Wanderer Vagabond
Patron
-
Posts
3,701 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
231
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Gallery
Blogs
Store
Posts posted by Wanderer Vagabond
-
-
9 hours ago, David J Smith said:
Ah. Past through St Neots a long time back. On the Leicester arm of the GU moored at Weltonfield marina now. Know anyone in that area. Machanic here was a bit vague.. With "euwwwwwww, that sounds expencive". Just what I needed eh. Would it be something tha RCR could diagnose and possible fix?
From my own experience and where you say you are,I'd strongly recommend Electrostart at Daventry (https://electrostart.co.uk/). They seem to know what they are doing with alternators and if you need a replacement, their prices are competitive. (No I'm not on a commission, but they've solved my alternator issues in the past
).
-
I'd tend to go with the other comments on the preference for Limehouse to Brentford rather than the other way. Come out from Limehouse on the flooding tide tide and get to Brentford on High water slack (hopefully). Why take the option of leaving Brentford on high tide and then hope to get to Limehouse and turn into the lock on the ebbing tide unless you enjoy the challenge?
-
16 minutes ago, roland elsdon said:
Thats where we were last night!
Must have passed you!
Yes, there seemed to be more boats coming up (against us) than there were going down, the Bascote staircase was fun though (1 down (us), 2 up). Needed a bit of explanation to the lock crew from the 'up' boats of what we were going to do.
-
5 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:
A full drawing
We were earlierhaving a discussion regarding these paddles. OH was saying that whenever it might be necessary to slightly open the top gate paddle to stop the bottom gates swinging open, it is very stiff to close the paddle again. On one of the locks towards the bottom of the Stockton Flight, one of the paddles was extremely stiff to raise, I don't know how stiff it would be to shut in an emergency (boat cilled, etc).
-
1 minute ago, roland elsdon said:
Yep the stockton pound is down. On arrival at our mooring we were 8 feet from the bank. After 2 hrs work we are 7 feet from the bank.
If you mean the pound with Kate Boats and Nelson Wharf on it, it was fine yesterday when we passed through (as was the Stockton Flight itself, although that was about midday).
Today the pound above Radford Bottom Lock looked to be about 6 inches down, we were going to moor there but changed our mind, went through Bottom Lock and have moored just beyond the overflow into the River Leam, where water is currently pouring from the canal into the river.
-
8 hours ago, Hudds Lad said:
What we found with those GU hydraulic things that take 23 turns, is that a lot of people don’t wind them down to close they just let them go. We were advised to do this by a couple of fellow boaters and a vollockie as it “saves time”. We also found that whilst this may be true and they drop slowly without slamming shut, on some of them this means they do not fully close, so after a couple of locks we reverted back to our usual way of working.
Yes, I'd always thought those Ham Baker's were hydraulic (they feel like it when you are winding them) but apparently not, they seem to be more like a bottle jack on a car.
My method (now that I've realised they are supposed to be lowered under gravity) is to release the pawl (or whatever they call it on those paddles) and using a gloved hand control the descent until it is down. If it hasn't fully bedded I just give it a turn by hand.
-
We passed through the Stockton Flight yesterday and, with a few boats on the move, it was fine, plenty of water. Talking to the lockie he says that there is an issue first thing in the morning so it looks as though there is a leak on the flight somewhere.
-
8 minutes ago, Tacet said:
I don't understand the focus on the shallowest pound. All the pounds with insufficient water to float the boat will need more.
With very few exceptions, the only option is to run water down from a higher level. One needs to be mindful of the effects on boats within the various pounds.
Unless it is clear the underlying problem has bee fixed, I would run down only enough to scrape through. If there is no leak, the passage of subsequent boats will help return the proper levels.
It is a situation where someone on the bank is very useful in running the minimum necessary. My technique is to draw paddles at both ends of a lock, with all gates close. This is an anathema to my wife, who insists on delivering it in discrete look lockfuls.
The focus on the shallowest pound was because that is probably going to be the one to ground you. You don't want to get down four or five pounds and then find that you haven't got enough into the shallowest and have to go back to the top to run some more down. My example was however, specific to Hurleston last year since there was plenty of water to refill the whole flight with the reservoir at the top and the flow coming down from Llangollen. This year is a different kettle of fish and I'm trying to save water wherever I can.
-
1 minute ago, ditchcrawler said:
So who is going to tell that to all the new boaters.
..and more to the point, why? All they need to know is to pass oncoming boats on the right hand side, unless to do so will lead to a collision. Even telling new hirers to keep to the right causes them some problems since they interpret that to mean keep to the right hand side of the canal at all times. Obviously the best place to put your boat in the shallow canals is in the centre of the channel where it is deepest, trying to keep to one side will just result in them regularly grounding and makes steering a nightmare.
-
1
-
-
23 minutes ago, Onionman said:
Arrived at Stockton flight the other morning and the flight was pretty much empty.
Someone was having a go ahead of us but it all looked a bit slapdash and they were clearly making it up as they went along. What's the correct way to fill a flight?
In a normal year, you'd find out where the shallowest pound is on the flight and aim to get that one refilled. At Hurleston last year we had a similar issue (I think a leak was causing it) so the only way to refill the flight was to open both top and bottom paddles on the top lock to send water down and then as the pound between that and the second lock fills, do the same on the next lock, and the next until you get to the shallowest pound then start shutting all paddles again, starting from the bottom up. Since Hurleston reservoir was at the top of the flight and there wasn't a shortage last year it was time and inconvenience rather than anything else.
This year we still don't want to be wasting water so I'd be putting as little amount of water down the flight as you can get away with (you'll be taking a lockfull down with you anyway). It kind of depends how big the pounds between the locks are. We'll be going down Stockton tomorrow so we'll see if it's been sorted.
14 minutes ago, Stroudwater1 said:Do you mean the lock chamber was empty or the water between the two locks was pretty much gone? If its the water between the two locks (The pound) then the best thing to keep the rest of the flight full would be to have a discussion with the boater ahead, hope they listen to you, point out thet water has drained away and they need to alter their technique a little (Well a lot probably TBF) and hope a Volonteer Locky may come along to save water and get the person to understand what they are doing isn't quite the best way.
My reading of it (might be wrong) was that the boat crew in front was trying to sort out the empty pound, rather than causing it.
-
7 hours ago, cuthound said:
The shunt is really just a very accurate low value resistor, typically dropping 50 or 75 millivolts at its full rated load, therefore unless the connections are different it shouldn't make any difference to the monitor
I would check that the cables have identical connections within the connectors and that the connectors on the old cable, shunt and new monitor are undamaged.
Yup, everything mentioned is just fine. I am still using the old RJ12 cable (couldn't be *rsed to feed the new one on the circuitous route around the engine). Both the new and the old positive, fused, cables work with both monitors, the only thing that makes any difference is the new shunt. The old shunt still works with the old monitor and if the monitor casing hadn't fallen apart, I'd still be using it.
-
Well having now resolved the issue, Vectron lied
. As was suggested in the above link the shunts should be interchangeable however whilst the old monitor will work on the new shunt, the new monitor won't work on the old shunt. Looking at them both I have no idea why since, other than an additional terminal to connect to the engine battery if you want to (not used yet), they seem identical.
It seems odd because in the enclosed handbook it says that the monitor can be used with a variety of different shunts, just not the one from the 600 obviously.
-
5 hours ago, haggis said:
In this thread it has been mentioned several times about hand/arm signals being misunderstood and I have to admit that although I use them, I too have been confused about what the other boaters was trying to say. You often see the skipper madly waving his arm about pointing to the right or the left but does he mean that that is where he is going or where he wants you to go?
When I do arm signals, I make big gestures and point to myself then point to where I am going. If I don't get an acknowledgement , or if it looks like the skipper hasn't "got the message" I repeat it.
I can't think of an instance where this method of signalling has been misunderstood.
OK, I know that horn or light signals could be used but when the majority of folk on the canals have no idea what they mean, I prefer to use something which is easily understood.
It is fair to say the skipper and I have different opinions on this subject 🙂
haggis
You seem to use the same method as me, there is no point debating horn or light signals since such information is not given to hirers and probably the majority of other leisure boaters don't have a clue of them either. For them to be effective both parties must have full knowledge of their meaning otherwise all it does is give the know all the bragging rights of 'You were in the wrong'.
For clarity I am aware of the sound signals and the only one I've heard that impressed me was on a waste tug on the Thames who blasted out 4 and then 1 (not to be confused with 5!) meaning 'I am turning fully around to starboard' and that is exactly what he did. His sound signal enable me to keep well out of his way. Compare this to the 'professional' muppet operating a passenger trip boat who gave 2 blasts as I was level with his stern and then pulled out directly into my path
sound signals or not you are still expected to look.
2 hours ago, ditchcrawler said:I had this in Birmingham when I met the little water taxi that had just come through the Bar, I was exiting "Black Sabith Bridge" and she stuffed a right arm out, I veered slightly to the right, she came straight towards me , we both did an emergency stop. She wanted me to go to the right of her, passing on the wrong side to give her a straight run from the bar to the bridge ! I was in the wrong, she is a professional.
Means nothing (see above) some of the worse cock-ups I've come across were so-called 'professionals'. When going up the Thames from Limehouse a 'professional' muppet reversed off Tower Pier directly into my path as I'm barrelling along at 9knots (going with the tide) and then stopped to point out to his passengers all of the wondrous sights of London that you can see from there, oblivious to the 18 ton narrow boat heading straight for him and unable to stop.
6 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:Maybe because posting something like "Colregs 34b" is about as intelligible to most of us on here as "quyxxcllobitic" is. Somebody flashes a light at me as I approach a bridge, I let go the tiller, stick the boat in neutral, duck down into the cabin to get my tablet, google it...
See? Bleedin' pointless. Horn signals are even dafter, as I'm standing on top of an aircooled Lister banging away and my ears aren't what they were seventy years ago anyway. And I'm younger than half the boaters out there
Every boater knows, after the first time out, that you drive on the right, because the boat you nearly hit explains it, either nicely or nastily, depending on mood. If you can pass on your extensive knowledge of Colregs in the available five seconds, fine. If not, just be careful. It really isn't hard to avoid disaster at 3mph. It's not just selfish boaters are the problem, it's the barrack room laywer types who have all the irrelevant regulations at their finger tips but no common sense
Whilst there is a whole load of 'stuff' in Colregs, the bottom line is 'avoid a collision'(clue in the name really). I managed to avoid a collision on the Thames up towards Lechlade (the windy bits) by steering hard to port (Colregs say you should turn to starboard). The boat I was avoiding steered hard to starboard and we ended up safely parallel to one another with no collision. Had I steered to starboard my stern would have swung to port and he'd have T-boned me (we met on a sharp bend).
As you say it isn't difficult to avoid disaster at 3mph, you just need to be aware of your surroundings. As I travel along I'm usually looking to see where the line of the canal goes into the distance (looking for bridges,locks etc) so I often see an approaching boat a long time before it is in front of me. On blind corners/bridges I always assume that there will be something coming the other way and work out what my 'escape' plan will be accordingly (steer into the weeds if absolutely necessary.
The only time I generally use a horn is approaching a t-junction when I'll blast once if I'm turning to starboard and twice if turning to port. For those that know they will then be aware of which way I'm going as I come out of the junction, and for those that don't know all they'll hear is a warning of my approach, both options being good
-
3
-
-
14 minutes ago, Rob-M said:
I agree with MTB, I expect the new model has different connections but uses the same connector type.
However, a quick Google turned up this blog, https://www.victronenergy.com/blog/2014/01/12/bmv-702-insights/, which states the 600S and 702 are interchangeable and the shunt didn't need replacing.
Thanks for the link, what he describes is pretty much what I was expecting, there seems no obvious difference between the shunts (except that two battery banks can be monitored, rather than just the one on my old unit) and the RJ12 cable is generic. I'm calling in at Calcutt Chandlery tomorrow for fuel and will seek some advice there if possible. If they can't help I think I'll be cruising back to Midland Chandlers at Braunston (where the unit was bought).
-
I hope there are some experts on battery monitors out there because this problem has me flummoxed.
The story is that the casing of my old Victron BMV 600 Battery Monitor split, probably as a result of pressing the buttons on it a bit too hard, it was an old unit and the buttons were a bit temperamental. Looking for a replacement I bought a Victron BMV 702 which to me just looked like and updated version (it's not a Smart system or anything like that). The shunt from the old monitor is still installed and since the wiring and RJ12 cable looked identical I simply removed the old unit and plugged the new unit into the RJ12 cable. Now the old unit still works but is a bit fragile and when connected the data comes up on the screen and if left connected whilst the engine is running it will automatically synchronize which to me suggest that the wiring is OK. When I disconnect the RJ12 cable from the back of the old unit and plug it into the back of the new unit, nothing happens. There is no display, pressing buttons has no effect and it just wont seem to fire up. Has anyone any suggestion as to why? or have I got a duff unit?
-
3 hours ago, agg221 said:
I have only once moored on a water point which, coincidentally also blocked a winding hole. We arrived an hour after dark in October, no moorings left in the line so stopped where we could, leaving the widest point of the winding hole still accessible but knowing it would be difficult if someone needed to wind a full length boat. We got up early the next morning in case anyone needed to use either the winding hole or the water point, then as soon as the first boat moved off the moorings we went in to their space, say 7.30am? Admittedly moving was by rope and pole as the engine refused to start (several hours later the fuel system was bled through) which wasn't ideal but we were ready to fend off if I couldn't steer it straight through past the moored boats between us and the mooring space. If anyone had needed the water point or the winding hole earlier we would have moved, whatever the time. It's just common courtesy.
Alec
I can fully sympathise with your illustrated issue and would not complain about it at all. When travelling on the Nene a couple of years back we were unable to find a mooring as the daylight started to go, so we spent the night on a lock mooring. Setting off first thing in the morning and, if anyone had come before, I'd have worked the lock for them. As you say it is a common courtesy.
With the boat photo'd at Braunston, unless the skipper was lying dead on the saloon floor, there was no justification at all for leaving the boat there. Anecdotally I know that he wasn't because the moorer who I was in conversation with said that they'd been sitting out on their chairs for some of the morning before I got there. Even if there was a medical emergency (which it seems there wasn't) there was a good boat length of mooring on the towpath opposite that could have been used. Should I happen to see this boat moored elsewhere, it is the one boat that I wont slow down for.
-
1 minute ago, David Mack said:
I would have breasted up to him and carried my elsan and rubbish across his boat.
I thought of that but the canal is too narrow there so I'd have blocked it. Some of us have consideration for others, unlike that muppet.
-
To perfectly illustrate the premise of the OP, I put forward these photos as exhibit A (yes, it might be 'naming and shaming' but given the level of ignorance, I really don't care)
The water point/Elsan/Rubbish disposal point at Braunston at 11.30 am this morning
Not a problem I thought, I'll moor up opposite and wait until he's finished. So I stood around like a lemon on the opposite side of the canal for about a quarter of an hour waiting for something to happen. There was no sign of watering up, dumping rubbish or emptying of Elsan's (or even going into the nearby chandlers) A nearby moorer walked past and asked me if I was waiting for the boat to move ,I obviously answered "Yes" to then be told, "Oh, he's moored up, he's been there since yesterday afternoon". Annoying doesn't begin to describe it. Realising this muppet's ignorance I then managed to squeeze in behind him but not properly moored so whenever a boat came past the bow kept drifting out. I did the necessary (Elsan, Water,rubbish) and then reversed back telling the crew not to bother fending off if the bow hit the moored boat; as it turned out the boat reversed as straight as an arrow (on the one occasion I had rather hoped it wouldn't) so we didn't. By the time I'd finished there was a queue to get the the service block.
It can be seen here that there was plenty of mooring available opposite
....but if that wasn't good enough for him, this is what the Braunston moorings looked like at the time......
When watering up I was conversing loudly with a moorer on the other side of the canal of just how ignorant this piece of mooring had been, but since there was no reaction from anyone on the boat I can only assume that to compound the matter, the boat was unoccupied.
I have a level of sympathy with someone turning up at Braunston at, say, 7pm no mooring available and taking the only place he could find (if that was indeed the case). I have no sympathy whatsoever with someone leaving the fecking thing there for the whole morning when alternative moorings were available
Rant over!!
-
2
-
-
Just as an aside, I was in conversation with the guy who owned and fitted my boat out from new today, and the subject of bowthrusters cropped up. One point he made was that my boat has a 10mm base plate and 6mm hull but when they install a bow thruster tubes they only tend to use 4mm steel so it seems it is almost deliberately introducing a weak point (given that it's not unheard of for BT tubes to be missed when blacking). Is that the norm?
-
Just now, IanD said:
So what you're all saying is that reversing would be easier with a bow thruster... 😉
It would make no difference in deep water since I can steer backwards OK in that. For me it just makes an unnecessary complication, illustrated recently when assisting someone at a lock. The boat had drifted diagonally in the lock and the lady on the helm asked the bloke I was working the lock with whether she should use the BT to straighten it up (seemingly an ideal use ). His response was,"No, don't touch the BT with this weed in the lock, last time it took me 30 minutes to clear it". He served the purpose by simply pushing the bow for her.
-
3 hours ago, Loddon said:
Personally never had a problem reversing my narrow boat, it seems to go where I want it to.
But then I watch where the bow is going rather than the stern
2 hours ago, MtB said:Me too. In fact I spend 90% of the time looking forward to detect the beginnings of the boat turning the wrong way. Once it starts, immediate full rudder is needed to counter the turning beginning but sometimes I'm too late and have to engage ahead, and the boat needs to completely stop before the rudder will bite again to straighten the boat up. doing this a few times in a 1/4 mile reverse take an absolute age when a BT would straighten the boat in a few seconds.
Sometimes I can do a 1/4 mile reverse in one go. Other times the same reverse needs 7 or 8 "stops and straighten-ups".
I find it all rather depends on the depth of water you are working in. On a river such as the Thames or Trent when you are generally in deep water, it is possible to correct the boat as soon as it begins to stray off course (yes I also spend 90% of the time watching the bows rather than looking behind) but on a shallower canal you need to be dead centre of the u-shaped channel before you start and as soon as the boat goes off that line you will be getting more drag on the shallower side which then accentuates the turn and is impossible to rectify without stopping and re-setting.
-
1
-
-
7 hours ago, MtB said:
I'm surprised you say this as I've never had a bow thruster and rarely have any problem hovering about mid cut when the need arisies. In fact I quite enjoy doing it. On a river it's even easier with a bit of current. Maybe its easier in a narrow boat than a proper boat-shaped boat like Bee.
The only rider I'd make on that is that when it's windy all rules go out of the window
.
On the river however, as you say, it is even easier if there is some flow since you just match engine speed to flow and hold station or even ferry glide (https://www.rya.org.uk/e-news/up-to-speed/mastering-the-ferry-glide)
-
8 minutes ago, IanD said:
The drag increase is tiny, just like it is for an aeroplane aerofoil. In fact it can be zero, because the Schilling rudder has more lift (sideways thrust) for a given size, so you can use a smaller rudder -- mine is about 500mm long compared to about 700mm for a flat plate rudder.
Twin flat rudders still don't work at large angles because the water flow breaks away from them (stalling), the Schilling rudder works up to much bigger angles by keeping the water flow attached to the rear side.
Kort rudders (or nozzles, to be more accurate) work very well in low-speed marine applications like tugs. On a canal they're very prone to getting jammed by weeds or canal debris because of the small clearance between propeller and nozzle... 😞
I would need convincing that the drag increase would be zero just because the rudder size is smaller since with a conventional rudder it will be the leading edge and thickness that creates the drag rather than the length of rudder. I was thinking that since water is a bit heavier than air, displacing the flow by having a bulbous rudder would lead to some increase in drag. Since my boat isn't highly powered in the first place, I'm not sure I'd want to.
-
4 minutes ago, IanD said:
Or if you don't mind being abused by the "new technology is bad" school and you have both a bow thruster *and* a Schilling rudder, you can move both ends of the boat away from the bank in parallel at the same time... 😉
Getting more technical now (had to look up a Schilling rudder) but I would have thought that having a bulbous shaped rudder (Schilling) would increase drag when travelling in a straight line wouldn't it? (isn't that why F1 cars have a DRG system?) Surely a twin flat rudder would have a better effect (not having seen either on a narrow boat though
).
Are boaters getting more selfish or is it just the world in general
in General Boating
Posted
Or there could have been a line of 60 foot boats who have all subsequently moved off just leaving him, and the cruiser has arrived since then.
That is the point, before criticising, it's always worth asking people, politely, if they could move a short way to let you get in, most people in my experience will on Visitor Moorings. If however someone has moored up in the middle of nowhere but hasn't left space for anyone else to moor it kind of suggests that they want some privacy, and I'll respect that and find somewhere else to moor.