Page 1 of 8 123456 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 77
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Henley on Thames
    Posts
    2,449

    Default Jubilee River & Wraysbury floods

    Did anybody else hear the interesting debate on BBC Radio Berks just after 8am this morning? A couple of residents & a very harassed EA official, with a lady from Ham Island saying how the EA should have closed the gates earlier & the real problem was the flood water going down the Jubilee River didn't get a chance to spread across the flood plain before it reached Wraysbury. In her words Ham Island had been sacrificed to save Maidenhead. However, if I heard correctly the point about the floods gates on the Jubilee River having not been closed early enough appears to be an admission it is causing flooding further down. The EA official also talked about a future flood relief channel for the Wraysbury area.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    189

    Default

    I have lived in Wraysbury for 30 years and the only significant flooding I remember is 2003 and now, seems strange how these floods have occurred AFTER the Jubilee River opened and nothing before, except the well known 1947 floods of course. With all the money spent on the Jubilee River you are never going to get any official admitting its use is causing more flooding downstream, they will always provide an 'expert' to counter this assumption.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    242

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GAJ52 View Post
    I have lived in Wraysbury for 30 years and the only significant flooding I remember is 2003 and now, seems strange how these floods have occurred AFTER the Jubilee River opened and nothing before, except the well known 1947 floods of course. With all the money spent on the Jubilee River you are never going to get any official admitting its use is causing more flooding downstream, they will always provide an 'expert' to counter this assumption.
    Does anyone know if the rainfall this time was more or less than in 2003 ?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    189

    Default

    I can't answer that one, the only thing different to 2003 was this time the flooding was quite slow over several hours, in 2003 my garden was flooded significantly within 45 mins to one hour as if there was a sudden surge of water ? Many local people blamed this onto the Jubilee River as it was the first time it was used after construction, but again the EA denied the JR was to blame !!

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Medway
    Posts
    19,987

    Default Tonbridge vs Yalding vs Maidstone

    If Tonbridge gets flooded its because "they " want to save Maidstone/Yalding.
    If Yalding gets it its because all the councillors live in Tonbridge.
    If Maidstone floods its all because......etc etc .
    Yawn.

    If you do not want to get flooded live on a hill...........

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    158

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GAJ52 View Post
    I can't answer that one, the only thing different to 2003 was this time the flooding was quite slow over several hours, in 2003 my garden was flooded significantly within 45 mins to one hour as if there was a sudden surge of water ? Many local people blamed this onto the Jubilee River as it was the first time it was used after construction, but again the EA denied the JR was to blame !!
    After 2010, the operating procedures were changed to open the jubilee in smaller increments in the later stages of a flood event. The flow rate was increased from 145 to 170 cumecs, still a considerable reduction on the design capacity. I understand the flow reached 160 cumecs during the 2003 event, before damage occurred to the structure.

    Could explain the slower rise in water level ?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    242

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TT_WO View Post
    After 2010, the operating procedures were changed to open the jubilee in smaller increments in the later stages of a flood event. The flow rate was increased from 145 to 170 cumecs, still a considerable reduction on the design capacity. I understand the flow reached 160 cumecs during the 2003 event, before damage occurred to the structure.

    Could explain the slower rise in water level ?
    I also understood that the operation of the Jubilee was in incremental steps as TT_WO posted and that to ensure that the capacity was not exceeded the rate of discharge was slowed to ensure that it did not exceed the agreed maximum rate (believed to be 180 cumecs) This showed on the E.A. data station logger at 1200 and 1800 on the 10th January showing 2 rises in levels after the previous falls. Slowing the discharge from the Jubilee to reduce further flooding down river obviously increased levels upstream to Maidenhead and Cookham.

    My own observations suggest that the E.A. lock keepers have handled the situation well under the circumstances but the critical question in my view is whether we had more rain than in 2003 ?
    Last edited by 534l4rk; 15-01-14 at 18:52.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    158

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 534l4rk View Post
    I also understood that the operation of the Jubilee was in incremental steps as TT_WO posted and that to ensure that the capacity was not exceeded the rate of discharge was slowed to ensure that it did not exceed the agreed maximum rate (believed to be 180 cumecs) This showed on the E.A. data station logger at 1200 and 1800 on the 10th January showing 2 rises in levels after the previous falls. Slowing the discharge from the Jubilee to reduce further flooding down river obviously increased levels upstream to Maidenhead and Cookham.

    My own observations suggest that the E.A. lock keepers have handled the situation well under the circumstances but the critical question in my view is whether we had more rain than in 2003 ?
    Is the Taplow guage the data logger station to which you refer?

    I to believe that the operation of the Jubilee river has been managed well this time, compared with the first use in 2003.

    It is seems that you believe (along with many others) that " Slowing the discharge from the Jubilee to/will reduce further flooding down river" this would seem to contradict the EA assertions that the operation of the Jubilee has no detrimental impact down river as the water is the same volume only delivered downstream by another route, ie, had it not been delivered by the Jubilee the same volume of water would have been delivered by the Thames.

    Many riverside dwellers have reported the speed that flood waters increased in height during the 2003 event which does seem to indic

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    158

    Default

    Sorry hit the wrong button, just to finish the sentence;

    Many riverside dwellers have reported the speed that flood waters increased in height during the 2003 event, which does seem to indicate that the route that the water takes does seem to affect the level downstream given that it is the same volume of water!

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    242

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TT_WO View Post
    Is the Taplow guage the data logger station to which you refer?

    I to believe that the operation of the Jubilee river has been managed well this time, compared with the first use in 2003.

    It is seems that you believe (along with many others) that " Slowing the discharge from the Jubilee to/will reduce further flooding down river" this would seem to contradict the EA assertions that the operation of the Jubilee has no detrimental impact down river as the water is the same volume only delivered downstream by another route, ie, had it not been delivered by the Jubilee the same volume of water would have been delivered by the Thames.

    Many riverside dwellers have reported the speed that flood waters increased in height during the 2003 event which does seem to indic
    Taplow – yes. My observations have been made using data from the monitor stations from Oxford and beyond down to Teddington. The subject related to river flooding seems to be controversial. Current thinking seems to support slowing down the rivers rather than speeding up. Whatever, the release of a greater volume at Datchet to my layman way of thinking will increase the likelihood of flooding further down. Certainly, the levels at Maidenhead appear to have been reduced by use of the Jubilee. I still believe the amount of rain compared with 2003 needs to be known.

Page 1 of 8 123456 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Latest YBW News

Find Boats For Sale

to
to