Jump to content

Paul C

Member
  • Posts

    10522
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by Paul C

  1. Nick, I think you're just unlucky (or perhaps its just a coincidence that you are boating in the same places that there's a few bad volockies). I've never had a bad experience with one; a few times they've been useless (ie they're no quicker). Some of the time, when people moan about them, they don't realise they've ALREADY helped them by not causing a queue of clueless boaters to build up ahead. Also I've known hire firms not bother with a proper handover because they know (or think) the first lock they encounter will have volockies. All positives......
  2. Coolants for cars diverged from only a few, to there being many variations now. Some modern coolants are now an "on condition" change item, rather than being a fixed time interval eg 2 years, 5 years. Of course you can't simply put in a different coolant, you need to add a coolant which is compatible with the existing. So first step is knowing what coolant the boat already has, its 99% likely to be blue (2 yrs interval) or pink (5 yrs interval) as stated above.
  3. I've learned to cope with pretty much all the combinations of what someone else might do at a lock, eg whacking paddles fully open going uphill in a deep lock, etc. At the end of the day, there's a sequence of events which can only be done in a certain order: open gates, boat goes in, close gates, open paddles, open gates, boat leaves, (I don't care what happens after that). A few times there's been paddles left open behind, I've either got off and closed it myself or beeped the horn to stop anything else happen before that's sorted. I've not had a 'volunteer' or other 'helper' open a paddle with a gate wide open yet though.
  4. No, “placing on the market” means advertising it for sale.
  5. So looking at the wider picture, given they don't have the ability to do this...........should they just let the status-quo in London continue?
  6. Are you indirectly implying that the current legislation is inadequate to deal with this?
  7. Shell, no licence plate, no documentation........could this have been never used on the canals? If not, why not? And if that's the case, I believe its "part-complete" and should have Annex 111a declaration. Without this, once home built and complete you can't sell it, or even try to sell it, in 5 years. You'd need to obtain BSS and insurance will be more difficult to find. See https://rugbyboats.co.uk/recreational-craft-directive/ Personally, I'd not touch it with a barge pole.....
  8. ....But when you slowed to let him through, did you give the horn signal?
  9. There will be some circumstances, but I will always try my best to pass on the right even if it makes it more difficult (but not impossible) to drive, exactly because of the confusion which can develop if boaters disagree on which side to pass on. Is there a standardised reference guide for boater's arm signals you could link to?
  10. If you avoid getting in the way of the tiller, you won't get knocked off by it. Its just a good habit to be into.
  11. Yeah, pragmatically these days you give a horn signal and hope the other boater understands it. I've found that 1 long hoot is universally understood, especially when the context is something like approaching a bridge hole and its close to judge who would arrive first. I have been pleasantly surprised by how many other boaters DO know their horn signals though (maybe my expectations are low!)
  12. I think the correct thing would have been for Nick to give 2 hoots. If the other boat agreed to pass on the wrong side, their reply would also be 2 hoots. If not though, they can give 1 hoot to indicate "I am coming at you! (And will pass on the normal side)". In other words, a pass on the wrong side is requested, not enforced upon another.
  13. Do you ignore appropriate horn (sound) signals in this situation? What would the horn signals be?
  14. I think 1997 is before they required maker plates to be fitted to shells. So it would either be an optional one somewhere (good luck finding it!) or a knowledgeable person to identify it from styling features etc.
  15. I've only had one "arsehole" encounter, not a historic boat though, just someone who I met on a typically narrow/twisty section of the S&W who didn't manoeuvre to the side of the canal, resulting in myself needing to slam on the brakes instead of driving through an offside bank tree. My sample rate is a bit lower though, so its not possible to conclude yet but I'd say the numbers of arseholes is about the same, so no real change from (say) 5-10 years ago. What I have noticed is the canals seem quieter now, except for certain hotspot areas eg Great Haywood was very busy. Shroppie was very quiet though.
  16. Its probably a workable idea, but the penalty for mooring in a permanent mooring place (with no permit) would need to be the same as (or proportionate to) the penalty for overstaying a CRT-retained stretch of towpath or visitor mooring; and equally enforced too. There is no current provision in law for them to do this but if a new law were to be drafted to allow them to hand over control to the LA, maybe it could be written into that. Of course, NBTA would totally not see the logic and reasoning, and simply say that "swathes of moorings they're entitled to are being taken away converted to unaffordable ones". NBTA are interesting - they don't have a mandate from their "membership" (there is no election or democratic process internally) so CRT and LAs could simply press on ahead and not see them as a stakeholder at all. There is a need for boater representation in these types of plannings/decisions though, so they could optionally invite them to the table which is what I believe CRT's current approach is.
  17. I see - so a percentage area of mooring space would be "converted" from towpath-side as-is, to towpath-side long term mooring (effectively), much as they exist in certain areas of the canal system eg Bunbury, Gailey etc. Part of it would need to be some type of penalty for non-permit holders mooring on the permit area. Interestingly, in Gailey there is a sign saying mooring without permission is chargeable at £150. I am not sure if I took a pic of the signs. And of course this would need to be enforced to be effective.
  18. So.......IF (inner) London's canals were given over to the Local Authorities, this would presumably mean jettisoning the 1995 Act (ie it would no longer apply there) and the LAs introducing their own licensing of some kind - a reasonable assumption since basically no other navigation authorities have the allowing of CCing written into law. Would there be a transition? Would there be a wholescale clearance of the canals? Would the boaters be unaffected and ignore a different set of rules from a different body? I imagine NBTA would have something to protest about then!!
  19. No worries up to 60', 70' I'm sure most marinas would be no worries either but others might need specific areas which could be full. Obviously, a 60' boat can fit in a 70' space but not vice versa. Regarding regular checks, there certainly do exist friendly marinas who would let you know of an alarm on the boat going off, for example. And don't forget other neighbour moorers too. I am not sure why MTB perceives them as otherwise, perhaps a regional thing.
  20. Agree, local authorities are better placed to handle this type of thing than CRT. Hence why London should be a "special case" canal with different management, different rules etc. My point on planning permission isn't so much about the complexity of applying, but of being successful - there's other bodies involved, and wider issues, with simply granting some moorings residential planning status. If these barriers were to be overcome, a joined-up approach involving CRT (or maybe not if they can 100% handover their navigation authority duty in that area) and the other bodies such as Local Council, etc
  21. Ideas like this have been aired before, but unfortunately the show stopper is that to "create" residential moorings, requires planning permission. That's a step change in complexity/admin etc to do so. And I bet as this "cheap" London accommodation scheme became known, there would be a flood of even more people getting a boat and trying to secure it, since its just the London accommodation - by any means - they're after.
  22. Some boats CAN definitely steer in reverse. In my experience, its often in a particular rev range. Other boats can't do this (or if they are doing it, the effect is so small as to be unnoticeable). Also, some boats will strongly prop-walk while others don't particularly. Knowing your boat and its characteristics means that the elusive utopia of actually being able to control/steer backwards reasonably well, is a step closer....but often you need to accept that reversing will mean that there is a lack of certainty with the directional control (and plan around it).
  23. The architecture of a narrowboat semi-trad or trad stern means that if you did have a rudder stop at say 50 deg, the tiller would get in the way when getting on and off the boat. So, they are allowed to go much further so the tiller can be pushed out the way.
  24. If you're going away from Llangollen and turning to return to Llangollen, it should be easy. If you're doing it the other way (eg away from Trevor, turn to return to Trevor) its a complete nightmare because what happens is, with the narrow/shallow canal and the high flow, and that you put the nose into the non-towpath wide bit of the turning hole, the flow of the water will try to push the stern round towards Trevor. So if you're trying to do it and reversing (no steer in reverse) it will completely interfere with the turn. Your direction though, it would pretty much do it automatically though.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.