alan_fincher
-
Posts
38,278 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
81
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Gallery
Blogs
Store
Posts posted by alan_fincher
-
-
A fourteen feet wide barge would be towed by a single horse, so it is unsurprising that the same applied to two seven feet narrow boats.
-
48 minutes ago, magnetman said:
Never thought about it before but I wonder if they are hauling two vessels with one animal.
That was enirely normal.
-
1
-
-
I may be wrong, but I seem in my distant memory to recall that the cottage actually had nothing to do with the canal, and was instead part of the cassiobury estate.
I'm happy to be corrected if that is not the case though.
-
1
-
-
21 hours ago, MtB said:
To be fair, yes. I don't know about commercial registrations. But were there ever tolls on the River Thames, it being a PRN? If yes, when did they stop?
I know my brother Mike was paying when moving narrow boats on the Thames to get around the four year closure of Blisworth Tunnel, (so some time between 1980 and 1984). My memory was that he was carring only a very nominal cargo, (possibly under a ton?), and it was a lot cheaper to pay commercial tolls than buying a pleasure licence.
I may be remembering wrong, but I don't think I am. -
Approximately what date do you have for these people being on Panther and Python, please?
I don't think the current Panther and Python existed before then, so for a match as the same boats your dates would need to be before then, I think. -
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
16 hours ago, MtB said:Indeed, as all one would need to do is scrap a canoe in order to licence a brand new 70ft x 13ft 6in behemoth.
Or, (much better idea!), scrap a brand new 70ft x 13ft 6in behemoth, and replace it with a canoe!
-
5
-
5 hours ago, Tim Lewis said:
From the Mike Westcott collection at the London Canal Museum, taken at Berkhampstead in April 1971
Tim
I'm uncertain if that is one of the two that I pictured being towed North in an earlier post, but from the part "erased" "3" at the end of "1393" I think it maybe.
It is certainly not one of the "Horsebarge Hotel" boats Tuba and Fleet.
A small point of order Tim - for some considerable number of years the spelling of the town has settled as "Berkhamsted". -
13 hours ago, Chris M Jones said:
I can confirm the number 1393 was the Thames Waterman's Hall number for William Stevens of 14 Friary Street, Guildford and his successors, W. Stevens & Sons. It was painted on all his barges.
And I can thank another well known waterways researcher who has been following the discussion for providing me in an email similar information.
Provided the right people are watching the correct information usually emerges-
1
-
-
As the registation number of the boats has featured in this thread this shows that registration numbers appeared across the back of the rear deck - in this case the vessel shows as registered at the Port of London.
Steering is my very long deceased brother Pete, and the photo is copyright of my other brother Mike.My strong suspicion is that 1393 is the Guildford phone number of William Stevens and son.
-
2
-
-
Whilst acknowledging MTB's comment that issues with the stove might relate to current regulations, I think I would rather acknowledge that Clarke stoves are budget items made (in China?) to a not very satisfactory standard. They of course cost a tiny fraction of what is charged for the more usually recommended boat stoves.
My guess is that if you want a stove that will stay in overnight with minimal faff then a Clarke stove is almost certaily a poor choice.
That said management of stoves is often a bit of a black art, and quite a bit of preactice on any particular stove is often required before you feel the master of it. I hope for the sake of your wallet that this is the case with yours.
-
4 hours ago, Tam & Di said:
The Stevens family had 8 barges, one went to Elesmere Port as Pluto says, and there were a couple at Berkhamsted as trip boats.
Tuba and Fleet?
Tuba certainly looked like a Stevens boat, having a transom stern as in these pictures.
Fleet however had a very different back end, simply curving in to the rudder, with no flat back. If it was a Stevens barge it was certainly of a different design to those one normally sees pictured.
I don't know the fate of either but, but would be surprised if either has survived.The 1393 number on the stern was common to all Stevens boats, I think.
This picture, (taken at Brantom's Wharf, Leighton Buzzard, supports that fact...
-
2
-
-
4 minutes ago, magnetman said:
I think they are going towards Lady Capels lock with Grove bridge behind them.
My last comment has probably confused things, as irrespective of direction of travel Lady Capel's is surely well North of Croxley!
-
1 hour ago, Derek R. said:
I wonder if that's more 'grass' for Dickinson's.
Aren't they running South, in which case this would seem unlikely?
-
Interesting photo, being one that shows one of those large circular metal discs fitted to the end of a balance beam.
I think these originated from what gates pivot on ot their lower ends, but may be remembering that wrongly.
-
2
-
-
9 hours ago, David Mack said:
GUCCCo 177 is Sutton, which is now full length. Has it been shortened and relengthened? Or is this a different 177?
I note the extended back deck and long tiller.
Definitely not Sutton. It's one of the wooden maintenance boats, but other than that I know little about it.
I don't think it is one of the wooden iceboats, though. -
21 hours ago, Speedwheel said:
Looking at this picture, it's the only one I've seen (or at least noticed) that shows a middle northwich with a hook and dolly.
Does anyone know if they all started life with that arrangement?
No idea. But I think I could answer the question "why is the front half of the rocker bar and supports missing".
-
5 minutes ago, Speedwheel said:
There's a clue on the cabin sides.
I looked at the wrong picture!
-
1
-
-
Jill or Gill? You've got me thinking now.
Speedwheel will definitely know😃
-
On 19/12/2025 at 09:52, Francis Herne said:
Presumably these don't fit a narrow lock and don't look straightforwardly removable.
Were the converted Northwiches only used on the wide GU?
No.
There certainly images of one of the boats, (Tycho I think), at work near Sutton Stop, (obviously not in "widened" form).
Somewhere I have a copy of a letter that relates to how successful Sickle had proved to be when put to work on the Oxford canal, (alongside the Oxfoed company's own "in house" ice boats). The conclusion was that Sickle worked well, but would benefit from a more powerful engine - an upgrade it was eventually given by BW when a 3 cylinder Armstrong replaced the ex GUCCCo Russell Newbery circa 1957 (I think).This is belived to be Tycho.
The date on the caption iis clearly wrong, though.
-
1
-
-
I pesume when still under the ownership of Dave and Gill Humphries. I remember this pair from shortly after they acquired them. Barnes was in immaculate condition whereas Badsey was in largely "ex Wendover Arm" condition, other than having had a useable engine fitted.
-
Twist it round fully several times, as if there is any scale holding it open you need to grind that up. (you can't really do it too much.....)
-
One of the advantages of owning an historic ex-working boat, with a full 7' width and 4' 9" deep hull sides. There is no problem at all with full 600mm deep work tops.
But I agree, if your boat is a nominal 6' 10" with very much shallower hull sides, then you will need significantly shallower work tops and hence be much more limited in your choice of hobs.
One thing to consider if you do select a domestic hob and convert to LPG, is that it must have flame failure devices on all burners. I suspect that probably all now do have, but worth checking. -
Yes, both first two are definitely Renton both taken at Gayton, near the start of the Northampton arm.
Sickle still clearly shows the former holes where the timber baulks were bolted on - now blanked off with rivets.
-
1
-
-
On 07/12/2025 at 16:32, Alan de Enfield said:
They have sold several (a small number greater than 1 and less than 4) that have sunk on their way to their new moorings.
So you are saying that either 2 or 3 have sunk when cruising to their new home base?
Whilst that may be true, I wonder if you have the evidence?
Of course a narrow boat sinking as soon as under new ownership is not necessarily an indication of anything wrong with the boat. It is easily achieved either by "cilling" it, or by trying to cruise with the weed hatch removed. This is just as easily done with a £100K boat as with a £15K boat.
This not a post in support of Wilton though - I agreethey have regularly proved themselves to be totally dishonest. And that's putting it politely!
Historic Boats for sale online
in History & Heritage
Posted
Interesting boat. You can't buy much for £10K, so it coud be a good buy for someone.
Pictures could be more helpful - the majority seem to be of all the crap in the hold.
I'm not convinced of MTB#s valuation of a PD2, though. I love the rattle of those engines, but most boats once having them have long since abandoned them. They don't have a great reputaion for reliability, and in particular they often broke crankshafts, (which is surprising if you have ever been shown just how massove the cranks actually were!).