tim noakes

@Wanderer Vagabond You make a very good point - we are caught both ways, boatman’s range (where we really do cook all our food other than in the peak of summer) and an engine that smokes a little all the time and like a WW1 destroyer trying to avoid a submarine when idling and/or cold and/or poorly adjusted (Mac please take note). And it’s started - I seem to remember some very tense times in Stalybridge a yer or so ago when this very point came up over our range. At the time -IIRC, while ago now - we brushed it off, mobile, exempt, BS like that. But in future?? Worrying. As you said ....”Where the real conflict will come...”. Yep. From our perspective we can do nothing about the engine (we go to extreme lengths already to reduce the smoke, as that’s wasted money as far as we are concerned and she already drinks fuel like a sailor on shore leave) so it will be heels firmly dug in on that score, fight to the death stuff. As regarding the range? I imagine we’ll tend towards using a gas stove in sensitive locations, in fact we do it already. It doesn’t warm the cabin, but makes it a little clammy instead, but its handleable. Oh joy....

Then there are issues over historic craft. Take the Bolinders out and fit electric motors?!? May as well scrap them.... They could easily be a casualty if this dubious initiative gets legs. The exhaust of a Bolinder is so far away from the modern requirement for a diesel (well, they’re not strictly a diesel, of course, they’re a crude oil engine, but I digress) that they don’t even speak the same language. Modern engines are measured in p.p.m. of this gas, that gas, how much NOx etc. Bolinders are measured in the output of BCBs (Black Crunchy Bits. BTW we thought about that before Terry did - RIP-). If I hear weasel phrases like ‘we all have to do a bit’ to justify an initiative that sideswipes these pieces of living history out of existence, I shall scream! I’m doing my bit alright, low emission vehicle, here I come; house insulated out the whazoo; videoconferencing rather than jumping on planes or even trains, bring it on. BUT leave my historic craft alone!! /end rant. I do hope - should something be brought forward - that a suitable arrangement/derogation for these old craft can be worked out. Or they’ll just disappear, with a few forlorn relics sitting in museums..... it’s a super-Herculean task for them to be kept going as it is. Here’s hoping. Tim Noakes

I have no patience or sympathy for this arrogant idiot, and hope C+RT find a way to throw the book at him. Having read the thread, here are a few points: 1. If the canal is in 'leaky' ground it will be clay lined up to around 6" above water level, both sides. On the towpath side the towpath is part of the clay lining, on the offside it usually extends at least 1 metre from the water into the field. 2. Chances are this is 'leaky' as it is on a summit level, and there has been (a possibly dubious) argument over the canal leaking onto the same property. 3. This is the OXFORD, which is not over-endowed with spare water on its summit level. 4. That 'plug' he has put back (soil, matting and clay just randomly stuffed in the hole and tamped down) will leak in a matter of weeks or months - in fact it may be leaking already, which is why his arm still has water in it. It's purely cosmetic as far as water loss is concerned. 5. C+RT usually own the offside bank for at least 6' back from the canal for obvious (maintenance) reasons. I'm sure C+RT will be aware - they actually don't miss much, and I hope they take good firm action. I'd levy a hefty fine, ban him from the waterways and pile a few hundred foot of the offside bank along there - with his boat still the other side of it - for good measure.

Yes, I understand, that makes perfect sense. Bit like them putting Spey (and the other clayton motors of that vintage, I imagine) at 7'1/2" to squeeze extra cargo in. Loved your video, that was way more ice than we were playing with. Saw you trying to rock, we find in ice of that thickness it needs 2-3 people to keep a boat going, but it really makes a difference. Otherwise one gets stuck in a 7' wide channel of broken ice. I reckon rocking widens it at least a foot. Of course, our deck helps - providing it is gritted! Cheers Tim

Ooops....I should have known that! (blushes). I'm beginning to wonder if there is more than one of these cat flaps around at the moment - anyway, I'll leave it to Tom to carry on with....if you haven't heard from him yet, you may soon do so. Cheers Tim

Lightening up on this topic a little, I would make an additional observation of the relative resilience of steel hulls versus wooden hulls against this type of ice damage. From observation and comment both in this thread and elsewhere, it seems that it is well known that a real ‘thump’ whether into ice, or, I suppose, a coping stone, can put a serious dent into a steel hull, even a full thickness trading narrowboat hull. Certainly, this seems to be supported by a glance at the front ends of many a steel narrowboat. In contrast, a traditional wooden hull – ie 2” oak – is incredibly impact resistant and resilient, and is capable of taking some serious punishment. This is, however, with two major caveats: 1. That the wood is in good condition and crucially rot and other weakness free 2. That it is protected from the cutting and abrasive action (of ice in this instance). Even relatively thin ice plating (ours is 1mm galv steel) when supported on sound timber, produces a really effective combination, coupling the underlying resilience and strength of oak, with the abrasion resistance of steel. I would back it against a steel hull anytime in severe conditions. On the video we were going through maybe 1” ice, but on other occasions we have kept going with the same lack of damage through up to 3”. Of course, if the underlying timber is weakened, then it would be most unwise. Not the sort of thing to try with a boat in need of new planks at the front, that’s for sure! Comments? Tim

Thanks for the support! I think another of the Spey group is already delaing with the cat flap issue. It is my understanding that we are going to provide the logistics to get it from Usk to the black country Museum and Stour, as she has lost hers. Tom K is looking into it, I believe.... Cheers Tim

Derek, I do not normally let quotation marks annoy me, but those you placed around one word above certainly have. To re-iterate the FACTS are: 1. The boat is in tip-top condition, with a brand new front end and ice plating that all put there with our own fair hands. 2. Last week at annual docking we confirmed she suffered no damage from the run through the ice. We would dispute that we 'risked' her in any way. We are fanatical over maintaining our ice plating, and have run through ice numerous times in the past and knew EXACTLY what we were doing. We hotly deny the baseless charge of irresponsibility although I would of course agree that you are free to hold your own opinion - in this case, it is our contention it's not a very good one. Tim

OK guys. Please see my main post to Laurence, but I am a little irritated and feel I need to set you a straight here, writing as one of the long time owners that agreed that a couple of our young members could 'have a go' at the ice, for the reasons stated elsewhere. 1. We have ownded 'Spey' since 71 (quite a bit longer than Claytons did, in fact), rebuilt her from one end to the other over that time, and know every plank and sheet of iceplating on her. 2. The previous winter we put her through an 11 week docking and completely replaced and rebuilt the front 30' of boat, keeping only the kelson and forward cargo bulkhead. One of the last jobs was ice plating her with a wide band. 3. So she was in perfect condition for trying this - or we wouldn't have allowed it. 4. Since then, we have docked her - for other reasons - and found everything beautifully intact, but in need of a new coat of tar, which was applied a few days ago. 5. We fully realise she's a historic craft, something of which we are very proud. However, with thought and care, she can be used in ways like this that show some of the less common aspects of boating. No risk to her, and lots of pleasure to others judging by some of the less judgemental remarks in these threads. Best to be sure of all the facts first, hmmm......?

Laurence, as a member of the group that owns Spey (one of the orginals who purchased her in 1971)I think I need to explain what's going on in the video, and correct a couple of misapprehensions. 1. You are quite correct in stating that the 'traditional' arrangement for ice plating is two narrow bands, one on the loaded water line, the other on the unloaded one. Spey was like that when we bought her in 71. 2. In a number of ways we have made minor departures from tradition, we do what makes sense to our current user of the boat on canals as they now are. In this context, we have a wide band (~20" or more) of ice plating, centred on the current semi-ballasted unloaded water line. This is specifically intended to facilitate rocking. This is because: 3. We are breaking ice, not just moving through broken ice, as would have been the case in the old days when company icebreakers kept the channel clear. Past experience has shown us rocking really makes a big difference, breaking open a slightly wider channel. 4. The owners on the video - part of our next generation of owners - were attempting this run after careful discussion with us greybeards. I have to say we were impressed with their success and energy, although they seem to now have our opinion of icebreaking - its something you should do once.... 5. On the safety angle, it was noted on another thread that they were not wearing life jackets. We had salted the deck, but still, I have to admit that is a very valid point. 6. And, finally, the discussion about reversing. Bit of mea culpa here, despite much sweat and tears by myself, reverse is at present very unrelaible on her. I think it's due to excessive wear on the fuel pump, but that's a discussion for another day. The upshot is if you pull the reverser, the chances are that the engine will just go out. Far more reliable to hand reverse it by overriding the fuel pump from the engine room. I promise to have it fixed soon ...honest..... Tim