Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by magnetman

  1. That was one of the first boats I looked at for sale when I was getting a bigger narrow boat in 1995. It was at Highline at Iver. 


    I think it was 45ft so looks to have been lengthened. 


    A lovely boat, 1976 by Joe Gilbert if I remember right. Hand start JP2 engine. £18k I think it was. 


    I didn't really know what I was looking at at the time but suspect that is a very nice boat. 

    I ended up with a 55 footer by GM / Tony Gregory with a DM2 which was also a very nice boat but not quite as interesting as the BALTIC. 


    nice boat that is. 


  2. I had an anode out on the magnet once in a lock chamber. 


    Close inspection of the steel tags indicated that it was never actually welded to the boat in the first place. It had been secured using some sort of adhesive. 


    Things are not always as they seem..



  3. 2 hours ago, Steve56 said:

    If anyone is interested I'll tell you about the engine as I owned the boat many years ago and fitted the engine. The engine is a Lister LPWS4 Which came from Lister as an ex development engine. I carried out a total engine rebuild. As a marine engineer I was carrying out a lot of service work for Beta Marine and knew the owners of the company very well from my Lister days. They allowed me to take it into the Beta works and give it a coat of paint and I did like the red paint that Beta used. While in the works one of the employees thought it would be a good joke to stick a Beta Marine badge on it. I didn't mind at all but it seems to have caused a lot of confusion ever since. So I can confirm that it is a Lister Marine engine and not really anything to do with Beta.

    So did Lister do a turbo version of the LPWS4 or was the Turbo and 52hp thing just an advertising error? 


    I had an LPW2 in a boat once and I'm sure it was no more than 20hp. More like 18 if I remember right. So 52hp out of a 4 does sound like it might have had some sort of help. 


    Intrigued of Tunbridge Wells. 


  4. If you come off the cut at Isis lock via sheepwash channel turn left you will almost certainly find a mooring spot just below Osney bridge before the lock. 


    Technically you are meant to have a Thames registration for this bit of the River but you have to buy these from the lock so IF you opted to just stop there (very close to Oxford city centre via Botley road) then go back onto the canal it's quite likely you would not be found out. Not sure what length boat you can turn there though so if you have a long boat it could be interesting.  Locks are on public power all the time after lock keepers go home so can always travel outside of duty hours. 


    EA on the Thames are terrible at enforcing registrations and although it is part of the River I really don't think a run from Sheepwash for ten minutes down to the moorings and back is going to cause any sleep loss. 


    ETA worth taking a rain coat if the bridge is still leaking ! There was a persistent water main problem last time I was up there with a lot of water coming out. 


    • Greenie 1
  5. My mum had a BV1505 on her narrow boat and one day she had a mechanic working on it and he stepped on the lift pump. Tiny little crack in one of the pipes. Not the exact same symptoms but basically a little bit of air was able to get in and it caused problems.

    The (mechanical) lift pump itself was a tiny little thing with integral inlet and outlet pipes rather than screwed-in unions. 


    New lift pump ordered, I fitted it and it was fine after that. 





  6. I reckon it would be quite a good idea to fit a good quality night vision CCTV camera in an engine room with wet exhausts, linked to a dedicated LCD screen near the helm. 

     One of my boats which is a twin screw seagoing motor cruiser has keel cooling for both engines but even on that I think if I did venture out anywhere in open water I would put a camera in the engine room just so I could keep an eye on the engine status and the situation in the area generally. 








    • Greenie 1
  7. I've noticed having been up and down the River all summer that a lot of the lock keepers seem to be ok with narrow boats using centre and stern lines. 


    Worth being aware that the byelaws -require- bow and stern lines and also that you must follow the instructions of the keeper if reasonable. So there is zero validity in getting into a conflict with the keeper about which lines to use. 


    I've done the length of the Thames up and down single handed in my 55ft narrow boat, 71.5ft narrow boat and 58ftx12ft barge never had any problems. Bow and stern lines aevery time.


    Going up I would tie off the bow line and control the boat with the stern line and periodically secure stern line then go and tighten bow line. 


    The bollards differ. Lightermans hitch for the ones with no pins or just a locking hitch for the ones with pins. 


    I always manage boat from the lockside and refuse all offers of assistance as it's easier like that.


    Quite a lot of activity but it seems to work ok for me. 


    Lately I am boating on a 32ft craft so ropes easier to deal with but if you do it right a long narrow boat is not going to be a problem. 



  8. Coincidentally I bought my first narrow boat from Pyrford in 1993. The bloke selling it said "take things slowly". Such good advice that was. 


    I still do take things slowly and tend to enter locks in neutral and just glide in. Much less trouble like that. 


    The short bit of the river Wey will help you get used to the boat. 


    It'll be fine, just take it slow around locks and never be in a rush to do anything. 



    ETA the River is nice and slow at the moment. I would suggest 3 days not two for Shepperton to Reading. 





  9. Most of the fittings are loosened so you just remove it, fill your builders bucket, place other bucket under tap, decant first buckey into water tank with funnel, repeat &c then when finished put the fitting back on. 


    Hoses are not the way ahead here. 


    Using a bucket allows one to engage in a physical level (15kilograns each time) with the water which one is so incredibly dependant on. 

    • Haha 1
  10. It's definitely dodgy there. 


    A couple of years ago I was going up and down the Thames in a little 20ft Colvic with open stern cockpit. 


    I stopped at the Tesco moorings to grab some rations. Must have been off the boat for about ten or 15 minutes. 


    I had things like boathooks and oars and a couple of fishing rods from previous owner (I don't fish) on the back by the seating. When I got back to the boat after this short time it was obvious someone had rifled through the items to see if there was anything worth nicking. 


    I don't bother stopping there any more. There is a Waitrose in Caversham for light rations and a Tesco attached to a petrol station so I just stop up there on the park if I need anything. 


    Of course the big Tesco  is handy for petrol but I possess no petrol powered devices on the boat now so not needed. 


    Not surprised about agro at the Tesco moorings as it is basically just a  slum shanty town. 

    • Greenie 1
  11. On demand self inflating and deflating side airbag fenders seem more achievable and would be more effective than thrusters and use less power. 

    A full length linear balloon unit with air pumps linked to the distance sensors could prove to be quite effective. Build it into a channel around the edge of the side decks so it would be out of the way when not inflated. 


    It would need to be made of a durable material and able to be pumped to a very high pressure very quickly. 











  12. 2 hours ago, Loddon said:

    What I meant by stating river fed us that there is a decent water supply..........to enable the pound below to be kept "on weir" 

    The "normal canal section" is to prevent flooding 😱

    Yes and what I was referring to was that the pound below Stockers lock will go low without the windows in the paddles because there is no other feed of water into that pound when the lock is not being used. 


    And Springwell lock is deeper therefore uses more water. 


    Above stockers lock the towpath is raised and extra reinforcement for flood protection this means that water does not overflow the gates and for obvious reasons there can not be a bywash there so we have to have another way to get the water through the lock, continuously and in a controlled manner.  

    If you look into Stockers lock when empty or below the lock when full you can see the water emerging from the windows. 


    Sorry to derail the thread !



  13. 26 minutes ago, furnessvale said:

    On the other hand, leaving them closed hinders someone coming from either direction! 😃


    I'll get my popcorn!


    Closing all gates is a great way to hide lack of maintenance. 


    Locks should be maintained properly. Leave gates open = problems directly related to basic maintenance. People will start complaining about dry pounds. Maybe if people complain something gets done? 


    Close the gates = less problems but there is still a lack of maintenance. Nobody complains then the whole thing falls apart. 


    Asking people to close gates after use was a BW scam to attempt to cover up the fact they were reducing the maintenance and also a way to get some conflict going with users who conveniently don't notice the maintenance issues because they are too busy having a go at each other. 


    Anyone who can't deal with arranging for their boat to go through the lock if the gates at the other end are left open needs to consider another activity !




    6 minutes ago, Loddon said:

    Stockers is river fed, Springwell is not. 

    There is a river section above stockers lock yes but the level of the waterway in normal conditions is quite low compared with a normal canal section and there is no bywash. 


    Springwell is a deeper lock therefore uses more water. There would be a net loss of water in the pound below Stockers without a feed of some sort. 


    So you cut windows in one top and one bottom paddle and provide a constant unchanging flow of water through Stockers lock in any conditions when lock is not in use. Gates open or closed either end same feed as long as the window is not blocked with debris. It will clean itself when the paddle is operated. A nice simple arrangement no drama no fuss and very easy to implement. 


    Springwell is in effect river fed because of the windows. There is a sluice on the towpath side half way between the locks to deal with high level problems. 

  14. On 28/08/2021 at 10:31, Loddon said:

    Going back to the locks:   

    GU and K&A locks were built with an "internal" bywash  this worked by using the top paddle chambers to pass water into the lock and over the bottom gates which were slightly lower than the top of the chambers this set the weir level on the pound above.


    Due to some incompetence by BW bottom gates were built higher than the originals, this meant that it raised the level in the pound above. One way round this was to leave the bottom paddles up when exiting the lock.


    It used to be a common sight on the lower GU to see water cascading over the bottom gates as the bywash was working as intended. Also you could pass a boat that was going downhill only to find that the lock has refilled itself by the time you arrived😟


    Some of the GU locks also have windows in the paddles. Or at least they used to when the paddles were made of wood. 8 inch square hole in the board. 


    Stockers lock has windows because Springwell is a deeper lock and there would be a net loss of water if nothing was moving through the lock. 


    A lock that definitely should have windows is the top of Sarah's 2 in Watford. That short pound used to be terrible for going low. Windows would sort it out. 


    Not been on the cut there for years now so it may have been sorted out or perhaps a paddle clipped slightly open. 


    I'm pretty sure Aynho Weir lock has windows and quite big ones at that.  





  15. £30k seems a lot but it is a very nice boat. 


    Toyota land cruiser engine is rather infra dig I wonder if there is a way to describe it slightly more traditionally. 


    I really thought it had a ford cargo engine in it. Maybe that was a more traditional description than a land cruiser engine. 


    I reckon it has been repowered in the last 25 years. 


    It really moved well with the 6 pot ford engine which was almost certainly less powerful than the jap unit. 

  • 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.