Horace42
Patron
-
Posts
1,375 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Gallery
Blogs
Store
Posts posted by Horace42
-
-
It is not beyond the wit of engineers and physicists to invent ways of providing 'heat' without CO2 emissions, or by containing it at source, or even collecting it afterwards.
The blunt instrument of banning the use of fuel that causes the problem would just delay the solution - until the loss of 'heat' becomes serious and/or the alternative' fuel runs out.
A tourniquet around the neck is a quick fix for a nose bleed.
-
1
-
-
18 hours ago, TheMenagerieAfloat said:
@Horace42 Good luck in your new home. If you can put/have the boat put in a marina or other group mooring near your target destination for a few months whilst you look for your new place you might find it a great way to meet like minded people in your new neighbourhood - although EOG is a lot of peoples dream the social aspect of boating can be really nice in a new area. If your kids don't live anywhere near water there is no shame in renting a furnished place for a few months before buying your next property. Being a 'chain free' buyer is good!
xx
Thanks. There's great merit in what you say. A temporary marina makes sense if we 'live' on our boat in between selling and buying.
Many years ago - first thinking of moving but in those days to a canal-side property - we would find a place for sale - moor up moor - knock on the door with a hold-all full of money and pay cash.
51 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:Monel, Stainless steel, aluminium, etc (even GRP)
There are plenty of materials that are non-rusting but I doubt many narrowboaters would be prepared to pay the price.
But what is the price? Do you have any prices for non-rusting metal?
-
23 hours ago, Sea Dog said:
May I take this opportunity, and I'm sure I speak for many here, to wish you all the very best with your sale and for your forthcoming career as a land lubber. It sounds to me like you've had your money's worth and more from "Willpower" and, notwithstanding your inattention to her bottom
, she's given you great service and a bundle of happy memories. Good luck Horace! 
Thanks Sea Dog for your kind thoughts. No complaints - and many happy years of boating. Goodness knows how much money (and time working on it) we have spent. An ignorance stemming from a simple 3 question philosophy on life when we have a free choice:
Do we want it?
Can we afford it?
Do we need it?
If a definite yes-yes-yes, then we go for it.
Only 1 'no' usually kills it.
Edit. Re keeping our boat, it gets 3 no's.
-
On 08/02/2020 at 09:47, Bee said:
As Rose Narrowboats says, local conditions, stray volts and internal dryness are important. Its the stray volts that are so hard to know about. Is it this that causes pitting? I understand the anode and cathode bit (well sort of) but as I understand it local bits of carbon, slag(?) and just plain old 'stuff' within the steel is enough to start a pit, you do not have to have an iffy electrical system on the boat or your neighbours boat. The only way that I know to deal with this is paint, my experience is that once you paint the pit it stops it developing but I cannot remember every pit on the boat so who knows? How is it that HMS Belfast is still afloat? or any other steel boat sitting in corrosive salt water?
Interesting point about stray electrics --- my boat at the end of my garden (unused and occupied for most of the year) is permanently connected to a 230vac land line (but fitted with galvanic isolators)
If pitting takes place in the unpainted areas, even a brand new boat can have bare patches due to scratches - where the electric current focuses - then I imagine my boat would be full of holes by now - but is not - being absolutely dry in the bilge. Rain-water gets into the engine bilge when the covers are not on - and is pumped out when necessary.
-
On 07/02/2020 at 22:05, TheMenagerieAfloat said:
I did wonder but was a little surprised at someone who knew what a blinking mess their hull was likely to be having it surveyed themselves prior to sale - makes it harder to say 'I'm sure it's fine' Shirley?
Yes! it was tongue -in-cheek on my part. Sorry.... it is my dry sense of humour frivolously creeping into a serious question about the longevity of a steel narrowboat.
........... and please don't call me Shirley!
-
On 07/02/2020 at 21:18, Alan de Enfield said:
I've only had one survey (my 1st 'big boat') the survey was excellent, we bought the boat and then found serious issues that took £20k+ to resolve and all of which the surveyor had 'passed with flying colours'.
Engaged a marine lawyer who went thru the survey and basically said - "don't waste your money going to court, the 'small print' absolves him from any errors and omissions, and basically the survey is just an opinion and not legally binding".
Have purchased (probably) 18 or 20 boats since (we normally replace them every couple of years) and never had a condition survey.
Add in the recurrent failures of BSS Examiners to even move out of the saloon, let alone see the Fire extinguisher are 10 years out of date, or other 'tests' I've set and I have little respect for the term 'surveyor'.
It won't be long before the money I've saved on surveys will buy me a new boat.
When we bought the Catamaran in Croatia (it was a £250k boat) we told the broker we did not want a survey, he insisted, I insisted, & in the end he paid for it to go over to Italy and be lifted out (nowhere in Croatia could lift it with 23 foot beam) and have as survey. He was not prepared to sell it and potentially sully his name by selling a 'bad-boat'.
The only fault found was a crack in the cross-trees which had already shown up whilst on its mooring when the broker arranged a rigging survey.
Yes Alan, I agree with you wholeheartedly about the surveyor... . Yes an 'opinion' - not traceable to any national standards for hull thickness - but based on many years of experience - and delivered with smug arrogance....a waste of money .... but regretfully a procedure embedded in the boat ownership 'system'.
As you probably know know better than me, CRT with compulsory 3rd party insurance, and the insurers particularly for fully comp, make regular surveys mandatory for valuation.
Having jumped through the hoops I am insured ...... except in my case .... although the insurance company might have to pay me for the 'loss' of my boat, and CRT for cost of emergency removal of an obstruction to navigation), there is a risk they might ague I am not insured for the latter, and sue me to recover their costs in excess of the insured value.
It all comes down to trust I suppose....or lack of in my case.
All on the more reason to give up boating.
-
On 07/02/2020 at 20:45, Mike the Boilerman said:
I'm shocked so many here could not see his tongue stuck so firmly in cheek saying this...
So many fantastic rises to the bait, he got!
Thanks Mike - a direct hit!
-
On 07/02/2020 at 20:41, cheshire~rose said:
May I ask what was the idea in investing in blacking 3 times was for?
Did you think the fish would complain about the hull looking a bit shabby?
If you do not feel you were warned about keeping a boat protected from rust then why invest in blacking at all?
I vaguely recall I was told (by boatyards, mariners, BSS MOT people, paint-makers etc) that blacking was required for insurance purposes.
-
On 07/02/2020 at 17:59, Alan de Enfield said:
Alan. I think I read your original article. It was one of the reasons I decided not to have my boat replated.
No regrets. If I find one, I will let the new owner decide what to do with it.
-
On 07/02/2020 at 17:31, David Mack said:
Cutting out and replacing plate is the gold standard treatment for thinning hull plate, but is disruptive to the internal fitout and can be costly. The alternative is overplating - welding a new steel skin over the existing bottom and sides up to just above the water line. The detractors will point out that corrosion can still occur between the old and new skins, and that the added weight can make a boat sit dangerously low in the water if there are ventilation openings in the hull sides. On the other hand there are hundreds of replated boats around the system, which have been given a new lease of life. Martin Kedian, occasional contributer here, reckons he can overplate without doing any damage to internal fitout or hull insulation, and is prepared to give prices on his website. Have a chat with him via http://www.kedianengineering.co.uk.
The you can decide whether to get the work done, or sell the boat as is.
Thanks David. I will check out Kedian - but honestly as part of a puzzle to complete the picture, rather than any serious intention having the work done.
-
On 07/02/2020 at 17:27, Bee said:
You have had the boat 30+ years. IF you had bought it brand new it would very likely need some plating by now so you have done well with it. Do you like the boat? Enough to give it another 30 + years? If you do then get it overplated. Do you Really like it? then get the old steel removed and new put in (you might find this then leads to a re- fit as well). With a survey like that its really just a project boat and worth E Bay auction money - a few thousand at most. Your questions have pretty much been answered by others but a steel boat really is endlessly repairable if the owner wants to do it. If you go to Holland there are very many old (and ancient) iron and steel boats still in use, some of these are not classics either but because they are useful they get repaired.
Thanks Bee. I think you have summed it up quite well.
You mention eBay - I will have a look.
-
On 07/02/2020 at 16:07, Graham Davis said:
33 years ago you bought a steel boat and didn't know that it was going to get rusty? Really?? Sorry, but I find that very difficult to believe.
And you've only had it blacked 3 times? Frankly I'm not surprised the surveyor has condemned it. As he is obviously a wiser and better informed man then you I would suggest following his advise might be a good idea.
1/ Yes, the thickness that stops the water getting in.
2/ See 1.3/ No,
It might seem like I am arguing with you, sorry, but the advice to follow surveyor commendations to replate my boat is not a good idea according Alan and his article on replating. To my mind the surveyor is only 'wiser and better informed' in respect of protecting his own arse...sod the client.
-
On 07/02/2020 at 14:25, Arthur Marshall said:
I think my boat is about sixty years old, maybe a bit more. It's been replated twice - wouldn't have needed the second replating yet if the first had been done properly, but there you go. If you've only had it blacked three times n thirty years I suspect the surveyor was right and it's almost ready to sink. (Sounds like a survey i had on a house once, which more or less implied the surveyor thought he'd been lucky to get out without the house falling on top of him, and advising me not to go back in without wearing a steel hat!). Mine, before I had it done last, was so thin it was only the blacking keeping the water out - when they cleaned it off to reweld, you could see daylight through the hull. Very pretty it was too, like little stars... it started sinking for other reasons and the boat only survived because I was gazing sadly into the engine bilge at the time and saw the hole develop and the water start to come in.
You have to work out whether it's cheaper to resteel the boat or buy a new one. I would think that with a survey like that it would be virtually unsaleable, though the "we buy any boat" mob might give you a few quid for it, but if they're anything like the car ones, they'll rip you off good style. My resteeling cost me nine grand, if the boat's worth less than that after doing it, and you don't want it, then it's scrap.
You only need one pit to go through to sink. Then you have to pay recovery costs on top of having a worthless boat. I'd treble check your insurance policy for phrases like "as long as properly maintained" and the rest of the weasel get out clauses. They may well refuse to pay for the refloat now they've seen the survey, but they'll always be happy to take your money, especially if they think they'll be able to turn down any claim.
A surveyor can't tell you how long before you sink - too many variables. They won't put anything in writing in case they're wrong and you sue. And you're allowed on the canals until you sink, then you're only allowed under them... CRT don't care as long as you pay to hoick it out again. There aren't any standards of hull thickness either - you just get the thickness and quality of steel you choose and pay for.
I really can't see how you can complain that you weren't warned that a steel thing, sitting permanently in water might go rusty. First, it aint rocket science, and second, you must have had a clue when painting it every year that some of this brown stuff that appeared had something to do with damp!
Lots more wise words Arthur. I was being flippant when I said I did not know about the rust - of course I did - but not to the extent that it would be a constant and continuous battle to keep it a bay. It is fair to say it became obvious the first year of ownership, but I ignored the blacking mainly out of laziness - and now it come up to bite me.
As you have said here (and my reply earlier) the insurance is the tricky bit - but I have done all that I can in this respect. If the worst happens - they cannot say I did not tell them before I paid.
As a minor but relevant detail, I have fitted a moisture sensor and alarm in the lowest point of the bilge to detect he first signs of a hull leak.
-
On 07/02/2020 at 14:43, TheMenagerieAfloat said:
To be honest with you if you've enjoyed your boat for 33 years you'll have probably had better 'value' from it than most boat owners get. I'm not sure if you liveaboard or use it for play but if you put it in the 'like a car/caravan' rather than 'like a house' category in your head (i.e. it is a liability requiring maintenance as it depreciates rather than an asset which increases in value (sometimes) without significant investment) then you might get a better perspective on it.
Surveyors generally focus on the stuff you can't see easily as an average person whilst the boat is in the water (e.g. I'd rather they spent time using their ultrasound on the hull than looking at the quality of the kitchen cabinets which I can judge myself). You've clearly invested time and energy (and probably some £ too) in the parts you can see - and those are what will attract a new buyer. They may also want a hull survey (I don't think you're obliged to show them yours although it would come across odd not to if you mention it and they ask) but by that time they've already basically 'fallen for' the bits you've kept pretty.
Options are
* sell, without mentioning your survey, at a price which reflects the condition of the visible bits
** reduce price significantly (to close to 'scrap' value) after they get a hull survey to reflect what it is likely to say
* sell, with mentioning of your survey, priced at scrap value, with a comment along the lines of 'price reflects work recommended by recent survey to get hull up to standard of living accommodation'
* fix and sell - you'll need to speak to a few brokers/ppl on here/browse appolo duck/... to get an idea of if the returns will be worth it to you
Edited to add...
1, Are there any standards for minimum thickness of rusty hulls?
** as above, only for some insurance/insurers
2, What is the death profile of a steel narrow?
3, Who would buy a rusty boat?
** dreamers/the poor/the ambitious/the unaware/the 'fallen for the fit out' types/someone spotting a potential bargain/... lots of boats near me are in pretty shocking nick.
Thanks for the detailed reply and selling tips.
Yes! Many years of fun, but as a fair weather cruiser. My boat is moored at the end of my garden - and hardly used - it is more of a hobby - I am always doing jobs on it. But as my reply to Arthur, my boat has to go.
I will sell it 'as is' with full disclosure of the report - and at the valuation price or less - I don't want any after-sales hassle.
In this respect the hull is a minor worry. Over the years I have refitted it out a couple of times - and with added electrical 'gadgets' (excluding solar panels). Things that are neatly packaged as 'norm' today, but long ago only available to DIY boaters with skills and time to design and fit them.
Although I have drawings and photos of everything, I have a feeling the new owner will have problems if something goes wrong. I don't want to be called out - even if paid.
-
On 07/02/2020 at 13:34, TheBiscuits said:
Just check that your policy doesn't include a phrase like "has a survey within the last 5 years with all recommendations carried out" as many do for older boats.
If your policy has that wording and you haven't had the work done then you are not insured, even if they took your money.
Note that you can still get 3rd party only insurance without this requirement, it's for fully comp policies that it applies.
So very true. Insurance has been my problem - even with fully comp cover - you are right about 'recommendations being carried out' - I asked the surveyor to say my boat was seaworthy for the time being and repairs were not immediately required..... or that it was in immediate risk of sinking .... all I got was a smart-arse answer.
But I have got fully comp insurance (based on a copy of the survey report accepted by the insurers) - so I should be covered for my loss, where for me the costly risk is not losing my boat (because it sinks at the end of my garden due to undetected minor leaks in the hull and a failed bilge pump) but instead to me, the perceived 3rd party risk of my boat sinking in a lock and me being landed with a huge bill for emergency clearance of the obstruction to navigation. Then refusing to pay blamed on 'recommendations' not being carried out'
For this I am comforted by good independent authority that an insurer is fully liable to pay out on a claim (by law) unless it can traced to a contributory cause by something that would not have happened had the recommendations been carried out.
-
21 hours ago, Arthur Marshall said:
That's about as long as I've had mine. i don't think it owes me anything and I don't begrudge it the money I've spent on it, it's been 30 odd years of pure happiness (and occasionally expense). It sounds like the OP is thinking of moving on to another boat, in which case (as he can presumably afford a new one) it would be probably best to sell it for whatever he can get for it without bothering too much.
If mine fails to get its engine fixed, that's how it'll go and I'll pick up whatever I can afford to potter about on, but it won't be another narrowboat.
ETA final piece of crucial advice... fit TWO automatic bilge pumps, because one will certainly fail as soon as you need it. Mine always have.
Arthur - We will sell our boat and not replace it.
Regretfully (in our 80's) we have to give up boating because we feel the physical limitations brought on by old age exposes us to serious accidental injury, even when being very careful.......days on jumping across locks to operate gates (to save walking round) - are long gone. Even stepping up and down on stationary boat close to the bank is an ordeal for my wife who has bad painful arthritis in her joints...and as for pulling on mooring ropes - we do not have the strength....well we do! but this is where the risk creeps in....I say this as a matter of fact - not for seeking sympathy.
Coupled to this is the need to move home to be nearer our children in our old age - not because we want to - but more for children's sake because they worry about us be far from them in emergencies.
This means selling our home (which has an EOG mooring) and without a boat, our new home will not need to be canalside.
The economics of selling our boat is no big deal seen in the context of our house and land sale to a developer for housing. - which timed by demands of completion might mean we move out quicky and live our boat for a while.....a dream for some by all accounts...but for us a logistic nightmare.My question about rust and things is more for the benefit of the boat buyer - I just want to get rid of the hassle.....!
There are comments by many others that I will respond to asap.On 07/02/2020 at 13:27, billS said:answer 3 - a scrap man
Yes - but how much for
-
I have a steel boat and it is going rusty. I was not warned about this when I bought 33 years ago (but you live and learn) - and it also need a lot of cleaning and painting - that I have done regularly (almost annually to make it look pretty) - except hull blacking (only 3 times). And when recently in the dry dock I paid a surveyor to inspect and value my boat (for fully com insurance - and pending sale).
The surveyor as good as condemned my boat. In fact he did a better 'blacking' job than the boat yard. He did not inspect the interior at all...I should have saved my money!
Due to excessive rust 'pitting' in numerous places the surveyor recommended it was necessary to have the patches cut out and refilled with new steel - or the hull replated etc, etc, ..
and waffle about the ineffectiveness of each option ....but subsequently refused to tell me what standards of minimum hull thickness applied - or how long I had before my boat would become 'unseaworthy' and not allowed on the canals....or when replating became a requirement, all I got was 'clever' answers with smug arrogance.
I did not have my boat replated. The insurance company accepted the report and renewed my fully comp, policy at the survey value.
From this questions arise,
1, Are there any standards for minimum thickness of rusty hulls?
2, What is the death profile of a steel narrow?
3, Who would buy a rusty boat?
Any idea please,
-
I like the long tubular rubber side fenders. They sink easily when dropping them deep (needed to stop the hull plate grounding on hard underwater stones in shallow moorings. They are quick-drying and take up little room for stowage.
-
3 hours ago, David Schweizer said:
Your first statement would be correct, assuming they are not tax excempt. However, Planning Regulations would recognise that if the property already has mooring rights there would be no "change of use" unless the mooring rights had a specific designation such as agricultural wharfage.
Technically correct, but I used to moor on an end of garden owned by someone else, and when BW tried to charge mooring fees, the owner produced his deeds which gave specific rights transferred from the original owners for the right to moor against his property without charge. From recollection that was after 2002 and BW withdrew their legal threats.
I think they (CRT) get round it now by granting a license (for a fee) for exclusive use of the amount of water needed for the boat at the at the place where the boat is moored.
The landowner only provides access to and from the boat, for which permission is needed to use the land, and for CRT to identify the site to grant exclusive use of the water.
-
9 minutes ago, David Schweizer said:
Can you think of a reason why it should not be allowed. it is privastely owned land? The only reasons I can think of are if mooring a boat would cause an obstruction to navigation, or if the property's deeds forbid it. There was a time when BW tried to claim that they owned the first three feet of the bank side, which in most cases is not correct. Again it depends on what is quoted in the deeds or any conditions containe within the original Enabling Act
It could be nothing to do with mooring. If all done officially, the householder would be obliged to declare the income and pay income tax on it.
Also a 'change of use' needing council approval (to bump up the rates), and now at risk of being classed as a business by HMRC, could land you with a capital gains tax when you sell.
Life is already complicated enough .....
-
1 hour ago, cuthound said:
The problem with having a cheap half price EoG mooring is that you have to buy the house that comes with it! ?
Yes. That is one of the 'rules'......
-
1 hour ago, cuthound said:
The problem with having a cheap half price EoG mooring is that you have to buy the house that comes with it! ?
13 minutes ago, Andrew Denny said:Is an EoG mooring allowed to be sublet?
A simple interesting question, but I guess it has a complicated answer.
-
10 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:
If you walk down to your local shop 1 mile away, and then walk back home, your DISTANCE is 2 miles, but your RANGE is one mile.
If you do that every day for a month then your DISTANCE will be 60 miles but your RANGE will still be only 1 mile.
C&RT have 'suggested' that if you have a RANGE of less than 20 miles then you are unlikely to be complying.
However if you shuffle back and forward 1 mile 25 times per year you have a RANGE of1 one mile and that suggests that you are tied to that area and are just 'bridge-hopping' and definitely not complying.
Redacted by Horace - Go to #30 for whole article.
Thanks Alan.Very interesting reading, although somewhat academic for me. I'm a continuous moorer. Not by design. Just don't get out much nowadays.
The cost of today's cruising/mooring commented above by others, must be daunting for those on low incomes who have to find low price accommodation out of necessity - and choose to live on a boat - only to find there are lots of rules (that must seem 'petty' to them) forcing up the cost.
By comparison my 'half-price' permanent EOG mooring must seem cheap.
-
28 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:
I wonder if Mr Holder knows the difference between distance travelled and 'range' ?
If he has travelled a total of 17.7 miles in a year, that could be :
Point A then 600 yards to point B, then 600 yards back to Point A …………………. Repeat …………………………...
I am not aware of the subtle legal nuances of range and distance traveled, although I can guess, but whatever measurement method is used, is a difference in distance of 2.3 miles the basis on which a successful depends.
.png.ecfdb6d66b80ad65b6a9691bb3a66927.png)
IWA to protect waterways from HS2
in General Boating
Posted
Except during construction...the noise will come from 'passing' traisn. Loud or not, soon out of earshot - and psychologically, as you know what it is - and gone in seconds - (thus ignored - and out of mind).....unlike, by comparison, for example, to noise from adjacent boats with engines running at unsociable hours - with no sign of any let up....!
That is what irritates me.