Arnot

Yes you have a point and my idea may well be unecessary. It's just that I remember wiring boats using the old British colour coding for the engine and with a rudimentary colour coding for the cabin. It did make it easier to do and certianly made it easier to fault find and add to later. I am also an old electrician and have spent many happy hours trying to work out what wire went where in trunking when most of it was inaccessible, I guess that this is the rationale for trying to avoid the problem from the outset. I don't see many boats that have more than one 230v circuit extending into the cabin, I tend to use a garage distribution box with two MCB's, one for the cabin ring and one for an outlet (where fitted) in the engine room on the basis that this may be used to operate power tools on the towpath. I like to see colour coding on the engine wiring so that diagnosis is easier if a fault occurs, Barrus, Vetus, Beta etc all have their own colour coding but it would be easier if there was some standardisation. For cabin wiring, certainly you can get away with twins all of the same colour and I agree that singles can be very complicated but they do generally allow for more variety in conductor size. In mains wiring every circuit has it's own feed (phase) and return (neutral) so that isolation can be achieved at the distribution board which is how it should be. However in a 12v system in a boat, apart from by convention, I can't see any overriding reason for every circuit having a separate negative return a loose return is not going to electrocute anyone. Many of the loads are either very occasional or miniscule (such as LED lighting or audio), if the return was shared using single wiring and junctions there could be a significant saving in wire and space. Not that I am advocating this approach just re-examining it in the light of todays usage of power and the improvements in equipment efficiency. I suspect I don't but I have been asked for a wiring plan or schematic by some variety of inspector before now, perhaps it was for a new boat or a hire boat and it was something other than BSS. Perhaps someone could put me right here... There will almost certainly be too many possibilites but in vehicle wiring this is handled by having a primary colour that indicates the group (i.e. marker lighting, auxilary, headlights, engine sensors, ignition circuit etc) and a trace or band to indicate the sub-group (i.e. left side lights, right side lights, number plate lights, usually all controlled by the same switch but separately fused). In addition almost every manufacturer has variations on this theme but along the same logical lines so at least you have an idea of what wire you are looking at. Regards Arnot

As I have experienced it the first court can be either a Tribunal or an initial High Court judgment with leave to appeal, at least I have been given leave in both instances in the past. I am informed that the findings of a Tribunal carry the weight of a High Court judgment but may have been misinformed. I am glad you had a good experience with counsel, it isn't always that way, I have often observed counsel doing an appalling job for their clients in the High Court but they never seem to lack competency in billing! I think that this was where the quality of your counsel showed, getting it listed for 11/2 days was a result and allowed the necessary time to properly present the case. I suspect that HMRC saw this as potentially dangerous to their cause. If it had been appealed and lost a precedent would possibly have been set that would have cost them a lot of revenue and it wasn't worth the risk. Best to let it lie... I had a look, very nice boat, very nice reporting... I agree with your inference that it should not fall to the individual taxpayer to fight this sort of battle but as yet no-one has come up with a better idea and at least it gives rise to a spirited case. Kind Regards Arnot

When wiring up an individual boat this approach holds good but requires a logical approach and makes future third party repairs and maintenance more difficult. For the BSS it is preferable to have a full schematic diagram which takes some time, surely it would be better if there was to be a generic schematic that could be downloaded and used. Also for those doing their own fitting out, a readily available master diagram with most of the options on would probably be helpful. Also if the same colour is used for all circuits (as often is) then if the harness is damaged or needs to be added to then it is more difficult to identify the wire you need. On a vehicle harness it is usually possible to open the harness at any point and identify every cable which save a lot of time and minimises the chance of mistakes. Regards Arnot

Just the 12/24v circuits, the mains side is already well covered by the wiring regulations and not generally as complex anyway. I am thinking of domestic circuits such as; Water Pump Cabin Lights Fridge Inverter (enable) 12/24v Sockets Audio/Video and engine wiring such as; engine run (ignition) pre-heat starter solenoid feed alt warning light (possibly two or three of these) oil pressure lamp oil pressure guage oil temperature coolant level warning light coolant temp warning light coolant temperature tacho feed Alternator output (almost certainly red) battery sense stop solenoid Plus possibly any others that might be suggested... I think that all returns should be black based on both convention and availability Regards Arnot

I am just starting to see if I can come up with a standard colour code for narrow boat wiring and wondered if there were any similar standards that could be used for a pattern. There are the old type British colour code and the more modern European colour code that seem to be used occasionally but neither seem wholly appropriate. There is an American standard but many of the colours are not readily available in Europe. Any input anyone? Regards Arnot

How very interesting... (not that I currently live on a narrow boat or for that matter intend to). I do however have a number of HMRC High Court and Tribunal cases under my belt. On that basis I would offer a few comments based on my experience: 1) HMRC (VAT) guidance notes and notices are just that, they are not to be confused with the law. HMRC however consider that their internal procedural documentation is the law and will operate on that basis. They do not seem to have any system of internal appeal and so to challenge a decision it is necessary to do so in the High Court or at a Tribunal. 2) Although it is difficult, a VAT tribunal is actually the taxpayers best friend. The Chairman will listen carefully to the case presented and give a fair decision along with a detailed justification of it. They will give all the time necessary to present a case and rarely prevent a point being made even when only vaguely relevant or quite rambling. When faced with a taxpayer in person representing their own case they will tend to give the benefit of the doubt and even on occasions lead them to present their case most effectively. They seem to be genuinely interested in fairness and the application of the law as Parliament intended it. 3) High Court hearings are best avoided, the quality of justice is arbitrary, the time allowed is very short (I have seen some cases decided in less than a minute) and the basis of the decision will, by default, be on the strict application of the law regardless of the justice of it. They operate on the assumption that if you are unhappy you can always appeal. It seems to me that the High court is for deciding matters of law and the appeal court is for deciding matters fo Justice. 4) Any effort to change the law that would result in less tax revenue is almost inevitably doomed to failure; the weight of opposition from the Treasury would swamp it. Without significant political support it is not going to happen and it would not be in the interest of any political party or lobby group to provide this. 5) The "floodgates" argument is always very interesting. This is usually a tacit acceptance that they fully realise that what is being done is unfair and/or unreasonable and/or illegal but that they intend to continue doing it. It means that they know that the argument is ultimately untenable but do not intend to back off unless forced to do so. It is the argument used by bullies and tyrants worldwide since the start of civilisation. It is official speak for “if you think you are big enough, go on!” You are in for a fight if you take it up but given you have the staying power you may well win. 6) As I understand it, any structure intended for and used as a persons primary place of residence should not be subject to V.A.T. Attempts by HMRC to define this in terms of merchant tonnage are specious and should ideally be dismissed out of hand, the relevant law does not presume any system of measurement. I think that a boats displacement weight would be more appropriate despite HMRC's Public Notice. I cannot see what relevance the merchant shipping regulations have to a principal place of residence that does not carry cargo. If you live on a boat, you live on a boat. Providing you live there more than half the year it is by definition your primary place of residence. I doubt that your local tax exile would get away with claiming that they were not resident if they stayed in a narrow boat! Perhaps a letter to HMRC asking if, as someone who lives on a narrow boat, you are exempt from income tax as "non resident" would prompt some clarification! 7) The fact that a narrow boat is capable of being used for "recreation" or "pleasure" is frankly irrelevant. If a climbing enthusiast builds a house in the Highlands of Scotland with a view to die for, the fact that they derive pleasure from it or built it where they did to enable "recreational" use is not taken into consideration. If a Yachting enthusiast builds a house (with a slipway) etc. etc. It is not what ancillary purpose or benefit your choice of principal residence conveys that matters it is whether it is your principal place of residence and if that was the intention. I really struggle to see what part of "live aboard" needs clarification. 8) I think that the matter or its means of propulsion is irrelevant regardless of if this propulsion system is a part of the residence or easily added. I cannot see any definition of residence that precludes it being mobile. 9) <HM Revenue & Customs are currently considering how best to deal with this judgment and how to take the policy, or indeed, the law forward.> Chilling! I interpret this as “if you (or anyone else) don't like the way we enforce the rules, we will just change them!. It is indicative of the ethos of HMRC as a government agency to maximise revenue collection regardless of the law rather than a Crown Department to enforce the law. 10) It has been said earlier, the 20489 Tribunal seems odd and it was amazing that HMRC did not appeal it. I disagree, I think that this decision is a very good example of a Tribunal considering the evidence placed before it as well as the fairness of the situation and coming to a decision that set no precedent but was at the same time equitable. It is an historic legal principle that if common law and equity conflict then equity should prevail as this explains. I could go on and on here but in essence, the subject of this topic is fairly typical of HMRC hypocrisy and the more this sort of thing is not challenged, the more it will go on. Well done Richard Fee, the judgement carries the weight of a High Court decision and should be read very carefully - <(some of whom do what might be, somewhat incorrectly, described as peripatetic work on the canals)> – very droll! HMRC seem to hate Tribunals and will go to some lengths to be reasonable when faced with the possibility, if as a "trader" (HMRC speak for the "enemy") you have a stalemate with HMRC over an issue you think they are being unreasonable about just try asking them for a decision letter and an application form for a Tribunal. They will about face so quickly they risk snapping their necks! Regards Arnot

Just so... A bit of a project in my semi-retirement Thanks for the calculations as well. Well spotted Magnetman... many thanks for the definitive info. If she can get to Tamworth without obstruction she should make it to Stone. Yes 45HP does seem a reasonable amount of power, as long as my skier can hang on... Weather permitting I should get to see it for the first time on Monday, I have to go to a show in London anyway so I can kill two birds with one stone. Regards Arnot

I am thinking about buying a large old narrow boat which is currently moored near Rickmansworth and if I do I will want to get it to Stone in Staffordshire. It is a 71' x 7' hull and seems to have a resonably powerful engine. Given that although I work on boats for my living, I have never actually owned one, could anyone take a guess at how long it would take to make the journey? Also given the dimensions of the hull, are there any potential dead ends? I intend to go north on the Grand Union to Braunston, then north on the Coventry to Fazeley, then onto the Birmingham and Fazeley to Fradley from whence on the Trent and Mersey to Stone. I don't know what the draft is but suspect that it is not abnormally large. Regards Arnot

Given the weather this summer(?), would it be a better idea to paint the hull in bright colours with castles and roses and black the top? I'm sure I'm not alone but I'm pissed off with being pissed on! Happy cruising, Regards Arnot

This seems like a fair question so here is my contribution on the subject… First, to outline my take on them. Gibbo seems to have an almost fanatical objection to alternator controllers and I admit that I have some sympathy with this view, not because I think that they are entirely worthless but because they are far too frequently touted as essential or attributed benefits that are illusory or irrelevant. It offends my sense of technical ethics to see many people pay out good money for boxes of tricks that do little for them when this same money could actually achieve real results. However, like most solutions, when they are applied to the correct problem, they can be highly effective. When unnecessarily complex, installed poorly and/or installed when unnecessary, they tend merely to contribute to unreliability (Microsoft Syndrome?) Now to look at the term “Alternator Controller”; this is in effect marketing speak coined to identify regulators that attempt to do more than merely regulate the output voltage of an alternator to a single predetermined setting. It has however come to be used for any device that controls the output of an alternator (often along with “Battery Management System). Broadly, these devices can be divided into two categories, the simple battery sensed regulators that are mostly external but can just as easily (from a technical point of view) be internal and the more complex devices that will vary the regulation voltage to differing levels dependant usually on time but occasionally according to temperature or current. Either type attempts to get more current out of the alternator over the charging cycle and thus charge the batteries more quickly and it is fair to say that in most cases this is successful although there are other techniques. I think that it is fair to say that there is an optimum charge rate for any battery or bank of batteries but here is where a major problem lies. There are many factors that determine this rate such as type of battery, condition of battery, state of charge of battery and temperature of battery, these are all variables that a regulator cannot easily measure if at all. There are also other factors to consider when regulating the output of an alternator such as the temperature of the windings and the amount of mechanical power available from the drive system. An alternator merely converts mechanical energy into electrical energy (less some losses due to inefficiency) and if the fanbelt and pulleys cannot reliably transmit enough mechanical energy to support the available output of the alternator, early failure results. As a general rule, a maximum charge rate that should be used is 5c or one fifth of the capacity of the batteries, more quickly and the charging is markedly less efficient and will lead to gassing and overheating, more slowly and the charge retention will be marginally better at the cost of taking longer. Bear in mind here that this is the actual charge rate not the potential maximum, an alternator capable of 100A at full speed will often only deliver 50A or less at a reasonable engine speed. So; unless you are intending to cruise at high speed or moor with the engine running at high speed, it is probably better to go for an alternator with a current output that is between a third and a quarter of the battery capacity. It has been stated that modern alternators already have a high voltage output and they generally (but not always) do. However this is not new, the average output voltage of alternators over the last thirty-five years I have been working with them has not increased noticeably although the current output has. I suspect that this impression has been obtained because along with higher output currents have come better wiring specifications. The early installations were often wired for a “dynamo” and the alternator just grafted in as an afterthought. Of course this takes me on to the importance of using the correct cable. It has been stated that 70mm cable will give adequately low resistance and is fair to say that on a machine sensed alternator the thicker the cable the better the power transfer. However heavy cable is more likely to strain the generally pathetic output terminals on most alternators quite apart from the cost of purchase and installation. In addition, the positive cable is only a part of the circuit, there is also the negative return to consider and other “lossy” items such as the various terminals with their dissimilar metal contacts, the effects of corrosion and master switches to name but a few. I find as a general rule that the guidance for the current rating of cables given in the wiring regulations is pretty good. One counter intuitive aspect of a battery sensed regulation system is that marginally under sizing the cable will allow most alternators to produce a slightly higher peak current output but the complexity of the calculation and reliability aspects of this technique tend to outweigh the gains achievable. Now let us move to charging regimes. It is my opinion that multi stage charging where the bulk, absorption and float are used whilst wholly appropriate to bench charging of batteries under controlled conditions is almost always irrelevant to battery charging from an engine driven alternator on a narrow boat. If you really feel that you are likely to be cruising at constant high speed for periods of ten hours or more on a regular basis or moored up with your engine racing all day and every day then go for it, otherwise, a regulator with a constant voltage regime is perfectly good. Paying good money for a multi stage controller seems barmy to me. When looking at the simpler constant voltage regulators, these can be split into two groups, the machine sensed ones and the battery sensed ones. Two clarify the difference; the electronics are more or less identical all that varies is where the regulator measures the voltage for the purposes of regulation. On the simpler machine sensed type the regulator measures the voltage on the output terminal of the alternator and takes no account of the battery charging circuit. Thus any losses in the outboard circuitry remain uncompensated and under high current output conditions the voltage at the battery will be reduced. This is the type of alternator generally fitted to vehicles and cheaply available from motor factors and accessory shops. It is not designed with battery charging as a high priority because on most cars the battery is really only used for starting (which takes about 0.1Ah out of it) and after that the alternator is used to supply the various electrical loads of the vehicle. Quite sensible really as most vehicles are used for transportation and not parked up with power being used for long periods. A battery-sensed system is has different priorities in that it will not regulate the output of the alternator closely but instead monitor and regulate the input voltage to the battery or batteries. This is to optimise the characteristics of the charging system to maximise the battery-charging rate. On a narrow boat where usually most power is taken whilst the batteries are not being charged and charging time is an expensive commodity, this makes absolute sense. It has to be said however that the majority of battery sensed regulators merely compensate for losses in the positive side and ignore the negative return but as this is rarely a major source of the circuit losses, in practice it is a minor shortcoming. Now, slightly controversially, to touch on the matter of temperature compensation which is where I, with respect, differ with Gibbo. Given our temperate climate, if batteries were located on the back deck of a boat and well spaced, there would be little if any need for temperature compensation. However the reality is usually very different. One major problem is that batteries are often located inside the engine compartment and under the back deck (on a cruiser stern or semi trad), most modern engines are indirectly cooled and to achieve efficient running tend to be around the 90-degree mark and there is rarely any active ventilation system. The consequence of this is that the batteries are often in a very warm environment for extended periods whilst cruising or charging when moored. Compounding this problem, it is (for no evident reason) common to locate multiple batteries side by side in a box with little if any through ventilation. Inevitably batteries on charge generate some heat and the warmer they get the more heat they produce. This heat generation along with the heating effect of the engine and the adjacent batteries combined with the lack of cooling ventilation often leads to batteries getting warmer than is advisable. Don’t misunderstand me here, this is not a major problem and most boats will not suffer from it but it does exist and is easily avoidable. To summarise, in a perfect installation where the alternators output is well matched to the battery capacity, the mechanical drive is more than adequate and the losses of the cabling, termination and other components in series with the charging current are minimal, a standard machine sensed system will perform perfectly well and even has some benefits in terms of battery charging. However, installations are rarely perfect and so battery sensing often has a useful part to play and can bring real benefits in reduced charging times. This particularly applies where there are mechanical constraints about the size of alternator that can be installed reasonably easily (such as on a BMC 1.5 or early Barrus Shire) and the battery capacity is quite high (fours and sixes seem to be quite common nowadays). This is achieved by maintaining the alternator at it’s highest possible output for longer thus reducing the charging time. The complex multi stage systems are usually just a waste of money. As Gibbo pointed out, alternators are by nature two stage and the overlay controllers could not force a third stage even if it were helpful. In addition, there are certain alternators that will conflict with a controller possibly leading to catastrophic failure. As a parting shot, for those of you with a single alternator and multiple battery banks, can I suggest that the alternator output is connected directly to the domestic batteries, as these will almost inevitably require the majority of the current? It seems to be a general rule (unless you have one of the tacky split charge diode contraptions) that the alternator output is connected to the starting battery and then distributed to the others and this really doesn’t make sense to me. Just for the record, I also have no major vested commercial interest at the moment. I just tend to be less pedantic after thirty-five years of doing this sort of thing than some. Regards Arnot

The terminal you have marked "?" is almost certainly the D+ or warning light connection, this can be verified with a reistance meter by pulling back the white insulator on the regulator slightly and checking that the resistance between the revealed blade and the "?" terminal is near zero. The terminal you have marked "D?" is probably a modification for using this alternator with an adverk or some other similar supplementary voltage regulation system often known as battery management. This can be verified by meauring the resistance between the (correctly identified) D+ terminal and the "D?" terminal, if it is as I suspect the resistance should be about 4 Ohms and it's use is not essential for the alternator to be used. What the terminal is almost certainly not is the temperature compenstation system fitted to some alternators for agricultural use, this would be orange and lead directly to the regulator. Hope this helps, Regards Arnot

I have noticed this one as well and also don't have a reason why but I will try to find out for my own interrest and if I come up with anything feasible will share it. Is it possible that in a positive ground system that the negative most cell dries out most? Interesting one... Regards Arnot

No there isn't a tacho output on this alternator but you can fit one quite easily if you want. Regards Arnot

Altering the pulley would allow the alternator to deliver it's peak power at a lower engine speed but wouldn't change the control side of it at all. As a generalisation, I would have expected a BMC 1.5 to have to rev enough to drive the alternator at a reasonable speed anyway and I don't think that this mod would help you much. As well as this there is a potential problem in doing this; the "grip" area on the pulley is disproportionately reduced and may lead to the drive belt overheating and wearing prematurely. Fitting a bigger alternator and fitting a controller are two different things entirely. A bigger alternator is a good solution if the control system and wiring are all up to par and it is actually purely the size of the alternator that is the problem, however normally there are a cocktail of problems and the larger alternator once fitted can never deliver it's potential because of wiring or control issues. In addition, many of the higher output alternators need to be driven at very high speeds to actually deliver the stated ouput. Unfortunatley the only way to be sure about this is to have your boat checked out by a competent and well equipped electrician who had the kit to monitor the speed, current and voltage of the system at the same time. Controllers fall into a few camps, those that overlay or augment the alternators existing regualtor system such as Adverk and some of the Sterlings, those that use voltage amplification such as the more expensive large Sterlings and finally those that replace the regualtor that is built in to the alternator. They all have pro's and con's but I prefer the regulator replacement route with a battery sensed feedback loop and adjustable regulation point. You will find many dissenting veiws on this one though I will say however that controllers of almost any sort provide big improvements, this is because most of the alternators fitted to boats were never intended to charge large batteries for extended periods and constand speeds, they were designed for vehicles where the electrical requirements and mechanical drive characteristics are totally different. Hope this helps. Regards Arnot PS Do I hear incoming?

I saw it, I thought about it and I thought about the cost of a divorce :-) I loved the text... Seriously though, wouldn't a a ton and half of VRH packing 50hp in any moderate sized boat only be good for waterskiing or high speed dredging? Regards Arnot PS My VRO is now roughly cleaned, I have evicted the army of spiders, cleaned the mouses nest from the inside the rocker covers and harvested a good sized bag of guano. I am now awaiting manifold repair, water pump repair, new injection pipes and a temporary fuel tank. When these are done I will run it up to temperature and pressure and make sure the coolant system is intact. My worry at this stage is undetected frost damage to the block although is doesn't seem to have any of the symptoms of this. Here's hoping!

Chill man! I was only trying to share a bit of my experience and you are at liberty to take it or leave it. I didn’t really want to get into a convoluted discussion/argument, life is too short and I have an engine to play with. Why do you feel the need to jump down my throat? I bow to your superior knowledge of inverters and one of your posts taught me something interesting and useful about mains generator waveform - thank you! More directly, I used the hypothetical case of an alternator rotating at a reasonable speed specifically to try to answer your specific question, not the original post. However, as an observation on the original post, I would have thought that even a vintage engine with a 40cm pulley would have been able to turn an alternator at 5000 rpm or so at full engine speed and certainly would not expect the battery voltage to fall when the charge light goes out. I still suspect that it is not purely a problem of insufficient speed and that there is something wrong with this alternator, possibly a damaged stator and/or main rectifier. Anyway fin I hope you got it sorted out. Regards Arnot

The alternators used on most Vectra's from the year 2000 onwards have a digital control function where the alternator output is controlled by the engine ECU. There are a number of reasons for doing this which are academic as far as the OP is concerned, suffice it to say that if the alternator he has is one of these, the only way he will get it to work on a narrow boat is to replace the internal regulator with a third party external one. It is worth being aware of this type of alternator, they have been used by many car manufacturers for a number of years and are starting to turn up at the scrapyards in reasonable quantities by now. Most will be the bosch ones with a full black plastic back and internal fan but there are a lot of others. OP, if you can post the make and part number of the alternator you have I may be able to confirm this. Regards Arnot

Essentially under the circumstances you outline, battery sensing will have no effect as you say. However if at a given shaft speed and load impedance it is possible for the alternator output voltage to exceed the regulation voltage then a battery sensed system will allow the alternator output voltage to rise above the battery voltage to compensate for any losses in the distribution wiring and other components such as current shunts in the charging circuit. Since the output current is proportional to the difference between the peak voltage and the batteries nominal voltage and the peak voltage is higher, more current will flow. The actual increase is a bit difficult to calculate in a theoretical sense due to the number of variables and essentially it would be futile in this application as the phenomenon can be readily measured. The trouble is that this effect is quite difficult to explain in terms other than mathematical but if you have the opportunity try it! Get an alternator with a battery sensed regulation system and drive it into a flattish battery sufficient to clamp the voltage and measure the current as it rises to the point where the regulator begins to operate. Do this once with the sensing wire connected to the alternator output i.e. machine sensed and then again with the sensing wire connected to the battery positive i.e. battery sensed. You should observe an increase in the peak current of about 10%. and a more rapid decline in the charging current once regulation commences. The practical effect of this in a situation where an alternator is charging a flattish domestic battery bank in a narrow boat is that because the alternator output voltage has to rise further before the regulator starts to reduce the rotor current, the maximum current is marginally increased but more importantly it is maintained at maximum level for longer. Even after the regulator starts to reduce the rotor current, it will reduce it less thus maintaining a higher charging current over the majority of the charging cycle. In a fairly well charged battery that has just been subject to a high load like a starting battery the replenishment cycle will be considerably shortened. If you have such a system installed in a boat with some means of monitoring the charging current and are able to move the sensing point between the battery positive and the alternator output you will notice that when battery sensed, the high current is maintained for longer and once it starts to fall it does so more rapidly as a consequence of the more rapid early charge. The benefit to the narrow boat owner is that the domestic battery bank can be charged more quickly and thus when moored without a shoreline available the engine does not have to be run for as long. It’s probably worth pointing out that the effect I describe is not a theoretical hypothesis but an attempt at a simplified explanation of observations made over thirty-five years of building alternators and installing them in many applications that require an optimised charging regime. I hope (but doubt) that this explanation will win you over so give it a go and see for yourself… Kind Regards Arnot

2v Cells come in all flavours and characteristics not just gel, you could have a look at Fiamm Cyclic 2v Cells as a start but almost all the major players have similar offerings, they are just difficult to find. The 2v cell solution is not popular but I cannot understand why, it has a lot of benefits for the domestic battery for a narrow boat. I suspect that the cost can put some people off but in the long term they will almost certainly work out significantly cheaper. Possibly no one uses this system because no one uses this system? Possibly people are tied in to the 110Ah 12v battery collection way because that is the way the boat is built and there is a fear of having to do all the rewiring and remounting required. I don't know - all I can say is that when I get round to adding a boat to my engine, this is the way I will go without a moments hesitation! Although not many people do use 2v cells I am sure that those who do will confirm that they work very well (and some have already) Regards Arnot

Have you thought about using two volt cells to get your capacity? It would probably cost a bit more but would last a lot longer... Regards Arnot

I will post some pictures as soon as a) I can find time and I can work out how to do it... :-) In the mean time - it runs! After removing some of the chickenshit and spiders, everyting looked pretty good. The oil in the engine was to the top of the stick and reasonably clean, the oil in the fuel pump was to the right level and of the right consistency. The engine turned easily by hand and the starter seemed uncannily clean inside but had obviously not been use much or messed about with it was however totally bereft of lubrication (it is a CAV BS5 and the drive runs in a white metal bearing). I lubricated it and freed it up and it seems fine now. So - I connected some batteries and turned it over with the valves lifted. This went well and it made all the right sort of noises in all the rightl sort of order. I noticed some unburned but atomised fuel coming out of the exhaust manifold (no silencer) and thought let's go for it... Dropped the decompression lever and hit the button and away she went, first compression! surprisingly quiet (these things are relative) considering it was on a pallet and in a workshop with no attempt at an exhaust system. The oil pressure was good and steady and after running for ten minutes there were no suspicious metal bits in the oil sample I looked at. A couple of minor diesel leaks around the injectors but I should be able to fix these tomorrow. I guess that some attempt at a fuel tank would not go amiss as well. Enough for now, I have just got back from rewiring a battery/starting/charging system and all the information I ordered from Ray Hooley has arrived so I'm off to memorise it. Regards Arnot

If it's a what to do next sort of direction give me a call when you are ready. If it's a will I be getting nearer sort of direction, don't worry, most of what I do is mobile and I have a sprinter van (a sort of narrow boat on wheels) full of bits and bobs for this sort of repair. Although I often work out of Roger Fullers boatyard or from Stone Boat Building, I am not tied down to them and float about quite a bit. Regards Arnot

I don't know if it would meet the cosmetic requirements but have you thought of Marley Torch On roofing felt? it comes in a variety of finishes and has a polyester weave inside to prevent creepage and cracking. Its not very "boat" but it is very "old school" and could be quite quaint... I have used the stuf itself on a variety of roofing projects, it looks reasonable and it is easy, quick and durable, Regards Arnot

Yes, thats no problem, I have rebuilt more alternators than I have had hot dinners I suspect... I used to build specialist alternators, convert standard ones to marine and have even rewound rotors and stators in my time. I sitill make specialist alternators for narrow boats but only install them, not sell them as an item. I also design and build specialist high voltage regulators for 14, 16 and 18 volt systems where 7, 8 or 9 two volt cells are used to provide a higher voltage at distance for very long runs with higher loadings. If ever there is an insurmountable problem it's usually because of lack of spares or the cost of spares making the job non-viable. Regards Arnot

I am based in and around the Stone Stoke area and could have a look if you like, this is the sort of thing I do all the time. PM me with your number and I will give you a call. Regards Arnot