't rate lights as any cop when it comes to fog.. least not the ones yachties use..
<hr width=100% size=1>
Twister_Ken
Well-known member
Re: In defence of the indefensible
Hear hear re lights in fog. Does it say anything about lights in colregs?
<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.writeforweb.com/twister1>Let's Twist Again</A>
Hear hear re lights in fog. Does it say anything about lights in colregs?
<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.writeforweb.com/twister1>Let's Twist Again</A>
Ohdrat
New member
Re: lights in colregs
Off the top of my head.. I don't think you do have to use your lights, I am fairly certain about that.. but if anyone knows otherwise...........
<hr width=100% size=1>
Off the top of my head.. I don't think you do have to use your lights, I am fairly certain about that.. but if anyone knows otherwise...........
<hr width=100% size=1>
kimhollamby
Active member
What cannot be defended...
...is that many boats (mostly yachts it has to be said) do not use the small craft channel and can often be seen wallowing around in the main fairway trying to sail in, often against a strong tide.
The leisure community drops its trousers, holds its tail in the air and asks to be spanked when it cannot obey the most basic of rules that are, after all, sensible in what is a narrow entrance. I would imagine a letter to Yachting Monthly has come after months of lip biting; the current QHM would not have been the only one to get angry about this but he is the first one I believe to have come out so strongly regarding the situation.
I expect some of the boats criticised were well outside of the defined limits of the small craft channel and therefore in an extremely vulnerable position (for them) and horrible position (for any shipping movements).
<hr width=100% size=1>
...is that many boats (mostly yachts it has to be said) do not use the small craft channel and can often be seen wallowing around in the main fairway trying to sail in, often against a strong tide.
The leisure community drops its trousers, holds its tail in the air and asks to be spanked when it cannot obey the most basic of rules that are, after all, sensible in what is a narrow entrance. I would imagine a letter to Yachting Monthly has come after months of lip biting; the current QHM would not have been the only one to get angry about this but he is the first one I believe to have come out so strongly regarding the situation.
I expect some of the boats criticised were well outside of the defined limits of the small craft channel and therefore in an extremely vulnerable position (for them) and horrible position (for any shipping movements).
<hr width=100% size=1>
mikeb
New member
Re: lights in colregs - yes
c) The lights prescribed by these rules shall, if carried, also be exhibited from sunrise to sunset in restricted visibility and may be exhibited in all other circumstances when it is deemed necessary.
<hr width=100% size=1>
c) The lights prescribed by these rules shall, if carried, also be exhibited from sunrise to sunset in restricted visibility and may be exhibited in all other circumstances when it is deemed necessary.
<hr width=100% size=1>
billmacfarlane
Active member
Re: What cannot be defended...
Even if you've used your GPS/Chartplotter to keep in the small boat channel and have left its limits, I'd still think twice about leaving in zero vis as there's still a lot of heavy traffic about out of the channel. On the other hand if a yacht leaves with his radar going and sticking to the small boats' channel who's the QHM to say whether the skipper is competent or not? That's after all why we buy radar-so we can navigate in conditions like that.
<hr width=100% size=1>
Even if you've used your GPS/Chartplotter to keep in the small boat channel and have left its limits, I'd still think twice about leaving in zero vis as there's still a lot of heavy traffic about out of the channel. On the other hand if a yacht leaves with his radar going and sticking to the small boats' channel who's the QHM to say whether the skipper is competent or not? That's after all why we buy radar-so we can navigate in conditions like that.
<hr width=100% size=1>
kimhollamby
Active member
What happens if IPT signals introduced
Will be fascinating to see if there is any move to introduce IPT signals. Probably a huge manning implication at QHM end and not much room outside at low water for holding off to side of main channel on a busy day. For those reasons, probably not on...or is it?
<hr width=100% size=1>
Will be fascinating to see if there is any move to introduce IPT signals. Probably a huge manning implication at QHM end and not much room outside at low water for holding off to side of main channel on a busy day. For those reasons, probably not on...or is it?
<hr width=100% size=1>
