tehmarks

Ignoring the sudden queue for Bumblehole Lock this morning, it's pleasant on the Staffordshire & Worcestershire at the minute. There's definitely traffic, but it's certainly not what I'd call busy. Not much moving on the Main Lines last week either — saw four boats, all within two minutes of each other, from Wolverhampton to Oozells Street. Hopefully they'll all remain on the Coventry and Oxford

Originally this thought came about from wondering whether one could design an electric propulsion system around a B-Box LVS/LVL installation. A 'full stack' of LVS modules is remarkably close to the peak current requirements of a Lynch Marlin 8kW, which intuitively seems a bit too weedy for a long steel narrowboat — and certainly if one want equivalence with their existing engine. This got me wondering about how much power one actually needs, because the obvious comparison is the days of horses. It seemed like an interesting thought experiment. The other obvious benefit is a potentially significant cost saving. I'm not suggesting that anyone actually tries to stick a tiny motor in a big boat, more a case of wondering how much reserve power for manoeuvring one actually needs. People constantly seem to rev the whatevers off their engine making routine manoeuvres, and I'm not convinced it's at all necessary.

Apologies, I haven't really explained myself properly. I don't mean a motor that is undersized for propelling the boat when cruising, I mean I don't think I see the point in fitting whatever the equivalent power motor is to a 38hp (in my case engine), for the reasons that mrsmelly mentions. If you can cruise along at a steady pace using 3kW, I don't really see the need to have a another 17kW in reserve to make up for a lack of anticipation. Obviously you do need excess power, but as boats seem to be over-engined to begin with, I'm not convinced you need anywhere near as much excess power as many people are including when designing electric propulsion systems. It's potentially important if you're designing a system around a proprietary battery system that has a defined peak current that can't be circumvented by throwing more copper at your custom bank of cells. Power seems to be many people's solution (including mine occasionally) to messing up and often even routine manoeuvring; is it not far preferable to just avoid the messing up to begin with, or to think ahead rather than relying on throwing it full aft as you arrive at full speed at the lock landing that was visible quarter of a mile away? Like I said, just a thought, and I'm interested to hear everyone's opinion.

But on the other hand, most leisure boats don't draw anywhere near as much water as a fully-laden working boat. And applying power in shallow water is going to increase your issues, not reduce them. I can't remember the last time I had to motor hard off an obstruction. Actually, that's a lie, I got stuck going through a toll island on the BCN recently. Power didn't help though - what fixed it (quickly and without too much effort) was getting the shaft out. I can't remember a time before that.

The premise is pretty simple, isn't it? Pass line around [bollard/strapping post/etc] and let it out in a controlled fashion. I don't see why passing a mile of boats would be an issue? Again I'm not talking about being towed from the towpath, but having an 'underpowered' boat. There seems to be a lot of focus on what size electric motor can replace a diesel engine, but I'm not convinced, on the still canals, that equivalence is necessary other than for those who try to solve every problem by revving up the engine? I think it'd be quite interesting to install an underpowered motor and give handling it a go.

To simplify it as far as I possibly can; if you cut a tree down and burn it, and replace it with a new tree, that new tree will, give or take, extract as much carbon from the atmosphere as you have created in burning the old tree. Furthermore, the carbon that the old tree sequestered was extracted directly from the atmosphere itself in the very recent past. If both sides of the equation balance, ie the source of the wood is sustainable, then all that is happening is that the carbon already present is being recycled in a constant loop. It's a balanced equation. If you dig up coal and burn it, you are releasing fresh carbon into the atmosphere that would otherwise never have been released. That is a huge and fundamental difference. It's adding new carbon to the atmosphere. Burning wood is not adding any 'new' carbon to the atmosphere. The issue isn't that there's CO2 in the atmosphere; the issue is that we're adding huge amounts of CO2 to the atmosphere that was previously permanently stored in solid form within the Earth. I can't put it any more simply than that; it's very basic science, it's taught at KS3. If you can't get your head around it and want to pretend that all is bad and therefore it's pointless trying to make a difference, I can't help you. I've also yet to find a carbon-negative method of heating, but please do tell me if you come up with something.

The carbon released from burning coal was sequestered millions of years ago. The carbon released from burning wood is equivalent to the carbon 'stored' by the tree from the atmosphere within its own lifetime. And so of course wood is better - you're generating no 'new' carbon, you're only reconverting back to the atmosphere what the tree has taken in from the atmosphere through photosynthesis. If the wood is sustainably sourced, it is thus effectively carbon neutral.

I don't mean in the sense of towing - I mean in the sense of learning how to handle a boat that is limited in manoeuvrability. Recycling past techniques like strapping the boat to a stop coming into a lock, etc. Not relying on having an extra 37 horses (so to speak) to get one out of tricky situations, but rather avoiding getting into them in the first place. That said, judging by the hire boat that smacked me yesterday and actually dented my hull, maybe that is a silly and dangerous idea...

I've been musing about electric boats a lot recently, as I'm planning my own long-term conversion. One thing that I can't help but think, when people compare electric motors versus diesel engines, is that boats were moved perfectly well in times of yore by a single horse. No aft gear, no massive excess thrust on demand. On the canals at least, would it really be such an issue to go back to more traditional boat-handling techniques rather than relying on excess thrust on tap to manoeuvre and fix sticky situations? Obviously beating upstream on a flowing river is a different matter - but many will never end up in that environment in the first place. Just a thought.

If one cruises past a...* 🙄

I'd agree with that definition, yes. I don't agree with the seemingly popular mindset though that you have to be on the move constantly. I fit living on the water around a full and busy life of work and other hobbies, and while I actively like boats and enjoy boating, I still take fullest advantage of most nice 14 day moorings that I come across. Am I a genuine boater? Anyway, sorry, I've gone off on a tangent.

What is this genuine boater nonsense that keeps coming up in threads like these? Granted, I appreciate it's a bit different on the rivers, but on the canals there seems to be a bizarre mentality that only people who cruise every or every other day are 'genuine' boaters. It is a shame that many of these always-cruising genuine boaters can't manage to lift their fenders when they cast off...but I suppose that's a different topic.

I would very happily have a boat with portholes (and a tug deck, and a proper engine room, and...), but alas I am stuck with my windows for the foreseeable.

A fair point — but I can confidently state as a lighting designer that there will be no strong glare or reflections today at the Bratch. It's dull and overcast.

When people are pointedly staring inside my home/at me in my home, I feel I have to meet their gaze and wave to avoid feeling like a zoo exhibit. I'd say it's a bit rude to stare at length through windows in the first place, to be quite honest!

If you cruise past a boat while staring blatantly through the windows — and the occupant sat on the sofa waves hello to you — it's rude and a bit weird to continue staring while not waving back. Seems so obvious that it doesn't need stating aloud...so why do so many people do it!?

Pram hood? Very nice looking? Get out of here 😂

I'd also recommend giving Nick at Westfield a call. He/they were incredibly helpful earlier in the year with me, and are a small family brokerage. https://narrowboatinsuranceuk.co.uk/ GJW are also good.

You surely can't be that old? 😉

Or takeaway, of course! Thanks for the heads-up.

Thanks all; I think we'll stop in Tipton for either Mad O'Rourke's or the Fountain — if the food doesn't appeal we can always go in for drinks and cook aboard.

I don't suppose anyone has any suggestions for nice places to eat (for three vegetarians) and moor overnight within 4-6 hours cruising in any direction from Gas Street Basin? Mad O'Rourkes Pie Factory in Tipton is already on my shortlist, but wouldn't mind some alternative options to consider.

But we only have one city that starts with Bristol? 🙂

And sorry Col if I've jumped to any conclusions, but it seemed a reasonable assumption that people using this excuse aren't tearing along — it'd be a bit implausible to claim you can't go any slower while simultaneously pushing the speed limit!)

I believe (but could be mistaken) that the 2mph figure appears in some CRT publication, and so it seems reasonable to expect boats to come past at up to 2mph. I'm a bit sensitive to this as I've recently had a few people shouting the usual 'slow down' abuse when I know I'm in tickover. And I'm very sure my boat doesn't do 2mph at tickover on any canal. Similarly the gentleman who I think shouted "slow down you pr'k" when I passed, not overly quickly, in a crosswind gusting 30mph didn't really enamour me with his understanding of boat handling either. The issue seems to be that some people want to 'play boats' without any of the inconvenient realities of boats. The expectation that everyone should pass at tickover is mental and unfounded and should be actively pushed back against at every opportunity. People should pass at an appropriate speed for the conditions at that moment — surely we all, for example, pass more cautiously when we see boats moored by pins to soggy mud than we do when we see boats moored with chain to piling? Similarly, are you really going to slow at all for the boat moored on the opposite bank of a deep and wide river? 2mph seems like a good starting point on the canals, but it always has to be subject to local conditions. Some waterways are shallower, some deeper, some boats displace a huge amount of water compared to some others. Etc etc etc. No allowance should be made for shoddy (but secure) mooring practice though. (I'm not disagreeing with you — just fleshing out my thoughts now that I'm sat on my sofa and not at work.)