David Schweizer

If you are referring to the engine, it certainly was not a steamer in 1967. We met up at the Leicester IWA Festival where Binky was very proud of his "new" engine, which he claimed was the most powerfull engine fitted in a narrowboat at the time. The Festival Organizers were organizing Tug-o-war competitions and we challenged Pearl. Our boat, Pisces, pulled Pearl backwards along the entire length of the contest. What we had not told him was that Pisces had a 36HP V4 English Turner fitted, wich proved to be more powerfull than his 3 cylinder Bolinder.

There was a converted narrowboat called Pearl, moored in Aylesbury Basin in the 1960's. It was owned by Binky Bush, who was one of the founders of the Narrowboat Owners Club. Is this the same boat?

Let me assure you that most of the "locals" do not think of him as an amicable character, rather a nuisance who has caused the local Emergency Services a lot of trouble over the years.

Over the past fifty plus years. I have used both types of windlass, and have always found that those with the head set at 45 degrees to the shaft seem to be more easy to use. I have no definitive answer as to why this should be, except that the shaft on the 45 degree ones are operating from the outside circumference of the spindle wheras the 90 degree ones are operating from inside the circumference. The bronze windlass I not my one, but it is identical to mine. Mine has nothing stamped on it, and I have to admit, I cannot see anything stamped on the one in the photo. The reason I describe it as a copy of a Harry Neal is because Lawrence Hogg, who commissioned them, told me that the pattern used was an original Harry Neal Windlass.

You beat me to it whilst I was adding the photo, and yes, bought from Warwickshire Fly.

I have five or six traditional windlasses, but tended only to use two of them, a Cast Bronze copy of a Harry Neale Windlass, and a chrome plated double headed welded steel windlass. Both have the head set at 45 degees to the shaft, which makes them more efficient to use.

After something like forty years of removing retailer's stickers from antique items made from wood, I can safely state that the best fluid for their removal is White Spirit. Simply dampen the sticker with White Spirit and wait a few minutes for it to penetrate through to the adhesive layer, then gently lift the sticker away. If it resists removal repeat the process until it will lift without any difficulty. Once removed, any adhesive residue can be easily cleaned off with a cloth dampened with White Spirit. If you have any doubts about the effect of the White Spirit on the paint, test in an area out of view first. I would be very surprised if it did not have side rails. I have never seen one without them, and their absence would, as you suggest, make the stool a very weak construction.

To which stool does that comment relate?

So how much would you be willing to pay for this one?

Ah yes, I remember it well, but there was no warning sign in 1968 when we took Pisces down the Lower Stratford, and got firmly stuck in one of the Lapworth locks. The water went down, but the boat stayed suspended in mid air, so we re-filled the lock, but the boat stayed firmly wedged. Strenuous efforts were deployed to release the boat, including tightening the hull chains, applying oil along the rubbing strakes, and the volunteer Lock Keeper's Land Rover working hard. All efforts failed to achieve anything until a large party of walkers arrived. With ropes attached to the rear dollies, and about forty people in two groups on both sides of the canal, and the Land Rover and boat engines both running hard, the boat suddenly popped out of the lock like a champagne bottle cork. Once clear of the lock, we had to reverse through numerous lock back to the junction before we could continue our revised journey. The Southern Stratford had not been re-opened very long and, having read the above post, I now wonder whether our experience led to the erection of the warning sign.

Pedantic Point. I am intrigued to understand why the myth, started by BW, continues to suggest that the maximum width for all single lock canals is 6ft 10ins. Our former boat was 7ft wide and we managed to negotiate all the Central Midlands canals without any difficulty. The narrowest canal we experienced was the Trent and Mersey, which isn't really Central Midlands, and even then we had a couple of inches spare.

What a terrible waste of Lignum Vitaem, the hardest commercialy available wood known, and much prized by wood carvers, who use old Bowls to make Carving Mallet heads.

True, but in reality, persistant contact between almost every type of timber and any ferrous metal in a wet or damp environment will cause some oxidization of the metal and some degredation of the timber. The ozidization is casused by water reacting with tannic acid, which is present in almost all plant life, but in higher concentration in some timbers, including Oak, Walnut, Mahogany, Red Alder, Sweet Chestnut, Western Red Cedar, and Douglas Fir. Apparently, bronze is one of the metals not significantly effected by tannic acid, and a person I know, who works on the restoration of old boats and ships, only uses bronze screws and nails for all underwater fixings, It may well also be the reason wby boat propellers are traditionally cast from bronzw. Definitely not Oak, it is possibly one of the worst timbers for causing oxidization of ferrous metals in a wet or damp environment. Traditionally the timber used in the UK for areas where it is routinely wet is English Elm. It can still be found in specialist hardwood yards, but predominantly in the north of England and the Scottish Borders, where some stands have survived, but it is extreemly expensive.

A friend of mine cruised continuousy around the system for most of the year, but based himself for a few months in the winter on an official winter mooring. He went to the Local Council in which the winter mooring was based, offering to pay Concil Tax, but they said there was no proceedure for him to pay, so he payed nothing despite attmpting to pay!!

Actually Arthur there is a legal reason, residential moorings are required to have Planning Consent, conversely leisure moorings do not, hence the differentiation. When I was involved with our local Parish Council, we were consulted over the years, by the Planning Authority on a number of different planning applications for residential moorings. Each one failed when it went to the Planning Authority because, amongst other things, it was felt that they would remove leisure moorings in a very busy and popular tourist area, and there was no consideration given in the applications for the parking of resident's vehicles.