Derek R.

That's GERALD if I'm not mistaken.

Well, being air cooled doesn't help but a lot of clack comes from the pump drive coupling if at all sloppy. Still reckon they sound a lot better than those Listers in PACIFIC and SICKLE. Ask what the PD2 in YARMOUTH sounded like a couple of hundred yards up the cut - luvverly!

Slough rally, early eighties.

Ah memories! I can recall crystal clear water above Cow Roast lock too, and tying up for a night outside the Tringford pumphouse - that was before the galvy fence went up. Edited to add: Been scratching about: In commenting on the probable lack of steam engines to back pump, I was thinking of those situated South of Cow Roast, and though memory is poor, I believe have dates on them of 1947ish? Alan Faulkener’s book ‘The Grand Junction Canal’ has a complete chapter on reservoirs and water supply, and the ‘Northern Engines’ are indeed listed. By 1841 nine pumps were installed to pass water around seventeen locks. They were at; Fenny Stratford, Stoke Hammond, Soulbury, Leighton Buzzard, Church, Horton, Ivinghoe, Seabrook, and Marsworth. All engine houses were of brick with slate roofs and powered by steam engines. They not only pumped water ‘back’ it seems, as they also pumped from streams in the area. The chimney behind Peter’s Two may have been a remnant from the Marsworth engine, but I am uncertain of this. It seems strange to be set back that far from the canal, though if it was, then it might have been so to connect into the Northern Railway feeder, which subsequently fed Marsworth reservoir. From what I can remember, was it not of circular concrete construction? However, if you look at the area in Google Maps you can see a direct line to the chimney base to a ground fixture just above lock 38 indicating a possible subterranean line. In Faulkener’s chapter on reservoirs and water supplies, mention is made of a modification to the original plan, as the feeder was found to be inadequate for the flow, making a feed into the canal above 38 necessary. From there it could be run into Marsworth Reservoir. This is probably that feeder. A little aside: Just come across a website that show much history of canals, and from which there are many fine images I have not seen before.Appendix II in chapter V is relevant to water supply: HERE. (Scroll down past the personalities). - and some nice images in Chapter IX HERE.

I do remember the little brick building below the lock now you come to mention it. The water from the borehole is the same water that is (was?) extracted and bottled as pure Chiltern Water at Tom's Hill Farm just up the hill. Contaminated - more like fearful of some possible litigation claim from funny tummy.

Steam? That would require a boiler house and chimney, along with permanent stoker/engineer at each pump house. I think a gas engine may have been installed at some, though electric is more likely. Not sure that Cow Roast is a 'back' pump, just a borehole - and superb qaulity it was, but now fitted with a grill which prevents filling a can. It might also be considered that modern electrics and pump gear are so much more compact than the originals as fitted. An 'empty' house might conceal equipment beneath the floor, or off to one side.

Aah! Yes. I have a namesake who was at work locally - a Reynolds that is! Don't think he had any connections to this London born boy though!!

Well, apart from all that - that's quite a lengthy and interesting description of its inventory. Sounds like a 'Rover's' dream. Basic, adequate, a bachelor's boat.

Very nice Mr. Hardy, but how about instead of pleas to restore currently closed waterways, some concentration could be on maintaining and dredging open waterways? Eyes bigger than belly? Aren't men and machines as important as desk jockeys?

Excellent images, many thanks for posting them - and copyright is to that of Derek Quilliam if I am not mistaken! I wonder if some folk can put names to those people - and the horse! PS: Please do not apologise for B & W - it's the best! Colour photography can be misleading right the way through from choice of film to development and printing.

I would have thought not so much 'sold off', but had their capacity limited by the Reservoirs Act 1975. This has been updated in 2010, but the effects are unknown to me - primarily because I have not read it.

If SICKLE had been left as BW intended, she would be a perforated flower garden on the bank somewhere, much like several old steam rollers became childrens playground aparatus (until H & S stepped in). Some of those have been restored to working condition after much of their original structure and components had been removed. There is a place for ex-working boats to be preserved in the state they last worked in. At the least, it will present some evidence of BW's ability to desicrate some fine craft into floating crew cabins/pillboxes. Yes, there is room for them and they'll be welcomed I'm sure, and as always cost will be a major influence on restore or retain.

With regard to castles, they were stylised - buildings that resembled castles, not slavish copies of any that existed. The other common elements were a bridge across a waterway leading into a lake, though not always. Claytons boats had a 'castle' facing a reed edged 'pond' Fred Winnet [spelling?] painted them thus. Many had sailing boats on an expanse of water. There were 'mountains', and those of the North West often with sunset coloured skies. Tony Lewery's books depict the variations well, and the names of the well known painters. What is tradition? It's a way of doing things a certain way that have developed over years of use, primarily because it works. But what works for one generation may not always be the best when times and general practices change, such as gate and paddle shutting. The community that once was has gone, and has been replaced with another - based not on necessity of goods in transit, but in the main leisure. The saddest part of it all is that the 'old' ways were more efficient in their practice, and whilst there are those who attempt to learn them and use them, a newer generation are using a different method, one based upon conservation of water and resources which themselves are a far cry from what once was. There was a time when it was traditional to start a car with a handle. Mine is still fitted with one, though rarely used.

True. What does change is the angle of light passing through the lens, this has the effect of making the concentrated light at the focal point become more oval in shape. It certainly does with my magifying glass moved around twixt lamp and desktop (though it is convex on both sides). There is also distortion involved, as there is in that drawing showing lines that do not really show the truth. As shown light is bent at one angle in one direction, but twice in the other. Suffice to say if the lens is far from optically perfect - as most 'deck lights' were, then the issue of burning curtains and woodwork is compromised, though not completely eradicated.

I hadn't realised the lock chamber was filled with water. Quite a terrifying prospect for any person within! Hence the need to drain water for the rescue of those inspecting within, got that much now. Stuck in a leaking(?) submarine chamber could drive one insane if asphyxiation didn't get you first. I had imagined counterbalancing of the caisson, not a submersible one. Must have given some challenges sealing the aperture at the lower canal end. It all sounds a little insane as a concept.

OK, how about a narrow boat 'pan' or 'skillet': Collect from Portsmouth. That's a good sized handbowl.

The caisson is but the Anderton lift, but in an enclosed tube as opposed to open tank. The advantage is clear for both - almost no loss of water, and so minimum feed supply would suffice to maintain summit levels. The closed tube would be stronger than an open tank of comparable size, but I do wonder why a 'lift', such as at Anderton, was not preferred. Ground movement must have been a constant concern, then there is all the 'mechanicals' to consider and maintain.

This opens up the thought that what licence monies are paid might be allocated to individual projects by the licence payer. I bet that wouldn't go down too well in head office! A 'dismissable' thought I'm sure.

Don't think the image in post No.11 was taken midday on the Equator.

You may have found this image through the other links, but someone on the forum posted this image a while back to illustrate the effect of light through a Bulls Eye lens. The possible danger is in the focal point striking wood which then begins to smoulder and burn. Ex-working boats Bulls Eyes were often of a poorer quality glass with imperfections such that thsi presented little or no problem. Modern day Bulls Eyes are better quality glass (in general) and the effects are shown in this image. Some recommend painting a small circle in the centre of the glass, or overlaying the underside with some opaque material. Thanks to the original poster who suppied the image, I'm afraid I forget who.

That's the wrong book. The one you want is a 'cheque' book. It's OK - I've got me coat . . .

Take a look through Google Maps at the aerial shots of Knowle and Maffers. The area covered by each of the two side ponds at any Knowle lock is in excess of the surface area of the lock - almost by a factor of two. Dependent on their elevation in comparison to the maximum water level in the lock (and of course on depth, and most are heavily silted now) each pond would be easily capable of taking at least one quarter of a lockful. Two obviously makes a half - 50%. The side ponds at Maffers are equally large in area. Although it's a crude and inaccurate way of gauging their capacity by simply looking at aerial photography, it does give some measure of size in relationship to area alone. The claim they might only retain one third or less collectively, must surely be down to displacement by silt, weed and general rubbish - plus, any leakage occuring.

I think that's tongue in cheek, but bread is the last thing they should be eating. Swells inside and enlarges the liver. Same with garden birds. The French force feed Geese to get foie gras - similarly it enlarges the liver. Straying a bit off paddles Mr. Reynolds!

Mention of double side ponds reminds me that they were just so on the GU at Maffers and elsewhere in the main. Two sets of paddle gear by the lockside, one worked the upper pond, and the other the lower pond. Going down you would fill the upper first, shut that then fill the lower, shut that and empty the rest into the lower pound. Reverse order going up; take from the lower pond first, close then take from the upper pond, close then from the upper pound. Simple when you say it quick. It's arguable that it saved 'much' water, but it did slow passage.

http://goo.gl/maps/ZLYvK Factory Bridge carries Hurst Lane across the cut here, and the towpapth bridge across the basin entrance remains. (At least I hope I've got the right spot!) If I can risk a slight digression: Amongst what must have been hundreds of factories connected to and adjacent to the canal in Birmingham and its surroundings, B.S.A. were amongst them, and a small part of their original factory is extant today still making guns. The following link shows several images of the Armoury Road factory - and yes - there is one showing the canal and towpath passing the main site. http://www.bsatrust.org/