Today's most viewed
Ship makes ferry big impact on first arrival
 |
| BIG IMPRESSION: Wight Light in the harbour. Echo photographer Chris Moorhouse |
Campaigners fighting the introduction of controversial new cross-Solent ferries say they are even larger than they feared after getting their first look at the vessels.
There was anger from protesters as the first of the new Wightlink vessels arrived in its new home at Lymington.
Currently moored alongside Lymington Pier railway station, the Croatian-built Wight Light towers above the yachts anchored in the Lymington River.
Roger Wilson, father of Olympic gold medal-winning sailor Pippa Wilson, said: "It's even bigger than we thought and the diagrams suggested."
Dr Don Mackenzie, a leading member of the Lymington Society, said Wight Light appeared to be twice the height of the existing ferries.
He added: "It's massive - much bigger than I expected it to be - and I'm told it creates a huge wash. The new vessels will have a dominating impact on the river and will be very intimidating to sailors, especially those in small craft."
Wight Light is one of three replacement ferries due to enter service as part of a £26m investment in the future of the busy cross-Solent route.
They are longer and taller than the existing vessels, which were built 35 years ago, and displace almost twice as much water.
 |
| COMPARISION: The silhouettes above show the difference in size of the old and new vessels. |
Critics claim the ships' wash will damage environmentally-sensitive parts of the riverbank by accelerating the erosion that is already taking place.
They can carry 65 vehicles, 15 more than the present craft, and have also sparked fears that they will result in even more traffic using already overcrowded roads.
Lymington River Association and other organisations in the town have spent months fighting the introduction of the new ferries.
Last night the Royal Lymington Yacht Club warned that the vessels were likely to have an adverse impact on sailing in the river.
A statement on the club's website said: "We hope that Wightlink can mitigate these impacts by operational changes but some will remain."
However, Wightlink said sea trials conducted in Croatia had established that Wight Light produced "very little" wash at speeds of up to six knots.
The company added that a study carried out by ABP Mer had confirmed Wightlink's assessment that the ferries' impact would be no greater than that of the existing ships.
The second vessel, Wight Sky, is due to leave Croatia next week.
Andrew Wilson, Wightlink chief executive, said: "The sea trials undertaken by Wight Light went according to plan and provided further evidence that the new Wight-class vessels will be ideal replacements for the existing Lymington-Yarmouth fleet."
Wight Light will enter service later this year if sea trials in the Solent in the next two weeks prove successful.
7:57am Wednesday 3rd September 2008
Print 
Email this 
CommentPosted by: Andy, Locks Heath on 8:21am Wed 3 Sep 08
"I'm told it creates a huge wash" says "Doctor" McKenzie, and on the basis of this unsourced hearsay his organisation opposes these ferries and uses any misinformation and exagerration it can get its hands on. "It will inimidate sailors..." Wightlink's St Clare on the Portsmouth route is more than twice as heavy as these vessels - so have all the blue capped sailors from Wootton Creek run for their lives yet? Perhaps any precious yachtsmen so intimidated should think twice about putting to sea at all lest they meet something a lot larger and faster. If you want more hard evidence "Doctor" I remember the MVs Farringford and Freshwater that preceded the Cenwulf class and though they were much lighter, their wash - especially the paddler Farringford - was far more severe. There is no direct correlation between displacement and wash - it's to do with shape particularly at low speed. Cenwulf and her sisters create very little wash when sailing past the Marinas and I saw this for myself just two weeks ago sailing on Cenred past the RLYC ....but on that subject, how much tidal erosion do dredged yacht basins cause down river, or would the Lymington River association prefer to deflect all the blame onto someone else? The Ferry route provides permanent - not seasonal - careers both directly and indirectly on both sides of the Solent. The LRA don't give a **** about anyone's livelihood unless they are rich enough to own a yacht - Something of hypocritical paradox there that perhaps summarises their outlook.
"I'm told it creates a huge wash" says "Doctor" McKenzie, and on the basis of this unsourced hearsay his organisation opposes these ferries and uses any misinformation and exagerration it can get its hands on. "It will inimidate sailors..." Wightlink's St Clare on the Portsmouth route is more than twice as heavy as these vessels - so have all the blue capped sailors from Wootton Creek run for their lives yet? Perhaps any precious yachtsmen so intimidated should think twice about putting to sea at all lest they meet something a lot larger and faster. If you want more hard evidence "Doctor" I remember the MVs Farringford and Freshwater that preceded the Cenwulf class and though they were much lighter, their wash - especially the paddler Farringford - was far more severe. There is no direct correlation between displacement and wash - it's to do with shape particularly at low speed. Cenwulf and her sisters create very little wash when sailing past the Marinas and I saw this for myself just two weeks ago sailing on Cenred past the RLYC ....but on that subject, how much tidal erosion do dredged yacht basins cause down river, or would the Lymington River association prefer to deflect all the blame onto someone else? The Ferry route provides permanent - not seasonal - careers both directly and indirectly on both sides of the Solent. The LRA don't give a **** about anyone's livelihood unless they are rich enough to own a yacht - Something of hypocritical paradox there that perhaps summarises their outlook.
Posted by: Condor Man, Southampton on 8:26am Wed 3 Sep 08
Typical bigotted views of yachty types. Wight Link are trying to boost their income, which in turn goes back to ordinary people who work for them. Will the likes of RYLM pay the wages of the workers who could lose their jobs? No, they want to dominate the land and the people around them.
Typical bigotted views of yachty types. Wight Link are trying to boost their income, which in turn goes back to ordinary people who work for them. Will the likes of RYLM pay the wages of the workers who could lose their jobs? No, they want to dominate the land and the people around them.
Posted by: Andy, Locks Heath on 8:29am Wed 3 Sep 08
...and a note to the Editor - the word censored by your automatic obscenity filter in my last post is d-a-m-n. It might be classed as offensive in the more bigotted parts of the American Bible Belt but I think here in Hampshire we're a little more enlightened. In view of some of the offensive immature tripe that gets onto a lot of your threads at the moment you should get yourself a better product or have someone edit the posts manually. Now perhaps I should go back to bed and get up again.
...and a note to the Editor - the word censored by your automatic obscenity filter in my last post is d-a-m-n. It might be classed as offensive in the more bigotted parts of the American Bible Belt but I think here in Hampshire we're a little more enlightened. In view of some of the offensive immature tripe that gets onto a lot of your threads at the moment you should get yourself a better product or have someone edit the posts manually. Now perhaps I should go back to bed and get up again.
Posted by: Fed up, On board on 8:30am Wed 3 Sep 08
[quote]Last night the Royal Lymington Yacht Club warned that the vessels were likely to have an adverse impact on sailing in the river.[/quote]
My heart bleeds for you
Last night the Royal Lymington Yacht Club warned that the vessels were likely to have an adverse impact on sailing in the river.
My heart bleeds for you
Posted by: Lymo on 8:30am Wed 3 Sep 08
Unfortunately, it will never hit home to many of the well-to-do lot in this area that we are in an economic slow down and therefore, having investment such as a new ferry is something to be thankful for.
I wouldn't be at all surprised that if the ferry company said it was pulling out of Lymington, a lot of the yachties would be glad!
Unfortunately, it will never hit home to many of the well-to-do lot in this area that we are in an economic slow down and therefore, having investment such as a new ferry is something to be thankful for.
I wouldn't be at all surprised that if the ferry company said it was pulling out of Lymington, a lot of the yachties would be glad!
Posted by: bacon bufty, the poop deck on 8:37am Wed 3 Sep 08
mmmm, sailors
Posted by: Frank, Hants on 8:37am Wed 3 Sep 08
The boat is bigger than I had imagined. Pity it couldn't have been built in Britain. I'm wondering if it might get stuck on the mud at low tide?
The boat is bigger than I had imagined. Pity it couldn't have been built in Britain. I'm wondering if it might get stuck on the mud at low tide?
Posted by: Shorecrab, Penno marshes on 10:11am Wed 3 Sep 08
How typical of the yachties to only care for themselves and their precious hobby, which to them takes priority over the local working men and womens needs. And to use the environment as a tool because their real argument is to flimsy. That is one butt ugly ship though.
How typical of the yachties to only care for themselves and their precious hobby, which to them takes priority over the local working men and womens needs. And to use the environment as a tool because their real argument is to flimsy. That is one butt ugly ship though.
Posted by: Andy, Locks Heath on 10:23am Wed 3 Sep 08
With regard to the RLYC's comments about sailing on the river, when we sailed to Yarmouth two Saturdays ago on Cenred every single yacht bar one wayfarer (outside the channel marker posts anyway) was under power, not under sail and all the yachts only put sails up as they neared Jack-in-the-Basket. This is not because of the ferries, this is because the yachties are either not skilled enough or are just too imaptient to get out to the Solent as quickly as possible. I challenge the LRA and the RLYC to deny that this is normal for Lymington River and pretty much always has been.
With regard to the RLYC's comments about sailing on the river, when we sailed to Yarmouth two Saturdays ago on Cenred every single yacht bar one wayfarer (outside the channel marker posts anyway) was under power, not under sail and all the yachts only put sails up as they neared Jack-in-the-Basket. This is not because of the ferries, this is because the yachties are either not skilled enough or are just too imaptient to get out to the Solent as quickly as possible. I challenge the LRA and the RLYC to deny that this is normal for Lymington River and pretty much always has been.
Posted by: D. Waterman, Horndean on 11:02am Wed 3 Sep 08
If these supposedly intimitated sailors are worried about this apparently massive new ship, perhaps they are not fit to be sailing at all. How about having a look at the super tankers, container ships and cruise liners that use the solent and Southampton Water every day and the cross channel ferries and naval ships that use the very narrow entrance to Portsmouth Harbour?
They may find something to be intimidated about then. Perhaps a lenght of string attached to their precious little yachts may be advisable? That should keep them from danger.
If these supposedly intimitated sailors are worried about this apparently massive new ship, perhaps they are not fit to be sailing at all. How about having a look at the super tankers, container ships and cruise liners that use the solent and Southampton Water every day and the cross channel ferries and naval ships that use the very narrow entrance to Portsmouth Harbour?
They may find something to be intimidated about then. Perhaps a lenght of string attached to their precious little yachts may be advisable? That should keep them from danger.
Posted by: Bright Spark, Stubbington on 11:05am Wed 3 Sep 08
I would rather sail across The Solent in a yot ... yocht ... yoghurt ... yoh! .. yatch but don't have a spare £90,000 lying around, so like most would have to use the ferry servicee. For those of us without dingys what is the alternative?
I would rather sail across The Solent in a yot ... yocht ... yoghurt ... yoh! .. yatch but don't have a spare £90,000 lying around, so like most would have to use the ferry servicee. For those of us without dingys what is the alternative?
Posted by: sailor on 11:41am Wed 3 Sep 08
[quote][bold]Andy[/bold] wrote:
With regard to the RLYC's comments about sailing on the river, when we sailed to Yarmouth two Saturdays ago on Cenred every single yacht bar one wayfarer (outside the channel marker posts anyway) was under power, not under sail and all the yachts only put sails up as they neared Jack-in-the-Basket. This is not because of the ferries, this is because the yachties are either not skilled enough or are just too imaptient to get out to the Solent as quickly as possible. I challenge the LRA and the RLYC to deny that this is normal for Lymington River and pretty much always has been.[/quote] Ignorant statement. Sailors drop their sails on entrance to the river (which officially starts at Jack in the Basket) because it is more controlled to motor down the narrow, bendy, shallow river, not because of lack of skill or impatience. There is a speed limit in the river of 6 knots anyway which most yachts could do under sail. Dinghies (such as a Wayfarer, sail down the river because they are more manoeuvrable and they have no engines. When the Royal Lymington refers to sailing in the river it means the use of the river by all craft, not explicitly travelling down the river with sails up.
Andy wrote:
With regard to the RLYC's comments about sailing on the river, when we sailed to Yarmouth two Saturdays ago on Cenred every single yacht bar one wayfarer (outside the channel marker posts anyway) was under power, not under sail and all the yachts only put sails up as they neared Jack-in-the-Basket. This is not because of the ferries, this is because the yachties are either not skilled enough or are just too imaptient to get out to the Solent as quickly as possible. I challenge the LRA and the RLYC to deny that this is normal for Lymington River and pretty much always has been.
Ignorant statement. Sailors drop their sails on entrance to the river (which officially starts at Jack in the Basket) because it is more controlled to motor down the narrow, bendy, shallow river, not because of lack of skill or impatience. There is a speed limit in the river of 6 knots anyway which most yachts could do under sail. Dinghies (such as a Wayfarer, sail down the river because they are more manoeuvrable and they have no engines. When the Royal Lymington refers to sailing in the river it means the use of the river by all craft, not explicitly travelling down the river with sails up.
Posted by: bacon butty on 11:47am Wed 3 Sep 08
sail or motor, who cares you are all harming the enviroment, I say the only thing that should be alloweed up and down that river be the ferry then the river bank is only exposed to wash for a set number of times a day. The yotties dont care they are up and down it all day and all break the speed limits. It is not right they could keep there boats moored out to see and get droped off by the ferry on route to the island, see how many want to sail then. Just a status thing with most of them look at me i got a yot, yeah well done if you decide to mortgage your 3 bedromm semi for a small boat well done, you aint no big shot. Get off the water and get the ferry it makes sence
sail or motor, who cares you are all harming the enviroment, I say the only thing that should be alloweed up and down that river be the ferry then the river bank is only exposed to wash for a set number of times a day. The yotties dont care they are up and down it all day and all break the speed limits. It is not right they could keep there boats moored out to see and get droped off by the ferry on route to the island, see how many want to sail then. Just a status thing with most of them look at me i got a yot, yeah well done if you decide to mortgage your 3 bedromm semi for a small boat well done, you aint no big shot. Get off the water and get the ferry it makes sence
Posted by: Andy, Locks Heath on 11:53am Wed 3 Sep 08
[quote][bold]sailor[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]Andy[/bold] wrote:
With regard to the RLYC's comments about sailing on the river, when we sailed to Yarmouth two Saturdays ago on Cenred every single yacht bar one wayfarer (outside the channel marker posts anyway) was under power, not under sail and all the yachts only put sails up as they neared Jack-in-the-Basket. This is not because of the ferries, this is because the yachties are either not skilled enough or are just too imaptient to get out to the Solent as quickly as possible. I challenge the LRA and the RLYC to deny that this is normal for Lymington River and pretty much always has been.[/quote] Ignorant statement. Sailors drop their sails on entrance to the river (which officially starts at Jack in the Basket) because it is more controlled to motor down the narrow, bendy, shallow river, not because of lack of skill or impatience. There is a speed limit in the river of 6 knots anyway which most yachts could do under sail. Dinghies (such as a Wayfarer, sail down the river because they are more manoeuvrable and they have no engines. When the Royal Lymington refers to sailing in the river it means the use of the river by all craft, not explicitly travelling down the river with sails up.[/quote] Excellent. So if you acknowledge that virtually all yachts are under power while in the river then what is the RLYC's point? There is no problem of manouevreability, yachts are not having to tack or jibe, and they can stick to a course. So if I am so ignorant (which I am palpably not) - then articulate exactly why the new ferries pose such as problem as to be banned from the river.
sailor wrote:
Andy wrote:
With regard to the RLYC's comments about sailing on the river, when we sailed to Yarmouth two Saturdays ago on Cenred every single yacht bar one wayfarer (outside the channel marker posts anyway) was under power, not under sail and all the yachts only put sails up as they neared Jack-in-the-Basket. This is not because of the ferries, this is because the yachties are either not skilled enough or are just too imaptient to get out to the Solent as quickly as possible. I challenge the LRA and the RLYC to deny that this is normal for Lymington River and pretty much always has been.
Ignorant statement. Sailors drop their sails on entrance to the river (which officially starts at Jack in the Basket) because it is more controlled to motor down the narrow, bendy, shallow river, not because of lack of skill or impatience. There is a speed limit in the river of 6 knots anyway which most yachts could do under sail. Dinghies (such as a Wayfarer, sail down the river because they are more manoeuvrable and they have no engines. When the Royal Lymington refers to sailing in the river it means the use of the river by all craft, not explicitly travelling down the river with sails up.
Excellent. So if you acknowledge that virtually all yachts are under power while in the river then what is the RLYC's point? There is no problem of manouevreability, yachts are not having to tack or jibe, and they can stick to a course. So if I am so ignorant (which I am palpably not) - then articulate exactly why the new ferries pose such as problem as to be banned from the river.
Posted by: bacon butty on 11:57am Wed 3 Sep 08
Look at that last post by Andy, this is typical of the yotty type of concil scum who think they are something there not, why on this thread has everyone found it nessesary to break out long paragraths and big words...............
...because they are all trying to be something there not.
Look at that last post by Andy, this is typical of the yotty type of concil scum who think they are something there not, why on this thread has everyone found it nessesary to break out long paragraths and big words...............
...because they are all trying to be something there not.
Posted by: bobbyboy, eastern southampski on 12:04pm Wed 3 Sep 08
Oh dear some-body's stuck a floating block of flats in the yachties Paradise at least yours will move ours will be permanent just another "blot on the landscape".
Oh dear some-body's stuck a floating block of flats in the yachties Paradise at least yours will move ours will be permanent just another "blot on the landscape".
Posted by: Mental Mickey, Tatchbury on 12:05pm Wed 3 Sep 08
Correction - they are being something that you're not.
Correction - they are being something that you're not.
Posted by: sailor on 12:06pm Wed 3 Sep 08
[quote][bold]Andy[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]sailor[/bold] wrote: [quote][bold]Andy[/bold] wrote: With regard to the RLYC\'s comments about sailing on the river, when we sailed to Yarmouth two Saturdays ago on Cenred every single yacht bar one wayfarer (outside the channel marker posts anyway) was under power, not under sail and all the yachts only put sails up as they neared Jack-in-the-Basket. This is not because of the ferries, this is because the yachties are either not skilled enough or are just too imaptient to get out to the Solent as quickly as possible. I challenge the LRA and the RLYC to deny that this is normal for Lymington River and pretty much always has been.[/quote] Ignorant statement. Sailors drop their sails on entrance to the river (which officially starts at Jack in the Basket) because it is more controlled to motor down the narrow, bendy, shallow river, not because of lack of skill or impatience. There is a speed limit in the river of 6 knots anyway which most yachts could do under sail. Dinghies (such as a Wayfarer, sail down the river because they are more manoeuvrable and they have no engines. When the Royal Lymington refers to sailing in the river it means the use of the river by all craft, not explicitly travelling down the river with sails up.[/quote] Excellent. So if you acknowledge that virtually all yachts are under power while in the river then what is the RLYC\'s point? There is no problem of manouevreability, yachts are not having to tack or jibe, and they can stick to a course. So if I am so ignorant (which I am palpably not) - then articulate exactly why the new ferries pose such as problem as to be banned from the river. [/quote] The new ferries pose a problem because they are larger (less room for yachts), taller (more windshadow for those under sail), travel quicker (less time to manouevre) and displace around twice as much water as the former ferries (destroying Lymington River).
Andy wrote:
sailor wrote: Andy wrote: With regard to the RLYC\'s comments about sailing on the river, when we sailed to Yarmouth two Saturdays ago on Cenred every single yacht bar one wayfarer (outside the channel marker posts anyway) was under power, not under sail and all the yachts only put sails up as they neared Jack-in-the-Basket. This is not because of the ferries, this is because the yachties are either not skilled enough or are just too imaptient to get out to the Solent as quickly as possible. I challenge the LRA and the RLYC to deny that this is normal for Lymington River and pretty much always has been.
Ignorant statement. Sailors drop their sails on entrance to the river (which officially starts at Jack in the Basket) because it is more controlled to motor down the narrow, bendy, shallow river, not because of lack of skill or impatience. There is a speed limit in the river of 6 knots anyway which most yachts could do under sail. Dinghies (such as a Wayfarer, sail down the river because they are more manoeuvrable and they have no engines. When the Royal Lymington refers to sailing in the river it means the use of the river by all craft, not explicitly travelling down the river with sails up.
Excellent. So if you acknowledge that virtually all yachts are under power while in the river then what is the RLYC\'s point? There is no problem of manouevreability, yachts are not having to tack or jibe, and they can stick to a course. So if I am so ignorant (which I am palpably not) - then articulate exactly why the new ferries pose such as problem as to be banned from the river.
The new ferries pose a problem because they are larger (less room for yachts), taller (more windshadow for those under sail), travel quicker (less time to manouevre) and displace around twice as much water as the former ferries (destroying Lymington River).
Posted by: bacon butty on 12:08pm Wed 3 Sep 08
dont want to be MM, and thats a Walter Mitty, always got something to say hav'nt you, always implying your something you are not, well you are the same as the rest, bet your really mental really craaaaaazy, you are so small minded
dont want to be MM, and thats a Walter Mitty, always got something to say hav'nt you, always implying your something you are not, well you are the same as the rest, bet your really mental really craaaaaazy, you are so small minded
Posted by: bacon butty on 12:10pm Wed 3 Sep 08
ha ha mental mitty
Posted by: Forest Hump, Forest on 12:19pm Wed 3 Sep 08
Sailor's quote
"The new ferries pose a problem because they are larger (less room for yachts), taller (more windshadow for those under sail), travel quicker (less time to manouevre) and displace around twice as much water as the former ferries (destroying Lymington River)".
Who or what gives sailors the divine right to dictate the right to use Lymington river? You are both pompus and self-rightous. I think the dredging of Lymington Marina has caused more damage than the new ferry could. As for the displacement argument, Andy has already stated it is not proportional to wash generation. Stop being so selfish and think of all the people who truly benefit from this service
Sailor's quote
"The new ferries pose a problem because they are larger (less room for yachts), taller (more windshadow for those under sail), travel quicker (less time to manouevre) and displace around twice as much water as the former ferries (destroying Lymington River)".
Who or what gives sailors the divine right to dictate the right to use Lymington river? You are both pompus and self-rightous. I think the dredging of Lymington Marina has caused more damage than the new ferry could. As for the displacement argument, Andy has already stated it is not proportional to wash generation. Stop being so selfish and think of all the people who truly benefit from this service
Posted by: Don Life Jacket, Aground on Brambles on 12:19pm Wed 3 Sep 08
Sailor says the ferries [italic]travel quicker (less time to manouevre)[/italic] but shipmate, the speed limit in the river is the same for all vessels whatever their size, I advise that you and your crew maintain a sharp lookout, carry flares, don life jackets, maintain a listening watch on vhf channel 16, don't drink Pimms before your return journey, check the wx forecast and never stand in a bite or coil. See you in The Gun Inn on completion for tea and medals.
Sailor says the ferries
travel quicker (less time to manouevre) but shipmate, the speed limit in the river is the same for all vessels whatever their size, I advise that you and your crew maintain a sharp lookout, carry flares, don life jackets, maintain a listening watch on vhf channel 16, don't drink Pimms before your return journey, check the wx forecast and never stand in a bite or coil. See you in The Gun Inn on completion for tea and medals.
Posted by: Andy, Locks Heath on 12:26pm Wed 3 Sep 08
You can't have it both ways "Sailor" - are the boats under sail or not? You talk about windshadow one minute and then berate me for ignorance the next because I pointed out that almost all yachts use motors in the river. regarding size, it's beam, not length that predominates in Lymington River - but if you think the enlarged footprint of a single vessel makes that much difference then perhaps we should also ban any increase in yachts and yacht sizes as well. Are you happy to sign up to that? And as to your point about estuarial damage, prove it. Could you compare that with the tidal suck caused by the Marina basins where your boat may be? Unfortunately you are not only prejudiced but you are also a bigot for prejudging (wrongly) that I know nothing about sailing. As it happens I have been instrumental in stopping my own sailing club from supporting the LRA in its false, selfish and hypocritical aims, which you wholeheartedly support. You are not only ignorant yourself. but something of a hypocrite too.
You can't have it both ways "Sailor" - are the boats under sail or not? You talk about windshadow one minute and then berate me for ignorance the next because I pointed out that almost all yachts use motors in the river. regarding size, it's beam, not length that predominates in Lymington River - but if you think the enlarged footprint of a single vessel makes that much difference then perhaps we should also ban any increase in yachts and yacht sizes as well. Are you happy to sign up to that? And as to your point about estuarial damage, prove it. Could you compare that with the tidal suck caused by the Marina basins where your boat may be? Unfortunately you are not only prejudiced but you are also a bigot for prejudging (wrongly) that I know nothing about sailing. As it happens I have been instrumental in stopping my own sailing club from supporting the LRA in its false, selfish and hypocritical aims, which you wholeheartedly support. You are not only ignorant yourself. but something of a hypocrite too.
Posted by: bacon butty on 12:32pm Wed 3 Sep 08
wow are they so clever, read the arguments carefully they dont have a clue
wow are they so clever, read the arguments carefully they dont have a clue
Posted by: the vengeful cabbage on 12:36pm Wed 3 Sep 08
Yawn who cares how big the ferry is if the company feels it needs this size of ferry to turn a proffit then the economy of Lymigton can hardly afford to force the ferry company out by saying no. To all you yacht loving pims sippers out there what is going to be more annoying
1. A several hundred tonne 60ft high ferry moving very slowly and broadcasting its presence.
or
2. A load more jetskis that would not be put off by the presence of a ferry.
Yawn who cares how big the ferry is if the company feels it needs this size of ferry to turn a proffit then the economy of Lymigton can hardly afford to force the ferry company out by saying no. To all you yacht loving pims sippers out there what is going to be more annoying
1. A several hundred tonne 60ft high ferry moving very slowly and broadcasting its presence.
or
2. A load more jetskis that would not be put off by the presence of a ferry.
Posted by: sailor on 12:43pm Wed 3 Sep 08
[quote][bold]Andy[/bold] wrote:
You can't have it both ways "Sailor" - are the boats under sail or not? You talk about windshadow one minute and then berate me for ignorance the next because I pointed out that almost all yachts use motors in the river. regarding size, it's beam, not length that predominates in Lymington River - but if you think the enlarged footprint of a single vessel makes that much difference then perhaps we should also ban any increase in yachts and yacht sizes as well. Are you happy to sign up to that? And as to your point about estuarial damage, prove it. Could you compare that with the tidal suck caused by the Marina basins where your boat may be? Unfortunately you are not only prejudiced but you are also a bigot for prejudging (wrongly) that I know nothing about sailing. As it happens I have been instrumental in stopping my own sailing club from supporting the LRA in its false, selfish and hypocritical aims, which you wholeheartedly support. You are not only ignorant yourself. but something of a hypocrite too.[/quote] hang on a sec, you said yachts motor in the river because of lack of skill and impatience. I pointed out that neither of these are true, hence the ignorant comment. i'm not suggesting you don't know anything about sailing, i'm suggesting that your previous comments as to why yachts drop their sails are false. and yes i do believe the footprint of one vessel will make a difference, because it is drastically larger than any other vessel using the river. remember, yachts were using lymington river a long time before any ferries turned up. Neither am I ignorant or hypocritical.
Andy wrote:
You can't have it both ways "Sailor" - are the boats under sail or not? You talk about windshadow one minute and then berate me for ignorance the next because I pointed out that almost all yachts use motors in the river. regarding size, it's beam, not length that predominates in Lymington River - but if you think the enlarged footprint of a single vessel makes that much difference then perhaps we should also ban any increase in yachts and yacht sizes as well. Are you happy to sign up to that? And as to your point about estuarial damage, prove it. Could you compare that with the tidal suck caused by the Marina basins where your boat may be? Unfortunately you are not only prejudiced but you are also a bigot for prejudging (wrongly) that I know nothing about sailing. As it happens I have been instrumental in stopping my own sailing club from supporting the LRA in its false, selfish and hypocritical aims, which you wholeheartedly support. You are not only ignorant yourself. but something of a hypocrite too.
hang on a sec, you said yachts motor in the river because of lack of skill and impatience. I pointed out that neither of these are true, hence the ignorant comment. i'm not suggesting you don't know anything about sailing, i'm suggesting that your previous comments as to why yachts drop their sails are false. and yes i do believe the footprint of one vessel will make a difference, because it is drastically larger than any other vessel using the river. remember, yachts were using lymington river a long time before any ferries turned up. Neither am I ignorant or hypocritical.
Posted by: bacon butfy on 12:50pm Wed 3 Sep 08
[quote][bold]bacon butty[/bold] wrote:
Look at that last post by Andy, this is typical of the yotty type of concil scum who think they are something there not, why on this thread has everyone found it nessesary to break out long paragraths and big words...............
...because they are all trying to be something there not.[/quote] the real question is, why do you have such a problem with "big words"? feeling a tad inadequate? you can always ask an adult for help with any words you don't understand
bacon butty wrote:
Look at that last post by Andy, this is typical of the yotty type of concil scum who think they are something there not, why on this thread has everyone found it nessesary to break out long paragraths and big words...............
...because they are all trying to be something there not.
the real question is, why do you have such a problem with "big words"? feeling a tad inadequate? you can always ask an adult for help with any words you don't understand
Posted by: bacon butfy on 12:51pm Wed 3 Sep 08
[quote][bold]Mental Mickey[/bold] wrote:
Correction - they are being something that you're not. [/quote] You mean literate and articulate? Yep, that'd be my guess, too
Mental Mickey wrote:
Correction - they are being something that you're not.
You mean literate and articulate? Yep, that'd be my guess, too
Posted by: southy, redbridge on 12:59pm Wed 3 Sep 08
rlyc will get no backing from me i know to well what they are like.
iow ferry in lymington been there a lot longer than any yacht club.
back in the late 50's and early 60's rlyc broke its own rules by exceding its own max membership limit and registering none local people,just so they could get a yacht basing build built in the 60,s
there is more than enough manouevre room. and if you need more room then you should learn how to sail and learn the rules of the sea.sail-be-for-stea
m do not apply in shipping lanes and channels.has most yachties seem to think.if you cant controll you vessel in a channel then you get out the tender and you tow it in.
most yachties now days are no more than sunday drivers on the water
(andy try spelling d-a-m-n,dam)
rlyc will get no backing from me i know to well what they are like.
iow ferry in lymington been there a lot longer than any yacht club.
back in the late 50's and early 60's rlyc broke its own rules by exceding its own max membership limit and registering none local people,just so they could get a yacht basing build built in the 60,s
there is more than enough manouevre room. and if you need more room then you should learn how to sail and learn the rules of the sea.sail-be-for-stea
m do not apply in shipping lanes and channels.has most yachties seem to think.if you cant controll you vessel in a channel then you get out the tender and you tow it in.
most yachties now days are no more than sunday drivers on the water
(andy try spelling d-a-m-n,dam)
Posted by: bacon butfy on 1:01pm Wed 3 Sep 08
[quote][bold]bacon butty[/bold] wrote:
What did i ever do to you........dont have a go at me cause you were abused as a child, I aint done nothing wrong just airing my veiws minding my own business and you go calling me a name, you are so low, you like the boats do you shall we humour you shall we, daddt let you see big boat id you very good and suck this[/quote] A tantrum. Nice. Dishes out endless abuse, basically starts crying when he gets it back. What a turd
bacon butty wrote:
What did i ever do to you........dont have a go at me cause you were abused as a child, I aint done nothing wrong just airing my veiws minding my own business and you go calling me a name, you are so low, you like the boats do you shall we humour you shall we, daddt let you see big boat id you very good and suck this
A tantrum. Nice. Dishes out endless abuse, basically starts crying when he gets it back. What a turd
Posted by: what on 1:12pm Wed 3 Sep 08
[quote][bold]southy[/bold] wrote:
rlyc will get no backing from me i know to well what they are like. iow ferry in lymington been there a lot longer than any yacht club. back in the late 50's and early 60's rlyc broke its own rules by exceding its own max membership limit and registering none local people,just so they could get a yacht basing build built in the 60,s there is more than enough manouevre room. and if you need more room then you should learn how to sail and learn the rules of the sea.sail-be-for-stea m do not apply in shipping lanes and channels.has most yachties seem to think.if you cant controll you vessel in a channel then you get out the tender and you tow it in. most yachties now days are no more than sunday drivers on the water (andy try spelling d-a-m-n,dam)[/quote] what the??? Can somebody translate this for me. I dont mind that Southys spelling aint allways all that but this is completely unintelligable.
southy wrote:
rlyc will get no backing from me i know to well what they are like. iow ferry in lymington been there a lot longer than any yacht club. back in the late 50's and early 60's rlyc broke its own rules by exceding its own max membership limit and registering none local people,just so they could get a yacht basing build built in the 60,s there is more than enough manouevre room. and if you need more room then you should learn how to sail and learn the rules of the sea.sail-be-for-stea m do not apply in shipping lanes and channels.has most yachties seem to think.if you cant controll you vessel in a channel then you get out the tender and you tow it in. most yachties now days are no more than sunday drivers on the water (andy try spelling d-a-m-n,dam)
what the??? Can somebody translate this for me. I dont mind that Southys spelling aint allways all that but this is completely unintelligable.
Posted by: bacon butfy on 1:14pm Wed 3 Sep 08
[quote][bold]what[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]southy[/bold] wrote:
rlyc will get no backing from me i know to well what they are like. iow ferry in lymington been there a lot longer than any yacht club. back in the late 50's and early 60's rlyc broke its own rules by exceding its own max membership limit and registering none local people,just so they could get a yacht basing build built in the 60,s there is more than enough manouevre room. and if you need more room then you should learn how to sail and learn the rules of the sea.sail-be-for-stea m do not apply in shipping lanes and channels.has most yachties seem to think.if you cant controll you vessel in a channel then you get out the tender and you tow it in. most yachties now days are no more than sunday drivers on the water (andy try spelling d-a-m-n,dam)[/quote] what the??? Can somebody translate this for me. I dont mind that Southys spelling aint allways all that but this is completely unintelligable. [/quote] I wouldn't worry about it. most of his posts are just made up anyway
what wrote:
southy wrote:
rlyc will get no backing from me i know to well what they are like. iow ferry in lymington been there a lot longer than any yacht club. back in the late 50's and early 60's rlyc broke its own rules by exceding its own max membership limit and registering none local people,just so they could get a yacht basing build built in the 60,s there is more than enough manouevre room. and if you need more room then you should learn how to sail and learn the rules of the sea.sail-be-for-stea m do not apply in shipping lanes and channels.has most yachties seem to think.if you cant controll you vessel in a channel then you get out the tender and you tow it in. most yachties now days are no more than sunday drivers on the water (andy try spelling d-a-m-n,dam)
what the??? Can somebody translate this for me. I dont mind that Southys spelling aint allways all that but this is completely unintelligable.
I wouldn't worry about it. most of his posts are just made up anyway
Posted by: General Malaise, Nearby on 1:22pm Wed 3 Sep 08
[quote][bold]what[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: rlyc will get no backing from me i know to well what they are like. iow ferry in lymington been there a lot longer than any yacht club. back in the late 50's and early 60's rlyc broke its own rules by exceding its own max membership limit and registering none local people,just so they could get a yacht basing build built in the 60,s there is more than enough manouevre room. and if you need more room then you should learn how to sail and learn the rules of the sea.sail-be-for-stea m do not apply in shipping lanes and channels.has most yachties seem to think.if you cant controll you vessel in a channel then you get out the tender and you tow it in. most yachties now days are no more than sunday drivers on the water (andy try spelling d-a-m-n,dam)[/quote] what the??? Can somebody translate this for me. I dont mind that Southys spelling aint allways all that but this is completely unintelligable. [/quote] You need to check your own grammar and spelling before you start criticising.
Unless you're trying to be ironic.
what wrote:
southy wrote: rlyc will get no backing from me i know to well what they are like. iow ferry in lymington been there a lot longer than any yacht club. back in the late 50's and early 60's rlyc broke its own rules by exceding its own max membership limit and registering none local people,just so they could get a yacht basing build built in the 60,s there is more than enough manouevre room. and if you need more room then you should learn how to sail and learn the rules of the sea.sail-be-for-stea m do not apply in shipping lanes and channels.has most yachties seem to think.if you cant controll you vessel in a channel then you get out the tender and you tow it in. most yachties now days are no more than sunday drivers on the water (andy try spelling d-a-m-n,dam)
what the??? Can somebody translate this for me. I dont mind that Southys spelling aint allways all that but this is completely unintelligable.
You need to check your own grammar and spelling before you start criticising.
Unless you're trying to be ironic.
Posted by: southy, redbridge on 1:32pm Wed 3 Sep 08
General Malaise, Nearby he not being ironic.he one of them people that keep changing there names and cant be counted
General Malaise, Nearby he not being ironic.he one of them people that keep changing there names and cant be counted
Posted by: Iain, Lordshill on 1:44pm Wed 3 Sep 08
[quote][bold]Forest Hump[/bold] wrote:
Sailor's quote "The new ferries pose a problem because they are larger (less room for yachts), taller (more windshadow for those under sail), travel quicker (less time to manouevre) and displace around twice as much water as the former ferries (destroying Lymington River)". Who or what gives sailors the divine right to dictate the right to use Lymington river? You are both pompus and self-rightous. I think the dredging of Lymington Marina has caused more damage than the new ferry could. As for the displacement argument, Andy has already stated it is not proportional to wash generation. Stop being so selfish and think of all the people who truly benefit from this service[/quote] Was ready to compose a comment, then realised that this bloke had said it already, and far better than I'd have been able to articulate.
Forest Hump wrote:
Sailor's quote "The new ferries pose a problem because they are larger (less room for yachts), taller (more windshadow for those under sail), travel quicker (less time to manouevre) and displace around twice as much water as the former ferries (destroying Lymington River)". Who or what gives sailors the divine right to dictate the right to use Lymington river? You are both pompus and self-rightous. I think the dredging of Lymington Marina has caused more damage than the new ferry could. As for the displacement argument, Andy has already stated it is not proportional to wash generation. Stop being so selfish and think of all the people who truly benefit from this service
Was ready to compose a comment, then realised that this bloke had said it already, and far better than I'd have been able to articulate.
Posted by: General Malaise, Nearby on 1:46pm Wed 3 Sep 08
[quote][bold]southy[/bold] wrote:
General Malaise, Nearby he not being ironic.he one of them people that keep changing there names and cant be counted[/quote] Same old me again.
Same old you by the look of it - unintelligible.
southy wrote:
General Malaise, Nearby he not being ironic.he one of them people that keep changing there names and cant be counted
Same old me again.
Same old you by the look of it - unintelligible.
Posted by: Tut tut on 1:52pm Wed 3 Sep 08
[quote][bold]southy[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]Tut tut[/bold] wrote: [quote]yachts were using lymington river a long time before any ferries turned up[/quote] You don\'t own the fricking river mate. Get over it and deal with it. [/quote] tut tut its the other way round the ferry been there longer than any yacht club,the ferry been around for a number hundred years now,first started up by a boat builder and fisherman[/quote] either way, neither of them own it and despite the arguments I'm sure it is big enough for both to go about their business
southy wrote:
Tut tut wrote: yachts were using lymington river a long time before any ferries turned up
You don\'t own the fricking river mate. Get over it and deal with it.
tut tut its the other way round the ferry been there longer than any yacht club,the ferry been around for a number hundred years now,first started up by a boat builder and fisherman
either way, neither of them own it and despite the arguments I'm sure it is big enough for both to go about their business
Posted by: tool on 1:55pm Wed 3 Sep 08
[quote][bold]southy[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]Tut tut[/bold] wrote: [quote]yachts were using lymington river a long time before any ferries turned up[/quote] You don\'t own the fricking river mate. Get over it and deal with it. [/quote] tut tut its the other way round the ferry been there longer than any yacht club,the ferry been around for a number hundred years now,first started up by a boat builder and fisherman[/quote] sailor doesn't say yacht club, he says yachts. the ferry was NOT there before yachts used the river.
southy wrote:
Tut tut wrote: yachts were using lymington river a long time before any ferries turned up
You don\'t own the fricking river mate. Get over it and deal with it.
tut tut its the other way round the ferry been there longer than any yacht club,the ferry been around for a number hundred years now,first started up by a boat builder and fisherman
sailor doesn't say yacht club, he says yachts. the ferry was NOT there before yachts used the river.
Posted by: southy, redbridge on 2:12pm Wed 3 Sep 08
the ferry gets its first mention back in the tudor times.when this area was only used by fisherman,small men-of-warships and merchant shipping only,there was no yachts around in them days.first yachts seen in this country was not till charles II
the ferry gets its first mention back in the tudor times.when this area was only used by fisherman,small men-of-warships and merchant shipping only,there was no yachts around in them days.first yachts seen in this country was not till charles II
Posted by: the vengeful cabbage on 2:30pm Wed 3 Sep 08
[quote][bold]southy[/bold] wrote:
the ferry gets its first mention back in the tudor times.when this area was only used by fisherman,small men-of-warships and merchant shipping only,there was no yachts around in them days.first yachts seen in this country was not till charles II[/quote] Source please
southy wrote:
the ferry gets its first mention back in the tudor times.when this area was only used by fisherman,small men-of-warships and merchant shipping only,there was no yachts around in them days.first yachts seen in this country was not till charles II
Source please
Posted by: southy, redbridge on 2:53pm Wed 3 Sep 08
a book call history of sea vessels vol 5.in there it say's:-Yacht from the Dutch word Jacht, was originally disigned in 1667 and used as a light, fast sailing vessel used by the Dutch navy to pursue pirates,smugglers and other transgressors around and into the shallow waters of the Low Countries. After its selection by Charles II of England as the vessel of choice for his return to Britain from the Netherlands for his restoration, it came to be used to convey important persons.And was used has a pleasure craft from the 1800's
a book call history of sea vessels vol 5.in there it say's:-Yacht from the Dutch word Jacht, was originally disigned in 1667 and used as a light, fast sailing vessel used by the Dutch navy to pursue pirates,smugglers and other transgressors around and into the shallow waters of the Low Countries. After its selection by Charles II of England as the vessel of choice for his return to Britain from the Netherlands for his restoration, it came to be used to convey important persons.And was used has a pleasure craft from the 1800's
Posted by: clair, Solent on 2:58pm Wed 3 Sep 08
I don't know a thing about sailing but its a joy to hear all you know it alls having an educated interested all things 'sails' keep going - I love to hear it.
clair
I don't know a thing about sailing but its a joy to hear all you know it alls having an educated interested all things 'sails' keep going - I love to hear it.
clair
Posted by: King Mush, Woolston on 3:02pm Wed 3 Sep 08
Same old story of the Politics of Envy amongst the sensible posts.
If somebody has the money to buy an expensive yacht and use it around our waters I say good luck to them.
They bring money to the area and all the spin-offs in brokering, mooring,maintenance and much more for the local economy.
We all know about the odd numpty that can hardly handle a paddle boat on Southsea Common then gets into 'difficulties' when jumping into his boat after a night on the gin.
Deal with it you Socialist suckers.
Same old story of the Politics of Envy amongst the sensible posts.
If somebody has the money to buy an expensive yacht and use it around our waters I say good luck to them.
They bring money to the area and all the spin-offs in brokering, mooring,maintenance and much more for the local economy.
We all know about the odd numpty that can hardly handle a paddle boat on Southsea Common then gets into 'difficulties' when jumping into his boat after a night on the gin.
Deal with it you Socialist suckers.
Posted by: General Malaise, Nearby on 3:03pm Wed 3 Sep 08
[quote][bold]clair[/bold] wrote:
I don't know a thing about sailing but its a joy to hear all you know it alls having an educated interested all things 'sails' keep going - I love to hear it. clair[/quote] A kindred spirit for Southy.
Stanley Unwin eat your heart out.
clair wrote:
I don't know a thing about sailing but its a joy to hear all you know it alls having an educated interested all things 'sails' keep going - I love to hear it. clair
A kindred spirit for Southy.
Stanley Unwin eat your heart out.
Posted by: Devil's Advocate on 3:11pm Wed 3 Sep 08
[quote][bold]southy[/bold] wrote:
a book call history of sea vessels vol 5.in there it say's:-Yacht from the Dutch word Jacht, was originally disigned in 1667 and used as a light, fast sailing vessel used by the Dutch navy to pursue pirates,smugglers and other transgressors around and into the shallow waters of the Low Countries. After its selection by Charles II of England as the vessel of choice for his return to Britain from the Netherlands for his restoration, it came to be used to convey important persons.And was used has a pleasure craft from the 1800's[/quote] mmm, so not specific to their usage on Lymington River then?
southy wrote:
a book call history of sea vessels vol 5.in there it say's:-Yacht from the Dutch word Jacht, was originally disigned in 1667 and used as a light, fast sailing vessel used by the Dutch navy to pursue pirates,smugglers and other transgressors around and into the shallow waters of the Low Countries. After its selection by Charles II of England as the vessel of choice for his return to Britain from the Netherlands for his restoration, it came to be used to convey important persons.And was used has a pleasure craft from the 1800's
mmm, so not specific to their usage on Lymington River then?
Posted by: southy, redbridge on 3:21pm Wed 3 Sep 08
[quote]mmm, so not specific to their usage on Lymington River then?[/quote] nope it would of been well after this date would you off seen them in the lymtoning area,and would be still only used has a goverment vessel and not a pleasure craft,was not till the victorian times did yachts start to be used has pleasure craft.
mmm, so not specific to their usage on Lymington River then?
nope it would of been well after this date would you off seen them in the lymtoning area,and would be still only used has a goverment vessel and not a pleasure craft,was not till the victorian times did yachts start to be used has pleasure craft.
Posted by: A Wilson, Broadst on 3:26pm Wed 3 Sep 08
Dr Don Mckenzie is away with the tooth fairies and a nimby and spoiling my fun
Dr Don Mckenzie is away with the tooth fairies and a nimby and spoiling my fun
Posted by: Dave on 3:34pm Wed 3 Sep 08
[quote][bold]southy[/bold] wrote:
[quote]mmm, so not specific to their usage on Lymington River then?[/quote] nope it would of been well after this date would you off seen them in the lymtoning area,and would be still only used has a goverment vessel and not a pleasure craft,was not till the victorian times did yachts start to be used has pleasure craft.[/quote] so when (approx obviously) were ferries used on the Lymington River?
southy wrote:
mmm, so not specific to their usage on Lymington River then?
nope it would of been well after this date would you off seen them in the lymtoning area,and would be still only used has a goverment vessel and not a pleasure craft,was not till the victorian times did yachts start to be used has pleasure craft.
so when (approx obviously) were ferries used on the Lymington River?
Posted by: sailor sam on 3:36pm Wed 3 Sep 08
Britain excels in yachting, rowing and sailing, and as an avid highly trained do no interferer, I’d say let's not nacy panct interfere, what’s a little slash of water here and there going to do, eh.
Britain excels in yachting, rowing and sailing, and as an avid highly trained do no interferer, I’d say let's not nacy panct interfere, what’s a little slash of water here and there going to do, eh.
Posted by: southy, redbridge on 4:08pm Wed 3 Sep 08
[quote]so when (approx obviously) were ferries used on the Lymington River?[/quote]well in a book first talk about a ferry in lymington river dates it in the tudor times,i think they range from 1485 (henry 7th )to elizabeth 1st (1603)so it be some time in this era
so when (approx obviously) were ferries used on the Lymington River?
well in a book first talk about a ferry in lymington river dates it in the tudor times,i think they range from 1485 (henry 7th )to elizabeth 1st (1603)so it be some time in this era
Posted by: the vengeful cabbage on 4:11pm Wed 3 Sep 08
Ferry well then i say let the yacht loving fools have their own way no commercial ferry to spoil their fun. It will mean noone of the imbred freaks can escape the island which will make me feel much safer.
Ferry well then i say let the yacht loving fools have their own way no commercial ferry to spoil their fun. It will mean noone of the imbred freaks can escape the island which will make me feel much safer.
Posted by: Derek, Dibden Purlieu on 4:27pm Wed 3 Sep 08
[quote]It will mean noone of the imbred freaks can escape the island[/quote]
What about the route to Portsmouth?
It will mean noone of the imbred freaks can escape the island
What about the route to Portsmouth?
Posted by: In the know, Southsea on 4:41pm Wed 3 Sep 08
[quote][bold]Derek[/bold] wrote:
[quote]It will mean noone of the imbred freaks can escape the island[/quote] What about the route to Portsmouth?[/quote] Won't matter anyway once the planning permission for the new bridge has been approved.
Derek wrote:
It will mean noone of the imbred freaks can escape the island
What about the route to Portsmouth?
Won't matter anyway once the planning permission for the new bridge has been approved.
Posted by: harbour master on 5:06pm Wed 3 Sep 08
[quote][bold]bacon butfy[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]what[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]southy[/bold] wrote:
rlyc will get no backing from me i know to well what they are like. iow ferry in lymington been there a lot longer than any yacht club. back in the late 50's and early 60's rlyc broke its own rules by exceding its own max membership limit and registering none local people,just so they could get a yacht basing build built in the 60,s there is more than enough manouevre room. and if you need more room then you should learn how to sail and learn the rules of the sea.sail-be-for-stea m do not apply in shipping lanes and channels.has most yachties seem to think.if you cant controll you vessel in a channel then you get out the tender and you tow it in. most yachties now days are no more than sunday drivers on the water (andy try spelling d-a-m-n,dam)[/quote] what the??? Can somebody translate this for me. I dont mind that Southys spelling aint allways all that but this is completely unintelligable. [/quote] I wouldn't worry about it. most of his posts are just made up anyway[/quote] Spot on.
He makes up stuff. Did it for weeks with Tower Ice Rink fibs but got 100% busted by several posters. Churns out claims with monotonous regularity. They seem at first to be of substance, but when challenged, these spurious claims do not substantially meet the litmus test of truth. His trick is to throw in a small kernel of truth or fact but surround it with fairy stories. Challenges are usually met with even more wooly, vague, unsubstantiated references he cannot prove, and/or attempts to rubbish the challenger or convert the individual challenger in a multi id poster he believes is set on annoying him. He is a 100% fraud. Review his posts. Check them out for yourself. Try nailing him to a hard solid fact. You will grow old in the process. The folksy writing style masks a smart intelligent articulate person who for some reason cannot be honest.
bacon butfy wrote:
what wrote:
southy wrote:
rlyc will get no backing from me i know to well what they are like. iow ferry in lymington been there a lot longer than any yacht club. back in the late 50's and early 60's rlyc broke its own rules by exceding its own max membership limit and registering none local people,just so they could get a yacht basing build built in the 60,s there is more than enough manouevre room. and if you need more room then you should learn how to sail and learn the rules of the sea.sail-be-for-stea m do not apply in shipping lanes and channels.has most yachties seem to think.if you cant controll you vessel in a channel then you get out the tender and you tow it in. most yachties now days are no more than sunday drivers on the water (andy try spelling d-a-m-n,dam)
what the??? Can somebody translate this for me. I dont mind that Southys spelling aint allways all that but this is completely unintelligable.
I wouldn't worry about it. most of his posts are just made up anyway
Spot on.
He makes up stuff. Did it for weeks with Tower Ice Rink fibs but got 100% busted by several posters. Churns out claims with monotonous regularity. They seem at first to be of substance, but when challenged, these spurious claims do not substantially meet the litmus test of truth. His trick is to throw in a small kernel of truth or fact but surround it with fairy stories. Challenges are usually met with even more wooly, vague, unsubstantiated references he cannot prove, and/or attempts to rubbish the challenger or convert the individual challenger in a multi id poster he believes is set on annoying him. He is a 100% fraud. Review his posts. Check them out for yourself. Try nailing him to a hard solid fact. You will grow old in the process. The folksy writing style masks a smart intelligent articulate person who for some reason cannot be honest.
Posted by: Mr P. Correct, Southampton on 5:09pm Wed 3 Sep 08
What does palpably mean? What is a Dibden Purlieu?
What does palpably mean? What is a Dibden Purlieu?
Posted by: southy, redbridge on 5:26pm Wed 3 Sep 08
harbour master aka local aka loads of other names.you never like it since i prove you wrong over a dock matter.keep changing your name to try and make look bad will not help you at all,keep to the one name and stand and be counted and stop putting words in to my mouth and slighty changing words in quotes.i not the first person you done this to and i dought if i be the last
harbour master aka local aka loads of other names.you never like it since i prove you wrong over a dock matter.keep changing your name to try and make look bad will not help you at all,keep to the one name and stand and be counted and stop putting words in to my mouth and slighty changing words in quotes.i not the first person you done this to and i dought if i be the last
Posted by: Dean, Lymington on 5:29pm Wed 3 Sep 08
[quote][bold]sailor[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]Andy[/bold] wrote: With regard to the RLYC's comments about sailing on the river, when we sailed to Yarmouth two Saturdays ago on Cenred every single yacht bar one wayfarer (outside the channel marker posts anyway) was under power, not under sail and all the yachts only put sails up as they neared Jack-in-the-Basket. This is not because of the ferries, this is because the yachties are either not skilled enough or are just too imaptient to get out to the Solent as quickly as possible. I challenge the LRA and the RLYC to deny that this is normal for Lymington River and pretty much always has been.[/quote] Ignorant statement. Sailors drop their sails on entrance to the river (which officially starts at Jack in the Basket) because it is more controlled to motor down the narrow, bendy, shallow river, not because of lack of skill or impatience. There is a speed limit in the river of 6 knots anyway which most yachts could do under sail. Dinghies (such as a Wayfarer, sail down the river because they are more manoeuvrable and they have no engines. When the Royal Lymington refers to sailing in the river it means the use of the river by all craft, not explicitly travelling down the river with sails up.[/quote] That's not the case is it when yacht racing is underway, as far as i recall i have seen many a yacht 'sailing' up the river on Thursday evenings causing mayhem to other river users. The yachts don't worry about the mayhem they cause to others, now that the ferries are here they are getting a taste of their own medicine. Notice no one worries about the over development in Lymington!!
sailor wrote:
Andy wrote: With regard to the RLYC's comments about sailing on the river, when we sailed to Yarmouth two Saturdays ago on Cenred every single yacht bar one wayfarer (outside the channel marker posts anyway) was under power, not under sail and all the yachts only put sails up as they neared Jack-in-the-Basket. This is not because of the ferries, this is because the yachties are either not skilled enough or are just too imaptient to get out to the Solent as quickly as possible. I challenge the LRA and the RLYC to deny that this is normal for Lymington River and pretty much always has been.
Ignorant statement. Sailors drop their sails on entrance to the river (which officially starts at Jack in the Basket) because it is more controlled to motor down the narrow, bendy, shallow river, not because of lack of skill or impatience. There is a speed limit in the river of 6 knots anyway which most yachts could do under sail. Dinghies (such as a Wayfarer, sail down the river because they are more manoeuvrable and they have no engines. When the Royal Lymington refers to sailing in the river it means the use of the river by all craft, not explicitly travelling down the river with sails up.
That's not the case is it when yacht racing is underway, as far as i recall i have seen many a yacht 'sailing' up the river on Thursday evenings causing mayhem to other river users. The yachts don't worry about the mayhem they cause to others, now that the ferries are here they are getting a taste of their own medicine. Notice no one worries about the over development in Lymington!!
Posted by: harbour master on 5:44pm Wed 3 Sep 08
[quote][bold]southy[/bold] wrote:
harbour master aka local aka loads of other names.you never like it since i prove you wrong over a dock matter.keep changing your name to try and make look bad will not help you at all,keep to the one name and stand and be counted and stop putting words in to my mouth and slighty changing words in quotes.i not the first person you done this to and i dought if i be the last[/quote]
[bold]QED[/bold]
southy wrote:
harbour master aka local aka loads of other names.you never like it since i prove you wrong over a dock matter.keep changing your name to try and make look bad will not help you at all,keep to the one name and stand and be counted and stop putting words in to my mouth and slighty changing words in quotes.i not the first person you done this to and i dought if i be the last
QED Posted by: Bright Spark, Southampton Water on 5:48pm Wed 3 Sep 08
I think you mean [bold]QE2[/bold]
Posted by: southy, redbridge on 5:51pm Wed 3 Sep 08
QED well that do explane a lot,they could never get any thing right.and never did like to be proved wrong.
tell ya what QED take a look on your site that you like to quote from so often
http://en.wikipedia.
org/wiki/Yacht
theres a little bit of yacht history there but it far from compleat
QED well that do explane a lot,they could never get any thing right.and never did like to be proved wrong.
tell ya what QED take a look on your site that you like to quote from so often
http://en.wikipedia.
org/wiki/Yacht
theres a little bit of yacht history there but it far from compleat
Posted by: Claire, Hanworth on 6:16pm Wed 3 Sep 08
OUCH!!!! Southy that must of hurt him.http://en.wikipe
dia.
org/wiki/Yacht
[quote]Yacht (pronounced /ˈjɑː
t/, from Dutch Jacht meaning hunting, compare German Jagd) was originally defined as a light, fast sailing vessel used by the Dutch navy to pursue pirates and other transgressors around and into the shallow waters of the Low Countries. After its selection by Charles II of England as the vessel of choice for his return to Britain from the Netherlands for his restoration, it came to be used to convey important persons.
Later, the word came to designate a wider range of vessels, almost always in private use (i.e. not used for commercial carriage of cargo or passengers), propelled by sail, power, or both, and used for pleasure cruising or racing.[/quote]
OUCH!!!! Southy that must of hurt him.http://en.wikipe
dia.
org/wiki/Yacht
Yacht (pronounced /ˈjɑː
t/, from Dutch Jacht meaning hunting, compare German Jagd) was originally defined as a light, fast sailing vessel used by the Dutch navy to pursue pirates and other transgressors around and into the shallow waters of the Low Countries. After its selection by Charles II of England as the vessel of choice for his return to Britain from the Netherlands for his restoration, it came to be used to convey important persons.
Later, the word came to designate a wider range of vessels, almost always in private use (i.e. not used for commercial carriage of cargo or passengers), propelled by sail, power, or both, and used for pleasure cruising or racing.
Posted by: Grace Darling, soton on 7:08pm Wed 3 Sep 08
A ship carrying blue paint collided with a ship carrying red paint. The crews were marooned - ha ha !
A ship carrying blue paint collided with a ship carrying red paint. The crews were marooned - ha ha !
Posted by: Grace Darling, soton on 7:09pm Wed 3 Sep 08
A ship carrying blue paint collided with a ship carrying red paint. The crews were marooned - ha ha !
A ship carrying blue paint collided with a ship carrying red paint. The crews were marooned - ha ha !
Posted by: go ferry go, southampton on 7:47pm Wed 3 Sep 08
THIS IS FOR EVERYONE WHO HAS MOANED ABOUT THIS NEW FERRY
[bold]STOP LIVING IN THE PAST AND MOVE FORWARD[/bold]
NOW PLEASE STOP MOANING
THIS IS FOR EVERYONE WHO HAS MOANED ABOUT THIS NEW FERRY
STOP LIVING IN THE PAST AND MOVE FORWARD
NOW PLEASE STOP MOANING
Posted by: Dock Worker, Port on 7:51pm Wed 3 Sep 08
Hahaha, lol! Wait until those yotties hear about us in the docks buying up the harbour and dredging it so we can get our big boats in!!! We won't rest until we've completely ravaged the coast for industry!! Mwahhhh
Hahaha, lol! Wait until those yotties hear about us in the docks buying up the harbour and dredging it so we can get our big boats in!!! We won't rest until we've completely ravaged the coast for industry!! Mwahhhh
Posted by: Mr P. Correct, Southampton on 7:52pm Wed 3 Sep 08
[quote][bold]Grace Darling[/bold] wrote:
A ship carrying blue paint collided with a ship carrying red paint. The crews were marooned - ha ha ![/quote] That joke was funny 30 years ago, and both times tonight ha ha!
Grace Darling wrote:
A ship carrying blue paint collided with a ship carrying red paint. The crews were marooned - ha ha !
That joke was funny 30 years ago, and both times tonight ha ha!
Posted by: harbour master on 8:03pm Wed 3 Sep 08
[quote][bold]southy[/bold] wrote:
QED well that do explane a lot,they could never get any thing right.and never did like to be proved wrong.
tell ya what QED take a look on your site that you like to quote from so often
http://en.wikipedia.
org/wiki/Yacht
theres a little bit of yacht history there but it far from compleat[/quote] QED = quod erat demonstrantum
quod erat demonstrantum = it has been demonstrated you cannot be taken seriously.
I am one person. I am not several people. I certainly am not “george”
Read on . . .
[bold]Posted by: George on 8:22am Mon 1 Sep 08[/bold]
[bold] southy wrote:[/bold]
for you to belive you need to go there your self or are you to lazy to get out of that chair and look for places.
[bold]george wrote:[/bold]
Come off is, Southy, it doesn't work like that and you know it. He's looked it up, as have I. The ice rink at Tower Park closed down years ago and you know it. Claiming it's there and refusing to accept that anyone else might ever be right about anything is a bit pointless, and saying "go find it", well, now you're just pretending you're flat-out denying. Or have you moved on from custom-fitted definitions of the word "conjecture" to re-defining the word "exists"? Come on, Southy, there's no ice rink at Tower Park and you know it. Just admit it!
[bold]Posted by: southy, redbridge[/bold] on 12:34pm Mon 1 Sep 08
its still there george,and the only way is to get your coat on and take drive down there.you can see it from the fittness center,whitch is where i go 1 mth for there warm swimming pool.weather if it was going to be closed down or closed for refrubishment that i cant tell you,but people who just quote from the internet is going to give out wrong info a lot of the time,thats why all web sites have disclamers for,old ibm saying rubbish in and rubbish out
[bold]Posted by: George[/bold] on 12:55pm Mon 1 Sep 08
[bold]george wrote[/bold] :
Ah, the old "the Internet is wrong" get-out. Well, I just phoned Tower Park and asked about their ice rink, and was told that they had one years ago but it's no longer there. Nor is there one in the vicinity. So presumably this is all just some massive conspiracy to keep details of this ice rink secret from everyone, is it? The defence rests.
PS. The quote "rubbish in, rubbish out" is actually "garbage in, garbage out" and it isn't an IBM slogan, it was a term used by someone who at one point was an IBM engineer, but he really got it from Charles Babbage. If you're gonna hide the truth behind a soundbite, make sure you've got the right soundbite
[bold]Posted by: George[/bold] on 3:17pm Mon 1 Sep 08
[bold]southy wrote:[/bold]
sorry you are right there it is garbage and not rubbish.but george drive down there and come in from the by pass end and not town end
[bold]George wrote:[/bold]
Sorry Southy, I'm not going on some fools errand because you're in denial. Unless there's some gateway to an alternative reality at that end of Poole, I'm doubtful it'll yield any new results. There is no ice rink there, it's been confirmed by a real, actual human being who is there, and in a position to know. Not some website you can dismiss as being "wrong" because it's on the Internet. An actual employee of the leisure facility in question. You're making stuff up, pure and simple, and even when caught out on this, you still persist. If there was a way to shake ones head in baffled pity over the Internet, I'd employ it right now. I can only hope that this is mere stubbornness on your part, and not an actual delusion.
So there it is, readers. The reason this ice rink campaign is doomed to failure. Those behind it have repeatedly proven they're not in the least bit concerned with factual information, reality, or truth. Some ice-rink "facts" for you:
1) 5000 people out of 204,000 is a landslide. Those who did not sign the petition, would have, had they not not signed it. Or something
2) The result "7-3" by an ice hockey team is irrefutable proof that an ice rink would be economically viable
3) The word "conjecture" has a different meaning, dependent upon whether it is applied to ice rinks or not
4) Anything other than a flat-out denial of a proposal can be considered a "100% success"
5) Anyone who follows a sport on TV would actively participate in it, if the facility existed in the local area
6) There is an ice rink in Tower Park, Poole. The fact that it has not actually existed for the best part of twenty years is irrelevant. It exists nonetheless, but is being kept a secret by all involved, for reasons that are yet to be adequately explored
7) Anyone who concerns themselves with concrete facts, rather than whimsy, has a negative attitude. Probably linked to the fact that cartoon characters don't realise they're walking on thin air until they actually measure this fact. It's amazing what one can accomplish when one is ignorant of outside limitations. Apparently
8) If one wishes for something hard enough, and ones heart is pure, rational arguments are utterly meaningless
9) The only way a campaign can fail, is if an equal and opposite campaign to the contrary succeeds. Quite how this paradox manifests itself is as yet unknown.
10) The Internet is wrong, except in situations where it can be shown to support an ice rink in Southampton
Quite an amazing amount of denial, really
[bold]Posted by: George[/bold] on 4:58pm Mon 1 Sep 08
[bold]southy wrote[/bold] :
you mean the call centre for the company that runs tower park,if you want evidence drive down there on the last firday of the mth and i pay for your fuel
[bold]george wrote:[/bold]
Last Friday of the month? Sorry, can't make it. I'm taking my magic carpet to the new intergalactic hypermarket on the Moon. My unicorn needs re-hoofing.
It ain't there. I spoke to them. Not a call centre. An actual employee at Tower Park. Why would there be absolutely no way of finding this ice rink, other than by some mysterious directions known only to you? It's not in the back of a wardrobe is it? Fancy some Turkish Delight?
[bold]Posted by: George[/bold] on 7:21pm Mon 1 Sep 08
[bold]southy wrote:[/bold]
i was refering to the multi names that local use.
any way it dont matter about tower park,i know there is one,i will ask question about it next time i down there.any way look at it like this if theres not one there then that makes southampton ice rink even more viable and more likey to make a bigger profit has this would increase the size of the catchment area
[bold]george wrote:[/bold]
It does matter! You've been using that non-existent ice rink in your arguments for weeks. I just googled +"poole park" +"ice rink". Guess what the first hit was? Another Echo story where you claim you take people to this massively profitable ice rink at Tower Park about once a month.
http://www.dailyecho
.co.uk/mostpopular.v
ar.2432571.mostcomme
nted.ice_rink_dream_
up_to_developers.php
Then there's a story from the Bournemouth Echo about a Bournemouth lass lamenting that she'll never be an Olympic skater unless Bournemouth gets an ice rink. Apparently, the nearest one is....Gosport, 52 miles away.
http://www.bournemou
thecho.co.uk/mostpop
ular.var.1761735.mos
tviewed.ria_turns_up
_heat_on_ice_rink_de
bate.php
That's 2 stories on the first google page alone. One claims you go to an ice rink in Bournemouth/Poole on a regular basis, the other is from an Olympic hopeful from that same area who can't find an ice rink within 50 miles! Now you're trying to back-pedal a bit here, saying it doesn't matter, and maybe there isn't one after all, but the first thing you find when searching for "poole park ice rink" is you claiming you go there all the time! You're quite clearly making this stuff up! There's little point carrying on the charade any longer
[bold]Posted by: George[/bold] on 7:29pm Mon 1 Sep 08
Here's another one from the Bournemouth Echo. A load of people bemoaning that they have to travel to Gosport or Basingstoke to ice skate. Why would they have to, when there's one right there in Tower Park?
http://www.bournemou
thecho.co.uk/mostpop
ular.var.2084608.mos
tcommented.operator_
in_bid_for_permanent
_ice_rink.php
And a petition for an ice rink in Bournemouth
http://www.ipetition
s.com/petition/iceri
nk4bournemouth/
And another story lamenting the closure of the ice rink in 1991
http://www.thisisdor
set.net/display.var.
920399.0.0.php
And a press release from Bournemouth Borough Council about the possibility of maybe opening an ice rink in Bournemouth
http://www.bournemou
th.gov.uk/News/press
_office/Press_Releas
es/May_2008/ice_rink
.asp
Seems odd that all these people are so desperate for an ice rink in Bournemouth, when there's one a coupe of miles up the road in Tower Park
southy wrote:
QED well that do explane a lot,they could never get any thing right.and never did like to be proved wrong.
tell ya what QED take a look on your site that you like to quote from so often
http://en.wikipedia.
org/wiki/Yacht
theres a little bit of yacht history there but it far from compleat
QED = quod erat demonstrantum
quod erat demonstrantum = it has been demonstrated you cannot be taken seriously.
I am one person. I am not several people. I certainly am not “george”
Read on . . .
Posted by: George on 8:22am Mon 1 Sep 08
southy wrote:
for you to belive you need to go there your self or are you to lazy to get out of that chair and look for places.
george wrote:
Come off is, Southy, it doesn't work like that and you know it. He's looked it up, as have I. The ice rink at Tower Park closed down years ago and you know it. Claiming it's there and refusing to accept that anyone else might ever be right about anything is a bit pointless, and saying "go find it", well, now you're just pretending you're flat-out denying. Or have you moved on from custom-fitted definitions of the word "conjecture" to re-defining the word "exists"? Come on, Southy, there's no ice rink at Tower Park and you know it. Just admit it!
Posted by: southy, redbridge on 12:34pm Mon 1 Sep 08
its still there george,and the only way is to get your coat on and take drive down there.you can see it from the fittness center,whitch is where i go 1 mth for there warm swimming pool.weather if it was going to be closed down or closed for refrubishment that i cant tell you,but people who just quote from the internet is going to give out wrong info a lot of the time,thats why all web sites have disclamers for,old ibm saying rubbish in and rubbish out
Posted by: George on 12:55pm Mon 1 Sep 08
george wrote :
Ah, the old "the Internet is wrong" get-out. Well, I just phoned Tower Park and asked about their ice rink, and was told that they had one years ago but it's no longer there. Nor is there one in the vicinity. So presumably this is all just some massive conspiracy to keep details of this ice rink secret from everyone, is it? The defence rests.
PS. The quote "rubbish in, rubbish out" is actually "garbage in, garbage out" and it isn't an IBM slogan, it was a term used by someone who at one point was an IBM engineer, but he really got it from Charles Babbage. If you're gonna hide the truth behind a soundbite, make sure you've got the right soundbite
Posted by: George on 3:17pm Mon 1 Sep 08
southy wrote:
sorry you are right there it is garbage and not rubbish.but george drive down there and come in from the by pass end and not town end
George wrote:
Sorry Southy, I'm not going on some fools errand because you're in denial. Unless there's some gateway to an alternative reality at that end of Poole, I'm doubtful it'll yield any new results. There is no ice rink there, it's been confirmed by a real, actual human being who is there, and in a position to know. Not some website you can dismiss as being "wrong" because it's on the Internet. An actual employee of the leisure facility in question. You're making stuff up, pure and simple, and even when caught out on this, you still persist. If there was a way to shake ones head in baffled pity over the Internet, I'd employ it right now. I can only hope that this is mere stubbornness on your part, and not an actual delusion.
So there it is, readers. The reason this ice rink campaign is doomed to failure. Those behind it have repeatedly proven they're not in the least bit concerned with factual information, reality, or truth. Some ice-rink "facts" for you:
1) 5000 people out of 204,000 is a landslide. Those who did not sign the petition, would have, had they not not signed it. Or something
2) The result "7-3" by an ice hockey team is irrefutable proof that an ice rink would be economically viable
3) The word "conjecture" has a different meaning, dependent upon whether it is applied to ice rinks or not
4) Anything other than a flat-out denial of a proposal can be considered a "100% success"
5) Anyone who follows a sport on TV would actively participate in it, if the facility existed in the local area
6) There is an ice rink in Tower Park, Poole. The fact that it has not actually existed for the best part of twenty years is irrelevant. It exists nonetheless, but is being kept a secret by all involved, for reasons that are yet to be adequately explored
7) Anyone who concerns themselves with concrete facts, rather than whimsy, has a negative attitude. Probably linked to the fact that cartoon characters don't realise they're walking on thin air until they actually measure this fact. It's amazing what one can accomplish when one is ignorant of outside limitations. Apparently
8) If one wishes for something hard enough, and ones heart is pure, rational arguments are utterly meaningless
9) The only way a campaign can fail, is if an equal and opposite campaign to the contrary succeeds. Quite how this paradox manifests itself is as yet unknown.
10) The Internet is wrong, except in situations where it can be shown to support an ice rink in Southampton
Quite an amazing amount of denial, really
Posted by: George on 4:58pm Mon 1 Sep 08
southy wrote :
you mean the call centre for the company that runs tower park,if you want evidence drive down there on the last firday of the mth and i pay for your fuel
george wrote:
Last Friday of the month? Sorry, can't make it. I'm taking my magic carpet to the new intergalactic hypermarket on the Moon. My unicorn needs re-hoofing.
It ain't there. I spoke to them. Not a call centre. An actual employee at Tower Park. Why would there be absolutely no way of finding this ice rink, other than by some mysterious directions known only to you? It's not in the back of a wardrobe is it? Fancy some Turkish Delight?
Posted by: George on 7:21pm Mon 1 Sep 08
southy wrote:
i was refering to the multi names that local use.
any way it dont matter about tower park,i know there is one,i will ask question about it next time i down there.any way look at it like this if theres not one there then that makes southampton ice rink even more viable and more likey to make a bigger profit has this would increase the size of the catchment area
george wrote:
It does matter! You've been using that non-existent ice rink in your arguments for weeks. I just googled +"poole park" +"ice rink". Guess what the first hit was? Another Echo story where you claim you take people to this massively profitable ice rink at Tower Park about once a month.
http://www.dailyecho
.co.uk/mostpopular.v
ar.2432571.mostcomme
nted.ice_rink_dream_
up_to_developers.php
Then there's a story from the Bournemouth Echo about a Bournemouth lass lamenting that she'll never be an Olympic skater unless Bournemouth gets an ice rink. Apparently, the nearest one is....Gosport, 52 miles away.
http://www.bournemou
thecho.co.uk/mostpop
ular.var.1761735.mos
tviewed.ria_turns_up
_heat_on_ice_rink_de
bate.php
That's 2 stories on the first google page alone. One claims you go to an ice rink in Bournemouth/Poole on a regular basis, the other is from an Olympic hopeful from that same area who can't find an ice rink within 50 miles! Now you're trying to back-pedal a bit here, saying it doesn't matter, and maybe there isn't one after all, but the first thing you find when searching for "poole park ice rink" is you clai
