Alenafour

I forgot what a pig's ear I made of posting this first time around. The red pipe is the pipe for the back pumping. Mind £100,000 plus to fill in a hole?

I agree, although they are horribly inconsistent in those they choose to help.

What size is that propellor? I'm guessing 24-26"?

There's a geezer selling 35mm slides on eBay, labelled "Original 35mm British Waterways Kennet and Avon Canal Narrow boat slide 1960's". I'm don't think they are the Kennet and Avon and would guess Grand Union. Nice images though. Over to the team...... http://www.ebay.co.uk/sch/m.html?_odkw=&_ssn=davephotopics&_armrs=1&_osacat=14281&_from=R40&_trksid=m570.l1313&_nkw=Original+35mm+British+Waterways+Kennet+and+Avon+Canal+Narrow+boat+slide+1960%27s&_sacat=14281

I missed the part where Alan's address or any other personal data were used in the article. If you don't consider this forum to be the public domain you are naive. A bit rich coming from someone who hides behind part of a duck's anatomy. Did you have an opinion on the article on CRT's risk assessment or are you just stalking again?

I'm sorry???? All the 'personal' details were out in the public domain by Alan Fincher and family on this forum. I might agree with your edit if this was an incident kept private by those concerned but that simply is not the case. I have read exactly that before and it's an accurate report of the Fincher's statements to the Wide World. it's pretty galling hypocrisy for Alan to then complain about this story being repeated because 'it affects his negotiations with CRT'. As I read it, the method statement dated a few days ago, still does not clearly address the issues and, as such, should be in the public domain. And for Starcoaster to claim journalist integrity is a laughable jibe at another journalist who time and time again brings CRT discrepancies to our attention. Perhaps she would like to show some of her proper journalism, the only stuff of hers I've ever read is the waterways equivalent of cute cats on Facebook. I see again and again, these accusations of 'CRT-bashing'. Why are they so bashable? If their discrepancies, incompetencies and mismanagement are not true they are easily defended. Do you think we should ignore them? Every single story I have read of Allan's comes backed up by facts and research of which I was unaware and I am very thankful to him for bringing these things to our attention.

And why should CRT's mismanagement of lock volunteers, of which you are not the only victim, lie under your claim to secrecy? it is a matter of concern to everybody. if it your contention that Allan's story misses salient facts - and we have only your veiled hints as to that - then you only have yourself to blame. This is not the first time it has been pointed out that you wrap your interactions with CRT in so much fog no-one knows what is going on. Allan Richards has revealed serious discrepancies and errors in CRT documents that directly affect boaters' safety. What, in your opinion, should he do with this information? If you had this same information, why did you keep it secret?

Ok, I can see my example went right over your head. Let me try and help you. Is it OK to report on a road traffic accident without asking all those involved for permission? court reports? You obviously, quite unconsciously, have a line somewhere. Where is it?

Good to see someone start to see the serious stuff contained within.

Tony puts it very well; cheap jibes. And what does this pathetic piece of content free sneer say? Why are you joining the bandwagon of people with fingers in their ears going 'nah nah nah' rather than paying attention to reports about real safety concerns. ....or do you think Alan Fincher is lying too?

You really don't get it do you? (why am I not surprised ) I'll try to explain simply; the article is not about your grandstanding chums.

So where, on the MJG sliding scale of man bites dog to World War III does reporting facts become secondary to sycophancy? I repeat; without over-reliance on smileys, point out the flaws in Allan's article. You're just pissed he scooped you.

It's an interesting, well researched and informative article on subjects that should be of concern to all of us. Unlike your rather childish and badly written post. As I say, I presume you level the same criticism at any news story where the protagonists were not asked to comment? Remind me of the falling subscription rates of the advertising vehicle you 'work' for. As someone who relies on trite sarcasm and emoticons rather than writing to make her point, perhaps you could point out to me exactly where Allan Richards has gone wrong in this article.

. .

Sour grapes. it's a report on the risk assessments and method statements involved in volunteer lock keeping with a passing reference to the Fincher's incident using details in the public domain. You, who call yourself a journalist, then diss him for not asking permission to retail this. The rest of the article seems well researched to me, especially in regard to the hastily and incompetently prepared document issued by Lee King. I suppose you'll be moaning next that the BBC didn't ask IS permission before reporting on the recent events in Palmyra? professional jealousy? or simple hypocrisy?

As I say, solar measurement is always a bit empirical, there are so many factors that come into play. You can only really get an objective measurement into flat batteries (or a short circuit) in clear sun with the panel pointed at the sun. Yes is the answer to your question. I bought them initially because of their reputation for low light performance and I have no doubt they probably are better but it's so marginal when there are so many other factors (for instance it's more difficult to keep them clean than a glass panel) that now I just buy what seems most cost effective at the time. It's the op that raises the interesting issue, that with strictly limited roof space is it worth going into realm of diminishing returns to maximise use of that space and my take is that no it isn't.

1. You're up against a sine wave and the reality that, in England you get 10% of the power in the winter in the summer. So one question is; what do you do with the other 90% in the summer if you meet your winter needs? 2. Solar energy input and boat electricity usage is not an exact science where you can tweak the numbers by a few percent and expect to measure the gains or losses. 3. Space is usually a limiting factor, except on fat flat boats, so simply go for as much as you have roof space for in a reasonably cheap panel format. Chasing diminishing returns is a mug's game because of 2. above. 4. For a limited use boat such as you describe 24 amp hours which is a fridge in the summer and lights in the winter, 250-500W seems a good place to aim at, it also puts you in the range of affordable controllers. The low light performance is, in my experience, a myth. Amorphous panels were originally designed for the American military with durability in mind. They are very robust, I have a 64W with a big scratch in the plastic that performs exactly the same as one without.