Jump to content

Increase of shipping MSC ?


Dizzy
 Share

Recommended Posts

Or under :wink:

 

 very true

 

As MacEnroe said, "you can't be serious?"  Even the tugs have to lower their mast/radar. and the big liners have to lower theirs to get under the High level bridges.

 

Why do ships running up and down the canal need masts and radar ?

 

They've been quite vocal about car parks lately, you'd think they would have something to say about a development which could turn large parts of the towns road system into one...

 

 

 

Its wbc dream come true though and all three political parties

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gosh I'm slacking today and loads of replies to read and catch up on sorry and thanks to all who replied to my first question . :oops:   All interesting stuff though.

 

MiddleC.. what was in the letter you mentioned earlier as we've certainly not had one.  Odd seeing as though we are so close to the canal and between 2 of the 3 local swing bridges that go off virtually in tandem.  Maybe I have been blacklisted (only kidding as I'm sure that wouldn't happen) 

 

I think I'm turning into a ship spotter now though and I heard a rumble a while ago so checked on the AIS again. :oops:   Costal Deniz passed here again going the other way (approx. 22.33 towards Liverpool) it's still Type HAZ A (71). 

 

Sussed the (71) now Algy ... the '7' means 'cargo' and the '1' means 'Major Hazard (Haz A)' ... so it's carried the same sort of 'whatever' from Liverpool to Irlam last night and similar back again today.   

 

Seems the other two from last night that I saw/heard were the Arklow Flair destination Manchester (Type 70.. general cargo?) and the Arklow Rainbow heading the other way for Liverpool then onto Cean (again type 70.. general cargo?)

 

Re: the new proposed high level bridge that has so far never happened.... I was sorting some of my mums old press cuttings and other snippets out a while ago and I'm sure there were some about the high level bridge and the funding that was given for it but they reckoned it wouldn't work and would make matters worse...... but I've got a feeling I might have thrown them away.  It might have been a new bridge from Brian Bevan Island though..... I can't remember  :oops:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

MiddleC.. what was in the letter you mentioned earlier as we've certainly not had one.

 

 

Hi Diz,

 

The letter was from David Mowat MP (I would assume everyone in the area got one/or will get one) setting out his concerns about the increase in canal traffic, and asking for folk to complete his online survey-

http://www.davidmowat.org/

 

Go to "Manchester Ship Canal Survey" I think it only consists of four questions, and really I cannot see how answering these will make any difference to the situation at all. Just an exercise to show people he is showing some interest I think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Middlec, I'll have a look :)

 

Just to be boring..... Two ships have been down already.  I got stuck at the Stag swing bridge coming back from Warrington at 8.40am as ship number 1 went past.  Got in put the kettle on and other half shouted "a boat's going past'"  (ha ha it's catching) and sure enough there was and it was 9.10am

 

So two within half an hour and the Bridge must have pretty much gone off again within 10 minutes of opening to traffic.  Glad I was near the front of the queue :)

 

They were Arklow Rambler (1st) and Calypso (2nd) by the way, both General Cargo Ships heading for Manchester.  Costal D is moored at Liverpool Docks at the moment  :oops:  :oops:  :lol: 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Blimey I wish I hadn't looked now Middlec,  their master plan is 132 pages long so I've only glanced over it for now  :|  

 

I can understand why they want to do it but heck it's going to be one busy canal by the sounds of it.

 

I noticed the only mention of the swing bridges in the WHOLE of their document is one paragraph which simply says :

 

 

Warrington Swing Bridges

 

6.80 The movement of vessels entering or exiting the Manchester Ship Canal is tide dependent.

There is a time window when vessels can enter or leave the Canal at Eastham Locks.

Furthermore, vessel movements to the upper reaches of the Canal above Runcorn entail passage through

Warrington where there are three swing bridges in close succession, all of which are situated upon the local highway network.

There will therefore be times whereby the movement of vessels (around tidal restrictions) will entail the opening of the bridges

which may co-incide with the typical AM or PM “rush hour” peak upon the road network.

 

 

Surely if they are far more ships and movements are tide dependant they might all have to go down in one long convoy then.  I think I'll just move :|

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a "memorandum of understanding" between the Council and Peel (about avoiding peak hours). The LibDems have "rejected" it http://www.warringtonlibdems.org.uk/not-nearly-good-enough but rejecting it means nothing when Peel has navigation rights and can legally swing the bridge as often as they want. It would take a private act of Parliament to expunge those rights.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Entry (or exit) of the MSC is dependant on the tide in the Mersey. Entry is through Eastham Lock. So, yes, if there were a lot of these container boats they would have to come through in batches to catch the tide. But that's always been the case I think, boats have had to queue to enter or exit the canal, it's just that it's not been noticeable for many years because the MSC has been so quiet.  So the idea of travelling in a convoy on the canal  is feasible, depending of course, as to the destination of each container boat on route. The next set of locks from Eastham is of course at Latchford. Latchford locks could be busy again. Wow! Now that area is in need of a bit of investment. Have you seen the condition of the second smaller lock there?

 

This is Eastham Lock looking out to the Mersey

EasthamLockEntrance-ExitMerseyfromMSC_zp

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought Eastham locks were only there to prevent the Mersey flow into the canal at high tide, a type of storm gate. :unsure:  :unsure:

 The water level in the MSC was much higher than the Mersey when we were there. After entering the lock from the Mersey they needed to bring the level up to match the water level in the canal (in the pic of Eastham lock with gates closing, water level was then brought up to the top )

EasthamLockfullandgatesopeningontoMSC_zp

The pic above is Eastham Lock gates opening giving entry to the MSC. It shows the difference in the water level to that in the Mersey in the previous pic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought the idea was to put a port at Runcorn and unload the containers there and then ship them on smaller boats up the canal. that way they do not need to run ships up and down the canal that are dependent on the tide. The ones that are tide dependent will not need to go as far as Warrington,just to Runcorn and then back down to the Mersey. The ships then going through Warrington could be run at any time avoiding peak traffic times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's an idea.

 

Permanently open all the swing bridges, and blow up the cantelever for good measure. Then, of course, since there's no access from south of the canal to the north we'll have to stop sending all our money there too.

 

Let's see how long Lancastrian Warrington manages without the Cheshire villages of Stockton Heath, Appleton, Grappenhall, Thelwall and Lymm!

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's an idea.

 

Permanently open all the swing bridges, and blow up the cantelever for good measure. Then, of course, since there's no access from south of the canal to the north we'll have to stop sending all our money there too.

 

Let's see how long Lancastrian Warrington manages without the Cheshire villages of Stockton Heath, Appleton, Grappenhall, Thelwall and Lymm!

 

You said this before but failed to qualify your claim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's an idea.

 

Permanently open all the swing bridges, and blow up the cantelever for good measure. Then, of course, since there's no access from south of the canal to the north we'll have to stop sending all our money there too.

 

Let's see how long Lancastrian Warrington manages without the Cheshire villages of Stockton Heath, Appleton, Grappenhall, Thelwall and Lymm!

Do you have to blow it up inky, can we not just place a lockable barrier or dig the road up as after all it is of significant historical interest. Don't forget you will need to remove the lock gate walkways at Latcford locks as well, oh! and jus to be sure remove Latchford railway bridge and sink the boat at Thelwall Penny Ferry. Damn I forgot the tunnels they will need concreting in. How about the Thelwall Fireduck, you may need to consider that small bit of access, i think that just about isolates us from you.

Well! you started it mate!. :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nobody has mentioned Warburton toll bridge, excellent! I intend to hot foot it down there right away and buy out the franchise, then when the bridge burners have done their ghastly work you can expect some changes around here, strictly in the interest of modernising the transport infrastructure of the area of course.

With my monopoly on canal crossings you can expect the charge to rise from the present 12p each way to a very reasonable £3 or so, though obviously, if demand is high enough, this may have to rise. And I'll be needing wardens if anyone is interested, also, anyone who knows where there are automatic number plate recognition machines going cheap, please give me a shout, I can't have rogues swapping tickets and suchlike.

Finally, it would be churlish of me not to thank the people who gave me the idea for all this in the first place.

The parking department at Warrington Borough Council, and also the directors of Warrington Hospital, take a bow! You're an inspiration to us all!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Probably longer than the Cheshire villages of Stockton Heath, Appleton, Grappenhall, Thelwall and Lymm! Would last. Lancastrian Warrington has been subsidising them for far to long :wink:

 

:P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P

 

Have you ANY idea at all what proportion of WBC's revenue comes from south of the ship canal???

 

Or ANY idea what proportion of it's budget is spent there???

 

Lymm for one did perfectly well as an Urban District with it's own council and services in the past, and could easily do so again. Although personally I'd favour joining some of the other Cheshire villages in the locality - either with Knutsford, High Legh, Mobberley, Wilmslow etc. in Cheshire East, or along with Stockton Heath, Appleton etc. joining Northwich in Cheshire West.

 

Even the old Chehsire County Council structure was preferable to WBC!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At least then Wariington proper won't have to subsidise your cheap parking anymore.  What a complete snob.  Oh and by the way I don't think Wilmslow would touch you with a barge pole regardless how hard you shake your begging bowl. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:P'>http://www.freesmileys.org/smile :P'>http://www.freesmileys.org/smile :P'>http://www.freesmileys.org/smile :P'>http://www.freesmileys.org/smile :P'>http://www.freesmileys.org/smile :P'>http://www.freesmileys.org/smile :P'>http://www.freesmileys.org/smile :P'>http://www.freesmileys.org/smile :P'>http://www.freesmileys.org/smile :P'>http://www.freesmileys.org/smile

 

Have you ANY idea at all what proportion of WBC's revenue comes from south of the ship canal???

 

Or ANY idea what proportion of it's budget is spent there???

 

Lymm for one did perfectly well as an Urban District with it's own council and services in the past, and could easily do so again. Although personally I'd favour joining some of the other Cheshire villages in the locality - either with Knutsford, High Legh, Mobberley, Wilmslow etc. in Cheshire East, or along with Stockton Heath, Appleton etc. joining Northwich in Cheshire West.

 

Even the old Chehsire County Council structure was preferable to WBC!

 

Perhaps you would post some stats for us inky

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P

 

Have you ANY idea at all what proportion of WBC's revenue comes from south of the ship canal???

 

Or ANY idea what proportion of it's budget is spent there???

 

Lymm for one did perfectly well as an Urban District with it's own council and services in the past, and could easily do so again. Although personally I'd favour joining some of the other Cheshire villages in the locality - either with Knutsford, High Legh, Mobberley, Wilmslow etc. in Cheshire East, or along with Stockton Heath, Appleton etc. joining Northwich in Cheshire West.

 

Even the old Chehsire County Council structure was preferable to WBC!

 

 

You would allow Norwich to join your villages, so kind???

 

 

Yet you still have not justified your comments with figures!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At least then Wariington proper won't have to subsidise your cheap parking anymore.  What a complete snob.  Oh and by the way I don't think Wilmslow would touch you with a barge pole regardless how hard you shake your begging bowl. 

 

I wonder if the people of Stockton Heath Village ever come into North Warrington or is it beneath them, maybe they just do all their shopping at Aldi.

 

Like or not Stockton Heath is a small district of Warrington

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...