Tony Brooks
Patron
-
Posts
26,115 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
114
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Gallery
Blogs
Store
Posts posted by Tony Brooks
-
-
Be aware that the vast majority of the Thames banks and river bed are owned by the adjacent property owners and they may not allow mooring or charge for it. If you don't know how to look after yourself and boat when rivers go into flood, then my advice would be get a berth in a marina, and the only ones close to Oxford that I can think of are Oxford Cruisers near Eynsham or the marinas at Osney. I don't think Bossoms Boatyard accept bats as large as yours.
-
10 minutes ago, Tracy D'arth said:
Sounds like its a standard RCR make work, make money, job.
I didn't know that there was a fuel solenoid.
I wonder if it is an electric fuel pump. The only other solenoid I would expect would be a stop solenoid, but neither should be under the engine.
Still, lets hope RCR are correct this time.
-
5 hours ago, Maudesmaster said:
I have manual head torqued down and push rods for No 1 cylinder in place
trying to establish which stroke to adjust tappets
As an old Scottish ship mate used to say “Mar Heeds a boiling “ I now know what he meant going back to Canterbury to see if the experts there can explain it in dummy narrow boat owner lingo
thank you all for input
Basically, you adjust the valve clearances when the cam follower is on the back of the cam. Cams are normally shaped like a section cut down through the centre of an egg. The back of the cam is the end with the larger diameter. In this position, the valve clearance will be ta its maximum. Whatever method of setting the engine to the correct position you use, it will be designed to set the cam follower on the back of the cam.
Note, there are cams that are more rounded than egg shaped, and these are normally adjusted with the engine running. As far as I know, it is mainly General Motors companies that do/did this, so certainly not most UK engines.
My method works because the heel of the cam is 180 degrees of rotation around from the peak, so set the valve fully down means the cam follower is on the peak. The question then is, "how do you know when the cam shaft has turned through 180 degrees". That is easy because the cam shaft turns at half engine speed so if the crankshaft is turned through 360 degrees (one full turn) the cam shaft will have turned through 180 degrees, so the cam follower will now be on the back of the cam.
Although I will always say follow the manufacturer's instructions, the Gardner method seems a bit complicated, but it seems clear enough to me. It is still designed to get the cam follower on the back of the cam.
Don't worry about which stroke, just get the follower on the back of the cam. Both valves will be closed around TDC compression
As both are at a very similar position and the back of the cams have a number of degrees of rotation where they do not lift the follower, it allows you to use piston pairs on an engine with an even number of cylinders and this is what I think is confusing you. Using piston pairs that is not possible on your engine, you would set the non-adjusting piston pair to be around TDC between exhaust and inlet stroke. That puts the adjusting cylinder at BDC
-
20 minutes ago, jonesthenuke said:
I suggest following the instructions in the Gardner manual valve clearances.pdf
If you need a manual PM me
As there are specific instructions, then I agree, but I am still unclear where the 0.254 something came from, certainly not your manual extract, and it is about a quarter of an inch. Not likely for setting valve clearances.
The method I described will meet the Gardner requirement of having the piston at the top of the compression stroke, almost certainly within the TDC ineffective crank angle.
-
3 minutes ago, howardang said:
If you are serious about combining offshore cruising with inland waterways my suggestion would be, before you waste time, energy and mony on building a compromise vessel, is to get some experience of offshore conditions and requirements (and limitations. You mention certain requirements but you don't speak of any experience of conditions offshore, and the demands required of a boat and crew. Have you any knowledge of realistic conditions which you may find and level of experience required to be confident in venturing offshore. This sounds very much like a pipe-dream which will never come to reality. Much better to take the earlier advice to buy a narrow boat and spend some time exploring inland waterways and then see if your dream exists. If so, get some experience in offshore boats - possibly by taking a few RYA courses, before wasting money on what might be an unrealistic pipe-dream.
Howard
Totally agree. I understand that the crew on I Frances (the "narrowboat" that crossed the Atlantic) said never again because of the discomfort and the fact they went backwards for much of the time.
-
What are you asking, because I can't see where you tell us what you are trying to do.
Adjust the valve clearances?
Set the injector pump timing? But why you would need to do that for just a head change, I don't know.
Something else?
Assuming you mean valve clearances, the way I would do it on any three-cylinder engine is:
Turn the engine until one valve is fully down, and use a bot of chalk or crayon to put a witness mark on the front pulley or flywheel. Align it with any engine feature that is convenient.
Turn the engine one complete turn until the witness mark realigns.
Adjust the clearance on that valve.
Rub out mark and repeat for the other valves.
-
40 minutes ago, Jen-in-Wellies said:
Totally off the wall idea and happy to be shot down in flames. How about two narrowboats? Use them as a motor and butty on the narrow canals, then bolt them together to form a catamaran for wider canals and the sea.
I know roping together is not the same, but did that chap who took a full length pair to the Black Sea by water all the way get into a spot of trouble doing this. Not sure if it was in the channel, but I know he sunk one on the Rhine.
I suspect the stresses in the bolts and struts if needed would be very great in a side swell, so again he needs a naval architect.
-
17 minutes ago, dreamboater said:
Is it possible to get a standard sea-going boat that will fit on the inland waterways? If so then I would be open to buying rather than building.
I have done around half of the canals but the goal is to be able to do both in the same boat.
I think the only one that comes close is a specific model of the Freeman 23 (not sure about the 23) but that is only 23ft long with a beam of 7 feet so may jam in some narrow locks. Typically, they had a small Ford petrol engine. I doubt it would do 10 knots, and I would not fancy being in a rough sea with it.
-
Be aware a boat built to narrowboat dimensions crossed the Atlantic (I Francis, I think) so have a Google for that.
A slightly modified boat destined for a GU hire fleet did a number of seagoing voyages, one to the Scilly Isles I think. (Ocean Princess, I think)
The owner of Lee Sanitation had a modified narrowboat that did a number of costal and cross channel voyages.(NB Progress)
It has been reported here that pilots on the Severn and Wash have expressed surprise at how well standard narrowboats ride the sea.
None of this is intended to say any old narrowboat will do, but it shows it is perfectly possible in narrowboat dimensions.
I am not sure current battery technology is up to an electrically powered sea boat, especially as the power required tends to increase by the square of the speed.
I think that you need to consult a Naval Architect and work out how you will get the documentation for the Recreational Craft Regulations. Since about 1998 there are rules about building and fitting out new boats.
If I were planning this, I would want to ensure that the ballast is securely held in place because with a narrow beam it is likely to roll badly and the last thing you want is the ballast shifting.
-
45 minutes ago, Michael Siggers said:
Dying to get back on it now as I want to check the back of the Key switch to check the connections. I'm guessing if it's an internal short then the worse case scenario is a new Key Switch.
Yes, but I am sure that you can find a non-Bukh switch to do the job. It is likely to be cheaper, but note few have a "turn anticlockwise to stop" position and no glow plug position between ignition on and start. However, if all you can get is one with a glow plug position, there is no reason not to use it and ignore the glow position. If needs must you could even fit a separate stop button, but it all depends upon costs.
-
12 minutes ago, Michael Siggers said:
Good Afternoon
Hoping someone may be able to shed some light on a problem which has started today.
I had to move the boat this morning so that it could be taken out the water for blacking. All good so far.
The problem came to light when I had to turn the Engine off. On the Bukh, to turn the Engine off, the key has to be pushed in and turned to the 11 o'clock position, at which point the buzzer sounds, the engine stops. The key is then turned back to 12 o'clock and removed.
However, this morning, when I did this to stop the engine, the engine stopped but the Oil and Amp light came on and stay on, even when the key is turned back to 12 o'clock and removed. For the last week it has been fine as I've been crusing in it. It was fine yesterday when I arrived back, so not sure what has changed overnight. The lights do go out if I turn the Engine Ioslation off, but come back on when I turn the Engine Isolator back on, even with no key in.
The ONLY thing which I did this morning, by mistake, is that I unplugged the Shoreline from the boat first before the land connection. I had turned the Victron Inverter on before unplugging to maintain 240V.
I spoke with Nick at TW Marine and he has suggested that a short may have developed on the connections on the rear of the Key Switch which I will be looking at as soon as possible, but just wanted to see if anyone had any thoughts.
Just seems odd it was OK yesterday and now today, it's decided not to be.
Kind regards
Mike
The lamps are definitely getting power, and I agree with Nick that a short between the switch terminals is one possibility. Another is that the ignition switch has developed an internal short. However, on my DV36 the key became so worn that if you were not careful you could take it out when only partially turned back to the OFF position from either stop or ignition on position, so make sure it definitely is in the OFF position.
Those two lights are the only ones that should come on with the ignition on and the temperature gauge should also "kick" as the ignition is turned on with a cold engine.
This has nothing to do with the shoreline.
-
2 hours ago, David Mack said:
I suspect the main issue is that the number of such craft coming onto the market is small, and by the nature of being exempt from some RCD requirements at the time, these craft do not have full documentation. So the BMF and the brokers are erring on the side of caution by declining to deal with such boats. Selling them (as a broker) would not be illegal, but why take the risk?
That is my view as well, but if the brokers' trade body advises not to sell such boats, it would be a brave or foolish company who did so.
58 minutes ago, Paul C said:See above - they don't use the term "selling", they use phraseology which is more wide-reaching.
And I think that is what some here are choosing to conflate with "the seller". Doing so just confuses the issues, and maybe that is what they intend to do.
2 hours ago, BoatinglifeupNorth said:You and @Alan de Enfield keep going on about brokers refusing to sell boats without naming any, so I would say it’s you that needs to prove and back up your words and not me to waste my time.
You are calling Alan and myself liars, so it is you that need to prove your assertion. If you do not, I trust that you are aware that you have broken the forum rules.
You just want to fling mad at your selection of members while declining to prove your assertions.
-
20 minutes ago, MtB said:
Swerving off at a tangent, what is someone supposed to do if they own a boat now defined as 'in scope' when it didn't use to be?
A widow for example inheriting a boat owned by her deceased husband and she needs to get rid? Is she supposed to keep it until it rusts away? Scrap it? Give it away? How can she dispose of it lawfully?
This seems to be another problem area. If the boat had full pre-revison RCD documentation ad had had no major alterations, then I don't think there would be a problem. I also don't think that just fitting solar panels or changing one CE marked cooker for another would count as a major alteration. I can see a problem (which I think the lady who posted a while ago had) with a pre-revision self fit out boat that never needed to comply with the RCD, so had no documents. As I see it all she has left if she can't find a broker to handle it, is a private sale to someone who does nor care about the RCR/RCD, even if it is at a discounted price.
I think it is a mess produced by legislators who have absolutely no comprehension of UK inland boating and have had no reason to review their work.
-
3 minutes ago, BoatinglifeupNorth said:
Please define what you call an “In Scope Boat” or is it basically a boat built post RCD introduction 1998. Do you know of any specific BMF Brokers that are turning boats built post 1998 away because of non conformity RCD/RCR, if so as you’ve been asked please name the Broker😱
An "in scope boat" is any boat that is supposed to comply with the RCD/RCR as they stand at this time. That is it, nothing else. What this is all about now is what makes it an "in scope boat" and that is where there is argument and disagreements. I am secure in my mind that there have been cases, some posted on here, where a post construction assessment certificate has been demanded. I am sure that if you were more interested in finding the truth, rather than justifying what you think, you could do a search and find them. You and the others who seem to be promoting the idea that RCD/RCR documentation is not important look to me like all you are doing is sticking your head under the sand. You and others asking for specific names could always try contacting a few brokers asking about selling a modern boat without the documentation. Then you and they can list those that refuse and those that accept such boats.
6 minutes ago, MtB said:Seconded.
Nobody seems to really know what an "In Scope" boat actually is.
Is a self-build done in 1998 an "In Scope" boat? If it is, does it now need a £4k RCR inspection and declaration of conformity (or whatever it is called?)
How about a 1998 boat with full RCD ticket and a vintage engine (say)? Does that need the same? Would it even pass RCR with the vintage engine?
The problem in both cases seem to have come about with the latest revision that seems to have brought (note seems) more boats into scope, e.g. self fit out boats that were exempt, or boats post 1998 that have been fitted with any non CE marked engines - be they vintage, non CE marked second-hand. or weird one off imports.
I agree that nobody seems to have defined exactly what an in scope boat now is, but I don't see how we can be sure until there is some case law, and at the present rate of prosecutions that seems to be an exceptionally long wait.
It is all very unsatisfactory, but as things stand I do not think it responsible (not aimed at your posts) to suggest that not having the correct documentation will never cause any problems when selling.
-
2
-
-
32 minutes ago, PaulD said:
Question. There are multiple references here to the responsibility of a distributor to ensure products have a declaration of conformity. But is a broker a distributor or an agent? A distributor is someone who buys and then resells a product. An agent is someone who assists the owner to sell. In other industries an agent is not responsible for compliance.
I agree, it looks like a grey area. As I said, insufficient case law to clarify the situation, but the BMF, who presumably consulted experts in the field, seem to suggest they are distributors. However, does that mean Apollo Duck etc. are also distributors as defined. They publish adverts and I think allow videos of boats.
In the context of this discussion, I don't think it matters what the regulations may or may not say, what matters is the interpretation the BMF has advised their members, and it would seem that they think the brokers are distributors as defined by regulations - correct or incorrect.
-
36 minutes ago, BoatinglifeupNorth said:
Especially the two posters that jump on every RCD/RCR/Compliant Paperwork Post on here and start quoting the Law and Brokers refusing to sell boats and I’ll name them @Tony Brooks @Alan de Enfield 😱😱😱😱😱😱😱😱😱😱
I suggest that you CAREFULLY read my posts on this subject. I only ADVISE (you do know what that means, I assume) that buying an in scope boat without the full RCD/RCR paperwork may cause problems later on. Whereas your "advice" along with others seems to be that it there are no risks associated with buying an in scope boat without the relevant paperwork. You will also note that earlier in this topic I pointed out that a private sale would be one way around the broker problem. If you can read AND understand you will also grasp that I do not state things as definite, but do state as a possibility.
-
45 minutes ago, MtB said:
A list of brokers who do not demand all RCR paperwork in place would be equally as useful to people seeking a broker. Whether they are buying or selling.
That would be nice for those wishing to sell, but might equally put a regulatory spotlight on the named brokers. If what Alan has posted is correct, then I think we could conclude brokers who are not members of the BMF or associated organisations would be the ones to look for. This in no way is intended to suggest what Alan has posted about it is incorrect, I simply don't know, but to my mind it seems likely.
-
Just now, MtB said:
Is it?
Despite repeated requests from various posters for names of brokers refusing to sell boats with missing RCR, I'm not sure I've ever seen such a broker actually named.
Why is everyone so coy about saying which brokers are complying with what they perceive as the law? It makes no sense to me.
I am sure that we have had a post from a lady who had had a broker demand the boat be certified, although she did not name them, and after an earlier exchange on this topic I had a PM or email from someone confirming that is the case. I don't think that we get much further, saying that unless the brokers are named this is all a mirage.
-
3 minutes ago, blackrose said:
I'm not doubting K&N's ability to manufacture an air filter, the point I'm making is that different filters will naturally allow different maximum airflows depending on their construction and overall size. Therefore I'm asking whether putting a random spec air filter onto an engine that will also have a specific airflow requirement might restrict that flow if the filter chosen happens not to have adequate airflow for the engine?
The specification of an air filter is not solely governed by the size of the connection to the engine surely?
The size of the inlet manifold connection will be determined by the engine manufacturer in relation to the air flow required, so there will be a relationship between connection size and required air flow.
Another point s that K&N main market is petrol engines, that when tuned, have peak revs of over 6000 rpm. Few, if any, boat type diesels will rev at much over 4000 rpm, so the maximum air volume required will be less on our types of diesels.
I suspect the OP may have a BMC 1.5 engine, so there is a good chance he could fit anything from a BMC B series engine, the MG specialists may be able to help, but the exhaust manifold cum header tank may get on the way.
-
12 minutes ago, MtB said:
It all strikes me as horribly ambiguous and not nut and dried as Alan tries to make out.
Isn't there also a qualification mentioned somewhere along the lines of RCR applying to a boat "First being made available on the market"?
Or was that RCD only and now superceded by RCR?
I agree on both counts, Alan's and the ambiguity. I think the problem is that there is not sufficient case law to clarify exactly what the regulations mean in practice, so people (the brokers) are erring on the side of caution.
We can discuss this ad nauseam and try to find excuses for why the regulations may or may not apply, but it is clear that right now brokers are refusing to handle boats and no matter what any individuals may think and say that is a fact people wanting to sell via a broker must face. It is of no help to them trying to pick holes in the regulations and their applicability.
-
16 minutes ago, blackrose said:
Is it ok to just whack any old air filter onto an engine? I would have thought the engine spec is relevant here? Different engines will require different amounts of air and if the random filter you happen to fit restricts air flow too much that wouldn't be a good thing.
As K&N are a respected name in engine tuning circles, they are unlikely to produce an air filter that restricts the air supply. The filter linked to will fit, I think, a BMC 1.5 and although the filtering look finer than the wire mesh on the "standard" it has a far breather area so is very unlikely to restrict the air supply.
The range of filters fitted by marinises to engines around 1.5 litres capacity is large, from no filter as on the Vetus air boxes, through larger frying pan filters as per many Beta and Listers, to the small foam types fitted on some BMCs, and it seems to make little difference to exhaust smoke and performance, so I doubt the air restriction is a concern providing one does not do anything like fitting motor mower filter.
If I were the OP, I would just pipe the breather into a milk "bottle" stood in the engine drip tray. I think that would solve a lot of the filter fouling.
-
22 minutes ago, BoatinglifeupNorth said:
Is it? “apparently” please let us know the list then if you know any broker that 100% won’t sell a boat without a current RCR/PCA.
Lets comprise a list of brokers on here that sellers with older boats can use and not be forced into getting a new RCA/PCA by the broker.
I think it is only "in scope" boats that the brokers are demanding RCR/PCA certificates for. There is no reason for them not to sell boats that are not "in scope", so your request seems to show a degree of misunderstanding of the discussion, and apparently the law as it stands.
-
4 minutes ago, Tacet said:
Thanks, but I still believe there is an offence committed when someone claims or conducts themselves in a manner that allows others to reasonably believe they have expertise that they do not and the law expects them to deliver that expertise. If they do not, then an offence has been committed. (For clarity, a civil offence).
-
32 minutes ago, Tacet said:
A simple claim to exercise expertise not possessed is not passing off.
And your proof of that statement is? It certainly was explained as thus during my motor management law classes when I was studying for my professional qualifications. I have since seen no reason to doubt it.
Thames Rules for Continuous Cruising?
in New to Boating?
Posted
In my view that would make far more sense than trying to CC or get a large wide beam mooring on the Thames. However, there may still be a commute from a fair distance like Lower Heyford, but at least that has a railway station. It all depends upon how much time is available to get a mooring where you can live-aboard and keep your head down.