Derek R.

TYCHO is not wooden, and re-inforced at the fore end specifically for breaking ice. The over plating within the fore end doubles the original thickness of quarter inch plate to half inch, yet there are dings and dents all the same. Along the sides there are more, some dents are of quarter inch steel that has been deflected by as much as half an inch. What thickness are ice plates as fitted to wooden boats? For my money, I would not have risked damaging a wooden boat for the sake of getting to an event - especially as we nowadays consider such vessels as so historically 'important'. When working they would go as far as they could, but few if any of Clayton's boats would be owner operated - they were under orders, and likely such orders as to not risk the craft for the sake of a delivery. We broke ice with YARMOUTH back in '82, and the pumps would come on at regular intervals the night after. Yes, we'd punched a hole in the side plating up front right on the water line. Internal corrosion aided and abetted of course and a nut, bolt, and washers stood us good until docked later. A little ice can do a lot of damage.

Off topic, but speaking of shifting long loads - 130' of distillation tower from Greenwich to Bo'ness.

Pure speculation as I do not know for certain, but in the event of ice forming thick enough I would think the tank would be drained so as to prevent it becoming a solid block, and causing possible damage to steelwork in the process. Any over bridge road surface will ice up quicker due to the wind reducing temperature all round the structure. Similarly gateways and hedge breaks along a road will allow wind chill factor to form ice sooner and thicker in the immediate vicinity.

No Jenlyn, that was not an ignorant post, merely an observation on a fact of life. And yes - some are dossers. Back in the early eighties they existed but few and far between and some were interesting characters in themselves. I took to the waterways just thirty two years ago, but even during the past fifteen the number of places where once there were no boats, there are now lines of casual moorers as well as new linear moorings. Should they all be elsewhere? No reason why if they pay their dues, but their presence does slow movement down along with the lack of depth due to few loaded boats on the move regularly. I personally would not have joined such a re-enactment, no more than I would want to return to forking a trailer load of silage every day of the week, or returning to riding a motorcycle for a living in all weathers though neither are a comparison to boating. But for an occasional pleasure such as driving a vintage bus on some historic running day (they also have their detractors) it comes as an educational reminder for new and old alike - and it's not very often. However, if long distance, long day boating in all weathers is the goal, then there's nothing (bar stoppages/available time/money) that prevents any one of us doing so at any time, and at their own speed. What may be lacking, is the manner of learning to work efficiently - being shown the little tricks that were so often taken for granted by those who carried them out - day in - day out. They are the things that when missing, turn a long satisfying run into hell on Earth.

That'd be a rare old ploughing match along the Oxford - Tirfors at dawn? Perhaps a case for enlightening the general public to navigation issues - a la Basingstoke C 1950's. Are we about to go full circle?

The last line of Patricks mail is good news. With regard to safe working, though I have not experienced all types of gear throughout the UK, those on the River Wey when we boated there in 1982 seemed positively frightening. I'll never forget the surprise I felt when standing on a small piece of wood to operate the long swing windlass of some gate paddles. In comparison, the Southern GU was all efficiency and delight. The Shroppie and T & M gear must rate as some of my favourites, and the variety on the L & L was fascinating, though the later fitted (I think) Fenner gear with its slow action gave us some 'moments'. Less said about the Richdale Nine gear in '83 the better! I find the varieties reflect different engineering solutions in given circumstances, and finding something new is all part of life's ongoing education. Similarly, bywashes and wier water can cause just as much consternation and requirement for increased vigilance and technique - It's what makes boating so fascinating.

Ooooh look! Speedwheel's gone Petter - wonder why . . . I know a man with transfers.

Beautiful! I've drive tower cranes but not luffing jib. Well done.

Yes please. Could always do with more firewood.

Ah yes! Cosgrove - Wolverton! It is Wolverton we are speaking of. My error. There is in fact mention of wood in the Alan Faulkner book 'The Grand Junction Canal', though it refers to two applications: One by Jessop for the inverts for the temporary locks (the gates of which were to be re-deployed at Stoke Bruerne flight); and the other for piles placed in the embankment in an attempt to stabilise movement of same over where the original line of the river ran, and where subsidence was taking place. In January 1806 this part of the embankment did indeed collapse causing closure of the embankment, though as the locks were still in serviceable condition, they were used to maintain a through route for traffic. Harrison the contractor was under pressure from the company to make good alleged bad workmanship. This dragged on for a year, when an architect was called in to inspect the aquaduct who found the piers had sunk and the whole was out of alignment. The structure seems not to have been built as per the plans, yet no plans have survived. The dispute carried on until the dramatic collapse of the aquaduct on the night of Tuesday, 18 February 1808. Timber is mentioned again as being used to prop up one of the three arches allowing river water to flow. The Aquaduct as designed by Jessop was of three brick semi circular arches at river level. Puddling was the method used by the contractors of the embankment, and one might assume of the aquaduct also. However, after the February collapse Charles Martyn, a local carpenter, agreed to build a wooden trunk in March. This he did, and this trunk lasted until the stone/brick pier'd and Iron trunk was opened two years later. So there was a wooden aquaduct at Wolverton!

If you are referring to Cosgrove, Wikipedia states: "Initially flights of locks, four at the southeast and five at the northwest, were used to allow the canal to descend to cross the river on the level, and this arrangement came into action in 1800. However William Jessop, the canal company’s engineer, designed a three-arch brick viaduct so that the canal could cross at a higher level, reducing the water loss and delay in locking down to river level. His structure was opened on 26 August 1805, but a section of the canal embankment collapsed in January 1806; this was repaired, but the aqueduct structure itself collapsed in February 1808, severing the canal." The original set of locks were brought back into use for the duration of the building of the present Iron Trunk.

Not being a boat builder I wouldn't know. But consider the application of longitudinally laid bottom planks against athwart. The longitudinally built are more used in river and Sea going craft allowing more 'shape', either Carvel or Clinker built. There are generally more ribs to which they can be fixed. For a flat bottomed canal boat the 'knees' are there to maintain strength between the sides and the bottoms, and wide bottom planks or boards would mean less wood to replace, and possibly with greater ease than if replacing a few long planks or boards. It would appear that a desire for simplicity, ease of maintenance, combined with strength, would make athwart boards a common choice. Or, it could be down to available timber at whatever price it was at time of build. Or, It could be that a long thin boat without a 'shape' to the bottom would be longitudinally stronger with athwart board than with longitudinal planks. I'm sure there are technical and economic reasons for choosing one over the other - so await the experts. There - you can tell who is sitting at home and bored.

They're notoriously risky Richard, break one in there and that would be a head off job. With rusted Catalytic converter fixings and a host of other stuff looking like it was not shifting without damage, it was gently Bentley. I've used easy outs before, but never with success. Wrong technique? I doubt it.

Caution! If the hole is to be Helicoiled in situ, guard against swarf entering the combustion chamber. I had a BMW twin that was Helicoiled while I waited at a certain garage. "Oh the swarf will blow out when you turn it over". I spent twenty minutes turning it over and lost the battery power, eventually ending up bump starting the affair. No compression due to swarf preventing valves from closing. Did it damage the internals such as rings and cylinder bore? It could have done easily, but luck was with me, and it went on to run another 100,000 miles. In another instance, I had a spark plug shear off in a Ford Fiesta - iron Endura E engine. Soppy little plugs with no washers on. Previous owner must never have touched them - rusted in. Left me with the hex and insulator complete with central electrode in the spanner, and a sleeve of threaded steel seized in the head. Sod taking the head off, so I got the piston on top dead centre and plugged the remaining chamber space with greased rag. Then it was a case of drilling out bit by bit and vacuuming out the swarf as I went. Picking out the remains of plug thread from the head tapping was fun. Three days that job. New plugs and it ran just sweet. Be very very careful.

Nit picking twerp here - Stockers? Taller barns there, and I spy a row of houses beyond that look suspiciously un Stockerish! Chapmans has changed beyond all recognition (though boats still moor). Something called 'Toad Hall' there now. PS: I'm looking at the concrete coping at waters edge, that tree that I suspect still stands but bigger, and what is likely Batchworth Hill rising in the background. There's rising ground at Stockers too if I remember right, but the houses look like those in Moor Lane.

The 'farm' above Batchworth?

Dick Sparrow eh? Did his ancestors have the 'Black Pearl'? PS: I can smell the resin and acetone from here. Uninsulated ex-Nissan huts - been there done that!

Do take the video tour - the second is particularly interesting along with the photo gallery HERE. Interesting narrow boat - someone's fantasy short lived. Some serious bits of plate bending kit and hammer.

Isn't this fun! I don't know if it is Mountsorrel or not, but experiencing the credibility of one who has seen the photo stated to be Mountsorrel, I'm apt to believe it is. The edges of the building base as was, might be seen as those marks on the ground - not where the present wall is, but just behind where the present lock sign is, a few feet closer to the lockside. To my eye, there could quite possibly be water immediately beyond the washing line farthest support, and the building in the background possibly a stable or large shed on the far bank. It has eaves larger than most sheds, and stables did and still do feature this element in construction. If it was, then again the aerial shot shows 'something' on the ground to this day that could be remains of a base edge - or not - but it would line up perfectly in the old photo shot. Someone queried the position of the lock keepers house being on the offside. I don't know when the pub was built, but that, and the fact that the keeper may well have been responsible for wier maintenance and control, may have been why it was situated on that side. Looking at the aerial of Mountsorrel today, there is no evidence of there being a packhorse bridge in the region of where the old packhorse bridge still stands to this day beyond King's Lock, and which 'might' be just visible in David's shot of King's in 1908.

Quite so, I too now believe it to be Mountsorrel, and the cottage would have stood on what is today a garden. I can just imagine Mr John Smith of Leicester arranging a photographer to meet him in the Pub, and take a shot of him aboard two of his boats as they passed through the lock. (Maybe).

Mountsorrel. Very much changed then. Perhaps there is a channel of the river behind the sheds in the garden in that framed print, but all else would show the former lock keepers house standing on what is now a garden of a similarly aged building lying immediately behind. Unconvinced at present. I suppose that's another way of saying - my arse. However, this looks vaguely possible. Fascinating!

Mountsorrel. Very much changed then. Perhaps there is a channel of the river behind the sheds in the garden in that framed print, but all else would show the former lock keepers house standing on what is now a garden of a similarly aged building lying immediately behind. Oops! Off topic for this thread.

Ah yes! It was CLITHERO, not PARBOLD. Memory trouble.

I believe PARBOLD is 'at work', and looking very trim, down below Springwell lock. Seems to be run by the firm with little grey Bantam(?) tugs, two of which appeared at the tug of war at Ricky festival.

Though some tillers were less 'cocked' so to speak, and did not rise so high, this is a clear reason why so few were steered in the 'at rest' position. Almost all were steered turned in the 'working' position, save when locking when it frequently was taken out and placed on the cabin top to prevent damage against the lock walls when water turbulence would move the rudder part of the ellum. Motor tillers were often left on, but cabin top strings would be looped over the end of the tiller to prevent unwanted swinging to and fro. Common knowledge to many, but not all.