Leaderboard

Oh dear, we were going along quite nicely with everyone more or less playing fair till MJG challenges the rules and mod actions. Does it really matter what the rules are? I think like most folk on here I read the posts which gave rise to the mod action and thought they were a bit off and when I saw that a mod had taken action I thought that was OK. I saw no reason to go and read the rules to see whether what had been done was OK or not. Lets not get back to the days of challenging mod actions. In my view, it was such challenges in the past which led to some folk trying to see how far they could push the boundary and it all got pretty nasty as a result. I like the way we discuss things now and don't want to go back to the bad old days again. Relax, MJG, and enjoy the forum as it is. haggis

It's a sort of paradox that many folk say they are drawn to the canals to get away from the rat race, peace and quiet, more relaxed pace of life etc etc., but this year we have been plagued by the noise of engines and generators in the evenings as people try to recreate the conveniences associated with land based living. Once upon a time people who took to the waterways accepted the limitations of a boat but the march of technology means now if you can afford it you can have it. I met a guy earlier in the year who not only had a 6kw generator on board but also a £1800 fork lift battery - just to power his massive sound system you would love to be moored next to him on a summers evening eh? I have a very quiet engine but it is still not silent and we never run it when moored because I know how even a low level of noise can be intrusive, and people forget that an exhaust note can resonate several boat lengths away when it appears to be silent if you are stood close by. I doubt this is a popular point of view..

I totally agree, the mod came in just at the right point and did exactly the right thing, I would say. This is how the forum should be run, it's what that long drawn out discussion way back was all about.

There's probably a worthwhile debate to be had surrounding the moderation/rules, but in the middle of another thread on another topic isn't the place for it. I would suggest some comments are split off and placed in a thread in the "suggestions" sub-forum. The original moderator input is valid within the subject thread.

I don't think anyone questions the concept of limited liability. What is questionable is the ability of certain people to do pre-pack administrations, sometimes repeatedly, without sanction. George

It's been that peaceful till recently the subject probably never came up. Pearly & Co's entertainment value is as good as ever, but it's not worth getting bothered about. They have most of their fun in the other place, which is nice for them, because just about everyone there thinks the same. Here, we do actually have discussions with people whose opinions differ.

Some sobering facts about water

Ye gods! Nurse, the screens!

Everybody's seen it by now. It has limited application, but may be useful for those who set out to clog up desirable locations, annoy all the other boaters who are out cruising, waste CRT's time and money and spend some time in court.

I don't give a toss what you and those like you think. I'm prepared to stand up to an illegal and systematised abuse by an arrogant unaccountable authority regardless of the consequence. You, and your ilk, would do nothing. If you encountered a person being abused or in distress you would pass on by saying, 'We don't want to get involved do we dear' I don't want your help and I'm not interested in what you think. My complaint was correct; their behaviour was unlawful. None of you can, actually, address what I say you can only respond with inaccurate and nonsensical abuse. BW/CRT, and other abusing authorities get away with it because of people like you. Cowardly bores hiding behind their keyboards incapable of independent original thought or understanding. What are you frightened of?

The greenies you got and who they were from were not really unexpected though? I could have written the list. I don't post to up my greenie tally though.

They appear to :-) . I just like a quiet non confrontational life and I don't think I am alone going by the number of greenies my post got. I just don't want to see CWDF going back to how it was and perhaps we don't need things being stirred up again. During the time when you and others didn't post on here things settled down nicely and quite frankly no matter how necessary you feel it is to ask about rules most of us don't feel it is necessary at all . Please don't rock the CWDF boat haggis

Carry on like that and people will think you are a hobby boater

I singled you out as it was you who first raised the question of rules. Completely unnecessary in my view Haggis

Spark? SPARK!? You make it sound positively benign! The results can be catastrophic! You could weld with such a current and it'll be quite happy to melt your spanner with disastrous results such is the stored energy. There must be a video somewhere on YouTube of someone shorting a 12V battery - and we typically have 4 fully charged ones in parallel, so please don't try it at home! You can isolate the batteries fully - if the lines from the battery bank aren't connected, how much more isolated can you get? Just ensure you disconnect the negative lead from the bank first then it won't cause an arc if you have a little slip with your spanner (we all can) and you do 'touch the hull' because they're at the same potential (but don't do that anyway). That done, you won't have an issue if you have a little slip with your spanner on positive connections either (whether you remove the positive line at the batteries or not) because you're not now creating a circuit. That way you don't need to rely on tape on your spanners for your safety. Whilst proper insulation is essential for unavoidable work on live systems, it's not clever to rely on insulation tape for safety when isolation is perfectly possible. I agree with CH's bottom line. If any the above is not absolutely 'the bleedin' obvious', "don't do it" is exactly what the OP should do.

I must confess to never having read the rules, relying entirely on common sense and the ability to find another topic when things start getting gritty. The moderation seems to have quite a light touch in my experience.

One post does not a discussion make ...

Pardon me but I actually thought we were having quite civilised discussion. The posts that resulted in mod intervention were indeed a bit off and they probably warranted the action taken. It was actually at that point that the thread took a bit 'of a turn' and I don't have any issue with the action taken (ie the warning given) should you be in any doubt. All the subsequent posts were actually perfectly polite with some disagreement and with no abuse or insults thrown, so I fail to see why you singled me out for criticism. The suggestion that the wording on the R&G's be changed is really not that bad is it?

I was looking at replacing 2 of my batteries (you may recall the CO alarm thread where the shorting cell set off the alarm) Type 625 batteries (rated 200-210-230Ah depending on make/supplier) One source quoted the battery weight at 32 kgs, another source quoted the weight at 57 kgs. Whilst Vetus batteries may have the same high mark-up as their other parts, there are certainly differences to be had in batteries and some investigation is needed before purchase. To me, battery 'quality' is to a great extent determined by weight - more lead is good !!

That is incorrect I'm afraid. The site owner and moderators will discuss problems privately and individually but NOT in the open forum - possibly covers it. The moderation team will not discuss disciplinary actions within any publicly accessible forums. - Almost certainly does. As I say all is required is a simple change of wording.

Not a very good analogy I would suggest. In a court (in the UK and some other countries at least) you have the opportunity to defend yourself and put your case publicly before you are sanctioned, unless of course you are pleading guilty to the 'offence'. In most sanctioning systems on internet forums to publicly 'plead your case' would bring you in further breach of the rules. People can then make their own minds up as to whether the sanction by a court is fair, that can't happen here as there is neither the time nor resources to do this. All I am really suggesting is that if the policy re naming and shaming has changed then the forum rules and guidelines should be reworded to reflect this.

I didn't know Vetus sold batteries. Are they gold plated like the rest of their stuff? Like everything else Vetus, you can probably get an equivalent for 1/4 of the price.

Why would anyone knowingly inveigle themselves with Vetus once they know the price implications across a whole range of equipment and spares? 99.999% sure they will only be re-badged as Vetus.

Indeed! You have just taken me back 50 years to my HNC in civil engineering! George

A bit of a problem because some people would see that contact as a threat.

Absolutely. I'm with W C Fields on this one.

I'd go back to Martin again if I needed more work doing, wouldn't hesitate to recommend him to others either, but then I may be biased as he has already done a great job on my boat!

Interesting. From the forum R&G's Members who are deemed to have breached the site ethos, rules and guidelines, or who otherwise incite disruption of CWDF will be reprimanded accordingly and will receive notification via the warning system, personal message or both. The action taken may range from an informal notification (zero point warning) to an outright ban. Your warning level is only visible to yourself and the site staff. So that is not quite correct is it?

I always under stood warning points awarded on here were a matter between the moderators and the member concerned, when did this change please?

The pope?

So why bother to post in a discussion forum? Best stick to your own website where you can make your arguments at leisure - better still, build a forum into it so proper discussion can take place there on the topics of your choice and people can interract with you directly.

The brief KL.FM article I linked to says: Officers had to close off the road while they recovered the lorry from the river. Personally I'd rather believe our man near the spot (nbfiresprite "Somewhere in the Fens") than a local radio reporter, as all professional journalism seems to be done down to a budget these days. Or are they both right, the police recovered the lorry then threw it back like anglers do?

I think your prices are very reasonable even including crane prices. If we needed any major work doing on our boat you would definitely be at the top of or list. Tom

A desire to understand the rules/law and do things correctly and safely is, for me, part of the interest in boating. Understanding rules and keeping safe is not particularly different to life in general . If you are a regular on the Trent I am very surprised you don't posses a VHF radio or a lifejacket. The VHF radio is useful. It often can help build a picture of boat movements that a phone call cannot deliver . As for not wearing a lifejacket on the tidal Trent I think you are in a minority. Presumably you dont like obeying rules of any sort which is why you are drawn to the waterways in an attempt to escape from civilisation?

Our local coal boats have occasionally received warning notifications due to using the same places to load, the Crt operative logging details obviously unaware of the necessities of their business, wrongly assuming they had been static in that position more than two weeks. Easily sorted out by relaying the correct information though.

Oh but it is! A number of years ago we were camping in France. It was a lovely evening. We were sitting outside the tent, enjoying the last of the day, glass or two of wine etc. The people in the caravan opposite called their children in, erected an aerial, started a petrol generator and sat down to watch their TV. Grrrrrrrrrrr!!!!!!! GENERATORS ARE EVIL AND MUST BE DESTROYED (The poster fully understands that other views are available)

What do you call " Silent " I have been parked next to several " Silent " pain in the butt gennies over the years humming away at 10pm why do you need to generate electricity after 8pm? Speaking as a long term liveaboard we never find it necessary to do so and never have flat batteries. Just sayin like not having a go b4 someone jumps on me. We have a dometic travelpower on the main engine this does all the heavy work if needed during battery charging during the day and leaves us with fully charged batteries always by 8pm which does everything for many hours.

If you won't visit the site to see what has been put then why are you having an input on the content that you haven't read?

Utterly amazing that people clearly state they HAVE NOT read the link but feel free to adversely comment on it's content, and on the poster's honestly held views. In the same post to also declare that in view of who posted, the post would be biased against C&RT, is gob smacking. Even those with experience of working with C&RT have acknowledged and recognised the truth of the views expressed. Rog

You seem so very keen on visiting often Graham, why not post where he has a 'right to reply'?

And far more than one (your boat) work perfectly well with two or more baffles, in some case vertical so that should be good enough for you also, but it appears it isn't? According to your original posts an extra baffler would cause overheating on the grounds the engine water pump would not be powerful enough to overcome the extra resistance to flow. As Engines Plus have in the past and may still supplied the majority of new hireboat engines any that followed the mariniser's advice would be overheating according to you. They are patently not, even the ones that were allowed to do the London and Thames rings. This indicates that either the builders ignored Engines Plus's advice or your conclusions about baffles and resistance are wrong. I leave it to other readers to decide which is likely to be closer to the truth. It is my view that you have a tendency to read something, do it, and if it works take what you read as 100% correct. That's fine for you but when you then try to use that limited experience to advise others then, again in my view, you are in the wrong. No one has a problem with the Beta design because it will work but it may be sub optimal. I could reply in the same way and say if you have a problem with the Engines Plus design take it up with them but my experience tells me its a pointless remark to make. I do have a major problem when you mislead other people (in my view), criticise very experienced and well regarded people and then try to justify your conduct by quoting a single internet source. That is not good enough for me.

Neil 2 may not not be "the Eyes" of the Forum but I am probably not alone in considering you as often Impolite and expressing opinions that you do not have practical experience of .

Dear Black Rose being as you state most people haven’t heard of me prior to this forum perhaps you might like a potted history of my work life In 1967 I started working for Kearney and Treacker in Brighton and did a four year apprenticeship as a Fabricator welder passsing EITB courses with credits and City and Guilds fabricaton and welding courses with credit I moved to Northampton for personal reasons in 1973 and was offered a position with Hancock and Lane in Daventry and began a further apprenticeship in steel boat building I worked up through the ranks to become a leading hand I have built boats for notable companies ie Peter Nicholls yacht builders. G &J Reeves Probuild narrow boats and Steelcraft during this time I have been involved in the construction of over 100 boats I decided that I would like to finish by running my own company Kedian Engineering I bring over 45 yers of experience to this forum and am happy to share that if asked Thank you for your interest in my journey and for your comments on this forum which I take on board and read with interest Martin

The first thing to say is that the answer is "it all depends upon what you are going to do with it" The second is that most people measure engine size in hp, but for driving a prop torque and rpm are more important. A 72ft fully laden working boat with traditional engine may only have had perhaps 5 to 10 hp, but it had massive torque so (when matched to the correct prop - a very important issue) it would probably pull most of our modern 35 to 45 hp engined boats backwards. On a narrow canal where pushing the water in front of you is probably the most speed limiting factor I would suggest 5hp would be more than ample (might not stop too well) - Waterways World published an article years ago that said a 60ft boat only needs abort 2hp at canal speed. On deep, wide waters where wave making (in the absence of a speed limit) is the limiting factor you would need a far larger engine to attain maximum speed which may be about 8 or 9 knots in theory. Anther factor to consider is smoothness/lack of vibration. On flexibly mounted engines this would typically indicate a 4 cylinder (or 3 with internal balance weights) and the lower hp engines tend to have less than four cylinders. On the other hand very small NBs tend to use one or two cylinder engines simply to save on space. If I was going to spend a lot of time on tidal rivers (which are also subject to floods) I would probably specify something around 50hp for up to about 58 ft, for mixed use with summer visits to rivers and very occasional tidal use I would go for something a little above 30hp. I suspect most people would find 35 hp with a well matched prop adequate. But they would all still only be delivering that 2 or 3 hp at canal speed! Tony Brooks