Derek R.

Ah! I presumed under deck meant under the planked over deck. Yes, it possibly went in the back cabin space same as SICKLE. Silly me.

Sorry Laurence, it's not TYCHO - - and RENTON's blade was different - without any plate to the fore. I wonder if RENTON was in fact the first to be so modified, and the other type (as in TYCHO) was deemed to be a better design. RENTON lost its engine room? When we saw it around Leighton in the eighties on maintenance (and very smart) it looked like any other working boat with no sign of an under deck engine. Why would they have done that??

An impediment to what though? Their main duties when not engaged in breaking ice, and you could rock a Middle Northwich without any bar, would be on towing and maintenance, though that bar has been mighty useful when heaving one's self out of the hold! (But a curse when you bang your head on it!) Lifting a few boards would allow enough room to load bricks, cement and ironwork with the rocking bar in place unless you wanted something craned in like a mixer. I reckon once off - it stayed off, and as SICKLE's back end rail was indeed a little higher my money would be on it being THEOPHILUS. I know RENTON was used on maintenance in that area later, but where was 'it' at this time? It's a guess, but I don't think any had the 'A' frames fixed to the wood on the deck. TYCHO's went through such decking as there would have been, and was riveted to a hefty RSJ athwartships. I feel sure SICKLE's were fixed to the gunnels. There's a shot of an Ice breaker ascending Knowle in the fiftie's copyrighted to BTF Science & Society, and that had only a half length rocking bar. Might have been SEXTANS or THEOPHILUS. Did SEXTANS have a raised bracket to take the aft end of the long bar? Perhaps only SICKLE and THEOPHILUS did, in which case Alan's image at Linslade is THEOPHILUS. The support plate for the ram is exactly where it is on THEOPHILUS today.

The same can be said of many vehicles. Constant usage took its toll on appearances, and it was a credit to some garages on London Transport that their buses were turned out shining - just as Derby Corporation buses were (in the green and cream days) - fleets of night time cleaners saw to that. Amongst the Vintage Motorcycle movement great prestige is sought for the perfect and immaculate restoration. Yet just recently a certain machine was shown muck, oil, warts and all and criticised by one as being 'Grey Porridge' - not worthy of display in the journal let alone on the road. But in contrast machines in original condition - faded paint, scratches and dents, are the ones most sought after. Even in the antique world, polished brass is frowned upon when monetary value is considered. Having said that, I'm sure every owner rider/driver/boater feels that much better for displaying spic'n span, gives you a nice feeling - even if it is a bit Narcissistic!

So many questions on so many subjects Nick - are they all out of personal interest, or is there a goal to personal gain? I have no objection to the latter, just so long as folk know and are informed.

Replacing paid jobs with volunteers. I wonder how many high ranking politicians and Ministers would offer their services voluntarily (might get rid of some fraudsters). Would the many canal working groups ever have achieved their successes in opening up old navigations without volunteers, or wildlife rescue centres and WRVS exist at all. Not everything or everyone has the means to pay - such work is done out of genuine concern for the subject. Canal and Riverboat magazine carried a cover picture of me steering my boat into Shrewley tunnel in January 1989. I recall seeing a photographer up on the towpath and gave him a nod, after which he must have taken his shot. Doesn't bother me at all, and I certainly would not expect to be 'paid' for having been in that public place no more than I would expect to be paid for walking to the shops. The copyright position is adequately explained in Peter Scott's links. Google Streetview has been the subject of much annoyance to many. There are situations and images where peoples property has been 'invaded' by their cameras - through open doors and room contents through windows. Some properties have been 'fuzzed out' by request of the owners, and Google have complied to those requests. Streetview has been great for finding places and for seeing in advance a road layout and lane layout in advance of actually going to that place, but being able to see what is parked or placed on private property is indeed contentious. If you take your boat into a public place such as a rally of some sort, you expect to have it photographed - looked at, and people want some evidence of a craft to keep or show their friends. It's perfectly natural, and to be expected. But if such an image were to be used specifically for advertising some product or service, then permission of the subject is required. It's all adequately explained in Peter's link.

My Great Great Grandfather-in-Law would not have his photograph taken, as he considered it would prevent him from entering the after-life. But photography back then, and in Rural France was not an affordable past-time for the majority. People have their images taken every day. Whether it is by coincidence by being in the frame of some tourist shot or a scene recorded for posterity - does it matter? But having someone say "can I take a picture of you" is a bit different - you can agree or not. How many images exist of people steering boats, whether at events or just boats moving along somewhere. Tim Lewis's images are taken of many boats and people at events and are put on public display, I see no 'crime' of copyright infringement in that. In fact it's nice to see old faces and the latest condition of their relative craft. All this palava about having images stored and distributed does change somewhat when such images can be transmitted to the World and it's wife - and therein lay a fear for some of abuse. But isn't this a World we have created for ourselves? Do the Guards on sentry duty in full red and bearskin get asked if they can have their photo taken by the hundreds who do so? It gets silly when this 'copyright' business is taken that far. How many images exist of people doing things from a lifetime ago that appear in published journals - from magazines to club newsletters. Some are reproduced with permission of the family - some are not - though their inclusion may be there for historic documentation. But where does that leave the passer by when taking photo's of new developments? There has been quite a bit of contention (and worse) over security guards intervening in such instances. 'Security' - that's a joke! Travel the length of the Holloway Road and you will appear on over 300 cameras, but ask for them to be admitted as evidence in an action and you won't get far. This subject does have some merit in preventing unwanted distribution of personal images whether under copyright or not, but we have to remember that all of us have our images taken unwillingly a thousand times a day from CCTV and satellite. Just as we like to be seen and recognised - see and record, it is a multifaceted issue that is only slightly understood and even less under our control. Smile - you're on camera. Like it or not.

At risk of raising surveyors hackles the following is quite non-descript: Thickness readings were taken over most of the hull surface and the least thicknesses were found to be 5.1mm. The bottom plate is somewhat variable in thickness but it is reasonable to assume that the plate was originally approximately 8.0mm thick. Therefore some loss of plate mass was noted. "Most of the hull surface" Well, one would hardly expect 'all' of the surface to have been tested, though the most suspect in terms of thickness should and possibly would have been targeted. The lastmiddle sentence gives no indication at all other than an assumption. 5mm thickness is nothing to worry about, less than 3 is. And it is in the pits that the thinnest will be found. The sign-writer Nick Hardey was on the Waterways Craft list, but currently I cannot find a contact. Try Jim Shead's page of boat painters and sign-writers here.

I cannot say as I do not know, but if there is no conclusive evidence that the boat was built in 1988, there may be a possibility that memory has inadvertently thought '88 when it may have been '78. There may be many craft called Dragonfly, and I know Nick Hardey the signwriter lived aboard one such at Harefield in 2000something, and seem to recall him mentioning Hancock & Lane. Memory has no more details - not even the length, though I'm sure it was more than 40'. What on Earth is that in your avatar - it looks like red hot porridge from a wooden tub??? Curious!

What stand out at first read are: "I’ve worked at the Canal & River Trust for over three years now and amazingly before last week I’d never been out on a narrowboat before. . . . I’d never actually stepped foot on a boat." and: "The idea of the day was to give us a tour of part of the BCN so that we get to experience what it’s like to be out and about on the water, rather than watching the action from the towpath (or writing about what we imagine it would be like from an office)." ​It might seem a little unkind to pick up on what might appear negative comments, but all power to Laurence's action in getting those involved in management out of their cocoons, and very glad to hear Odette's interest has been ignited. Of course, not all CRT staff will be so open nor will some be so inexperienced about boating, but to have gotten involved in work of historical importance as well as leisure does raise the question what made Odette apply for the job, and what were the job interviewers interests in her involvement? Long gone are the days when management got to their positions through working their way up, and much has been lost along the way - involvement is everything. I'm glad Odette has widened her experiences and grateful to Laurence for providing the incentive.

The first and last links are recorded over clips from the films; 'Inland Waterways' and 'There Go The Boats'. Both available through Beulah films and a search on you tube and with their own descriptive narrative. I'm sure Laurence Hogg will also be able to supply similar information. More links and comments in THIS THREAD. (Not shouting, just emphasizing a live link!)

I would take a guess at the customer wanted 'headroom' in his back cabin, and was not fussy over details. Same can be said of many vehicle restorations, though in other fields some changes are seen as improvements on the original. The restoration of historic narrow boats has become something of a rivet counters paradise. It doesn't look 'right', because we're most likely all channeled into 'original is best'. Even so, boats and their proportions are a very subjective thing, and if it doesn't 'look' right, the ship is spoilt for a h'aporth of tar, but in this case it's several squillion quids worth of steel. An idea backed by lots of money doesn't necessarily produce the goods. Someone will love it though.

Well it may be the conversion in image resizing that makes it look 'pinched', but if not that's an unfortunate result. It doesn't follow as a true small Woolwich motor copy either way. But if that's what the punter ordered . . .

A combination of skill, persistence, focus, and art. Some people are amazing . . . but they won't admit it.

I don't suppose 100 years ago the commercial business of fleet management had much thought to those who followed 100 years hence! I wonder how many people today are cataloging their actions with a view to future historians ability to decipher ways and means?

TYCHO's counter is a new one, but slavishly copied from the original by Graeme Pearce and crew at Stockton in 2002. The rivets may not be quite exact replicas of those used by Yarwoods, but they are in the correct places as are the rubbing bands.

Is access to the River Dee a desirable thing for cruising boaters? Does it connect with extra miles of attractive waterways? If it is not, then it is likely it will not be used, and it will - especially being tidal - get silted up again very quickly without ongoing dredging. What then, would a campaigning rally to de-silt and make good the locks to gain access to the Dee when apart from a few bold spirits wishing to say 'they did it' - really achieve? This is rather like a copy-cat desire to see a full size working Foxton inclined plane. Sincere desire to re-instate something lost, but where are the benefits in a day and age where cruising is about backwater places in safe waters where amenities are on tap, or secure mooring are available. Does the Dee offer any of these things? Is this not just another White Elephant idea when other places could benefit from cash input and return fresh miles and destinations? Some sleeping dogs are best left as they are.

Absolutely. Dippers can be bought from agricultural merchants. Sometimes called corn scoops (though they come in differing shapes) and sometimes manure scoops. It's easy to see why the term 'dipper' came into being used, as a handbowl was dipped into the cut for water. But they were truly a bowl, capable of standing flat on its circular tin base, with a handle for ease of use - that's a hand bowl. Calling them dippers is like calling boatmen bargees, or water cans watering cans. Maybe no difference to many, but the devil is always in the detail.

Anderton lift was the only connection to and from the Weaver to the Trent & Mersey Canal, and as well as being the first of its kind in the World, I think justifies the cost though some will disagree. The Foxton Inclined Plane is not the only connection from top to bottom, and so the value of access is directly affected. How many would wait in a queue to use the locks instead of paying a fee to use the Plane? It's a big outlay for a fragile return. The boat scales at Stoke top are never used but do show what was in use at one time, but they have not been 'reconstructed' from raw materials - they're the real deal. Which makes a non-working replica Plane a bit of a White Elephant - even if it would be at lower cost to a working one. The bottom line must be who pays for its ongoing maintenance and a keeper to oversee operations. A large sum of money to get something built might be an obstacle that could be overcome by raffles, rallies and donations. But to maintain for years to come when it might see little actual traffic other than those wanting to say they'd been on it - and possibly only once? Best left a green sward and the plaques and information boards such as exist.

HNBC published a booklet entitled 'Our Disappearing Heritage' a few years back showing all too often new infrastructure that impairs and impedes, often in the name of 'safety'. Yet such structures - especially new railings - can add to danger in boarding and alighting from craft.

A friend posted me a short Vimeo video of London by Claude Friese-Greene. It's beautifully filmed, and the colour is most appealing. Shots of the Thames around the Pool, but mostly London as it was in the 1920's. http://vimeo.com/7638752 Amongst the comments was another link to a whole trip from Land's End to John O'Groats. Canals do feature albeit briefly, but one shot shows a loaded boat coming out of a lock on the Glamorgan Canal, loaded with what looks like moulded bricks. http://beta.bfi.org.uk/4ce2b6a1cd5c1 Notable points may be; 18m 11s Cardiff Docks; 19m 50s Glamorgan Canal; 23m 44s Narrow boats 'ELIZABETH' and two others plus shots inside Wedgewoods decorating room; 34m 49s Oban, fishing and gutting; 45m 30s Ballahulish Ferry; & 54m 00s London, with a little more than the former Vimeo. Overall, a fascinating insight to life in the British Isles in the mid 1920's, with a depth and detail I have not seen before.

Just so. It's a 'turnover' bridge taking the towpath from one side to another. Often there was iron work placed that also helped prevent towing lines from snagging. On some sharp bends on the BCN, vertical rollers were fitted on the inside of bends for the same reasons. Most are gone by now, though there might be some somewhere.

Only place they are not so dense is in the desire to be seen to be actively engaged in developing their ability to climb corporate ladders and in personal salaries and pensions. Cynical but true.

Fascinating stuff. Love all this historic sleuthing! Well done.

Thanks Nick, I've missed out on much not being local, and the 'Cap'n' has certainly done some research! Much to discover just perusing his 'Lost Canals' section.