Jonny P

I was just thinking that robtheplod shouldn't be too worried about Blisworth because from where the boat currently is they'll have to get through Braunston first. I'm not suggesting they should be worried about either but Brauston is definitely the trickier with those distortions. Anyway they've been through Wast Hill which is the most comparable tunnel on the network to Braunston and Blisworth. JP

Aha. That went over my head. I don't anticipate humour from Boater Sam!

Deliberate error there DC? The blurb on the tin claims otherwise.

That 400ml can apparently has a shipping weight of 358g and that includes the can. I don't think I'd rely too heavily on a metal spray with a density less than water. I suspect that's mostly what is inside it plus propellant. I doubt it serves any great purpose beyond the cosmetic. JP

OK, that's a slightly different description. I agree with your second point but "fully welded" doesn't mean that weld metal has to be applied from both sides. The only fully reliable test of the water tightness of a hull is to test it in the water. JP

When you talk about seams being welded on one side only do you mean welds that have been prepared in such a way that it is obvious they are designed to be welded both sides and haven't been, or that they have been welded on one side - quite possibly to the specified design - but you think they should be double sided? I'm imagining you are taking about butt welds joining the constituent parts of the overall base and side plates. JP

Yes. It wasn't personal, it was intended to illustrate a point. If one prizes quality of execution as per your original post then a production line approach would be a safer bet, hence the question. Your answer shows you understand that; and the world of manufacturing knows it. Somehow though it's a general opinion that the opposite applies to narrowboats. Maybe that's because collectively we really prize aesthetics and probably have a far greater understanding of that aspect than we do of the engineering details. Cost in a shell comes from the time required to cut, bend and weld complex shapes. A cost driven approach may lead to simpler shapes and ones that perhaps aren't quite so hydrodynamically advantageous or as pleasing to the eye, but that has nothing to do with quality of fabrication from the point of view of correctness of the metalworking or indeed the structural design. There is an argument a simpler standard shell is less likely to have defects because there's less risk in the volume and complexity of fabrication required. I would be very surprised if there aren't plenty of simple, relatively cheap but well constructed shells out there and more than a few lovely designs that are poorly executed. The use of the word 'quality' in these threads is hugely ambiguous. JP

Do you drive a Morgan, or something sensible that came off of a modern automated, refined and lean production line? JP

Thanks for that info. I believe that's Tom Lapworth who married Phyllis Wilson. Their children are my third cousins. Do you know who is in the pictures of Nuneaton and Barnes? JP

Not the greatest of efforts. It could do with some improvement.