magpie patrick

Using steam was one of the reasons for it's demise. Traffic was too light and thus the steam engine was shut down at night. As it takes about four hours to fire up a boiler guess what, they started using it less and less. Funny how you describe heritage as bollox, and the go on to want an exact replica of the 1910 version? If it had survived it would probably have been electrified in the 50s or 60s, had hand rails fitted when pleasure boats came, had the pulleys replaced with a simpler set up when the impact on cable fatigue became apparent...

How many reasons do you want! Objections to the incline... Technical: Shelmore Embankment Moves, and the plan would extend from the side of it, keeping the two fastened together would be a nightmare. The locks it would replace are probably the most intact in the flight, and it would be much cheaper to repair them The locks would offer dawn ti dusk user operation,a key IWA objective Visual. Admittedly this would have applied to the building of Shelmore Embankment 200 years ago, but this incline plane at right angles has a huge impact on views of and from the embankment, and offers views into properties that currently enjoy privacy Traffic: the country lanes around the area struggle with what Norbury Junction generates, and as the main point of the lift is to be a tourist attraction this is a major issue. Political, when asked, the locals voted for the locks, so the trust asked the question again... This has also split the trust, as only a few members really want the plane, but some committee members are pushing it. TBH this has probably held the restoration back 10-15 years, which is a shame as the Newport Branch would make a lovely, if energetic, cruise.

That, to my mind, is the point at which he has become unreasonable, of three options he has (no shower, shower with boat turned round, shower disturbing you) he chooses to sacrifice your peace and quiet at 3 am rather than his view.

Is this a washer woolwich? For replica read "pastiche"

Water loss is not a problem on most rivers, however sections of the lee and stort are effectively canals with limited water supply as for the Math ("do the Math" is an american saying, not a brit one) lock agin you, close gate (1) open paddles (2) open gates (3) Close gates (4) open paddles (5) open gates (6) close paddles (7) off ye go Lock for you close gates (1) open paddles (2) open gates (3) close paddles (4) so 7 one way or 4 the other average 5.5 gates closed lock agin you open paddles (1) open gates (2) Close gates (3) open paddles (4) open gates (5) close paddles (6) Close gates (7) off ye go having stopped for crew 8? Lock for you close gates (1) open paddles (2) open gates (3) close paddles (4) Close gates (5) pick up crew (as you can't in the lock?) 6? so 7 one way and 5 the other average 6 it is no more work operating a lock against you with the gates open, as you simply switch one clsing of gates with another, but it adds one gate operation when its for you and any slight leak adds opening the paddles as well

So do I my top three being... Saul to Stonehouse on the Stroudwater (which, with the HLF scheme would make the canal navigable from the G and S to Brimscombe). Cotswolds should then sit back and wait their next turn Finish the Monty (scored down because of likely restrictions on boat numbers) The Somerset Coal from the K and A to Midford (because my committee would shoot me if I didn't) Fourth would be Wey and Arun from the Wey to south of Bramley But it doesn't work like that. The Cotswold HLF bid was succesful in bidding for £12 million of a £40 million pot for that half year, it beat, among other things (I believe) the renovation of a museum in Oxford and the usual request for handout from one of the big heritage bodies (memory vague so I'm not naming them). The Droitwich Canal I beleive saw off a bid for money for "Vulcan to the Skies" although that subsequently got funding. If Foxton gets money it will be froma fund to promote tourism in the East Midlands, at the expense of a theme park in Charnwood Forest ro summat, from HLF in competition with an old manor house, and from Europe with a grant for "restructuring the rural economy" having seen off a ski slope in either Slovenia or Loughborough depending on the rules at the time Added, I have stuck my neck out a bit on those details so please don't ask for more!

Can I just add... I have no fixed view on Foxton, and didn't at the time. I was asked for professional advice, and have summarised it. If the locals are now agin, they have changed their tune (or Foxton has changed it's locals!) over the last ten years. Now, my opinion When people dream up things like the Brogborough Whilr (Yugh) I tend to point out that Foxton Locks are one of the busiest attractions for land based visitors on the canals... without a lift. The lift is now vastly different to when I did my study, an ironic case as you wouldn't have complained about spoiling the site then! The Falkirk Wheel gets a subsidy, but by virtue of it's location between Glasgow and Edinburgh (Location Location Location?) It has transformed the tourist economy of Falkirk. Love it or Loathe it, it is truly Iconic and Original, I squirm when people talk of a "second Falkirk Wheel" If the GU Leicester Summit is ever to be broad beam it needs a proper plan, with solutions at both ends proposed, even if they are built one at a time. This may not be a bad idea, as boats get more upmarket they run out of length. My personal opinion on something I looked at professionally, The Newport Incline Plane is a waste of time, and if built will suffer from Shelmore embankment moving The Whitchurch lift seems very odd, I would have thought a lock and a back pump would be more cost effective, and user operable. The schemes I actively or passively support as a private individual are the Somerset Coal, The Wey and Arun (which I have worked on professionally) The Monty (ditto, but I supported before I worked on it) and the Cotswold (currently working on it). I don't think I oppose any at all. I have been an active or passive supporter of the Huddersfield Narrow and the Droitwich, one of which has been open a number of years and one of which will open next year (and I've been professionaly involved in both, but rooted for them before that time) Oh, and the Bude Barge Canal, well, there's always got to be one hasn't there!

I thought of that, then thought "pre heaters" Then I had another thought. Patrick has his arm down weedhatch, Val leans back on starter button... So I kept the tractor key arrangement

I've no idea bout the last bit as the people now in charge either don't take professional advice or a getting it elsewhere. However English heritage are a lot more savvy than simply wanting things fossilised, and to be honest, while it is a scheduled ancient monument I don't think it's top of their priority list. Curiously they felt an adjacent incline was damaging to the setting When we reported it is true that the plane was largely covered in trees, and this has now changed. Do bear in mind there is also an agenda to get wide boats over the Foxton Summit, although building a "Hatton Style" 8 rise, as the GUC proposed in the 1930's, would also achieve this at Foxton We also recommended a new basin for the existing moorings (I know you didn't mean it like this, but I would never be so crass as to recommend "sling em off" without giving them somewhere else to go!)

It may be Foxton but there are other active proposals, one that attracted vehement local opposition was to replace the first twelve locks of the closed Newport Branch of the SU with an incline from Shelmore Embankment, this proved a PR own goal for the Shrewsbury and Newport Trust when it was pushed too hard (and it doesn't help, when the consultants report, written by me, made a firm recommendation for the locks!). Perhaps it's this one? When I worked on the study for Foxton as consultant in 2000 we found near universal support for putting it back as it was on the old site, even English Heritage felt this was the best bet. We offered a single tank option, so one half of the plane would be left, and we offered a new plane alongside the old, but consulting the public of Foxton, and all the authorities, confirmed two tanks on the old site. For those interested, at Foxton we proposed three tracks instead of four: this was for two reasons, it left the originals untouched, and we didn't trust the foundations so were going to pile under the three new tracks. We also recommended electric (possibly with a "show" steam for occasional use) and a much simpler pulley system as the Victorians didn't have the understanding of cable fatigue that we have now. It stalled because, despite saying that further work was needed to develop designs and secure funding etc, BW and others thought they could just get on with it

Something i say rather a lot TBH, Ripple isn't suitable for 12 when moving, even if she's safe, but I'd rather there was a margin of error. Otherwise the CE plate has to say something like "Maximum 10 people and we bloody well mean it so don't be a Dickhead and put 11 on" Much easier for the plate to say 8 I think

Yes, and to be honest, I think those old working boats with passengers on benches in the hold were reasonably safe. the passengers were low down, so no risk of capsize, the crew were competent and dare I say it passengers were probably more compliant, a shout from a gruff skipper of sit down would have got meek compliance not "F Off". As the boats were open no one would be trapped inside if it sank I suspect with a few modifications, and codifying what any working boatman would have classed as common sense, (not all on one side please, keep yer arms in if you want em to last the trip), benches in open boats would still be allowed, but might not be that popular now. The boatmen who steered these thinsg would also have known far better than most how to run a safe trip

Can see what you are saying but the logic was that 1) it was a passenger trip boat that had sunk, with more than 12 people on 2) there were plenty of hire boats that could carry 12 and these weren't causing a problem, there weren't any 14 berth hire boats So there was already a de facto limit of 12, sometimes 12 plus crew (anyone remember skippered camping boats?) Wasn't 70 based on the fact that only a few cars could exceed it? Yes, but where should the limit be? 15? oh well it'll be alright if I have 16 won't it... 20? 21 wouldn't do any harm surely...

It is not unless the boat is fitted out for it and under competent command. Why? On our wedding day we had 33 on board the Barbara McClellan from Bradford, however, we also had a professional skipper and crew who limited the numbers that attempted to be on deck, ensured that the rule of no one on the roof was enforced, and that people boarded and alighted safely. That skipper, of course, avoided drink all evening and was not part of the party. However, if you put thirteen on a canal narrow boat that is not equipped (no rows of seats and tables, no big outdoor seating area) and is not under competent command then there is pressure on space, on Ripple, at least one person would be standing inside and four sitting inside, and three standing with the steerer on the back deck. That one person might decide they'd rather sit on the roof. The four sitting inside might decide to join them, then the three standing on the back deck with the steerer join them, you've now got 8 people on the roof, the inexperienced steerer can't see and if they'd all on one side There are plenty of narrow boats that carry more than 12 people, they're called trip boats and seat up to fifty, and they have crews, and it has been confirmed they are safe through checks. the incident on the broads is an example of what can happen when there are no regulations and thus is hardly a good argument for less regulation. 12 was thought to be a pragmatic lower limit for regulation, and I think this limit was set in the late sicties early seventies following an incident where a passenger boat sank with loss of life. It probably related to the fact that there were many twelve berth hire boats then, some of the with a skipper, and these were the largest class of craft exempted

Dave, Sorry it's taken me so long to catch up on this, I was mired with Val in Hopsital when you posted, but that pales besides what you have been and are going through. I can't find words for this, so I hope the lack of them expresses my sympathy as well as it can A friend of ours (a director of the coal canal society) lives in Wooton Basset and is involved with the repatriations through the RBL. It amkes me realise what he does and apprecaite it Thoughts and prayers Patrick and Val

12 plus crew is the rule from the MCA, it is PLUS crew only for a formal trip boat operation, which would normally include taking fares (even if they are "not for profit") and being insured to run trips. You can't just ask twelve mates aboard and declare yourself and the Mrs "crew" The CE plate is the designed maximum for that boat. Assuming it's not MCA tested it's probably a "best guess" but for more mass produced models such as Phylis's then it may well have been scientifically tested. The point is your CE plate can say 25 but you still can't go over 12 without the MCA getting interested. The CE plate is probably based on the hulls capacity, not on the berths, I don't know what Ripple's says but comfortably putting more than 8 on would be difficult without some being in the cabin (four on back deck and four at front at a pinch) but as a boat that size could be a 12 berth it may be 12, however there are boats bigger than Ripple that are only two berths, I doubt the CE plate restricts them to 2

In two hours you can get a long way from "North Hampshire" (Farnborough/Basingstoke?) and there are a lot of canals. However August is one of the busier times. Thames advice not a bad idea but if you want a canal holiday on a canal boat the Thames won't be what you are looking for. The Southern Oxford is not a a bad bet (but busy). Or, if you fancy only a few locks, I would've though Rugby area is only two hours away and has the lightlu locked northern oxford and Coventry Canals. Remember, a canal holiday is made by pleasant scenery, relaxing activity (not the oxymoron it seems) good company and good pubs. We can all recommend the best, but they are subjective, and anyway, if it's "good" this time then look for better scenery, better activity and better pubs this time... hopefully you won't need to look for better company