Paladine

The engine is a GM 1.6D If the tacho proves to be defective, it will be replaced with some other brand. I have a Yazaki hour-meter and VDO (also Yazaki-made, I believe) oil pressure and water temperature gauges, so the replacement is likely to be a VDO tacho, which will match in with the others.

Yes, similar, but not the same, and what can be seen of the damaged label doesn't lend itself to ISSPRO. I wondered if it might be an old DURITE, but their current logo is nothing like, and the name appears on the front of all their current gauges. Of course, they may have have a different style 30-odd years ago, but I can't fine that either.

Thanks for trying. I found a website dedicated to logos and trawled through thousands, with the same result. I'm hoping that someone, somewhere, recognises the logo, or has a similar gauge (with an intact label) fitted in their boat.

My Internet and local enquiries have come up blank so far, which is why I I've widen the search for information. It's easy to replace it with a similar gauge, but I'm now hooked on trying to identify this one. It doesn't seem to be an El Cheapo, and I can't believe mine is the only boat that has one fitted.

As my original request for help in identifying the tachometer on my boat got lost in the recent forum outage (well done in recovering so quickly!), I thought I’d try again. The boat is a 1980s Bounty 30. The logo on the tacho is very distinctive, but trawling the Web for days has got me nowhere at all in identifying it. The label on the back of the instrument is sufficiently damaged to defy identification. From the revs = mph sticker, I would think the instrument is the original, from the boat’s days in hire. Neither the builder nor the hire firm remains in business, so I can’t ask them. The engine (which I also think is original) is a GM 1.6D. Can anyone identify the maker, please?

But there is an exemption from compliance with the RCD for "watercraft built for own use, provided it is not subsequently placed on the Community market during a period of five years;" (source)

There was a BSS consultation relating to hire boats, in which this was mentioned. On the Broads, it is a licensing requirement for hire craft to display the maximum number of persons allowed on board. It may be the same on the canals, but, as it seems that canal boats do not capsize, it may only relate to other sorts of hire boats.

This is a video of Norfolk Fire and Rescue training with throw lines in a mill race https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_pm8PwjoyfQ&feature=youtu.be The benefit of using a throw bag is that, after use the line is simply stuffed back into the bag, ready for re-deployment. Less likely to encounter a tangle than with an incorrectly coiled 'bare' rope. This is the make of bag they were using http://safequip.co.uk/product/safequip_rescue_throw_bag/ I bought one and have been pleased with it. Other makes are available. I have no connection with NFR or Safequip.

In terms of comparisons, of the 15 members of the national parks family, the Broads is the smallest in area (much of which is under water), comes 4th in the visitor numbers league, 3rd in the number of visitor days and 2nd (to the Lake District) in terms of visitor spend. The river tolls paid by boat owners provides 47% of the Broads Authority's income. What ain’t broke don’t need fixing. Thank you for your good wishes.

This is going well off topic, for which I apologise. Unlike the Broads Authority, which has a statutory duty to maintain the navigation, the Lake District NPA has no statutory duty to maintain the lakes. You mention the last 23 and 40 years. Well, just as a couple of instances, about 30 years ago the Limefitt Caravan and Camping site appealed against a planning decision. The Lake District NP web site reports that "In his decision, the Minister applied the sandford principle..." More recently, in 2013, an application by South Lakeland District Council to replace and improve jetties and a café, redevelop a car park and winter boat storage facilities, provide additional public jetty spaces and a boat/bike/canoe hire centre in Ferry Nab was refused, despite considerable support from local organisations. One of the objections quoted the Sandford Principle. The principle has been used in NPs and will be used again. Broads boaters don't need it and don't want it.

Forgive my ignorance, but I don't know where "up here" is, so I can't comment on your situation. As far as the Broads are concerned, conservation, enjoyment by the public and the navigation are equally weighted, unlike in national parks where conservation is given priority over the enjoyment by the public (in the event of an irreconcilable conflict). There is no national park that has a responsibility towards a navigation.

Yes, after a fashion. There isn't actually any bye law that covers CCing. Subject to the normal toll, BSS certificate and insurance, there is no control on how far a boat may or may not travel in a given time. The only restriction I can think of is where to moor. If you have your own mooring or have access to private moorings, you can come and go as you please. However, if you wish to make use of the 24 hr free moorings provided by the Broads Authority, then you can only moor for a maximum of 24 hours and cannot return to the same mooring (or one withing 500 metres of that mooring) for another 24 hours. Although it is not common, there are a small number of boats used as live-aboards 24/7, which have no home mooring. The Sandford Principle.

I am a long-time lurker on this forum, but, as I do my boating on the Broads, I just read the posts with great interest but have never posted before. However, to suggest that moving to the Broads will somehow avoid the types of perceived problems there are with CaRT is, frankly, nonsensical. I do not wish to hi-jack this thread, so please don’t jump all over me, but some facts need to be stated. All is not rosy on the Broads. The Broads Authority have just declared the Broads to be a national park, despite the fact that Defra repeatedly tell them that it is not legally a national park, having been incorporated by totally separate and individual legislation. There is a Facebook group called 'Protect the Broads we are not a National park', which has nearly 500 members. There is an online petition here http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/74305 that gives a flavour of the discontent (please sign it if you see fit). The latest criticism is that one of the members of the Authority was ineligible to apply for appointment, but that didn’t seem to matter to Defra, who appointed him any way. Details can be read here http://www.the-norfolk-broads.co.uk/viewmessages.cfm?Forum=48&Topic=36279&srow=0&erow=8 I’ll now don my tin hat and retire to my bunker.