magnetman

Yes I see what you mean shit the actual platform. Maybe that is the problem. I guess there is not a facility to update according to circumstances. The words 'lost everything' are so there on the website.

Yes that is true however the words are still there on the GFM page right now. This incident was clearly used to drive traffic to content. It was over-exaggerated for gain. Tell me I am wrong.

He can't debate my points so resorts to offensive language. This is a logical fallacy.

I didn't edit anything out. I said it how I see it. I can say it again. Claiming that people 'lost everything' was not accurate. Using extreme language like that to drive traffic to online digital content is dangerous because it can potentially erode trust. If the wording was "people are standing on the towpath at 4am in the rain looking at their Boats which are in a field full of water" would it have got £100k? "Lost everything, their homes clothes and possessions" is wording which should have been updated when it became obvious the next day what the actual position was. Particularly for the vessel called Pacemaker because all that happened to that one is it why aground in a flat canal bed. It's incredibly unlikely that there is any damage more serious than broken wineglasses. I guess I am alone in being concerned about morals and trust. Nobody else cares.

It is technically against forum rules to use ad hominem attacks because it degrades the discussion. There are other people reading it. If you want to robustly support the principle of random of the public being allowed to fly drones over other people's gardens then kindly do so without calling me a tool.

No need to get personal. You are welcome to stay and debate my points. I have never referred to your personality just made various points. I have no idea who you are and I have never watched a YouTube vlog video. I have extracted useful information from some with volume of and skipping through at high speed.

I don't dislike GFM as such I just think claiming people have 'lost everything' to drive traffic is wrong. Maybe it's okay for most people but this is erosion of trust. It's just not good. You are correct that I should stop going on about it 👍

I wonder if it might be the bearing on the fan. Perhaps a recommended service interval for the fan has been ignored. Easy to check. With everything switched off at the isolators spin the fan blade by hand and see if it rumbles.

I am neither cranky nor old. I am concerned. This whole story bothers me enormously as there is a massive moral hazard : This is not a good situation. The statement made on the original page is misleading. I won't go any further because accusation is not appropriate but this is a significant problem. Anyone who can read and understand English can see what has happened here. It can be demonstrated that nobody 'lost everything'. Yes some Boats were damaged as well as belongings but 'losing everything' is very powerful and emotive language driving sympathy and is not an accurate representation of fact. If this makes me cranky I shall wear the label. Extractive empathy is a powerful tool but it must be used carefully to avoid straying outside of basic universal moral boundaries. The thought of someone else 'losing everything' particularly just before Christmas is horrifying but this did not happen. The words are very specific. It's not impossible that people actually thought this happened.

There used to be a little cafe by the top lock there. Closed in the mid 90s. It was a proper old school greasy spoon. Building on the right of the picture.

I seem to recall from some previous suggestion "it is ok to take the piss just don't take the piss as badly as those who are taking the piss really badly and it will be fine" Problem is that the CRT come along and redefine what "as badly as" means and it all goes haywire. And the rest will be written in very tiny history books of no relevance.

KENNET is nice Boat. Some potential for eyebrow raising with the hydraulic drive and all that but at the end of the day (quite literally this scenario) it's handy to have somewhere to sleep lying down.

Not part of the embankment

Exactly. People are getting involved in interpersonal conflicts while the system is falling apart 'so it seems' at the seams. At the end of the day it is just a land use problem. The fact that some people who had shareholders made good money by getting statutory instruments which caused people to dig channels and do all the locks &c does not amount to a hill of beans in reality at this point. The Bridgwater thing is the interesting one because there is an Act which obliges the owner (BCC) to fix it. One to watch. The Welsh branch of the SUC will probably go back up in the currently non navigable section which is good. Impermeable lining. Nice thing to have

The British canal system is an endlessly beautiful work of art with very few equals but at the end of the day not many people are bothered and it's mostly just a water transfer route from the Dee to the reservoir in this situation.

Is there an installation guide? Also why did you do the thing in the second paragraph? Products like this have been sold as 'silent' or 'super silent' when they are actually quite noisy. It's a marketing problem because there is no law which defines a decibel limit for 'silent" It's based on perception. Nobody is actually going to think that a Diesel engine is silent. This won't happen in reality without very serious soundproofing/distancing and everybody knows this. If there is a decibel rating then that should be accurate but "silent" or "super silent" is just marketing bullshit.

Briggs and Stratton should have stuck with their hybrid motorcar.from 1980. Fast forward 45 years imagine how good this would have ended up being. It's a funny coincidence that the CRT was created the same year that residential squatting was criminalised. The problem is that a lot of the squatters who had caused the problems which resulted in the ban quickly noticed that the canals were a useful poorly regulated zone to exploit. Guess what happens next. I have been banging on about this for the last 15 years it's not a new theme for me

Water supply.

I had one of these. Nice things but very inefficient. I think the army had these or similar as they were reliable with minimal electronic gubbins.

Yes. R only thing which can potentially prove negligence is if someone has reported the leak where the wooden fence was and explicitly said it was a danger. Without that proof or the CRT inspection saying it was dodgy 😁 it's all hindsight which is something that everyone in the whole world has very large amounts of. Engineers in this field do know that if water is leaking through short piling in this situation that is the cause. The fenced off part is the key here. This is the cause of the phrase "when you get a water path" but if nobody flagged that specifically then it can easily just be described as a random failure of a very old earthwork.

I remember when this started. Someone realised you can sell canalboats 'off the shelf' (they must have had very big shelves) and that a microelectronics based inverter produces 230/240v "Mains Electric". Nice and small and quiet. In the mid 90s when I first got into a residential Boat inverters were a bit unusual. An expensive luxury and there were those rather cool rotary converters which had a 12/24v motor which turned a 230V generator. How cool! Mains electric aboard without fuel burning machines ! Of course there have always been generators but this changes the story. Point being that by marketing the foating metal box as something which has 240 electric (inverter) but failing to mention that you have to run the engine for a very long time you can sell things which look like floating apartments to ignorant people. The 240 is the key which unlocks the door to the sales. Couple this with the general idea that a Boat means a Wonderful Life and you have a very good way to sell dreams to people which very often end up as nightmares. Ker Ching.

You must remember, while engaging in the pile-on, that without the keyboard warriors (as well as the keyboard worriers) the real 'experts' would have no audience. So in fact it can be demonstrated that anyone who is also posting on a forum such as this, which is a social network rather than a forum with trusted 'insiders', is actually engaged in a social exchange contract. It does not matter what other people post about the engineering solutions to a collapsed canal embankment. It's quite an interesting phenomenon. By saying someone is talking out of their arse all you are doing is attempting to alter the social dynamic. That actually doesn't help. Hierarchy is very important in human society. It actually makes zero difference what the individual knows or does not know in any given situation. Online interaction breaks a very basic part of the social contract. The other person isn't there. Social hierarchy is blind. I suppose this is a bit high brow for a discussion about what to do with a couple of narrowboats which ended up at natural ground level when a canal embankment failed. I will try to be more serious in future

Improved regulations and the 'do one' theme. Coming to a thread of water near you soon.

People who have Boats generally understand that they are in a very fortunate position. I don't fully understand why someone would not have any Boats but that is quite probably just a personal thing. I therefore suggest that a person who is lucky enough to have spent significant amounts of time upon one of these marvelous floating articles is probably mathematically less likely to pursue a claim for negligence than someone who has not been so fortunate. The negligence claim, if it comes, will be from someone who resides upon the land. They might have a Boat as well but they will be a land person. Of course there is the rather obvious point that canals are just repurposed land with water on top but that is a different topic.

You are right. It is a massive failure of society which is why these drones need to be banned. By writing what you did your are confirming that you understand what I am referring to. Technology advance, as certain people identified years ago, must be handled very carefully. Without strict controls on these kinds of devices the "failure of society" (your words) accelerates and becomes unmanageable. As you also mentioned in your post the video content is too engaging for a very short time "only lasted 24hrs". It's like a hit. Governments need to sort out these things or there will be serious trouble. Banning drones for non commercial needs doing. Yesterday.