agg221

It's over 30yrs since I last saw the view in that first photograph. It hasn't changed! Alec

I went to school near there. The canal has been built over immediately beyond the basin and is under an industrial estate but the other side of the estate it is very much still present. I used to walk a long way down the road beside it every Wednesday lunchtime to the Sea Training School to play badminton. Alec

Wey and Arun in Sussex, Royal Military Canal in Kent. Alec

I'm sure much of the BCN is clear because we dredged it all out with our prop during the BCN challenge! Our mooring is between stoppages at Tyrley and Adderley so we can only go 45mins or so each way. We did go down to Adderley to wind as I wanted to work on the other side of the boat, which required breaking about 2" thick ice. Fortunately we have an iceboat... Alec

They were made. We picked ours up at the finish. Alec

When we had Hagley (72' ex GUCCC wooden butty built by Walkers of Rickmansworth in 1938) it had been used as a house boat on the Basingstoke, following which it was deconverted to a bare hull. We emptied all the rubbish out into a skip kindly provided by the previous owner to get it as light as possible and off it went on cross straps, towed by Severn. We took it through lock 1 and watched it head out onto the Wey, from where it went down the Thames and up the GU. We next saw it at Jem Bates' yard where it made it safely. Immediate repairs were fixing the holes in the bottom enough for it to float properly (including one large enough to stick a broom handle through) and during the subsequent rebuild we found both the stem and stern posts were split top to bottom. Could have been a bit awkward... Comparatively, taking a relatively modern steel boat up the Thames wouldn't worry me particularly, but a boat mover or someone experienced would give some confidence and a chance to gain some experience. Alec

A few points which might be helpful. If you are wanting to cruise as much of the journey as possible because you enjoy the cruise then it would be a good trip. But, if it's about saving money, be aware that it probably won't. Lorry/crane hire will be by the day so it won't make any difference and the access charges for craning out are likely to go up as you head south. On pure cost grounds it will probably be cheaper to get it craned nearer to where you currently are. Tuckeys are often recommended for boat moving. I have no personal experience. I have used Matt Gregory who may or may not have a big enough vehicle at the moment but if he does it can work out more cost-effective as he can do the whole thing with one, rather than a separate crane and lorry. Moorings. Depending on what you want and where you want to be exactly, Engineer's Wharf might suit. Not cheap, but decent and seems to have some availability from time to time. Was always very helpful for a friend who moored there (for example, the mooring was advertised at 69', his boat was 72', they actually checked rather than relying on the computer and were fine with it). Alec

We took a mooring there for a few weeks this summer as we wanted to get further north than was otherwise achievable and there was a gap where we couldn't visit to move fortnightly. It was fine, and we would use it in similar circumstances again, but it definitely isn't somewhere I would want to stay on board - we did for one night and the trains were very noticeable, to the point where when we returned we planned to get down to Barbridge rather than set off in the morning. The biggest issue though was the silt. We couldn't get fully down the pontoon in the first place and having left it for 3 weeks it was so solidly stuck that we couldn't move it. After about an hour of rocking, someone passing by came and added some extra weight to the side and we could finally shift it. It took so long to get out in the end that we didn't make it to Barbridge and missed the pub! I see the OP has signed up to Tattenhall. I have heard some vague negative comment but nothing concrete, and I know someone who moors there quite happily. If not, I know several people who moor at Overwater and like it. Alec

I want them to get on with the Montgomery as I have the Nicholson edition which includes it. Alec

I don't know whether this adds anything to the discussion but a Charles J Scragg married Winifred A Stevens in early 1933 at Basford, Nottingham and they had four children born between 1934 and 1944, all also registered in Basford. This is the only Charles Scragg listed with any birth/marriage/death event in early 1933. Basford would have been on the Nottingham canal at the time, although right at the limit of when it was open, suggesting that this particular family were resident on land there rather than on a boat. There was also the birth of a Charles G Scragg registered in Cheadle in Q3 1933. Late registration is possible, but Cheadle is not an obvious place to register a birth with any canal-related context. Mother's maiden name was Harrison. Alec

Given the choice, I suspect all of us would rather have no water in our boats than some water. There is probably a sort of absolute point of 'too much water' which is relatively objective and measurable by sinking or damage to fixtures and fittings, followed by 'more water than I would like' which is where it comes in and makes a mess (we currently have that from the vent fitting in the bathroom and an annoying but unidentified source which is running down the engine bay sides a bit). Beyond that there is a law of diminishing returns, but where there is a practical fit and forget solution it is probably worth doing as reality dictates that anything which requires human intervention will eventually either be forgotten or circumstances will prevent it from being done, giving you consequences you would rather not have. With regard to the specific question of a second bilge pump solution, there is a cost/benefit analysis to be done here. If it keeps the bilge dry enough by doing so that it makes a real difference then it is probably worth it against the cost of buying and installing it and the risk of it causing a further problem if a skin fitting gets broken off, which I would regard as minimal if you can tuck it in near a rubbing strip and it is well above waterline. From my own experience, I would perhaps go further and use the second bilge pump to plumb any other definite, predictable sources of leakage in to. I used our boat as a base for a business trip in November, just an overnight stay as it was convenient for a meeting the next morning and gave me a chance to check on it. I was planning to change the fuel filters, but actually went on board to find a couple of inches of water across the entire stern section. Briefly, I was that highly effective bilge pump of a panicking man with a bucket) and I then spent several hours lifting floors and removing as much as I could with a sponge and bucket, and cursing the fact that this had happened in the cold and wet part of the year so drying it out properly was going to be extremely slow and difficult compared with the extended dry spell over the summer. I then worked out what had happened. We had been out for a few days at the end of October. When we returned to the mooring we went through the usual series of actions, including a turn on the stern greaser to 'firm'. The stern shape on our boat does not make inspection of the stern greaser easy at all (you can't see below it) and the entry point for the grease tube is on the bottom. During his 'refurbishment' one of the corners which the PO had cut was not replacing the plastic tube, which being over 20yrs old had become brittle and split, so grease was not being pumped into the stern tube, but you couldn't see that because it was on the underside. The tube had therefore started to drip slightly, only about once every 30 seconds or so, so not obvious, but over the three weeks that had put about 4 gallons of water into the boat. There is a catch tub under the stern tube with a second bilge pump in it, but the pump had failed and the tub had overflowed, hence the water in the bilge. 4 gallons is not that much - annoying and messy but nothing more. It had not reached the level to trigger the main bilge pump which would have dealt with it if more had come in. I also moved the placement of the main pump so that it would trigger slightly earlier while I was at it (our boat has a slight V bottom and by moving some ballast around I could get it right to the bottom of the V). We were not actually in danger of sinking as the main pump would have kicked in, but the boat is now damp over winter in a way that it would not have been and time has been spent fixing that rather than things I would rather have been fixing, and we have to have the floors up which is not ideal for moving around by walking over the ballast (particularly during a night-time trip to the heads where there is a serious risk of stubbed toes!) The relevance of this is that if I was doing what Tony is proposing I would also add a catch pot under the stern gland, where the water is unlikely to contain any debris, and plumb that with a pipe part way up the container, running down to the catch pot under the steps which contained the second bilge pump. That way, a leak on the stern gland would be noticeable because the catch pot would contain water up to the level of the drain pipe, and I would have a second level of protection because it would be dealt with by the secondary pump, unless that failed in which case the primary pump would deal with it, and there would be a lot less mess to deal with if it starts to weep. Alec

I haven't received a message - should that be by email or PM? Alec

Can you see that written on the side of the nozzle? It should be etched on the side. Alec

In the absence of a proper pry bar, a pair of spanners can be effective. Find the longest one you have which will fit under the flange, lift it and slide another one underneath (or a screwdriver) at right angles, to form a fulcrum (pivot point). If you can get it right up to the injector flange and push down on the outer end of the first spanner you get some pretty decent leverage and most things will move so long as they are not too stuck. Alec

It's quite common to return multiple entries for the same boat with different registration authorities. The details often vary slightly as they are manual entry and depend on exactly what information was given when the boat was registered, what rounding errors get introduced into dimensions and what the person making the entry decided to put in the boxes. We once had to get a hire boat draft of 1.6m corrected in order to book a passage through Harecastle, and Oates has multiple entries, none of which match and none of which are correct. Note that the above boat has a draft of 1cm according to CRT so it should be ideal for cruising the increasingly silted up bits of the system! Alec

I have once started a 'legal' route, with the initial letter. It was not related to boats at all - I had sent three watches away for service and one came back serviced, one they said they couldn't do and the third which had been in full working order had had bits lost and the hands stuck back on the dial with superglue! I sent them a cheque for the work on the watch which had been serviced and itemised the issues with the third one, the cost to rectify and the reduction in value, from which I derived a figure. I indicated that I expected to hear from them with that figure, otherwise I would have no option but to pursue matters more formally. There are some good templates for writing such letters on the Citizens Advice Bureau website, which I used. I was sent the money, and payment for the serviced watch was waived. I would still rather have not had the damage, but it came out OK. Would I have take it further - probably. The issue is that my watches could be working/not working, sat in a safe/sat on my wrist and it would make no difference. I had time. The OP does not have time. Pragmatically, the installation has held up for two years, looking at the positioning of the one visible mount the engine would not drop if the bolt failed and the likelihood of all four bolts simultaneously failing is low. It could be argued that keeping an eye on it and changing the bolts every 2yrs to ensure they do not reach fatigue life would be an adequate bodge - I would not argue it was a satisfactory outcome but in terms of finance and stress it is the lowest impact approach. I am pretty sure I could come up with a bolt-in solution which met the manufacturer's installation guidelines. I am pretty sure this could be done without taking the engine out, or requiring realignment. That would make it a very low cost solution. Other very low cost solutions have been offered involving simple weld runs in-situ. Whilst morally the OP should not have to pay to remedy the installation, pragmatically that may end up being the best course of action if they feel the need for a fix now, rather than feeling confident in the option of changing the mounting bolts periodically or up-rating them a bit to increase confidence. I fear the moral victory may end up being too slow and too expensive to be viable in this case - coincidentally a position I found myself in when we bought our boat to a lesser extent. I ended up writing off the costs but am happy to share my experience with anyone who may be interested as the seller continues to sell other boats. Alec

If the piece of box-section is simply held on with a single bolt, it would be fairly easy to at least correct the orientation by finding a piece of box-section which is twice as wide but the same height, so that mount could be swivelled around. I would mount it so that the open ends are front and back, so that the engine mounting bolts were accessible. If you measure the height accurately from the bottom of the foot to the longitudinal bearer (large bit once painted white) and re-set it to that, it should be possible to remove one mount at a time and change them over. I also note that the single bolt holding it down is an 8.8. You could replace that with a 10.9, 12.9 or 14.4 if you can find one, which would considerably strengthen the installation while waiting to get it welded. It may even be possible to get a piece of U-channel welded to the new piece of box section so that the base of the U butts up against the inside face of the longitudinal bearer. This could potentially be bolted through sideways to hold it far more securely, without needing any welding. All the above contains quite a lot of supposition about access and what the issues with the other mounts are, but if I was in this situation I think I would end up looking for a low-cost solution which would mean something that could be done with the engine in-situ. The biggest risk I can see is fatigue failure in the bolts if they are under-specified (which is impossible to know) but since they haven't failed yet, it is reasonable to think that if you simply change them for higher tensile ones it will buy you at least as long as you have had so far since the engine was installed. Alec

Yes - it will rapidly disappear! Note the difference between caustic soda (sodium hydroxide aka lye and commonly available as drain cleaner) and washing soda (sodium carbonate). It's washing soda you want to use to passivate the surface of iron and steel against flash rusting, and is OK on aluminium but does not add much. The best option for rinsing off aluminium is a weak acid (note weak as opposed to dilute) such as citric (lemon juice) or acetic (vinegar). You could also use oxalic (boiled up rhubarb leaves) but it is unecessarily toxic. Alec

A really interesting thread - will be great to see what you have in mind as a final look. Regarding your engine, if you have access to a media blaster then I have found it a lot easier to run a first pass of getting paint off with a scraper or drill-mounted wire brush (often better than an angle grinder as it can be reversed when the wires start to get bent in one direction, so it keeps cutting rather than polishing), using a selection of pencil and wide brushes, and then blast with plastic media. This works on aluminium too, without cutting if you pick the right one, and brings up soft metals such as aluminium and brass to a level where a quick polish is all that's needed, having taken off both paint and corrosion products without damaging the metal. If I really need to, I can be gentle enough to leave the original Alochrom 1200 finish in place on a piece of Land Rover. This has been far more effective than paint strippers, and because it is a standard solid blasting medium you can run it through an ordinary cabinet if you clean it out well to remove hard grit before starting. Don't expect it to be as fast as harder media on iron castings, but it is not painful, and will do the job far faster than paint strippers will. It has the advantage that traces of residual material do not cause wear on engine components, although if you still have access to the parts washer a good clean after blasting will make doubly sure. If you need to protect iron and steel parts after cleaning to prevent flash rusting, a quick dunk in washing soda is effective as it stops the rust forming for a few hours while you get a batch ready for painting. Zinc phosphate/phosphoric acid wash (aka Eastwood After-Blast from Frosts) is also very good, but a lot more expensive and not necessary if you can paint fairly quickly. I tend to use it on bad castings with a lot of pitting, to 'kill' the rust which is too deep in the pits to remove. Do not use it on aluminium! Alec

These two posts, I think, highlight one of the issues with the current system. We bought our house with Grade II listing being fully aware of our responsibilities - the costs of maintenance should reasonably fall to us. However, there are various situations which are considerably less fair. 1. You own a property which is subsequently listed. 2. A business owns a commercial property which may already have been listed but previous generations of directors have not maintained. 3. There is a grant or tax structure in place which changes radically and unfavourably, often without reasonable warning. Examples. I haven't personally encountered the former, but I am aware of it. If listing was a wholly objective process then you could predict it, but the listing of some 1960s tower blocks for example was not something the relevant councils could have planned for and trying to maintain and repair crumbling reinforced concrete at height, to retain poorly insulated flats, is a financial burden. I have directly encountered the second. My employer is a non-profit distributing company limited by guarantee, established by the government of the time in 1946 when it was given its premises, including a site for erecting laboratories in the grounds of a minor stately home which has since been Grade II* listed. We are not designed to make a profit, so the upkeep of the building has always been a challenge. We recently had to carry out a complete overhaul which cost £1.2M, which was only possible because we could reallocate part of an EU grant to it, as the criteria for use imposed by the local authority suddenly got far more lax due to the 'use it or lose it' position approaching the end of the previous financial year. Without that, we would have done the exterior and mothballed it. For context, the highest net surplus the company has ever made would only have covered around 10% of the costs and we would compromise the existence of the business if we didn't reinvest in technology. We were not directly affected by the third, but in this area, long straw thatch is used rather than reed, and has to be replaced like for like, giving a relatively short lifetime. There used to be a grant to offset a lot of the cost of this, but the roof lasts about 25yrs and the grant structure didn't, so both the previous owners of our house and our next door neighbours missed it because the roof did not happen to need replacing at the right time. There are also all kinds of idiosyncrasies. For example, you can reclaim VAT on alterations to a listed structure, but not on the cost of repair. What a listed buildings officer will/will not allow is also highly subjective. We have had at least three officers in this area since we lived here - we had agreement in principle to build an extension before we bought the house, but the original listed buildings officer insisted on certain design details which were rather odd. We stood on the lawn looking at the proposed site with her successor a year or so later and she asked why we wanted all these strange details - we explained that we didn't - it was her predecessor! They were all deleted. There have been other strange outcomes since, but in general we appear to get the best result by asking verbally, then formalising permission if the outcome is favourable and if not we just wait until the next officer comes along! None of this makes ownership and responsibility for such structures as straightforward as it should be. Alec

The only problem with that is this year's finished at Withymoor, so unless the scoring system was significantly changed the routes would be largely the same (although there may be one less closure to deal with which would make a difference). Mind you, it was a nice place to finish and very convenient for us, so I wouldn't complain. It would be handy if CRT could be prevailed upon to provide a rubbish skip though - perhaps add some points for rubbish collected by weight? Given our draught we dredge up a lot that others run straight over, so I reckon we might be on to a winner with that! Alec

Excellent. I look forward to hearing more! Alec