aracer
-
Posts
367 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Gallery
Blogs
Store
Posts posted by aracer
-
-
16 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:
How old is your Nicholson and yes you can turn anywhere, You can't moor just anywhere as the bank isn't always suitable but loads of places to moor.
2018, I'm assuming that's the most recent edition?
Thanks - possibly won't want or need to moor at other than where Nicholson mentions, however CRT is still showing Purton bridges as being inoperable, so being able to moor to the West of there might be handy (and also the reason being able to turn is important, otherwise I'd just turn at Sharpness!)
It seems an awfully long time for a power failure, but always handy to have options.
-
On 08/09/2012 at 22:04, magpie patrick said:
We had a 62 foot narrow boat at Saul Junction Marina, and we now have a 23 foot cruiser on the K and A. Thoughts...
We preferred the G and S for weekends. It isn't crowded (actually it is, it has over twice the national average of boats per mile on the CRT system) but it is so big.
There are so many tiny variations for weekends. Mooring is possible virtually anywhere (not quite, but out of 16 miles I'd say 14 of them a moorable)
In the sixteen mile length we moored the boat overnight in at least nine different places. Starting From Gloucester:
Gloucester Docks
Pilot Inn, Quedgely
Parkend Bridge (to see the Severn Bore)
Saul Junction (but not in the marina)
Fretherne Bridge
Splatt Bridge
Shepherds Patch
Gilgol brook, near Purton
Old Severn Railway Bridge
Sorry, old thread revival - just checking whether things have changed as I'm aiming to head onto the G&S in a couple of days. Can I just check that it's still OK to moor anywhere - Nicholson says "remember this is a commercial waterway, only moor at recognised sites" and some of those on the list don't seem to be recognised sites!
Also, given a suggested 26m width and an 18m boat, presumably I can turn around pretty much anywhere?
-
In what way exactly do I not understand the situation? What prevents them from opening the river fully now if they can open it on 4th July?
-
On 13/06/2020 at 08:24, Captain Pegg said:
The ANT is a small private organisation that is funded almost exclusively through the tolls it raises and given the impact Covid-19 will have on their income I think their approach is entirely reasonable irrespective of the status of the boater. I’m not sure they are under any obligation to allow any boater to use their built infrastructure at all.
Well their approach has resulted in reducing their income by at least one toll. Meanwhile it must be costing them money to have to send a team out to operate locks which are usually boater operated.
On 15/06/2020 at 14:55, TheBiscuits said:I haven't seen the latest update from ANT, but I was under the impression the locks you have to book got damaged in the flooding and lockdown prevented them fixing them properly.
That doesn't appear to be the case at all, certainly not given that they are going back to normal operation on the 4th July. Given the most recent update it's quite clear that they've simply taken an overly restrictive attitude to limiting the movement of those of us who are already allowed to travel.
On 15/06/2020 at 14:55, TheBiscuits said:The booking is meant to make it easier for you, not harder as they help you through the booked locks.
I'm more than capable of working a lock - it makes it a lot harder as I would have to commit to timings 24 hours in advance, can't get through the locks after 4pm and can't be flexible with my plans. I can't see any way in which having to book locks 24 hours in advance would ever make cruising easier.
Their statements are at best disingenuous - for those of us living on our boats absolutely nothing changes on 4th July, yet ANT have decided that they can open the navigation fully then but have to restrict us before.
-
You wrote "If one of these filters is between the tank" - there is only one filter. It's a standard fuel filter exactly as described in the manual provided by Calcutt, with the 2 bleed points as on this pic from the manual
-
Reviving an old topic, but I presume there are still plenty of BMC engines around and people doing filter changes who might be reading this for reference. I was a bit scared of doing the fuel filter change from what I'd read, but it was all a lot more straightforward than I expected. I successfully bled the system without any difficulty (twice! I only found the new o rings in the bottom of the box after I'd bled it the first time ?). Two filter points as suggested above - that's two points on the one filter, I'm not sure if Tony misunderstood. Didn't need to touch anything on the pump. Didn't find a manual pump lever either and did it by cranking the engine (with the cutoff pulled out). Engine started first time afterwards, which I presume is a good sign (in any case it's now done about 10 hours running since and running as well as it ever has).
If it makes any difference mine is a Calcutt conversion on a 1988 boat.
-
1 hour ago, Jacsprat said:
Yes, I can relate to the 'risk averse' issue. Transport overland is out of the question for price and hassle, but breakdown cover is on the cards. I expect I'll very much enjoy this trip despite getting past the Avon restrictions and having a bit of a time constraint. I can always find a temporary secure mooring along the way if I can't make it all the way to N Kilworth in one go.
I should probably add my advice to you if I'm going to hijack your thread! Personally I'd very much recommend doing it as a boat trip rather overland even if that was an option for you. The very first time I ever steered a NB was the boat I had just bought at Northampton, which I then took a week getting back to Worcester. Due to constraints on my life that's still the longest trip I've ever done, but even if it wasn't I think it would still be the best because it was a trip with a purpose. Almost all single handed.
I had done a lot of sailing, so not unfamiliar with boats, but I watched a lot of Youtube videos to work out what to do with locks etc. - it turned out to mostly be easier than I expected.
Oh, and single handed I was going faster than the canalplan defaults even on that first trip.
-
On 06/06/2020 at 17:09, sharpness said:
I was looking at the ANT site earlier, their Covid 19 update No3 dated 13th May. They seem to have got all the flood damage problems sorted & at the moment are operating in the same way as CRT, essential travel only, no overnight, need to book passage through some locks 24hrs in advance.
https://www.avonnavigationtrust.org/covid-19-information/
I came here looking for advice / experience of the Avon in the current situation. My understanding is that the CRT position is no longer essential travel only - as of June 1st their advice is
"Our navigations are now open in full, subject to some exceptions, and you can go on longer journeys."
My boat is my primary residence, hence I can go where I like and stop the night wherever I want on CRT waters. Which is what friends of mine are now doing. Yet ANT updated their advice yesterday and it says "In line with CRT, including the River Severn, the latest government advice means that passages through locks is still restricted to limited travel only."
That doesn't appear to be in line with CRT - yes the Severn locks require booking because they aren't boater operated and CRT are operating with reduced staff. However ANT still say that many boater operated locks are closed to normal traffic and require booking, which isn't in line with CRT at all.
i was hoping to take a trip up the Avon in a couple of weeks, but it seems the position of ANT will make it a pain - I've got to work out in advance when I need to use the locks and can't change my plans. It's not an essential trip, but as a liveaboard government advice is that it doesn't have to be - do I have to justify the reasons for my movement to ANT in order to get them to open locks for me?
-
8 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:
So you are saying CRT have a Volockie season the same as they claim there is a boating season?
I'm suggesting the vlockies have a vlockie season - certainly I didn't encounter any in places which have been mentioned on here, or where I've encountered them since.
-
ISTM that in mid September the thread title is getting a bit old given the vlockies seem to be disappearing ? (I certainly met none at all during my week cruising at the start of October last year)
-
10 minutes ago, Jerra said:
You are if I may say so being more than a little silly. Other people enjoying their boating is fine what I don't want is people deliberately reducing my enjoyment when they aren't boating.
Yeah, but what if the people on the boat coming the other way also get their enjoyment out of doing locks - surely it's in both of your interests for them to shut the gates after they leave so that they get the pleasure of that and you then get the pleasure of opening them again?
I'm really struggling to see what difference it makes to you whether the locks are set for you by happy coincidence or because of the actions of a volockie. I think I have the answer though. Maybe when you're on a flight where the locks are set in your favour you could sent the volockie ahead to unset them ?
-
2
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, Rob-M said:
You said those that needed help the most so surely they would know they needed help. If there was a number to book then it would be publicised like the number for booking any of the other CRT operations that need booking, it isn't rocket science.
On the contrary, I'd expect some of those who need help not to be aware of that. I don't know any of those numbers and I live on board and have done lots of boating. More to the point, whilst I'm sure I could find the numbers (eventually...) for that I'd need to know what services CRT offers which I could book... There is also the question of how much in advance you'd need to book.
You need to have a think about which boaters are most likely to need assistance.
-
4 minutes ago, Rob-M said:
I don't understand that response as if they really needed help they would ring and book and guarantee having assistance where as now they must take put luck as to whether there will be volunteers or not.
In order to do that they'd have to know that they needed assistance and know how to ring up and book.
2 hours ago, Jerra said:Which has taken away a lot of the working of the lock for me.
I'm guessing you also find it irritating when you meet a boat coming the other way? Presumably you'd also prefer the gates to be closed by the crew of a boat leaving the lock you're waiting to enter? ?
-
11 hours ago, Rob-M said:
I reckon CRT should change volunteer lockies to be a bookable service where you can ring a central number and request assistance on a flight of locks at a given time. That way only those that want help and book it will receive it.
Which would result in some of those who most need help not getting it.
-
1 hour ago, Mike the Boilerman said:
This is all far too subtle for some here, who think that having a vollie there to wind the handle for them is just the BEST THING EVER, no matter how well or badly it is done.
A bit like when you throw a ball for an excited spaniel.
You guys are being very absolutist. I've maybe not done a huge amount of boating compared to some of you, but way more than the average leisure boater. I have encountered plenty of vlockies, but they've universally been helpful and I don't recognise at all the behaviour others have mentioned (apart from the one I mentioned ages ago, but I'm fairly sure he was actually a CRT chugger getting above his station rather than a vlockie - certainly haven't seen him around here again anyway).
However I suspect it also depends a lot on where you go - I've had a fairly limited range so far (and did a lot of that out of season). I do wonder whether there are specific locations which attract those who are a problem - interesting comment above about it being something suggested to people by their counsellors, maybe these are people who find social interaction difficult.
I do wonder a little about some of the attitudes on here though - for a start the first sentence there is a complete strawman, nobody on here is saying vlockies are good even if they're bad. But maybe some of you are also the opposite of an excited spaniel and ironically very similar to those you're complaining about - personally I welcome the presence of vlockies for the social interaction - it seems some here really don't want that. It's also really easy to deal with the minor stuff - yes I've been told to stay on my boat, on occasions when the vlockies were clearly going to work me as quick as I would myself I've complied, on others I've just politely said "no, I'm used to single handing, I'll get off and help if that's OK". Lack of eye contact may just signify poor social skills, but that certainly doesn't make somebody incapable of being a good vlockie, not so long as they are prepared to listen. I also note the attitude of wanting to work the locks - well maybe such people haven't done as much concentrated boating as me - after 30 locks in a day single handing I'm bored of working locks and happy for any assistance ?
-
3
-
-
1 hour ago, 1st ade said:
Now imagine the poor non-smartphone user. They boarded the train as it left the starting point and sat in a seat marked "Free". While they are sat there - the sign changes to "Reserved from ..." A passenger approaches "you're in my seat". "no I'm not... Ah"
In the case of the lock, I guess the equivalent is that when you're there at the controls with your boat in the lock going up, someone with the app way downstream makes the lock empty so it's ready for them - for good measure the app will then open the top paddles once the bottom gates are open to flush out the interloper without a smartphone ?
In reality you'd just set the interlock so that once someone has taken local control of the lock (do you need a key?) then app use is disabled. The obvious thing to do is to allow local control to override use of the app even if someone is currently using it, though that's a little more tricky.
1 hour ago, 1st ade said:(IMHO) a solution looking for a problem - Moor up, go hit the buttons on the console. If you MUST offer local remote working (a tautology in my view) make it BlueTooth or something which is provably with a few tens of metres of the structure. And make sure the BlueTooth Network is isolated from the Internet...
Not BT - it's not designed for use in that way and I don't think most smartphones would connect via BT in a way which would allow this to work. However the solution to that is simple as I already suggested above - there would be a local WiFi hotspot and you'd have to be connected to that to use the app (it's tried and tested tech - fairly standard to only allow connection over a local network - no need to even isolate it from the internet you can also provide internet access as standard networking stuff still separates the local network)
-
1 hour ago, Slim said:
Well I went diving on Tuesday and got it back - it's a "waterproof" phone so hadn't leaked much, have been drying it out since (being "waterproof" it's also hard for water to get out). Powered it up today now there's no condensation on the camera lens any more - it seems to work though still lots of dampness in the screen, so more drying required, but surprisingly hopeful given it was a couple of metres under for about 16 hours!
-
31 minutes ago, Slim said:
Or drop it in the water.
Oh - like I did on Monday!
-
2 hours ago, MartynG said:
The abuser would be identified.
I imagine the system requiring your location to be identified .
? the most amusing thing for me of imagining such a system is playing poacher and imagining ways to abuse it. Dead easy to spoof identity and location if so desired (you mentioned cameras, so presumably I could also watch as I operated the lock from hundreds of miles away). That's assuming an internet connected system which would be normal, but to put my gamekeepers hat on I'd make it a bit less user friendly by requiring you to connect to the local WiFi to operate it.
2 hours ago, MartynG said:It was just an idea that came to me. Dont take it too seriously.
Don't worry I'm not!
44 minutes ago, MartynG said:The existing lock controls would,of course, remain in place.
Hmm, I was wondering that, but that just makes it all so much more complex...
-
1
-
-
44 minutes ago, Mike Todd said:
I suspect that it is one of those things that look simple at first but rapidly become very complex when all the hidden aspects are considered. (One of the reasons why GBP mistrust experts . . . ) Even before H&S get their hands on it!
As a software developer who's done some work with apps it doesn't seem the most horrendous thing ever to develop. However I can't see how it could anything other than safety critical which adds a whole additional layer of pain. The security aspect is also tricky - not because it's a difficult thing technically, but from a human perspective. However I really can't see what's wrong with the current system which would make it worth it - the biggest problem being that not everyone would want to use it and I don't see why they should be forced to. Ultimately the market is so small (I'm assuming few people use the locks out of hours) - is the OP thinking CRT should divert money from maintenance for this?
-
13 hours ago, Rickent said:
You got a transit van for 10p?
Now that is a bargain.
I'd rather have the wood
-
3 minutes ago, cuthound said:
Yawn, I'm off to the pub now. Better than playing follicular disection with you.
OK, cool, so you're not prepared to admit you're wrong despite me providing evidence and you're still refusing to answer the question. I think we know where we stand regarding your contributions to this forum.
-
47 minutes ago, cuthound said:
Yes I stand by my claim re APNR, provided the offending car meets the conditions I stipulated.
So despite 1 million uninsured vehicles and only 100,000 caught a year it's impossible for a car to be uninsured for long. OK, you're entitled to your opinion.
QuoteMy insurer, LV only covers cycles for damage and theft as an option. Same with legal expenses when it will support the cyclists in recovering damages and compensation from others when the accident is not the cyclists fault.
However it covers legal liability as standard, including for cycling. Unsurprisingly the wording is almost exactly the same as standard. Page 26 of https://www.lv.com/-/insurance/media/gi/home-insurance/pdfs/policy-documents/2019/lv-home-doi-p1.pdf?la=en&u=20190528091550 (section 27, somewhat confusingly)
"What’s covered 27. Liability to the public If following an accident someone dies, is injured, falls ill or has their property damaged anywhere in the world, during the period of insurance, we’ll cover the legal liability of you or your family as: n occupiers of your home; n private individuals."
"What’s not covered Liability arising from: n pollution or contamination unless caused by oil leaking from any fixed heating installation in your home; n the ownership of your home or the ownership or occupation of any other premises; n the death, bodily injury or illness of you or a member of your family or domestic employees; n the ownership or use of any aircraft, motor vehicle (including motor cycles, quad bikes and motorised scooters), horse drawn vehicle, ship, vessel or craft;..."
motor vehicles specifically excluded, no mention of pedal cycles in the exclusions, hence right there is your 3rd party insurance for cycling.
QuoteWhy should I tell you what you think? If you have already stated it why do I need to confirm your answer?
Because otherwise the inevitable conclusion is that you've not bothered to read my post and you don't know what I think. It would be so, so easy for you to quote me that the inescapable conclusion is that you don't want to (hint, it's in the post I made immediately before the original question) - I can only assume that it's not something you want to discuss because it would challenge your views.
-
43 minutes ago, cuthound said:
I do acknowledge non compliance in some drivers and unless you can guarantee that you wont meet any ANPR cameras you cannot guarantee that you won't be caught.
There is a big difference between not being able to guarantee not being caught and ANPR making it "impossible for a car to be uninsured for long" as you claimed. Do you still stand by that claim despite 1 million uninsured vehicles and 100,000 being caught a year? Given the whole point of your arguments appears to be to divert, let me remind you that you were suggesting enforcement would ensure that even the bad cyclists had insurance - yet here we have plenty of bad drivers without insurance despite law and enforcement.
QuoteDo you see everything in black and white?
Only when people are making contradictory statements.
QuoteThe public liability section of contents insurance may or may not cover 3rd party claims whilst you are cycling, depending on the insurer. Mine doesn't.
https://www.theguardian.com/money/2010/jul/02/bike-insurance-covered
I don't believe you, I've never found a cycling exclusion on a 3rd party liability section of any insurer and I've checked quite a lot of popular ones (they all have almost identical wording). What insurer?
All that article is saying in this regard is that 3rd party liability cover on home insurance might not cover you for racing or organised events (it's a bit of a moot point - anybody racing on a bike will be a member of an organisation which provides 3rd party cover).
You still haven't answered my question - what is the principle reason that I think licensing, registration plates, compulsory insurance is a bad idea? A continued refusal to engage with this will lead to the inevitable conclusion that you don't like the answer and so are avoiding it.
Gloucester and Sharpness Canal
in New to Boating?
Posted
Thanks all. We stopped where suggested near the old railway bridge and enjoyed visiting Sharpness - went down to the docks at midnight to see ships going in and out on the high tide!
As mentioned, lots of places to moor, though I think we only stopped in one totally unofficial place. Only issue was that the bridge keeper at Fretherne had got the idea he wasn't allowed to open between 4:30 and 5:30 - having found no mention of that in any guidance I went and spoke to him, he phoned up his boss and then let us through (the two boats who had got there before us were just sitting and waiting...)