Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 77
  1. #31
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Just a few cables from Boulters Lock
    Posts
    12,592

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TT_WO View Post
    Trouble is that if you tip that bucketful in quicker then it used to arrive above Ham Island perhaps it may cause ham island to flood more than it used to. Not a test I would like to carry out in my living room.
    In any case, if there's a bucketful going in at Culham chances are there are many more bucketfuls - or even shed loads - going in at many more places as water drains into the river. In any stretch, the level at the lock head is always shallower than at the lock tail - or is it the other way round? - so there is natural variation in volume as it moves down-river. Bear in mind the river falls some 250 feet or so between Lechlade and Teddington.

    As I think Chris said earlier we have to trust somebody and this seems like an unwinnable argument without some firm evidence.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Oxfordshire
    Posts
    4,216

    Default

    Looks like somebody feels very strongly about it http://www.jubileeriver.co.uk/
    Anybody on here?

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    158

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chris_d View Post
    Not much just my warped sense of humour, Ham Island residents reported flood levels the highest in 60 years!!!! the photo was taken in 2006 a not particularly bad year and the level was close to
    the 60 year old mark, was just trying to illustrate that memories are unreliable especialy when there is an emotional vested interest.
    There are failing memories and emotional vested interest involved here. Earlier in the thread I stated that the jubilee operated at 160 cumecs during the 2003 event, re- reading the independent report following the 2003 event, that should be 144 cumecs this same report concluded that only 2-3mm was added to the levels downstream. The design modelling estimated an increase in downstream level of 40mm. The EA now discount any increase in level downstream.

    The EA report that the flow in the jubilee in this event was 1. The highest since it was built, 2. 180 cumecs, 3. Close to its design capacity (215 cumecs). So what is the maximum capacity that the revised operating procedure allows to flow via the Jubilee?

    The EA report that the jubilee protects 3200 homes in Windsor and Maidenhead I am sure it used to be 1000 homes? Must be my failing memory.

    The EA tell us that the 3 new bypass channels proposed to alleviate flooding downstream of the Jubilee are still very much on the cards but fail to remember that the Government spending review withdrew almost half the money allocated.

    The Atkins report published 2007 raised questions about the design modelling :

    "Studies concluded that the design capacity originally envisaged was not achievable through construction of the works as designed. This has been made clear by the use of improved modelling techniques and the availability of new hydraulic data which have altered the understanding of the influence the River Thames downstream condition has on predicted water levels in the Jubilee River"

    Perhaps those failing memories at Ham Island (excluded from the Independent review) are the best and actual information we have to go on.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    158

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chris_d View Post
    Looks like somebody feels very strongly about it http://www.jubileeriver.co.uk/
    Anybody on here?
    Not me gov!

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Just a few cables from Boulters Lock
    Posts
    12,592

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TT_WO View Post
    re- reading the independent report ....... this same report concluded that only 2-3mm was added to the levels downstream. The design modelling estimated an increase in downstream level of 40mm. The EA now discount any increase in level downstream.
    So we are talking about less than two inches variance between any of these three options which is hardly material in relation to the levels of flooding being discussed. It is, of course possible that someone made an error in activating the Jubilee River. It is also possible that there was a lot more water entering the river than had been the case in earlier events and that regional rainfall may have been different resulting in varying water entry into the river at different places.

    The argument will, no doubt, continue to rage and I doubt we will ever be made aware of any definitive conclusion. One thing I do know for sure - if you live on the edge of the river you are likely to suffer flooding from time to time unless your house is raised sufficiently high above the likely flooding levels. I actually feel a little sorry for Paul Daniels as he was prepared to spend money on raising his property but apparently refused by the planning officers.

    Also, can't remember seeing pictures of the flooding encroaching across Home Park at Windsor previously?
    Last edited by boatone; 18-01-14 at 13:31.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Just a few cables from Boulters Lock
    Posts
    12,592

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Oxfordshire
    Posts
    4,216

    Default

    If the EA are trying to cover up their incompetance they are not very good at it, a look at the predicted flood plains http://watermaps.environment-agency....180065&scale=5 shows Ham Island to be slap bang in the middle of largest area of high flood risk on the entire river.
    Last edited by Chris_d; 18-01-14 at 14:15.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    1,043

    Default

    Highest I've seen it in maidenhead since the jubilee river opened.we were told that over Xmas and new year it was operated manually as the techy bits were broken(hope that's the right way to phrase it),and it was at maximum capacity,fully open.
    Ask the EA?

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Just a few cables from Boulters Lock
    Posts
    12,592

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Flynnbarr View Post
    Ask the EA?
    Whats the point - and I think they are probably busy enough at the moment !

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    158

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chris_d View Post
    If the EA are trying to cover up their incompetance they are not very good at it, a look at the predicted flood plains http://watermaps.environment-agency....180065&scale=5 shows Ham Island to be slap bang in the middle of largest area of high flood risk on the entire river.
    Not really sure what the flood maps prove. Yes Ham island is in the high risk flood area, question is does the operation of the Jubilee increase/decrease the flood return period for this location? The inhabitants clearly think the flood levels are higher because of the jubilee. This should not be dismissed out of hand, these are real life observations as opposed to computer model predictions and when things calm down they should be investigated, this surely will only add to the performance of the modeling tools.

    As I understand it the Ham island residents are not asking that Maidenhead be flooded first but are asking if some of the water should not have been allowed on to the flood plain if this could have been achieved without actually flooding properties in the protected area.

Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 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