Accidents at locks - help needed

[WJM]

"Yes, there was a fault on the walkway"

 

 

 

What was the problem with the walkway? I know this lock very well and pass it / use it regularly and I dont remember any problems with it last year.

 

also, it seems strange that as a regular local boater, I have never heard of this incident. Just a comment, was ever reported in any of the media?

[nb Innisfree]

It certainly is an unusual occurrance, so much so that the fact it happened made it into a BW board briefing, which tells us that they have conducted tests on the affected lock.

 

I would agree that the best option, in any case where it is believed that somebody has actually gone into the culvert, is to leave the paddle open until the person re-appears in the chamber, and then to close the paddle without delay.

 

Closing the paddle will simply create a situation where somebody is stuck in the culvert, and potentially stuck at a point below the level of the water in the chamber.

 

Even if they do come to rest in air, you are then looking at a protracted process to drain down the head of the lock before you can re-open the paddle to reach them.

 

Allowing them to continue through may well cause them to suffer additional broken bones, but frankly, the choice here is between ending up with a living casualty who needs a lot of repair work, and having a corpse that still looks pretty intact.

 

Even if there are two boats in the lock, there will be small patches of water that the person can try to get to.

 

All this assumes the person is flushed through, the point I was making was if the person doesn't appear then closing the top paddle and draining the lock is the only option left. True they will be trapped and a protracted rescue will then be neccessary with perhaps a slim chance of rescue, but so what? Dismantle the whole lock if needed, it will just have to be carried out, a life is at stake. Rescue services will not give up until they are recovered, dead or alive

[honey ryder]

Ive a vague recollection of honey ryder mentioning this or similar incident, perhaps on her blog if it wasnt the main board. Bloody horrendous experience the the poor lady involved, glad she's on the mend.

 

yes I did. I was waiting for Axe to arrive in Rickmansworth when it all happened.

So as I wasn't there, I didn't see what happened and I can't comment on the facts, only heresay.

 

I think there is always potential for people to have accidents, no matter how safe something is deemed to be.

We all know locks are hazardous areas, particularly lock gate crossings, particularly when the paddles are up.

Im afraid more barriers, more protection, more cotton wool and nanny state protection will not stop accidents from happening. perhaps the reverse, as people are encouraged to rely on state molly coddling, we stop to think for ourselves.

 

example, fill a car with airbags, safety belts, etc, and we feel safe in our metal cages and may perhaps take risks because we feel safe. Put a spike in the middle of the steering wheel and take away the belts... suddenly a lot more thought goes into how we drive...

 

when around water/boats/locks, always one hand for yourself, thats my motto anyway. ( if a task requires two hands, I get help or I secure myself in a different way. )

[alan_fincher]

Ive a vague recollection of honey ryder mentioning this or similar incident, perhaps on her blog if it wasnt the main board. Bloody horrendous experience the the poor lady involved, glad she's on the mend.

Yes, you are of course right, it's referred to here........

 

Link to Honey Ryder forum blog entry....

[MartinClark]

Primed with what Dave said, I have found this in the Nov 2008 minutes....

Mr. Bridgeman referred to the incident where a customer had fallen into the water and had been drawn through a ground paddle culvert. This could have been prevented if she had been wearing a lifejacket.

Well. yes - wearing a lifejacket might certainly have prevented her from being drawn through the ground paddle culvert, but not into it.

 

This is only hearsay but, when I was boating in Ireland, an Irish lockie told us that, when they were trying to make the lockies wear lifejackets at locks, a test was conducted. They threw a mannequin into the water above a filling lock. The mannequin was drawn into the ground paddle culvert and shot out into the lock. They then put a lifejacket on the mannequin and carried out the test again. This time the lifejacket inflated, the mannequin was again drawn into the ground paddle culvert but this time promptly became jammed in there and did not appear in the lock.

 

Lifejackets are probably a Good Thing if you fall into a filling lock but apparently not if you fall in above the paddle sluice!

[alan_fincher]

Well. yes - wearing a lifejacket might certainly have prevented her from being drawn through the ground paddle culvert, but not into it.

 

This is only hearsay but, when I was boating in Ireland, an Irish lockie told us that, when they were trying to make the lockies wear lifejackets at locks, a test was conducted. They threw a mannequin into the water above a filling lock. The mannequin was drawn into the ground paddle culvert and shot out into the lock. They then put a lifejacket on the mannequin and carried out the test again. This time the lifejacket inflated, the mannequin was again drawn into the ground paddle culvert but this time promptly became jammed in there and did not appear in the lock.

 

Lifejackets are probably a Good Thing if you fall into a filling lock but apparently not if you fall in above the paddle sluice!

I agree wholeheartedly.

 

If it is possible to get sucked into the paddle culvert, absolutely the last thing I would want to have on at the time is a self-inflating life jacket that expanded to guarantee I could not pass through.

 

A very good reason NOT to wear them when working canal locks, it seems to me!

[bastonjock]

There was a chap badly injured at Orton Lock on the river nene this year.He came within a cats whiskers of death,the accident happened around April,he has jus recently been released from hospital,the incident involved the beam

[alan_fincher]

Further thoughts....

 

OK, I know Honey Ryder says she was not present for the incident, and is reporting it second-hand.

 

But what is written is.....

 

" I was ahead of the boat, preparing the next lock and as I crossed the top gate i looked down and my foot went down a gap in the rails where the paddles go...."

 

gasp....then silence...

 

"then I got sucked under and went through the channel with the water flow..."

 

Now this incident happened at Hanwell, (Lock 93), and the boat is heading up beyond Watford, so travelling North.

 

That means it is ascending the locks.

 

But Diane is apparently ahead of the boat, and crossing top gates, with the ground paddles drawn ? It's not explicitly stated, but she seems to be on her own ?

 

Normally if you were lock-wheeling for an uphill boat you would only need to be drawing bottom paddles, unless further boat(s) are in someway involved, but which is not explained, (e.g.you spot a Southbound boat, and the lock is more full than empty, so you decide to let them go first....)

 

It seems there was more going on here than anybody has explained, and without anyone actually telling the full story of this incident, it is probably not possible to comment on what might have happened, or what actions it would be sensible to take if similar circumstances arose in future.

 

If Diane is still watching the thread, perhaps she could both explain the full facts of everything that led up to the incident, including why these paddles were up, and also the bit not yet mentioned - "what was defective with the walkway?"

 

Then we would be in a position to make rather more informed comment, I think.

 

(Edited to sort out the quoting from the HR blog)

Edited September 7, 2009 by alan_fincher

[Axe]

Hi again - Di here - the one who had the accident. (maybe I should create my own account on here?!)

 

The return to Hertfordshire from Ripon meant dodgy internet access but I can now reply more fully.....

 

Sorry I don't know how to use the quote stuff on here but will answer some questions:

 

- thank you for the kind words from some 'posters' (!)

 

- sorry I can't say much more about the incident (yet) - hence nothing in the media, except my local paper last August

 

- the towpath telegraph worked amazingly fast last year, many hearing of the incident as far away as Yorkshire & it was mentioned

(apparently) at the IWA meet. Even last week someone who lives near the Hanwell flight mentioned they'd heard of my accident.

(I am now back in full brace/crutches with wound dressings hence the question 'how did you do that?')

 

- what I can say is the boat was in the lock and I was filling it ie top ground paddles open

 

- I KNOW that if I'd been wearing a life jacket I would be DEAD as I would not have gone through the culvert.

 

- I reported it to BW immediately and ONE of the defects was remedied within a month

 

- if it ever happens to anyone else....it was the water pressure that finally pushed me through so I agree - leave the paddles up!

 

- what I would like to convey is how I escaped drowning in the lock once I exited the culvert:

the water was clear, the sun was shining, I was being thrown around in the turbulence near the bottom of the water

The water from the 2 ground-paddle culverts was colliding mid-stream and creating what I describe as a catherine wheel effect

with the sun shining through the water bubbles. SOMEHOW I had the thought not to attempt to swim to the side but aimed for the

centre of these two 'wheels' at the bottom. I was carried to the surface!

 

- as for needing more info before being able to comment on the accident, please please, the questions is

'has anyone else ever fallen from a walkway like this, even if not reported'

 

- Cosmic - thank you so much for your advice - I did look at the site you mentioned and agree a phone call to them is my next step

 

Thanks

 

Di

 

PS I do think someone should look into producing a waterways guide for the emergency services as 'Lock 93 Grand Union Canal' really flummoxed them!!

[mayalld]

- as for needing more info before being able to comment on the accident, please please, the questions is

'has anyone else ever fallen from a walkway like this, even if not reported'

 

If you wish people to answer the questions that you ask, rather than discuss the issues, you are in the wrong place. You need to employ somebody to research this information.

 

I for one am not about to help anybody construct a case against BW that will very probably be to all our detriment unless I am convinced that this is something other than an attempt to make a claim out of a pure accident.

 

And yes, I do know of somebody falling from a top gate walkway. It was his own fault.

[mykaskin]

PS I do think someone should look into producing a waterways guide for the emergency services as 'Lock 93 Grand Union Canal' really flummoxed them!!

 

Phone 999 and ask for the coastguard who have bridge numbers (and I assume lock numbers) on their maps, and can co-ordinate the other services. I suspect they will also take a longitude and latitude unlike other emergency services.

 

Mike

Edited September 8, 2009 by mykaskin

[MartinClark]

My sympathy to you, Di, for having had such a frightening and horrific experience.

 

You seem to have omitted to mention just what these "defects" were. You say that one was fixed but that suggests that others were not. The defect that has been fixed may also be present at other locks. I'm sure we would be grateful to you if you can describe what these defects were so that we can look out for similar defects and, hopefully, avoid suffering a similar misfortune.

[WJM]

I am not convinced by this suggestion that a lifejacket would make the situation worse. A proper self inflating lifejacket provides a massive amount of buoyancy. While the suction from an open ground paddle will vary from lock to lock, my guess is that on locks like those on Hanwell flight, the suction would not overcome the buoyancy of the jacket.

[DHutch]

Hi. I am the person who fell - using 'Axe's' account to write this.

 

As to the accident....if you really want to know I ended up in the water above the top gates after raising both ground paddles, got sucked down into the culvert where I was stuck for what seemed like hours. I assumed I was dead. All the pre-death things you hear about went through my mind.

But the water pressure eventually pushed me through. Then I had to contend with a filling lock and the turbulence. I cheated death twice that day.

I had multiple injuries and had an op this August (a year after the accident) to put me back together - I will be able to walk sometime - maybe this year.

 

I still use the waterways, but yes, I still have flashbacks, I still cry but I am still determined that no-one else should suffer and the defect be attended to.

Not much fun!

- Very sorry to hear this happened to you. Its the sort of thing that people talk about the possabilty of, but never actaully consider would happen.

- I mean im sure it has happened in the past, the canals have been used too long for it not have done, but yes indeed, certainly not much fun that.

 

Glad you are alive and on the mend non the less!

 

However, without meaning to ask questions you would not like to answer, i two and im interested in what this defect entailed, if only to avoid a simular misshap myself or of my crew.

 

 

Daniel

[DHutch]

[shoedesigner mode] Hiking boots are not really meant for walking on chequerplate or the other surfaces you get around locks. Although they give you alot of ankle support, which is great, the cleated soles, as you discovered don't grip. The best type of non slip outsole is a siped sole, like the ones you get on deck shoes, you know with the wavy cuts in the sole. Crocs and flip flops are no good around locks either. [/shoedesigner mode]

I wear 'skate shoes' (vans, globes, etnies, etc) almost permantly and find this work very well when boating, as well as mountain biking and general use, as well as being comfy, smart enought to get into most nightclubs, and large enough to pass as steelys at a cassual glance by the uni workshop staff.

- There dont offer any real angle support and are usless on mud, but i've not found this to be much of a problem with the activitys i do.

[Cosmic]

Di,

 

Feel free to pm me if you need help working out how to make best use of the information from the RoSPA database.

 

Good luck!

[WJM]

So come on!!!

 

What is this killer defect that Hanwell Flight is afflicted with? Or are we saving that for a dramatic courtroom revelation?

[magpie patrick]

I don't know whether this is the "fault" but I must say the slot in the walkway, which the ground paddle slides into, makes me uneasy. I'm not an H&S freak by any means, but that strikes me as a hazard that seriously undermines that value of the wide walkway.

 

Of course, the slot is an historic, possibly even original feature, but so was working boatmen and their families falling into locks and drowning (I thinks David Blagrove has made a few points on this in hos various books and articles, I certainly recall an incident being described where a boat girl was swept through the culvert and drowned) and I for one don't wish to maintain drowning people as authentic canal tradition

[nb Innisfree]

I am not convinced by this suggestion that a lifejacket would make the situation worse. A proper self inflating lifejacket provides a massive amount of buoyancy. While the suction from an open ground paddle will vary from lock to lock, my guess is that on locks like those on Hanwell flight, the suction would not overcome the buoyancy of the jacket.

 

Just done a quick calculation, assuming a 10' drop in water level and an 18" dia. sluice a force of nearly half a ton will be exerted in the bottom of that sluice! enough to overcome lifejacket buoyancy tho it would be a lot less at the top (380 lbs)

Edited September 9, 2009 by nb Innisfree

[WJM]

I like it - the appliance of science! But that is assuming the swimmer is already at the mouth of the sluice. The suction will be much less at the surface, the place where the jacket buoyancy is doing it's lifting. The suction will increase the closer you get to the sluice entrance, but hopefully only the feet will be dangling there?

[alan_fincher]

I'm slightly dubious of some of the science and maths here.

 

I don't think a self-inflating life jacket will go off on absolute immediate contact with water, will it ? There must be a delay of some degree between the first contact with water and full inflation.

 

I'd have thought there was a very good chance that you could be half way down the sluice by the time it is properly inflated, (once you have accepted you can be in the sluice at all!).

 

I think two things would then have an impact on your ability to be flushed right through, firstly the buoyancy trying to reverse your travel, but secondly your much increased size in a narrow tube. I think either or both could make things far worse.

 

It is not legitimate to calculate anything based on an assumed 10 foot head of water pressure. The maximum head can be no more than the the difference in heights between the pounds. it's doubtful that is much over 7 feet at the lock involved, and certainly well under 8 feet. (You would travel a lot further, both because the sluice ends under water, and because the fall is to one side, as well as downwards, but that can't increase the water flow).

 

I would still really like to know....

 

1) What was defective about the walkway - broken, slippery, or just considered to be a poor design ?

2) Why someone apparently preparing locks on their own ahead of an ascending boat had the top paddles drawn.

 

Any comment about this particular incident might make far more sense if we could be told more about it.

 

If there is still the possibility of continuing genuine danger at these locks, unfortunately, we are still little closer to understanding what it is - that seems unfortunate.

[WJM]

This lifejacket question is interesting for me. I often wear one when I am single handing and there are no other boats around, on the simple reasoning that if I do fall in there will be nobody there to do anything to help me. Having seen one of these jackets deploying for real and undoubtedly saving the life of it's wearer, I can confirm that they do inflate very quickly. Personally if I was going to jump into the head of a filling lock for a dare, I would put my hopes in the lifejacket keeping me out of the sluice rather than potholing my way into the lock!

[Naughty Cal]

Yes these lifejackets do inflate extremely quickly. We were volunteers for an RNLI exhibit at Torksey lock and the rate at which they inflate is incredible. Scary if you know it is going to happen, if you dont it would leave stains in the pants.

[carlt]

Personally if I was going to jump into the head of a filling lock for a dare, I would put my hopes in the lifejacket keeping me out of the sluice rather than potholing my way into the lock!

I agree, I'd rather take my chances, with a life jacket on, rather than hope I get through the culvert in one piece.

 

It is possible to alter the time delay, on the firing mechanism (on my life jackets, anyway) even disabling the auto-inflation, if you wish, though.

[Lesd]

2) Why someone apparently preparing locks on their own ahead of an ascending boat had the top paddles drawn.

 

Hi Alan,

I think Di clarified this point saying that the boat was infact in the lock and she was filling the lock when the accident happened.

But your right, I think we'd all love to hear what the defeats are /were so we know what to avoid and prevent something like this this happening to anyone else.

Rgds

Les