magnetman

I thought it was bass. Like the music thing. Treble and Bass.

Bass as in the bass line. Jumping off buildings with parachutes. Taking a fish would be a contenchus approach, a bit ruffe and also rather bleak. Salmon else might try it.

Lastermaster.co.uk will laser cut to size in various different materials. ETA this is for metal articles not wood. I prefer metal adjacent to a hot flue personally. https://www.lasermaster.co.uk/pages/online-order You select the ring/washer the. put in material required and thickness then inside and outside diameter. Then they cut it and post it to you. Its a good service I have used more than once. Comes up at £22.52 including free delivery. Also you want it a little bit bigger so my use of 150mm was incorrect. Better to have put 155mm. I think aluminium is cheaper than stainless steel.

I had a relative who died in a terrible fire which was directly.attributed to a linseed oil soaked rag idly left on a windowsill in one their houses which they had the misfortune to be occupying on a somewhat lascivious weekend involving quite a number of young women. It was actuatually quite a nasty situation because that particular house was not insured. So it is best not to have linseed oil soaked rags.

I must have misunderstood the term flyboat.

I bet these geysers would love the Airbus A380.

Umpire launch. i am going to Henley on Saturday with my striped blazer. I will be on my Eton Racing Boats coaching launch called PODIUM. The one in the picture is a modern GRP copy of the original regatta steam launches. Big petrol engines in these ones. Not sure about the width but they look about 6ft. When detailed discussions were in hand on the specifications for these new launches, much thought was given to the most desirable power unit to be installed. Both diesel and electric motors had their advocates, but after taking a range of soundings, it was decided to continue to use petrol engines, which could provide greater acceleration and had a better power to weight ratio. 1992: BOSPOROS sold by the Stewards to a Dutch buyer. OUBC re-registered the name. 1993: ULYSSES and ARGONAUT were launched in May 1994: BOSPOROS, the second of that name, a new 50' glass-fibre-hulled launch commissioned by OUBC was produced from the same mould as ARIADNE etc, and used as an Umpire's launch in 1994 and subsequently. In 1994 MAGICIAN last served as an Umpire's launch and was then sold 1995: AMARYLIS bought by Dr Walter Scott from CUBC for restoration at Freebody's yard. She then continued in use as an Umpire's launch. 2008: HERAKLES GRP composite hull on the lines of AMARYLLIS 1928. 4.3 litre v6 petrol engine https://thames.me.uk/s00930umpire.htm PODIUM is excellent for winding them up. I am on it already without even engaging in competition. Original name from the rowing club. Clever name really. If one is training a load of kids to be champions in an environment without much text reading the word PODIUM regularly is going to help. I just hope they don't all want to be on it as it is not very big

My mistake ! now edited so you can take it off your post too.

post removed. TMC not TMP. I read the TMC in the second post as being TMP.

Roll pin is definitely better. Not difficult to remove later with a parallel punch the right diameter. Split pins are a bodge really. ETA I suppose in a castellated nut it could be awkward to punch a roll pin out as the top might spread a bit. In a standard nut it would be easy. There is a risk that someone later undoing the nut may not realise it is pinned because the roll pin is hollow. So they might force the nut and get into all sorts of problems. At least a split pin is obviously a pin. It depends on who is doing the work and what they know.

A funny thing about Cigarette Island which is no longer an island because of the bridge being built and the rivers Mole and Ember being joined together in a man made channel: "In 1926 council plans were drawn up to convert the island into a public park, in part to curb the "ever-increasing nuisance of caravan dwellers and occupiers of sheds".[1] In the early 1930s the Mole was diverted into the River Ember and the creek was filled in, and the park opened to the public in 1935.[1]"" So basically 99 years ago there were caravan dwellers and occupiers of sheds. Now there are slum shantyboats. Plus ça change. I find this amusing.

Oh I thought you were on a Boat ! Apologies for the misunderstanding I am Boat-centric so will tend to miss this sort of thing.

Accommodation licences are interesting because they also apply for jetties and structures above Staines even if the land owner does own the riverbed.

Byelaw 57 covers this. 57. Mooring, anchoring and vessels attached to moorings a) The master or person in charge of any houseboat or launch who causes that houseboat or launch to be anchored moored or remain stationary during the course of ordinary navigation shall ensure that no annoyance be caused to any occupier of a riparian residence by reason of the loitering or delay of that houseboat or launch. the chalet in question was on the non towing path side. They owned the land to the edge but not the bed of the River.

It is interesting. I had a look at a small chalet which was for sale below Staines and it turned out the land parcel did not include the riverbed. I think in some cases savvy land owners have managed to buy the riverbed freehold but in areas where they have not maybe the EA should be collecting rent. In the Cherry Orchard Gardens case at Molesey the EA own the riverbed so the 'unauthorised' moorings to the towpath may be trespassing. But what about the million pound houses opposite? If the EA own the riverbed adjacent to their manicured gardens then presumably mooring a vessel would also be trespassing in the same way as it is on the other side. EA do not own the land in either case.

ETA a slightly easier to read website with more information https://the-river-thames.co.uk/manage.htm With regard to the River below Staines, a dispute arose in 1840 (at the time the Victoria Embankment was first muted) between the Crown and the City of London as to the ownership of the bed and soil of the River Thames. The Crown advanced the the argument that as the Thames was a navigable river it was an arm of the sea and consequently there was a prima facia case that the bed and soil, as far as it ebbed and flowed, belonged to the Crown by virture of prerogative. This dispute lasted for 17 years, but some 660 years after Richard II's Charter, the City of London finally agreed in December 1856, to withdraw all claims to the bed and soil of the River and admitted the claim of the Crown. In 1857 the Thames Conservancy Act was passed which created a new body, the Thames Conservancy, to control the Thames between Staines and Yantlet Creek. The Crown's land rights were re-conveyed to the Conservancy except in places immediately adjacent to a Royal Palace. The consideration was that one third of all future rents and fines were to be paid to the Crown with the balance used for the benefit of navigation.

The Thames was tidal as far as Staines until the pound locks were built. The bed of tidal rivers is Crown property. After the pound locks were built and weirs constructed to impound the water for navigation the riverbed from Staines (Church Island / London Stone) to the marker below Teddington lock was conveyed from the Crown to the Thames Conservancy with the exception of riverbed adjacent to Hampton Court palace. So below Staines the EA do technically own the riverbed unless someone can demonstrate otherwise. Above Staines the adjacent riparian owner owns the riverbed to half way across but of course in some instances land may have changed hands and bed ownership retained for reasons of privacy for example with estates who sold or transferred land parcels to others but retained ownership of the riverbed in order to help prevent inappropriate erections. From https://thames.me.uk/s00495.htm The most authoritative guide to the Thames anywhere on the internet. The EA are the latest successor after Thames Water (Thames Conservancy Division) and National Rivers Authority. So basically the EA own the bed and soil below Staines unless someone can demonstrate otherwise on their land registry deeds. London Stone Staines WHERE THAMES SMOOTH WATERS GLIDE Other Maps: Bing Aerial Map Google Street View StreetMap GoogleMap ......... . A claim was set up by the crown to the bed and soil of the river. The right to the conservancy of the Thames had been contested in the time of Queen Elizabeth, by the then Lord High Admiral, and decided in favour of the city; but the right to the bed and soil of the sea-shore, and of navigable rivers, between high and low-water mark, is comparatively a recent claim on the part of the crown. A bill was filed against the corporation to enforce this claim, and requiring them to show their title; and after protracted proceedings, extending over a period of thirteen years, a compromise was effected. The city, with a view to the interests of the public, consented to acknowdedge the title of the crown to the bed and soil of the river, and the crown consented to grant a title to the corporation, stipulating, at the same time, that a scheme, suggested by Government for the future management of the river, should be adopted and embodied in an act of parliament, which act has recently come into operation. The Thames Conservancy Act, 1857, placed the authority over the river Thames — within the limits of the ancient jurisdiction of the city — in a board consisting of twelve persons, viz. the Lord Mayor for the time being, two Aldermen, and four Common Councilmen, elected by the Court of Common Council, the Deputy-master of the Trinity House, two persons chosen by the Admiralty, one by the Board of Trade, and one by the Trinity House. The members are severally to remain in office for five years, unless otherwise removed, and are eligible for re-election. The revenue arising from the tonnage dues below bridge, and the tolls and other receipts above bridge, together, form one fund for the management and improvement of the navigation of the river; and of the receipts arising from embankments, or other appropriation of the bed and soil, one-third is paid to the crown, and the remaining two-thirds added to the general fund above mentioned.

The law says 'Moored vessels' which would cover any type of Boat.

If I did not have my LTO (bankrupt electric bus project) I think I would buy one of two of the cheapest Fogstar batteries. £220 for 100Ah with all the gubbins and a 6 year warranty. Seems alright to me and less hassle than DIY. I have no BMS on the LTO and they are only charged by solar.

None on the vessels were occupied. It's a bit crazy because several GRP Boats went through and just got broken up never to be seen again. There have also been two wide beans sunk on Sunbury main (B) weir and when the rower drowned in the Sunbury sluices (C weir) last October a small cruiser appeared when the sluices were closed during the rescue operation. Too many scrap vessels around. It's gone completely mad down there. Elmbridge have done a PSPO which is a blunt tool for management of their land. I think they are going to have a large bill for waste disposal coming up here. A good opportunity to engage local volunteers. Of course the EA own the riverbed down there so it's an interesting argument about who must pay to actually remove all the Boats. There was an interesting precedent at Maidenhead after the floods where a property developer paid a private contractor to remove sunken vessels from land he (developer) does not own. At Maidenhead the land owner also owns the riverbed.

I always wondered when I first got onto Boats what would happen if public opinion swayed from 'oh what a nice alternative lifestyle' to 'what a load of filthy squatters'. Some of the Elmbridge land is in a terrible state and will be very expensive to clear up. Add to this the fact that at least half a dozen vessels (I heard it was closer to ten) went onto or through Sunbury weir in the January 2024 major floods and this problem needs to be dealt with. It is not just moored and sunk Boats there is also junk and rubbish on the land alongside the River. It really is quite bad in some bits. Also there is a flood management question if weirs are getting blocked. Public opinion may now be moving towards viewing those living on Boats as a problem which is very sad. It's no use pissing off the locals because they will always win if you get into a fight. There are a lot more of them and they have a vested interest in their neighbourhood... It is obvious. NBTA is an anti establishment political group. Nothing to do with Boats it's just that one can live on them then try to claim rights which don't exist then when the rights get clarified one can moan against the draconian authorities. Persecution complex.

You would not have known me anyway we went down in 2003 if I recall correctly. Got as far as Cambridge and St Ives.

When we went down there in the early 00s the guillotine gates were mostly hand wound. There was one which had been motorised and operated with solar power but someone had stolen the solar panels and the batteries. It had hand wind backup. Also I seem to recall one with a radial gate rather than the guillotine but not sure of that was powered. Ditchford. What a great place name. A ford across a ditch.

Good point. When the Woman (born abroad to Moroccan parents) takes my kids in holiday it almost always involves visiting her mother. So this could also translate to ethnic minorities not hiring or owning Boats for holidays because they do something else.

I have seen one or two 'ethnic minority' people on the narrows but not many. Quite often seen on the River in day hire. I have formed a view that perhaps Boats are viewed as slum accommodation by some. My kids go to school where 99 percent of the pupils are of Bengali descent. Usually first generation ie parents born abroad. They are intrigued that my kids used to live on a Boat and seem to think it is a very low quality of life and that we were drinking canal water. It is important to understand that people with quite close links to third world countries think completely differently to those of us who have never experienced how awful it is to actually live in those places. Its a mindset so if people have shanty Boats that would be undesirable and frowned upon. People from third world countries exist in a completely different world to us.