IanD
Patron
-
Posts
11,372 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
89
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Gallery
Blogs
Store
Posts posted by IanD
-
-
4 minutes ago, system 4-50 said:
This blog/topic is about the sailaways decisions I made during the 11 years I had the boat before I sold it 18months ago.
The bed outer size was fixed by the water tanks it contained so no plinth/foot recess possible.
It would be nice to nip out and do some measurements to answer your interest but I don't know where the boat is.
My requirement for the passage was that it would be big enough for anybody to get through who could also get the BSS required size escape exit at the bow, and apart from that, as easy to use as the space permitted. In practice no guests had problems navigating the passage.
"I don't know how deep your frames and lining are, IIRC on my boat the internal width below the gunwale after lining is about 6'1" (185cm)." The width at floor level would be just over 6ft. At gunwhale level it have been more. Since it was never properly lined I'll ignore that bit.
"I suspect you'll have a tendency to fall forwards onto the bed." Only after 2 glasses of red wine.
"Did you actually try this out before committing to the layout?" Did I do it before I did it? No. Did I research it carefully? Yes. Did it work ok? Yes.
"- the frames do look lighter —" Nothing light about the framing, much stronger than I saw at *******'s.
Glad to hear that it all actually worked out, I thought this was something you were still building now... 😉
I didn't say the frames were light, just that they were lighter than mine -- see photo with limber hole explanation...
-
11 minutes ago, nbfiresprite said:
Three so far (All pay council tax on their moorings), two were rejected for not being on the council tax database.
So as predicted, boaters who have residential moorings/address and pay council tax can get the payment -- no surprise there, just like people who live in houses, and entirely unlike CCers or CMers or liveaboards-in-marinas-under-the-radar i.e. most boaters on the canals.
Now what about all the others that the NBTA hoped would get it after they lobbied so hard for it? 😉
-
33 minutes ago, system 4-50 said:
0.000" to be precise.😄
I don't know how deep your frames and lining are, IIRC on my boat the internal width below the gunwale after lining is about 6'1" (185cm). If yours is the same then a 140cm bed would leave a 45cm walkway at ground level, so about 35cm at the gunwale, so maybe 30cm at shoulder level depending on how much tumblehome your hull has. This probably means having to shuffle past the bed sideways, and with no space to get your feet/toes under the bed I suspect you'll have a tendency to fall forwards onto the bed, especially while passing curtains etc. If there's a quilt hanging over the mattress edge you'll have even less room, but at least you'll have something soft to fall onto... 😉
Did you actually try this out before committing to the layout?
Normally the bed would be a little bit narrower (e.g. 135cm i.e. a standard 4'6" double), and the frame underneath would be a few inches narrower still at floor level (e.g. 120cm/4') giving a decent-sized recess to get your feet under.
Or maybe your boat is a couple of inches wider internally than mine -- the frames do look lighter -- so a 140cm bed will give the same walkway as 135cm in mine. Still, a plinth/foot recess is a good idea, if it's not too late for you to put one in 🙂
BTW limber holes are gaps in the frames to let water drain back down the boat, usually done by stopping the frames short to leave a hole in the baseplate/hull corner -- like this...
-
1 minute ago, system 4-50 said:
So the walkway is 0" wide then? 😉
-
12 minutes ago, system 4-50 said:
That's a pretty wide bed and narrow walkway, especially if there's no floor-level plinth to let your feet stick under the edge (is there?) -- how wide is the bed and the walkway when the lining is in place?
Could be challenging to walk along, especially with the tumblehome above the gunwale... 😉
-
8 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:
Thanks for that. I've got one under the stairs that has needed minor repairs for the last ten years.
If it needs spare reeds, I could always break up a surplus melodeon or two... 😉
-
12 minutes ago, Tonka said:
I'm insulted that you think I'd read that rag... 😞
And I've given up "discussing" anything with M_JG, it's simply not worth the effort.
As a general comment, people making snide digs at other people -- like you here -- isn't exactly conducive to a harmonious forum either... 😞
-
1
-
1
-
-
On 08/02/2023 at 08:59, pete.i said:
It's highly unlikely that you would smell your own smell. When I was a smoker, over 12 years ago now, I couldn't smell the ciggy stink on me or anyone else. Now I can smell a cigarette yards away and when smokers walk past me they stink. Same with a diesel stink. When I had my boats, and I was a smoker back then, I couldn't smell diesel but now when my son in law visits, who is a smoker and gets involved with diesel and petrol, I can smell him half way down the drive. I probably have my own stenches as well but I don't notice them and I suppose other people are too polite to tell me.
Don't eat so many sprouts and spickled eggs then... 😉
-
44 minutes ago, Boaty Jo said:
.... and half of it is nonsense.
But which half? 😉
-
1
-
-
15 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:
[snip]
Because the law requires it to be registered in your home country. You cannot register an American one in the UK because their Hexadecimal system is different to the UK, or Europe, or Canada etc etc
I think you'll find it goes from 0 to F in steps of 1 (0000 to FFFF for 16 bits) just like all the others... 😉
-
Is ballast going to be put on top of the sprayfoam on the baseplate?
-
1 minute ago, system 4-50 said:
Damn. I should have made the side passages only 6" wide, as long as the actual exits satisfied the BSS minimum.
You could have made them 0" wide... 😉
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, peterboat said:
About 20x lower than woodburners then...
-
2 hours ago, David Mack said:
Which doesn't specify a minimum width for side passages, only for openings used as a means of escape, such as hatches, windows or ports.
I know of hire boats with fixed 5' lengthwise doubles which have a *very* narrow awkward walkway but presumably are legal. Boats I've been on with 4'6" doubles are OK to walk past but you wouldn't want this if you had to do it all the time for through access, for example if the bedroom was at the stern -- for a frequently used passageway like this, a 4' bed is normally used.
-
9 minutes ago, Tacet said:
Grants of at least 70% were available for private dwellings. And, in fact, still are albeit only for "old private dwellings" as defined.
That's interesting, because AFAIK my parents got no such grant when they installed gas CH in place of an open fire with back boiler, they paid the entire cost. When were these grants available, and what were the conditions?
-
7 minutes ago, nicknorman said:
Well I think I can post my letter:
The devil in the lithium detail
I refer to the latest NABO News item about lithium batteries. Sorry but I think referring to lithium ion batteries generically is a big mistake. Yes the item does hint that there are different lithium chemistries but it’s a bit subtle! The bottom line is that LiFePO4 batteries are as safe as lead acid, or safer. LiFePO4 is extremely difficult to set on fire either by overcharging or by physical damage, and even in that highly unlikely event it can easily be extinguished. It doesn’t explode and spray hot sulphuric acid around unlike lead acid!
By comparison lithium cobalt oxide technologies are quite unstable, easily set alight and continue to burn even when under water (it makes its own oxygen for combustion!)
So any talk about Li batteries needs to specify the chemistry, otherwise it is a bit like talking about “fossil fuels” without distinguishing between diesel, petrol or LPG.
An area of concern is second hand batteries ex electric vehicles. If they are LiFePO4 then fine. If they are some higher energy density technology, then be afraid! The devil is in the detail and awareness perhaps needs to be raised on these differences.
Full disclosure: I have 600Ah of LiFePO4 batteries with home grown BMS and alternator controller. The batteries are fantastic!
Nick NormanThe reply didn’t seem to indicate that he had got my point.
And a lot of articles (and posters) also don't get the point, as can be seen every time the subjects of "lithium battery fires" or "re-using ex-EV batteries" come up... 😞
-
16 minutes ago, Tonka said:
So it could appear to be that the government has not learnt from making diesel cars advantages for taxes and then about turn.
The government are giving you payments to get Biomass boilers and then they will ban them
Surely that depends whether biomass-pellet-fueled boilers emit as much PM2.5 as woodburners?
Since they haven't come up anywhere in the discussions or articles my suspicion is that they're a lot cleaner, but some actual facts would be useful... 😉
-
3 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:
In the last big licence review it was proposed that CCers licence fees should be 2.5 x the price of a licence for a boat 'with a home mooring'.
They backed down and it was never introduced, but, I think the financial environment is very different now, and wouldn't be surprised if it was introduced this time around.
They'd encounter the same vociferous "it's not fair, think of the children!" resistance from the likes of the NBTA again though, as well as all the other CCers who don't think they should pay more while complaining that the system is falling to pieces around them...
-
7 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:
No sorry. I don't have permission to do that, someone else may, or maybe only Nick and I are members on here.
I didn't mean a copy or cut and paste; a short summary ( a few lines) wouldn't infringe any copyright.
-
Just now, ditchcrawler said:
The reply was from the person who sits on the BSS Technical Committee
For those who can't access it, can you post a summary of what it said?
-
33 minutes ago, MtB said:
My point exactly.
Comparing wood burners with gas boilers is invalid.
Huh? Surely comparing the PM2.5 emissions of woodburners with the most common form of heating today -- gas boilers -- is perfectly valid, otherwise what else would you compare them to?
It's saying that for this source of emissions gas boilers are very clean and woodburners are very dirty, which is surely the whole reason for banning them in urban areas?
-
1
-
-
9 minutes ago, MtB said:
So that sounds to me like load of unsupportable woolly-minded borrocks.
Just how much 'pollution" does "gas heating" produce? I'd love a nice easy, well-defined number, so we can compare it with the "eco" wood burners.
Are we counting just the PM2.5 from gas boilers? Not many of those I bet.
Or are we adding in the Nox, CO and CO2 etc? And including live fuel effect gas fires? And water heaters? How about those massive LPG burners the white line road painters use? They are all "gas heating" I'd say...
Or you could go and read the report, which covers all the sources of PM2.5 pollution -- which is what all this fuss (and the article) is about, not CO2 emissions, because it's been found in recent years that it's *very* bad for people. Which is almost word-for-word what the article says... 😉
Gas heating/boilers/whatever emit almost no PM2.5, because burning gas doesn't make any particulates. It emits a lot of CO2 but that's a separate problem.
-
4 minutes ago, Tonka said:
I am not disputing what you are saying but when you drive along some motorways why is it you will see housing estates being built right next to the motorway
Because that's where cheap land is available?
Just because PM2.5 pollution from cars is also a problem doesn't mean the (larger) PM2.5 pollution from woodburners can use this as an excuse to do nothing -- and from the government's point of view, banning woodburners would give a big reduction in pollution at the cost of some inconvenience to less than 5% of households, far easier and cheaper than reducing PM2.5 pollution from transport.
-
6 minutes ago, Jon57 said:
Put another log on the fire while you still can and chill out you guys.
If all boaters with woodburners just chill out and ignore this and don't try and raise the issue with the people making the rules, the easiest and therefore most likely outcome is that woodburning stoves will be banned on boats -- one way or another, sooner or later.
Then they can chill out, because they won't have any heating... 😉
-
1
-
These new log burner rules.......
in General Boating
Posted
And didn't the EU sue the UK as a result? Damn that overbearing supranational bunch of leftie lackies... 😉