Tony Dunkley

C&RT's most problematic shower can be found in Milton Keynes !

If the engine is keel or skin tank cooled, then the gearbox cooler will be in the engine water circuit.

C&RT don't really see things in such uncomplicated ways. Back in 2014, in the process of groping for a plausible sounding reason for revoking the boat Licence I didn't have, they first went for~ " mooring [too much] whilst not cruising ", shortly afterwards to be changed to~ " cruising [too much] whilst not mooring ". Both of these somewhat unfathomable examples of utter nonsense, were then dispensed with in favour of claiming that my [home] mooring was a "ghost" mooring which did not in fact exist. By way of supporting evidence for this, they then produced various print-outs detailing many sightings of my boat at the mooring [that they claimed didn't exist] and a list of Invoices for Mooring Permits dating back some 6 years prior to me owning the boat and acquiring the mooring !

That's generally all good, sound advice, except for the paragraph headed "About Tides" :~ Twice a day tidal surges from the Humber come up the Trent at around 11 m.p.h., i.e. eleven miles further up the river the tide arrives one hour later. The surge is a level rise followed by no more than 3 hours of upstream flow, the ‘flood’, which diminishes in strength and duration as it goes up river, usually losing its battle against the natural river flow before reaching the weir at Cromwell. This explains why the upstream journey on the tideway can soon turn from exhilaration to tedium. The assistance you get going with the flood tide will be greatest on spring tides, but even then it can be disappointing if there is a large amount of ‘fresh’ coming downstream. Time your journey north to avoid fighting the flood by mooring at Torksey or Dunham as it passes. Why does this belief that the downriver passage is best made all the way on the ebb persist ? The 43 miles from Cromwell to Keadby will always mean that boats following this advice will be arriving Keadby Lock, or Stockwith for that matter, with a strong ebb running down across the entrance to the lock, and, particularly at Keadby, the likelihood of barely enough depth of water in the lock tail for them to get in.

I wonder what the bullocks and the farmer who owns them, thinks of you, . . . . you're probably just about capable of figuring out what my opinion of you is !

The only way to reduce the gear wheel movement from neutral into either gear, is to renew one or both of the clutches.

It isn't, . . . . it's nothing like a crown wheel and pinion arrangement, . . . . . either inside the box, or under the engine hole top. In the [vertical] operating column, which is secured with 4 x bolts to the gearbox casing, is a large square threaded 'nut', under the external threaded retaining collar, through which the operating shaft moves up or down. At the bottom end of the operating shaft is a smaller diameter and finer pitch thread which goes into a phosphor bronze trunnion, which moves the mainshaft, and thus the ahead and astern clutch cones, into engagement by means of a bell crank lever and yoke. There is no adjustment for wear on either the ahead or astern clutches. As the clutches wear the wheel simply turns a little further either way from neutral before the gears engage. The wheel shouldn't be heavy, or stiff, to turn, and if it is, then there's something wrong. Correctly set-up and in good order the gearwheel can be spun from neutral into either ahead or astern gear with only the thumb and fore-finger.

Can you post up the text of this 'Welcome, we'll be watching you' document ? I would be interested in seeing the most recent list of whatever 'obligations' C&RT are fantasizing over now.

You weren't doing anything wrong at all, . . . the C&RT bloke was an idiot.

It's a National, and the smaller diameter pipe is the cooling water overside. Some Nationals had an [air] intake manifold alongside the water manifold on top of the heads, but this one looks like the version with the air-box on the side of the block just below the heads.

Perjury can only be committed verbally. But, of course, there will only be 'something to lose' if the deception is exposed and proven in Court. As for penalties a Judge can impose in these circumstances, again I'm not sure, . . . perhaps Nigel [Moore] will enlighten us. Doesn't help as regards falsified written material filed as evidence though, does it !

Not without some photo's. None of the cooling system parts and components were made or sold by the engine manufacturer, so there's no way of knowing what you've got, or how it's installed and piped up, without seeing it.

I don't think so, . . . not in a Civil action.

Unfortunately, no, . . . . C&RT dropped the action just before it was listed for trial, so there was never any opportunity to air this, or any of the other flaws and blatant untruths in their evidence, before a Judge in open Court. I did pass copies of all of it to the [very un-independent] Waterways Ombiasman as supporting evidence in a formal complaint, but after conferring with C&RT's 'in-house' lawyers in the course of his so-called 'investigation', the whole matter was glossed over and dismissed as inconsequential in the Final Report, which, quite understandably, he felt needed labeling as 'Confidential'.

Don't quite know what you're getting at here ? The butty was always left to pull it's own gate open singling out loaded downhill in all the Junction locks in the same way, and you only needed a thumb-string if the lock bottom [chamber] was full-up, or the pound was well down, causing the butty to start going back just that bit sooner after the motor went ahead, and then to nip the motor to it's own side wall because it hadn't got far enough along before the butty's stern-end got drawn across the chamber as it began to get drawn along itself that bit sooner. The most important thing was for the butty steerer to loose the thumb-string at just the right time so the butty wouldn't nip the motor to own side wall, but would be moving as fast as possible before the snatcher got picked up.

I haven't used this stretch of river since July 2013, but back then, and for many years previously, there had been some signage to assist pleasure craft, but on only three of the worst of the numerous boat 'parking' spots. The deepwater channel does follow an odd line in many places, but there were warning boards up and downriver of Normanton Island [submerged training wall, with sometimes just a few inches of water over it, smack in the middle of the river in the long bight just about half a mile below Girton Wharf], a couple more boards either end of Scotchman's Shoal [roughly halfway between Fledborough railway bridge and Dunham Dubs], and a couple of posts to line up with down Marton Rack. Apart from those three places, there weren't any other markings on the river itself, but I'm told that the Trent Boating Association charts are pretty good, with a line to follow marked on them all the way from Cromwell to Trent End

You can sleep soundly, secure in the knowledge that you need not have any concerns about 'evidence' of past misdemeanors being kept on record. I can assure you that C&RT definitely do NOT keep damning evidence on record to use against boaters on some future date. In the event of historical evidence and records of previous 'overstaying' being needed for any any reason, they simply create and falsify them, as required at the time, . . . . . see Post #26.

It's unlikely you'll get anything resembling useful help or advice from the lock keeper at Keadby on how to get there and pen at [local] High Water [HW], but if you would prefer that, then I can give you dates and departure times [from Cromwell, Dunham or Torksey] to do it in daylight and within the restricted lock working hours. Cromwell to Keadby is 43 miles, and even if you go for the option of getting into Keadby at around the time of HW, you will still have some ebb under you for a good two thirds of the distance from Cromwell. To give you more flexibility in planning which day for making the journey, you could increase the number of options to some extent by starting off from the floating pontoon at Dunham [about four miles upriver of Torksey], instead of waiting overnight topside of Cromwell.

The shortcomings of C&RT's 'boat logging' system, and the inaccuracy of the information it collects and produces may be news to some, but the fact that it isn't 'fit for purpose' and never has been, is something that was established long ago. On 6 August 2014, the Trust got close to admitting as much in an E-mail ~ quote : ~ ". . . the information held within our corporate systems can be extracted and displayed in many different ways depending on the reason or purpose it is needed." This rare example of honesty and openness came shortly after they were caught out producing fictitious boat location print-outs as evidence to use in Court.

Here you are Graham, . . . if it's hypocrisy you're into today, have a look in a dictionary for what the word means, then read this :~ 8 September 2016 Canal & River Trust to improve customer support for boaters From early 2017 the Canal & River Trust’s Enforcement Team will become its Boat Licence Customer Support Team. This reflects the team’s ongoing focus and share of the time they spend supporting customers to meet the terms of a boat licence to stay on the water. As Mike Grimes, head of boating at Canal & River Trust, explains: “As part of the evolution of becoming a charity, we’re highlighting the emphasis we’re putting on supporting boaters. That includes improving the ways in which we communicate and interact with boaters as well as being there to help facilitate the support that’s available from external agencies for those in need. “For the vast majority of customers it’s about being there on the towpath or at the end of a phone to help them keep their licence rather than the minority where enforcement action is the unfortunate last resort.” Ends For further media requests please contact: Fran Read, national press officer, Canal & River Trust ______________________________________ History isn't my strongest subject, but I'm fairly sure that during the French Revolution, the 'team' who were sending a considerable number of the population for rather extreme haircuts, did in fact call themselves something like the 'Committee for Public Safety'.

Except that success is more likely in contrived and groundless actions if your lawyers have a well deserved reputation for bending the rules and indulging in dubious practices.

It looks as if both those kids have eaten the bread and cheese, because they reckon they can steer alright without it.

On the rare occasions they needed to be given, instructions about which way to steer, whoever they were given to, were in fact 'hold in' or 'hold out'. 'Hold in' meant steer [the boat or boats] towards the 'inside' [towpath side] and 'hold out' meant steer towards the 'outside' [side opposite to the towpath] .

Yes, the side-bed was always dead opposite the range. 'Side-bed side' may sound a bit long winded, . . . but the side-bed was quite short ! How does the chimney being on the side it is help it to clear bridges when the towpath's on the side-bed side ?

That's 'side-bed', as opposed to 'cross-bed', . . . and, no, the only [working] narrowboat equivalent of port and starboard, on the rare occasions when it was necessary to distinguish between the two, was 'chimney side' and 'side-bed side'.