Derek R.

Hunton Chain - or change as in steamer crew? Slaughters or Slauters Bottomside Topside Broadwater Gas two Bushes Two below Maffas or Peter's two or Storkies two Nags Head three (Seabrook) Corketts two (Ivinghoe) Pools (Horton) Neals (Slapton) 'Jackdaw pound' yes, between Leighton and Stoke three and shallow Stoke Hammond three Talbots Finney Stoke seven Heyford Deeps (through Nether Heyford) Bugby seven Braunston six Wigrams three Radford ten That's about my lot. 'The Nag's Head'. Behind Cooks Wharf at Cheddington there is a house that could have been a pub at some time, and it's called 'The Duke of Wellington'. It may be conceivable it changed its name at some time? It's in Wellington Place, opposite Cheddington Road. Only a guess though.

Yes it was. I don't remember when it was first put there, but it was there when I worked at the Zoo in 1964. Back then the towpath side was on the Prince Albert Road side of the cut, and locked gates prevented any public access. Ken is seen facing toward the filled in Cumberland arm (behind the camera) that originally led down behind the Regent Park Barracks to Cumberland market, long since filled in. The Chinese 'floating' restaurant and adjacent mooring are in 'Cumberland basin'. One of our 'parish' moored AFRICA there. The images in the Canalplan link are confusing and show the bridge at the Western extremity of the Zoo grounds, NOT the Cumberland Basin end. It is also taken from the Western side - outside the Zoo grounds. The larger of the two Canalplan images show the Broadwalk bridge close by Cumberland basin, the OTHER smaller image is of the Western end bridge taken looking toward the Zoo and the basin end (out of sight). There was, and is NO towpath on the opposite (Zoo) side, though there are walkways higher up the bank. There is however, the Zoo waterbus landing stage (I remember that being built) The 'Broadwalk' bridge seen immediately behind Ken does NOT have a pipe slung beneath, but the next one does - confusing! And both are of a similar design. Interestingly (or maybe not!) the pedestrian bridge at the Western end (furthest from the basin) 'used to be' divided down the middle with a high railing fence: Zoo visitors one side, outside pedestrians accessing Regent's Park proper from Prince Albert Rd. the other. That has all changed. Now it is public access from Rd. to Park only. Both my Sister and I worked in the Zoo, and my Father on the 'Gates' taking entrance fees, he for 16yrs. until retirement in 1970. Wish I had a pound for every time I walked in these staff members footsteps! (We had proper uniforms back then, double breasted suit, collar and tie, hat, polished badge, buttons and shoes!) https://tinyurl.com/yc3ybh5b

No, he's leaning on the lower walkway on the bank beneath the main entrance walkway to the 'Feng Shang' Chinese resaurant (formerly the 'Barque & Bite'). Looks like the chains have been replaced with blue rope (cheapskates!). https://tinyurl.com/9w9b3y47 The first bridge seen behind Ken Dodd is the pedestrian bridge connecting Prince Albert Road with Regent's Park (outside the Zoo grounds), the second bridge is the much newer concrete bridge [correction: it's the iron bridge with pipe beneath seen in the water reflection. Concrete one is further along] connecting the Main Zoo area to the North Bank. Walking off this bridge one can access one of the two pedestrian tunnels within the Zoo that lead beneath the Outer Circle.

'Five Paddle' - that's how it was called amongst the boating fraternity during the 1980's, passed down by word of mouth and described as a 'compensating' paddle. I have an elderly Nicholson's that has most of the GU locks annotated with 'word of mouth' names as used down the generations, though I was a newcomer myself from '80 on.

I forget the price now, but must be low enough to attract the dreamers and wishful thinkers. The stanchions and rope do not enamour, but when tied to a towpath, do deter certain types from taking advantage to use the deck as an extension of the towpath for messing about on, or using it as a fishing stage. As to the 'deck items', when making changes within - where else do they go? Plenty of folk litter rooftops with coal, bicycles, timbers, pots of plants etc. Personally I dislike roof and deck clutter. Dinky little tug. If I were fifty years younger with enough dosh . . .

Never been called a Pigeon 'ole. It's a box. You can have Porthole though.

Who uses Port & Starboard on the canal? And not a Hole or 'ole in sight! [Edited to add: I'm wrong - Soap holes. They got soap holes in there.]

'Holes' appertain to small openings through which mice, rats, people (as in pot holing), and on the cut - bridges and tunnels through which boats go.

Which is why I added the caveat: We speak of GU boats, but they were (in the main) built by Yarwoods and Harland & Wolff. [my emphasis in this instance]

So many people using videos to show their expertise/disasters while boating, it gets tedious. There is far too much "This is how I do xxxx"; heat a pie; drink alcohol; have an engine failure; get suck; here we are smiling; here we are being threatened; shall we go or shall we stay; look - there's a horse; "It's a contact sport". No Tim, it wasn't. It's called carelessness and incompetence. Driving out of a lock with a line still round a bollard is down to the skipper, not the 'hand'. But I do like the Nature drawings of one young lady, though her boating is a little on the naive side. Are people so lonely they need solace in sharing? Or is it 'click-bait' to attract sponsors and advertising income? 40 plus years ago folk kept their heads down, tickled around the cut, cleared props, and met up with friends. No big deal.

Around that period we lived in St Albans, and were informed 'through' council that: had we fitted a water butt to catch rainwater (which when filled would overflow into the drainage system) we would be charged for 'reducing' the amount of rainwater that would otherwise have fallen on the land. The charge - £80pa. We chose not to proceed. As John K stated: - " interesting commentary on the inability of politicians to do anything right. " A similar situation arose in our previous tenancy in Shropshire. Severn Trent Water wanted to charge us for sewage and surface water disposal and treatment, even though all surface water drained onto private land which fed into (ultimately) the Severn, and that we had a soakaway system managed by the private estate on which the proerty stood. They sent out an engineer to assess the situation - that we were not connected to any mains sewage system. Speaking to the engineer in question, he stated that from his approach to the property, it was clear that no surface water run-off would enter their constructed water drainage system, and that his observation of the estate owned soak-away (it served four properties owned by the estate) was proof that no charges for sewage treatment were due. A case of 'officialdom' making assumptions without checking evidence. Where have we seen that before! Another incident comes to mind: When we lived in the Scottish Highlands, we were informed that the natural burn that ran across the land on which one prospective property stood, if any form of electricity generating device - however small, would attract a charge from the water authority, despite the water returning to the burn once it passed through any water turbine. We would be "using" 'their water'. Perhaps we should be charging them for any damage caused by rain, and subsequent damage to structures if 'their water' were the cause.

You are correct! From a distant memory 'water' sprang to mind, and I 'guessed' the rest . . . 'What a mistaker to maker'. (Spoken in an Italian accent).

Looks like a section of the iron teeth have broken away in one image. And that fire extinguisher takes me back to primary school days! They were water filled with a glass phial within holding air pressure. Striking the 'knob' broke the glass releasing the pressure, thereby forcing water from the nozzle.

Costs of maintenance. I cannot help but think the costs are somewhat similar, but that the frequency of the costs are more with a wooden boat than a metal one. So long term, the wooden boat costs require more frequent docking and attention to planking, than docking and some welding. I was sorely tempted to take on IVY, accepting that it was hardly a true historic and was beguiled by the shape of bow and stern. The thought of steering a wooden boat was also a magnet. But I was advised not to.

How easy it is to confuse with words. We speak of 'Josher's', but several yards built them - not Fellows Morton & Clayton though they did have yards of their own. We speak of GU boats, but they were (in the main) built by Yarwoods and Harland & Wolff. Likewise with Barlows. Barlows was a coal contractor, not a boat builder. Others built their boats, notably the Nursers. HARDY was built in September 1940 (As per the Barlows booklet). Charles Nurser wanted to retire, as did Thomas Hitchman the third partner, leaving Frank Nurser with fewer 'hands'. Barlows took over the yard on the 1st March 1941 leaving Frank Nurser to manage the yard. Nurser's were owned (after 1941) by Barlows the coal contractor from March 1941. Whether built before 1941 or after, Nursers built them. Details as per HNBC is correct. All the above details are from the Alan Faulkner booklet 'Barlows'.

Is that the Thames sailing barge CAMBRIA alongside? Bob Roberts skippered her in its last trading years.

Aah! The telephone, this was of a type used in internal communications in factories and warehouses. Basically would have been made by some telecoms company, so along a common design, but probably different (in some ways) to public phone boxes. At the top of the road where I lived as a child and which was used as a terminus for Trolleybuses (N. London) there was a similar such phone mounted within a box affixed to one of the traction poles. Bus Inspectors would be able to contact their office a block away, and also the bus depot on 'Jolly Butchers Hill' to give and receive instructions. (No walkie-talkies). The rest is down to studying the surroundings; beer kegs, wooden stakes, cobbles, building styles. And with regard to the location - a single comment that related to Utrecht in the You Tube video. I have never visited Utrecht, though those Bell End gables are quite typical of the Netherlands, as are the wooden stakes protecting bridge supports. But it was Glenn who found the bridge!

Saw the name Boog above a gable end. Didn't know it was a brewery. Yes, It's not obvious what the canalside building was used for, but the arched double doors look to lead beneath the road and presumably into the tall building behind, suggesting a transhipment point between canal and road, though most likely from brewery to both methods of transportation, though I'm guilty of conjecture there! I wonder if it was ever a bar/restaurant wharfside. Maybe just a warehouse. There appears to be a pair of rails or beams on the wharf beside the barrels in the B & W shot. These could have been used to load barrels and kegs onto boats.

Not much doubt about that. It's been 'tarted up' a bit. Think I prefer the sixties version. According to Google maps, the premises is now a psychotherapy practice! Vollersbrug. https://tinyurl.com/4yxxvfdw Edited to add: There were several cover versions done. One by Brian Houston of Belfast, and H & W's yard is glimpsed in the filming. Quite an interesting video in itself. https://tinyurl.com/3aazp2vb

In the comments below the You Tube video, someone writes it is in Utrecht, Netherlands. Good luck in searching for it - there's lots of bridges over the canals there. The style of metal kegs and the white painted stakes are a clue that it's not in England.

Good work Courty! Long way to go, but history being re-instated.

Very nice! Got radar too. Not a great deal of spec though. £10k to buy - £40k to recommission? I'm guessing 12' beam. It's gorgeous. Pop across the Channel, France, Belgium & Holland. Beautiful aft cabin.

A pure white house with minimalistic furniture and no pictures. (Not a quote, just a thought). Sounds like some form of Hell. Our house has no more wall space for many pictures we own, and memorabilia to suit (dust collects). But a cabin where everything is within arms reach is a very different beast. You have to be tidy, and possessions few. Having said that - it is surprising just how much 'stuff' does accumulate in a boat. If one is "passionate" about canals, why should that not include working practices with boat handling and ropework? Because excluding such things allows them to be lost to future (and current) generations. A tidy hearth equates to a tidy mind. Maybe I'm just too 'Old School'. My desk is cluttered. There are notes and documents along with books within reach, and within the drawers are a myriad of 'stuff'. But the bed is always 'made', and the washing up is always done, dried and shelved before 'settling down' for an evening. Untidiness can lead to depression. I'll wager Mr. Court's van has everything in its place? And Mr Marshall's bookshelf behind him looks suitably well ordered! 😉

Robbie comes over as affable and innocently charming. And a little naive, but I've had life knock me about a lot more than he has, being nearly twice his age. White shirt suit and tie? Who suggested that? I wasn't expecting Cliff Michelmore or Fyfe Robertson. And I have yet to see an image of him without a beard, albeit somewhat 'light'. His looking for the BBC building in Nottingham - Come on! It was there in the background! I spotted it straight away. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VDZ66zOaAgw He's alright, but the boat roof is over cluttered as are so many nowadays. We lived with nothing on the roof save pigeon box and chimneys - brass polished! In the opening shots of this video, there can clearly be seen dishevelment in the far sleeping area. Yes, this is nit-picking, but as a child I had been taught to make my bed after getting up, and even today I will not leave any area of my home unkempt, the bed being the first place to be 'made' before leaving the bedroom. Same on the boat. Personally I would never have shown the inside of a cabin unless spic and span. Boat maintenace? It failed its CoC at Staniland did it not? His style may be 'successful' - but to whom? A generation born long after mine I think, and therein lay 'my' problem - I'm an old git, and fussy with it. My school reports in the main stated for most subjects: "Must try harder". I did - once I left school. Wigan 1983, around the time Robbie was born. Some timber on the roof behind the water tank, tidy. Last boat - 'Old School'

There are many alternatives to the BBC if one wants to seek news from local areas or around the world, and there are many ways of discovering what is being reported (or not) by the BBC. Conspiracy 'theories' as they are so often called, mostly turn out to become genuine conspiracies through the course of time, but in the interim, they are labelled theories and supplied by "nutjobs", so called usually by the less well enlightened and those who have 'chosen their cloth' regardless of the cut. Window shop, change the tailor, broaden the mind. Back on topic (remember the topic?), the young gentleman would do better to keep his boat, and his person in better fettle. He has an ability to films and edit, which is more than I can do, but the delivery and presentation should be more concentrated on the surroundings, their history, and general good boating practice. All too often do we get to see more of the camera wielder than 'where' he is. This is a common trait amongst amateur 'vloggers'. It's all well and good during interviews, but rabbiting on about something that irks, with a lens full of 'face' (and he's not alone in this) can put people off. A classic piece of really good filming without any speech, is Mike Askin showing the starting procedure of his JP2 some time back, short and brilliant. Or Roger Barnes in his dinghy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NbPgP6wIF44&t=107s