davem399

Wearing my cyclists hat (or should it be helmet?), I don't think that pedal power would be very effective unless you are able to harness the power of a dozen or more fit cyclists. A few years ago, I did some power tests on my bike in the Sports Science lab of the local university. At the time I was fairly fit and my max power was only 330 watts ie 0.33kW and this was achieved just as I "blew up" A more sustainable power output would have been in the order of 200 watts. If my conversion into old imperial units is correct, 200 watts is about 0.27hp. Probably not enough to move our 58 footer very far, and I certainly wouldn't be able to maintain that for 8 hours a day for a fortnight! Dave

Alternatively, they might make a judgement on whether or not you can afford the BW licence and put you at the top of the list of potential licence evaders!

Although I cannot comment on the owner that CS Man spoke to, by way of a reply I would like to put my side of the arguement. My annual payment is also of the order of £1000 for the next year, but this does not equate to an annual cost of £12,000 as I am a special share holder which gives priority on booking weeks as I need to book for the school holidays. Most of my co-owners pay less than this, so the annual cost is considerably less than this figure. This figure is an all inclusive figure (except for diesel, gas, pumpouts, etc) and covers regular maintenance, mooring fees (can be over £2000 at some marinas!), BW licence, insurance, call outs, management fees, and winter maintenance works as well. And it includes £1000 contingency sum for those unexpected expenses. Hence, taking 3 weeks on the boat each year works out at approx £350 per week plus running costs. I'm not sure of the exact costs of hiring at peak holiday times, but our last hire week cost almost £1100 back in 2001. Thus I can get 3 weeks shared boating for about the same as 1 weeks hire. Some of our owners take advantage of the "extra free" weeks available and have 4 weeks or more afloat, further reducing the weekly cost. Another plus point for me is that the base for the boat is changed every couple of years allowing me to see other parts of the canal network. Whilst the idea of owning my own boat eventually is a possible goal, (roll on retirement!) working full time and living in east Kent would currently make owning a boat a luxury I might find difficult to justify, as it would involve a lot of travelling around the M25 to get to any part of the network on a regular basis for long weekends etc. I'm not too sure I follow CS Man's arguement about the lost interest on money tied up in the share. Surely anybody who has either a complete boat or just a fraction of a boat has money tied up in it? In fact, by having just a share, I have less money committed than the owner of an entire boat? Sorry to ramble on, whilst it may not suit everybody, given my own circumstances, shared ownership is appropriate for me to allow me and the family to enjoy our canal system Dave PS my only regret? - I wish I started boating on the canals 25 years ago!

Next time I pass by this shop, I guess I won't see it unless I remove my blinkers! Perhaps I'll spend the money the scheme saves me in other places. Dave

As the old saying goes - "Give a man a fish and you can feed him for a day, give a man a fishing rod and you can make him miserable for the rest of his life"

My understanding (from reading The Anatomy of Canals series of books by Anthony Burton) was Brindley's decision to go narrow when it came to the construction of tunnels. If he doubled the bore of the tunnel to accomodate 14' boats, this would have quadrupled the volume of material to be excavated.

For what its worth, the crew and I have just Hearbreak Hill both ways in the past fortnight. General opinion was that the locks, especially the paddle gear, was easier climbing the Hill, ie in the clockwise direction. Dave