SW Sunk Beacon

A

alldownwind

Well-Known Member
Joined
10 Aug 2004
Messages
1,290
Location
Medway
Visit site
Appears from a new chart correction (no. 376/2007) that the SW Sunk Beacon is no more - the correction is to delete it and substitute an 'obstruction awash'. Anyone know what's happened to the beacon?
 
It might seem trite, old chap, but as I'm sure you must know it's a point of interest to folk who yot across the estuary and take short cuts.
 
Well, we ought to lobby to get a replacement then. Its been the gateway across the Deeps for years, and is very interesting in rubbish weather at half tide.
As there are no other markers that I can think of, it would mean a long detour.

Or, perhaps more cynically, are they going to block the whole damned sandbank with more wind farms and just don't care any more for us intrepid navigators.

The Sunk is a very narrow gap at the best of times. Having to get through it without spearing the hull with an ex beacon that is awash could make life interesting.

So, as it has not been maintained in my cruising career, does anyone lay claim to it, or is responsible for it?
 
Are you willing to pay light dues or whatever, for its replacement?

This is going to be ever more of an issue. TH doesnt get money from us (except taxes of course) and therefore doesnt view us as important clients. Buoys and marks will increasingly be laid for big vessels only. Just like surveys of channels are mainly where big vessels go, not us.

You could argue that GPS makes the marks redundant, but thats only if your chart is up to date and based on up to date surveys.
 
For an East Coast sailor, using charts and GPS would be very risky, as the sand banks have a nasty habit of moving!..... the only reliable measure of safe water is the regularly checked marks....... and even then with caution...

I would pay a small amount each year for light dues if that is what it took, but frankly, I think that I pay enough tax as it is at the moment, and would prefer the government to reduce some of its massive waste instead.... their job is to provide as much as possible for as little as possible, not the reverse!!!!
 
I dont think these Solent types understand the real depths of seafaring knowledge and skill exercised by those of us who dare to brave the shifting sands in the Thames estuary.
 
>I dont think these Solent types understand the real depths of seafaring knowledge and skill exercised by those of us who dare to brave the shifting sands in the Thames estuary.<

Oh yes we do, and we're in great admiration of your outstanding attributes, and your determination to do navigation in conditions where cultivation would be more appropriate. Also, how can we show anything but respect to a bunch of ditch crawlers/seafarers* who are so supremely confident that they happily call one of their channels 'Sunk'.

* delete according to point of view.
 
Did a bit of amateurish surveying last autumn and the Sunk Beacon crossing is possible. More water than at the SW Sunk although caution is necessary if Essex River bound not to turn too early for the Spitway. There is a v shallow bit of the Middle Sunk which has extended NE over the last 10 years which blocks a direct route to the Spitway from the Sunk Beacon. There is a need to shape north before turning.

Last October, the Sunk Beacon was in better shape than the SW Sunk.
 
I have penned a plea to Trinity House to see what their future plans are for the beacon.

I will post a reply if and when......
 
[ QUOTE ]
TH doesnt get money from us (except taxes of course) and therefore doesnt view us as important clients. Buoys and marks will increasingly be laid for big vessels only.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not true. I'm not sure about other organisations, but CA are regularly consulted by Trinity House about buoyage changes. Where we reckon that changes would cause a significant loss of safety, we will say so, and usually TH takes account of our reasoned case. Maybe a reason for more small boat sailors to support CA.
 
[ QUOTE ]
I have penned a plea to Trinity House to see what their future plans are for the beacon.

I will post a reply if and when......

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure who is responsible for buoyage in the Estuary. PLA are certainly responsible for surveying that area (which is probably why the banks are so poorly charted), and may be responsible for the buoyage. I don't have recent charts here, but a ten year old one shows the seaward limit of PLA as roughly through Fisherman's Gat.

It's sometimes difficult to be sure. Harwich Harbour Authority control surveys and buoyage near the Harwich Channel, but Trinity House do the Deben and Alde Entrances.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Other threads that may be of interest

dgadee
Arzal?
Replies
12
Views
366
dunedin
D

Share this page

Top