Tony Brooks

I suspect that he has no idea about what controls hull speed on a displacement boat, but going up the Trent with the tide I did sustain 10 mph on a satnav for a while - probably 5 mph tide and 5mph through the water.

And as the pump will be on the other side of the filters, exactly how do you think that will help. It will make the delay until the pump cuts in even longer. You will get an initial spurt of water without the filter restriction, but it will soon drop to what you have now, then it will say the same until you turn the tap off, so the new accumulator recharges. Open the tap and the initial spurt, dropping to what you have now will just repeat. I suppose that if you fitted an enormous second accumulator, it could supply a lot more water until the pressure dropped enough for the pump to cut in, but you have mentioned space considerations. So if you don't have room for a second set of filters, I can't see you have room for a giant accumulator.

FWIW the "standard" difference that is acceptable between cells is 0.03 while Lucas used to say 0.025, basically you look OK for now but with a suspect more badly sulphated cell. "Boiling" a cell should not "dilute" the acid. It would strengthen because it would be just water driven off (probably plus a very small amount of acid mist) it so when you toped up to the correct level and allowed the liquids to mix the strength should be normal. It is far more likely that some sulphur from the acid is now locked in the plates as unrecoverable lead sulphate.

Two or more sets of what you already have with their inlets fed by a common pipe and their outlets going to a common pipe. That way each may restrict the flow, but you get two or more times the flow by the parallel pathway. Hence, the pressure pre-filters drops faster so the pump cuts in sooner.

I think what you mean is that the resistance of the filters is so high, that when you turn the tap on the flow from the tap takes too long to drop the pressure in the accumulator and pre the filters, enough to make the pump cut in. I expect the cycling period with an open tap has increased as well. I very much doubt a higher pump cut out will help much because I think it is resistance to flow in the filters. The answer is to reduce the filters' resistances but as the OP talks about using canal water a larger pore size would be inadvisable, so all that leaves is one or more sets of filter piped in parallel.

I agree with that, except the way most narrowboats trim (stern down) and the way the tanks are constructed I think the tank would need a sloping bottom to bring any water and muck to the front f the tank where the drain would be. That means more costs.

That was the initial problem then, much as many of us suggested.

Don't worry, let's see if RCR have solved it. They were on site, the rest of us are not. Ignoring the 13V you mentioned, there is still every chance it was a faulty start battery, especially as I don't recall getting the cranking voltages or how you measured it, so there is no way we can be sure about anything.

In fact I think it would make for a very gloomy, stuffy boat, so it would probably fetch less than a comparable conventional boat.

Ian D answered that pretty fully. If he wants a sustained 10 knots, especially in adverse conditions, then he is going to need a big diesel generator to provide the power when is batteries run out, and at present that won't take very long at all. However, he does seem t be altering his wants to be a bit more realistic.

If they do, do that, then they are very bad engineers. It just needs a suitable energise to run stop solenoid, like the majority of cars, vans and probably trucks. That is not to say Barrus have not done so, but the only complicated system I have actually come across is the Lister one that converts an earth return engine to insulated return when running. I still don't see how a faulty stop solenoid can make the starter with a GOOD battery can ever make the starter click. A solenoid on the Lister system probably could though, but then it is not a stop solenoid.

Ditto from me.

I don't think any of that apart from the last is beyond a conventional narrowboat. the reason the last is iffy, is that it is a long costal passage with little, if any, shelter along the way, so it would be very vulnerable to changes in the weather. it is also shallow in sea terms, so is likely to build up larger swells with wind. My own personal views, others will differ.# With the comparatively large weight of ballast, most narrowboats carry they tend, to roll less than the narrow beam suggests but are still likely to be uncomfortable. They tend to cut through waves rather than ride over them, so large waves may well swamp an open well deck. If one did roll onto its side the as long as the ballast did not move it would probably right itself like RNLI lifeboats do. So, a thick (possibly 25mm or thicker) to avoid the need for loose ballast and any further ballast needed being steel and welded to the baseplate. Properly calculated ribs, stringers and possibly a keelson to ensure the hull can stand the extra stresses it is likely to suffer in a bad sea. No windows. but use proper marine portholes, so they are unlikely to blow in if a wave hit them. Trad stern with stern doors that can be close while boating to avoid a following wave flooding the boat. No well deck or a well deck with a removable watertight cover. Large bilge pumps for all bilges and the well deck. Folding or removable mast(s) to mount navigation lights to meet the regulations, also the VHF aerial. Valves on all the hull piercings. High (roof) level air supply vent for the engine. Exhaust with a proper high level swan neck so following waves can't flood the engine internals. But most of all, experience and knowledge so you don't put yourself and boat into danger. The design would need experience, hence a couple of us mentioning the need for a naval architect for the design and calculations.

That question shows that you seem not to have even looked at any of the online maps, guides or bought a guide book for the area. A guide book like Nicholsons will show where the marinas are located and TEMPORARY moorings are. They will also show that there are NO other canals/rivers available for power boating within 25km of Oxford apart from the Thames, its backwaters, and the Oxford canal. There is a short disused anal above Oxford, but it has not been navigable for years, and the last time I went pas the riier banks around its mouth were full of what looked like squatter boats. Your biggest problem is the 25km distance limit, if you ignore that you get the Kennet and Avon navigations so, as said, Reading and Newbury. I would mention that Thames and Kennet marina is on the non-towpath side of the river so you can't walk along the towpath into town. It is at the end of a long track at the outskirts of Caversham (south Reading) which is then a bus ride or cycle ride to the station. All day car parking at the station is expensive, so just adds to your costs. If you ignore the 25km limit the Burghfield Moorings operator was on here last year saying they had spaces for live-aboards, that is on the river Kennet so subject to flood flows. No such a long walk to a bus stop for a probably hourly service into Reading. Two marinas in Newbury, I think, and walkable to the station, but that means a change at Reading for Oxford if a car is not to be used. I fear that you have picked an area which is very popular with live-aboards, with all the problems that causes.

Water and pump out facilities are adequate on the Thames. The EA provide water points at a number of locks, while pump outs are at some locks and various boatyards and marinas. Those places where there is no riparian owner or the riparian owner does not enforce their rights are few, and those that there are seem to be full of "squatter boats" for much of the time. This includes some of the backwaters around Oxford. There are official EA moorings but they are for 24 hours only and some allow a longer stay but at £x a night (I have no up-to-date figures). I would suggest £10 would not be too far out except in places like Henley who charge more, especially during the regatta and festival. So you need to be within 15 miles of Oxford so there may be moorings at Abingdon Bridge Marina or Abingdon Marina. That would be a bus commute. Oxford seems to hate cars, so make driving into the city diffcult.

I think on the statements that you have given us that diagnosis has a number of inconsistencies UNLESS the battery had problems right from the start. Explanation: A lead acid battery in good condition and a good state of charge can probably provide thousands of amps for a while, a starter draws a few hundred amps rapidly dropping as the motor speeds up to perhaps something over 100 amps. Now, for a faulty stop solenoid to prevent the starter working it would have to draw many hundreds of amps so it robs the starter of the current it needs and all those amps would have to run down a small cable. That means the cable would get very hot, the insulation start to burn, and then the copper strands would melt so the cable would disconnect itself, then the solenoid could not draw any current so the starter could draw all it needed.

Thanks, that makes much more sense as far as the smoke is concerned, but unless the battery was in a poor condition or state of charge at the start of this saga, I go along with Paul C's scepticism. If the solenoid was drawing enough current to prevent the starter working, I think it's relatively thin cable would have caught fire and melted. Once the cable parted, the starts should be able to spin the engine, but possibly it would not actually start. I have my fingers crossed for you.