PaulG

I agree. If there's any "fresh" in the river, then it is better going downstream from Stourport. Obviously it will take some time to get from Overwater to Stourport, and conditions on the Severn can change pretty quickly, so I'd suggest going this way round, just in case. As others have said, Tardebigge is much the same in either direction, not much in it really.

Interesting. My interpretation of the test results is that the Axiom works better in reverse, which is what you might expect given the symmetrical nature of the design. However, this appears to be at the expense of forward performance. In the "bollard pull" test, the standard 38 prop gave a pull of 264 Kg, and the Axiom was 57 Kg less, at 213 Kg. A quck calculation that I ususally get wrong tells me that's about 22% less power. This is seen in the speed tests, where the standard 38 prop produced 7.5 knots and the Axiom 7.10.

Sounds as if this person was lucky he wasn't in court on manslaughter charges. "The boat has been advertised on AirBnB and can accommodate up to ten tenants. A BBC mini-documentary screened earlier this year, with a reporter and insurance expert staying aboard for a night, showed something of the interior of the boat and the state of its toilets. The expert described the vessel as a fire trap."

A heinous crime!

I'm tempted to ask how you know that...

If the prop blade is assymetric, like this one: Then it is optimised for forward efficiency. When it is in reverse, it is turning in the opposite direction, so the effective shape is "backwards" for best efficiency. Of course, boats spend the majority of their time travelling forwards, so this type of design is popular. Designs like the "Axiom" look to be symetrical, so should be equally efficient when operating in either direction. However, for the short periods of reversing, I can't see that reverse efficiency really counts for a lot unless the boat is underpowered. If the prop is inefficient, then just give it more revs. Extra revs *may* cause more prop walk, however. But, as in the case of Mr. Brunel, you'd need to test two identical boats side-by-side without knowing which props are fitted to see if there is any difference in reality.

Naturally...

Not exactly an independent test then...

Any propellor design is a compromise. If you improve one aspect of it's performance, then it will often be to the detriment of another. Propellor design has been studied in great detail, and over a very long period. Even in the very early days, Brunel was responsible for two years of tests between 1843 and 1845 using HMS Rattler and other vessels. Since then, designs have been developed for many specialised applications e.g. submarines (primarily for quiet running), large merchant vessels (primarily for efficiency). In more recent years, powerful computing systems have been developed to produce optimised designs. Axiom claim that their design is beneficial for "Suitable for most types of vessel - fast or slow, displacement or semi displacement". So Axiom claim to have come up with a kind of "universal design" that over 100 years of research by heavy hitters like the Admiralty has missed. Personally I do not believe it. There's a discussion of ship propellor design here: http://www.marineinsight.com/naval-architecture/10-factors-considered-efficient-ship-propeller-design/ and in more detail here: http://marine.man.eu/docs/librariesprovider6/propeller-aftship/hydrodynamics.pdf?sfvrsn=2 There are blade profiles in the second document that appear very similar to the Axiom one... Yes, they are large ship propellors, but the performance must be proportional to size or they would not be tested on models. I am not suggesting that their design is not a good one - it may be perfectly sound, but I don't believe their "all things to all men" claims.

Excessive, IMHO. The boat opposite me has an Axiom. The owner says that they spend a lot of time down the weed hatch...

If true, that's a shame. The Royal Canal was on my "bucket list"...

This book was very useful to me when I first bought my boat. (Other books / vendors available!) http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/NARROW-BOATS-CARE-AND-MAINTENANCE-Nick-Billingham-HARDBACK-/351855529609?_trksid=p2141725.m3641.l6368

CRT still have this page up: https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/enjoy-the-waterways/boating/licensing-your-boat/licence-it-or-lose-it For those that don't like following links: "Our main tool for enforcement is the power for the Canal & River Trust to 'section 8' unlicensed boats. This relates to powers given in the British Waterways Act 1983 (and transferred to the Canal & River Trust) and allows us to remove boats from the waterway if they are there without our permission or persistently in breach of our licence terms and conditions – including not having a licence."

This tactic doesn't always work in their favour. A couple of years ago, we were going up the Tibberton flight on the W&B and just exiting the top lock , when a load of lads (armed wtih tins of beer and windlasses) came jogging down the towpath followed at some distance by a hireboat. "How far is it to Worcester? We're trying to get there before closing time" they panted as they hurriedly closed the top gate and proceeded to pull the paddles . I tried to point out that draining a lock that was already set for them was hardly going to speed their progress, but this fell on deaf ears.

I know nothing about the situation that you are in. Personally I think you need to explain the circumstances a bit better. It seems to me (from the limited information available) that the land owner was a victim of the "unscrupulous landlord" as well as you. The land owner says that he seeks to make a new agreement with you. I'm failing to see any threat there. If he is making unreasonable demands, then of course that is different. I think people on this forum are very willing to support worthy causes. But giving next to no information and then saying "Don't sign if you don't want to" is not going to achieve much in the way of results, IMHO.

I think you will find that Mr. Moore did.

Apparently the boatyard is "Tonbridge's Answer to Venice"... Of course, there remains the slight possibility that this description is over-egging reality. http://www.kentlive.news/tonbridge-riverboat-community-appeal-for-help-after-eviction-threat/story-29803370-detail/story.html Edited to say that, having read the letter from the landowner that is pictured in the article, his terms appear to prevent squatting on his land, whichon the face of it seems to be not unreasonable. Of course, there may be other correspondence that has not been published.