Leaderboard

I used these videos to learn how to make my dinette cushions I am now making shaped ones for my bow seating Rick

I live very close to a canal and I often meet the CRT guys on the CUT working when I am out for a walk, almost all the folks I have met are friendly and have a "can do will do" attitude to fixing problems and maintenance. What I do hear a lot is frustration because they are severely understaffed, they know very well what work should be done, but they don't have the resources /manpower to carry out the work. I was talking to a CRT employee a couple of weeks ago (yep, stopping him from working) and he listed around 12 priority jobs that needed doing on the 4.5 mile stretch he was working on, of those listed, the time he had been allocated for the work would allow him to fix less than a quarter of the problems, he predicted that of the problems that he couldn't fix, several could easily lead to closure and emergency repair in the very near future. so he knew full well what work needs to be done and also that he can't do it. Despite this, he was clearly trying to do the best job he could, to the point that he was waiting for a work group to turn up on their way back from another job to help him fix a problem on a lock gate he couldn't manage on his own, this was at around 5 PM, when I got back 1/2 hour later, the other gang had turned up and they were still working on the fix. The guy I spoke was chuffed he been made a permanent employee after the winter and clearly determined to do the best job he could. I only speak as I find, my thoughts are, great guys, doing the best they can in a no win situation. Whilst I have been out cruising I have come across CRT workers with contrary behaviour and attitudes, we all have good days, bad days, what I also know, is many of the CRT workers do follow the canal forums, I would not like to think we are criticizing CRT employees without proper cause, coz it' wouldn't be helping to improve attitude/motivation.

Little Bump - How's the research going? Yes, The Caley is beautiful and unique and makes everything better; but I can't say that I'm biased in any way at all. Inverness is a little different from London but we also have quite wide locks and a huge variety of boats. https://www.scottishcanals.co.uk/canals/caledonian-canal/ https://www.undiscoveredscotland.co.uk/inverness/caledoniancanal/index.html

I think your train of thought is somewhat purist, or academic at least. It could easily be argued that THEOPHILUS lost 'any resemblance to a Middle boat' on its conversion to an ice breaking tug in 1942. Like all other existing 'historic' boats THEOPHILUS has since been subject to alteration suitable to its owners requirements, and this has included removal of the original cabin / engine room, at least two engine changes (with another in the pipeline), and multiple owners who have seen it used as an ice breaking tug / hire cruiser / pleasure cruiser / house boat / restoration project - with each owner making their 'mark' in its development to what it is today. Absolute and detailed historical restoration is a fairly recent addition to the 'historic' narrow boat world and I can count on my fingers those boatyards that are successful in this, but then all but the most dedicated owners cringe at the cost !!!! Restoration project is the part of THEOPHILUS's history that you are criticising, but what does this mean as most 'historic' boats have been subject to this at least once. Any restoration is going to be governed by a multitude of points, such as costs / time / who is doing the work (owner or boatyard) / skill availability / boatyard availability / availability of missing parts / interpretation e.t.c.. There are numerous 'historic' boats that have been restored in the past in a way that is easily criticised - but were of their time and certainly not how the specialist boatyards would do it now. Equally there are specialist boatyards now carrying out restorations that look O.K. but are not historically correct, but in the main the owners seem happy with them (there are exceptions). To be honest as good as Grand Union Canal Carrying Company Ltd. boats were when built, and they were far superior to anything else of the period, I would not want mine to replicate every aspect - and it will not do as I do not want to erase 82 years of history - some good and some not so good. As to the value of any boat the seller will always start off speculatively, but ultimately the market will decide

Indeed, as a CCer who has "ranged" around 50 miles in the last 9 months I also don't need to know (my interpretation of range being the duck-paddle distance from the two most distant points). In fact, I'd hazard to say that the point of the vagueness of CaRT's rules are that "if you have to ask, it's not enough". Two points, the furthest apart over the course of the year. It only makes sense. Are we not talking about CCers? What's your definition of CCers and how does it differ from CaRT's minimum guidelines? How far must a CCer travel before you'd consider them a genuine, valid, bona fide waterway user? Genuine question. This is a discussion, it's not intended to be personal. The OP asked whether it is possible to CC and work a full time job in London. This sounds rather personal to me. Since I suppose I'm one of these CMers, I'll try to defend the position. I neither have nor want a base (a start point), and I want to cruise the network at my own pace within the spirit and letter of the rules laid down by CaRT and the interpretation of them as seen by the legal system. I do not want to be selfish in this, and I'd really like to find some common ground to avoid the conflict between CMers, CCers and PMers. I'd rather like if all waterways users, especially boaters, could come together and love one another. I agree that CCMers (coordinated continuous moorers) are reprehensible, but can we at least agree that CCers who roam beyond a certain "range" are valid waterways users?

First class example of an utterly hopeless advert. A boat in kit form for £50k and cant even be arsed to include any photos or say the name of the boat!!

I float on the surface and do the duck thing - I call that swimming I do the fish thing and people call that sinking.

Point of Order M'Lud... Ducks don't 'swim', they float on the surface and paddle. Fish swim. Hope that clarifies things....

I don't want to knock your idea, I've never actually done it so I can only give my thoughts and opinions. I assume that the carper on the walls are a tight weave but even so carpets are incredibly absorbent and as they degrade become drier and fragile; fragile and absorbent doesn't make a good surface to stick anything to but carpets have a added bonus they are themselves are quite heavy and meant to be laid flat not upright. I think if you really must leave the old carpet up then you will need to do something to prepare it before applying the glue (which ever glue you go with) so that you're giving the glue a better surface to work with. In the same way that you would need to seal a newly plastered wall, I think you will need to seal this carpet. If you don't and you stick the new stuff directly on to the old it may go well for a bit but it may also end in tears and temper tantrums quite quickly which will leave you back at square on removing the old carpet anyway, only this time you've made it a bigger and harder job than it needed to be. My knee jerk reaction is to say use emulsion to seal it, it's cheap, easy to apply with a roller, yes it will take quite a bit longer than normal you dry but if you start really early and pick a nice hot day to do it this will help with that. If you do use emulsion don't use too much at once, two thin coats better than one thick one and all that. Another sealant (but just as a sealant) option might be that crafters white PVA glue, you can buy it 5L at a time and it's as cheap as chips; however I reckon it'll be a nightmarish experience to apply. Of course what ever glue you choose to use to stick your new carpet up with will work as a sealant too but I'm assuming it will be quite a bit more expensive and over kill for a prep job. Another possibly less messy and possibly easier to rectify should it all go horribly wrong it the heavy duty velcro which is specifically designed for holding up, mostly wood I think, wall coverings. Personally I wouldn't even consider sticking new carpet on top of old stuff, though I can understand why you want to do it, I think that the old carpet will continue to degrade under the new carpet causing the whole thing to lose its integrity and you'll end up replacing the whole lot much quicker than you would other wise.

Quite! And there will be quite a few boaters who oppose scruffy boats and will see this as a back door method of cleansing the canals and gentrifying them for their own use. The rub will come when politicians notice the banning of diesel engines in boats results in only a small dent in diesel sales out on the cut... The natural target for a test/trial of electric boats would be to make them mandatory for the hire boat industry first.

I'd argue that I wasn't a bit of a dick. Not that they comment on here but I know a few of the local CRT staff personally and I'm sure they would say I was calm and polite throughout. I think it may be down to a difference in scenario's. In my case, if I wasn't at fault then it would mean that the recent repair work was - the chief engineer that visited site was primarily concerned with making sure that was not the outcome (Despite my boat, and others of the same beam always having previously fitted through the same lock). In the more recent scenario on the GU, this wasn't a consideration - no one from CRT needed to defend themselves. I can see why the owner of this boat was a bit pissed off about all the derogitory comments about the situation, lots of keyboard warriors about talking crap based on hearsay and very few of the facts.

And if you lot keep whinging and whining about them they will get even worse, not that I have noticed any change in their attitude. I have noticed a change in boater's attitudes towards CRT staff though. Oh and now that the Canal and River Trust is a charity, whether you like it or not, chuggers do an important job in as much as they keep the money flowing in. If they don't do their thing the cowboy building companies will buy up the canals, fill them in and build build cardboard housing estates with garages that cannot accomodate a car on them then we will have nowhere to sail our boats. So I suggest that instead of whining about CRT staff on here give them a smile and a cheery wave even if they have got a scowl on their faces. Believe me they have every right to be scowly the way they have been shafted. Oh yeah, I am not employed by the Canal and River Trust.

HMRC have indicated that if you make a 60/40 claim they will be unlikely to query it. Many suppliers will only take a 60/40 split because working out the different tax rates for different 'splits' appears to be too hard for them. When you buy fuel if you have no idea on 'real split' just fill the paperwork in as 60/40.

The Chris you are thinking of owns a boat called Bunny, or Rabbit, or something

Yes, it was the interpretation that many people applied. They quickly changed the guidance notes to clarify exactly what should and shouldn't be bonded.

I believe it is. Ex-Ladybank.

The marina is finished and lots more houses have been built. The Nevison pub is on the same side of the canal as the marina and is a 5 minute walk.

Your idea of “working well” and mine are very different. FYI I steered an electric trip boat (70ft narrowboat) for a season back in 1997...and that could just manage a day of trips before needing to be plugged into a charger which needed a 32a 240v supply overnight...and we had a get a tow home from a diesel boat if it had a hard day & we did an evening trip...unless there is a large amount of towpath infrastructure installed widespread electric drive won’t happen in my lifetime...it’s the same with cars...the charging infrastructure just won’t exist for a while yet. You may be happy with a couple of hours boating or driving....but that’s far from suitable for everyone.

I don’t think there’s quite the battle that you portray. The vast majority of boaters have a diesel engine because that’s the default. Once alternatives are routinely available and not prohibitively more expensive things will change. It will be a result of influencing the market through legislation that this will happen. Diesel engines were inevitably going to be superseded as the principal form of canal boat propulsion from the very first day one was fitted in a canal boat. Ultimately if someone really wants to keep a diesel engine they will almost certainly be able to do so but there may very well be a premium cost and/or restrictions. I may very well be one of those people depending on how soon things change but I don’t feel inclined to beat my chest in indignation over the issue. JP

Thanks for that.

I agree with the above. However nasty a job I really think you need to remove the old carpet first. Painting it with a really dilute PVA solution first (and letting that dry) might help to stabilise it somewhat and make the job a little less messy and dusty.

If it is empty add water. People suggest a dishwasher tablet or sanitising laundry liquid.

Ahem! I seriously think you are confusing the surname Lillie with the surname Liley. Please don't associate John with that dreadful saga, unless you can present evidence to support your claim!

Maybe you could mix it into the paint? Then put the mixture into the Flit can and spray your boat.

So you did all the hard work and now your services are no longer required...! I think you have certainly gone above and beyond what you set out to do.

Ha! You're hooked. But shush! Don't want it to become Kennet and Roch up here. T'wolves feed Boilermen to their whelps, alive and wriggling. You're OK, you have a wolf of your own.

Sorry to hear that Peter, but at least you got to see some of the Northern system. Despite your disagreement, I hope Lingy appreciated your hard graft crossing the Pennines. I don't expect to need your assistance personally, but I am happy to suggest you as a possibility to anyone who might.

So . . . let's make horses compulsory and introduce a new set of rules that restrict the amount of waste output. Oh, I forgot, animals are one of the greatest sources of pollution. Perhaps we will have to go back to bow hauling, that should fix the obesity problem. I put my faith in the power of road transport lobbies - if electric traction is made possible for trucks that routinely cover several hundred miles a day, I bet (as with the existing marinised truck engines in most canal boats) there will be a solution for us as well. But I doubt that it will involve solar panels on truck roofs . . .

Pilots say "any landing you can walk away from is a good landing". I wouldn't sweat it, your boat is safe and no one got hurt. Plus you are a lot wiser! Hard to say what you should have done since we were not there but again, your boat is safe and no one got hurt.

you didn't answer the question about day 3

Did he expect that? I don’t know and I don’t think it’s the relevant point. The navigation authority identified a failure to maintain the canal to the required dimensions and put it right. That’s what should happen. This wasn’t the only, or the first, boat to be restricted by this particular bridge. If this boat is 14’ wide at the gunwale then it navigates at the owners risk and should it get stuck on a piece of infrastructure that complies with the minimum craft dimensions then there will be no obligation on the part of CRT to take action and I very much doubt that they would. JP

If the old fibres are falling out as badly as you say won't the new carpet and glue just pull the old fibres off the backing. At the very least I suggest an attack on the old carpets by a decent vacuum cleaner to get as many of the old fibres off as possible. I use gel back polypropylene carpet and the hard rubbery back is often marked to assist cutting but I would not put it by a bed because the fibres are hard and uncomfortable. You can also take it out and hose it off if loose laid but this is no help in your situation. On my boat with no carpet in the lower hull insides I stuck the gel to cheap thin plywood and screwed the whole thing to the side using plastic screw cups with push on covers. Maybe something like that would answer but I bet the old fibres will still find their way out.

When I reported the knackered stop lock on the Macc (damaged by a boater, mind you, not a CRT employee) it was fixed within hours by a cheerful couple of guys, who also checked and improved various other bits of it. Last one I saw down there had just walked a mile down from the workboat (with tools) as someone had said the byewash was blocked. Generally I've always found them, and BW before, to be pretty dedicated. The problems are higher up, not with yer actual workers, and always have been. And, anyone doing hard physical work out of doors needs the odd break and a cup tea and a chat. I guess the OP has never done any (assuming that he was trying to denigrate CRT employees, which as has been pointed out, he actually failed to do).

Not all of them - some are doing a cruise, they just can't get away much. But I suspect they're in a minority. It's only annoying, as I said, if they pick the best or only spots to leave the boat. Otherwise, no, it isn't that prevalent and, like most of the stuff that people get hot under the collar about, it really isn't very important. I don't understand how anyone could abandon the tub and only check it fortnightly either. I'd at last leave a number in the window where I could be contacted if someone spotted a problem - unless of course one wouldn't want to be contacted by someone, such as CRT. And the only reason I now live in a house rather than the boat still is because I play (and have earned money for most of my life from) thirteen different instruments and own twenty thousand books, and I can't fit them all on a forty foot tub. And my wife won;t live on it because she can't work out how to play the double bass on it either.

I'm not sure how you can possibly get the impression of how often or how far they were going from seeing them once. This is a clear example of the bias against anyone boating in London, whether CCing or not. For all @Tony Brooks knows, these boaters in these "convoys" may have never met each other, and may be heading back to their home mooring. Besides, so what? As long as they weren't overstaying their 14 day mooring (again, whether this is the case you have absolutely no idea) and as long as they were ranging far enough over the course of the year, why do you have a problem with their changing places? Can you please explain what nuisance continuous cruisers are causing you? You have paid mooring fees (of your own free will, I presume) and had the benefit of a shore hookup, etc. You also had the option to CC available to you, but I imagine you wanted the comfort of a marina or to not have to cruise throughout every month of the year or wanted to be close to a place of residence, work or home, apart from cruising holidays. Why you are resenting people for making the choice you did not? Personally I have absolutely no interest in a home mooring. I bought a boat precisely because I don't want to live in the same place all the time. As much as I love the waterways, a large part of the joy of continous cruising is being able to stop in a new area and explore it for a week or two. I'd not want to cruise every day even if I had all the time and money in the world (which I certainly don't). I'd also not want a home mooring regardless of how cheap it was, because I have no use for one. However, if CaRT were to take away CC licenses, I'd rent the cheapest mooring in the country and never, ever go there. I'd still cruise weekly(ish) for a couple of hours at a time, staying in visitors moorings for less than the 7 or 14 day maximum that is specified. Would this still cause you the nuisance? Which is the more disingenuous option for my cruising pattern - a CC license or a mooring I never visit? Or am I not welcome on the cut at all with my cruising pattern, no matter what or how I pay for it? Is there a problem with abandoned old boats? I have seen one or two sunken (and some floating) wrecks but it isn't my impression that removal of these boats is a significant cost to CaRT. The CC license has been around for many, many years, and if boats ended up abandoned we'd surely see a lot of this around already. Do CaRT publicise what they end up spending our license/mooring fees on? My impression is that the primary problem with Continuous Moorers is that they occupy visitor mooring spots that then cannot be used by those genuinely visiting an area. What other issues are there? I am not aware of other issues like abandoned boats. I'm confused by this - showing that you have a "proper mooring" (presumably, a rented permanent mooring) is already a license option, so you are actually just suggesting doing away with the CC license entirely, or am I misunderstanding you? Or, are you suggesting a month-to-month license until you have built up a years' worth of acceptable continuous cruising before you're allowed an annual CC license? If so, I'm not sure how much this will help unless the requirements are also changed, as most CCers have no problem getting their annual licenses renewed. I'm also confused by this. Let's say I am exploring the country, going from Bristol to York (around 400 miles). I do 15 miles every two weeks over the course of 12 months, but for 13 days of the fortnight I'm moored up and seeing the local sights. This doesn't constitute "cruising" in your view? Someone on a voyage like this would have clearly no use for a home mooring. Would renting a home mooring in Bristol, say, make this journey more acceptable to you? Or is this cruising pattern unacceptable no matter how much the person pays nor what they pay it for? People who rent a mooring still go cruising and still have to abide by the 14/7/2 day (or whatever) mooring limitations. People who are continuously cruising are exactly the same, except they do this year round and don't ever return to a "home mooring". Those that pay for a home mooring resent those who don't, based on the fact that a small proportion of continuous cruisers don't abide by the requirements OR because they feel that the requirements are not strict enough. It seems to me to really come down to the haves looking down on the have nots.

Lol very true. Can be summarised in the following universal boating rule: "The ease of any given manoeuvre is inversely proportional to the number of people watching."