Francis Herne

Probably, but it's all good fun... We plan to enter with Atlas & Malus as usual - it would be nice to have another boat-and-butty pair as direct competition.

I've been there in the past to find a boat moored sticking out into the winding hole. That counts as daft in my book, although complaining about being bumped in that case would be really daft. I've heard (but at least secondhand from who-knows-where) the Go Boats have left permanently and aren't coming back next year. The person who told me was pleased, thought they were a hazard to navigation, but I rather liked them. Got people onto the water and added a lot more movement to the scene. It's definitely a bit shallow even when you're jot squeezing past the moored boats. Atlas draws 2ft 9in or something and we had quite a bit of... fun? The Tamar guys enjoyed it anyway.

I've occasionally spoken to the moorers on the arm, but not about the Challenge. The number of boats going up there is probably less than 10, which would be unremarkable on many canals. It's only a lot compared to the zero boats per day on BCN backwaters. One would expect Challenge participants to be (on average) fairly experienced, so if someone's getting hit repeatedly they're either moored in a daft place or there's some other issue that needs addressing. Putting a spotlight on navigational issues in the quieter bits of canal is the whole point.

Well... no. I've read everything written here (which was quite tedious, thus the objection). Assuming bad faith or that everyone else is an idiot right off the bat is never a good start. But anyway: Part of what was written, in the original post that kicked this off, was: You didn't write "-- but not in a straight line in deep water". The examples given of fast-flowing, non-deep rivers and currents are valid objections to the original statement. You've never acknowledged these, just narrowed the scope to exclude them and then argued that they're out of scope. Excluding them for the moment anyway: - On a deep, flowing river, a longer boat has more drag (~linear with length) when it's not in-line with the flow. This requires more power to overcome. - Current on bends pushes the bow or stern outward (>linear in length, because the moment arm is longer on top of the increase in side area). This requires more steering authority to overcome - either more speed through more power, or more rudder angle which creates drag and cosine losses requiring more power. EDIT: perhaps it's just linear. I overlooked that the rudder gets more moment arm too. I stated the second of these clearly in my last post, and the first was mentioned by someone else upthread, yet you completely ignore that and continue to say Back to the shallow-water case... The Ribble Link in normal conditions, and parts of the Trent in some conditions (and the Soar, and probably elsewhere), are both very fast-flowing and very shallow. Full power is needed. There are a number of boats that aren't fast enough to safely navigate the Ribble Link.* People mentioning these aren't confusing the deep-water and shallow-water cases, they're providing counterexamples to your assertion that speed and power in the shallow-water case are unimportant. All the "usually"s make this version of the statement almost correct. (I argue a longer boat does need more power on any "usual" river - there are few dead-straight rivers - but not so much in usual flows that it's likely to be a problem). They also exclude enough real-world situations, unusual overall but still frequently encountered by some boats, that it doesn't support your conclusions explicitly stated in earlier posts and never retracted. *(CRT advise boats using it should be capable of at least 6mph in deep water -- not because it is deep but because that's the only figure that's practical to replicate and measure for comparison)

As a third party to the debate so far without any personal investment (and a 30ft boat owner painfully aware of hull speed), there's quite a familiar pattern here from other threads: You've made a theoretical statement which is - within certain assumptions - correct, significant and quite interesting. I didn't realise that hull speed vs. drag balanced each other that neatly on narrowboats. In this case you even stated (some of) the assumptions to begin with! People disagreed with the validity of the assumptions for reaching your final conclusion: - That a high required speed will always be in deep water, because the Ribble Link (which was one of the cases mentioned even before your post) is notoriously fast-flowing while being about three feet deep mid-channel at some points. Some river sections can be too, albeit not quite that shallow. - That (implied by the second line I quoted) straight-line maximum speed meaningfully reflects convenient or safe handling on rivers, because effects like flow pushing the bow outward on upstream bends usually make navigation unsafe before you're literally going backwards. You then dismissed the challenges to your assumptions by simply restating them, including the factually-wrong one about the Ribble Link that you included directly in later posts. Any further comment is portrayed as "disagreeing with basic physics" rather than the actual disagreements with the assumptions (or whether the assumed case covers enough in practice to support your conclusions) that you still haven't meaningfully addressed. Then everyone repeats themselves five times with no further progress, leading to great frustration all round, including us poor folk who merely have to read through it. Please try a bit harder to understand which part of your statements people are trying to (constructively) criticise - often things you've implied rather than the theory directly stated - before kicking off the usual dismissal-followed-by-mutual-flamewar thing.

Under 'Edit Profile', the page where the first setting is 'Birthday'. It's between 'Gender' and 'Interests'. If you don't see it there perhaps it is a new account thing.

If the interfaces contain air gaps, then radiation comes into play internally rather than just conduction, and the order (in terms of which faces are adjacent to the air gap(s), and the temperature and emissivity of those faces) matters. It all comes down to quibbling about what exactly is meant by "the materials" and "the order".

Well, only if they're in direct contact. Any air gap between layers and the reflectivity/emissivity of the surfaces will matter (hence shiny multi-layer foil insulation). Not very applicable to a sprayfoamed boat but with a curved roof lined with flat panels of foil-surfaced insulation board there should be some difference. A couple of earlier posts imply (as I read them, however intended) that the sequence of materials in the roof is the primary difference between heat gain in summer and loss in winter, which is what I was trying to refute. If there is a difference for this reason I don't think it has a noticeable effect compared to other factors.

@DHutch has one, but the steam engine probably has more effect than the styling...

The difference in surface finish of paint over steel/wood/fibreglass/cheese won't be significant compared to the colour and choice of gloss/matt/anti-slip paint, which is totally unrelated to the material underneath.

Yep. Just wanted to be sure the original poster found the Shroppie one and was aware of the potential confusion.

It doesn't. A roof made solely of (symmetrical) Celotex panels would show the same effect. The usual steel/plywood/insulation layers shuffled in any order (but keeping the same thickness of each) will behave identically in constant sun. The only thing to make a difference is surface colour/finish, which isn't closely tied to the material. One with steel on the inside, rather than the outside, would heat up slightly slower in the mornings and cool slightly slower in the evenings because the steel's heat capacity is then inside the insulation. Compared to the heat capacity of other things in the boat I don't think the difference would be very noticeable.

Stretton boatyard seems the best option to me, unless Martin Brookes is able to do it which is unlikely tbh. I'd overlooked that option. (Industry Narrowboats on the Shropshire Union -- there's another Stretton on the Oxford, also with a boatyard...) Was trying to think if Oxley Marine at Wolverhampton have a crane but don't think so. They have a few boats on the side so must get one in occasionally.

My suggestion, assuming I'm understanding the link correctly, is to set "Can edit own content? [x] Events" on a group or set of groups containing all members. (It's 'Blog Entries' selected in the screenshot but 'Events' is an option in the same list). Does having multiple groups complicate it much? The worst I see is having to configure that on a few more groups. I don't see a reason for any member not to be able to edit their own events -- based on my experience yesterday, edits to events (just like new events) are subject to moderator review before becoming public so it can't be abused. Unless the setting bypasses that...would need testing. Perks for 'patrons' seems unrelated and I don't really have an opinion.

I think the two earlier are talking past each other a bit. Not sure if blackrose's understanding is wrong or just imprecisely described. The roof usually transfers much more heat in summer than winter for the same differential in air temperature. This might be unexpected. The asymmetry is that in summer much of the heat arrives by radiation, heating the warm side far above the warm air temperature. In winter there's not much radiated heat inside the boat (except very near the stove) so the warm side is roughly equal to the air temperature. The cold side is close to cold air temperature in both cases. The asymmetry in material layers (steel-foam-plywood, say) has little effect. An 'inside-out' plywood-foam-steel roof shouldn't behave differently in a steady state if the outside is painted with the same colour/finish. "on the inside the foam doesn't have a sheet of hot steel bonded to it and is only dealing with warm air" can be read as either of those, so it's either wrong or it's not 😛 I stretched a tarpaulin over the south-facing side, and part of the roof not covered by solar panels, to keep direct sunlight off which helped quite a bit. My panels are spaced off the roof and shade much it quite well. The sticky-backed kind seem like the worst possible case for gaining heat into the roof. I've vaguely dreamed of having a cooling loop with tubes welded or glued to the walls, roof and baseplate. Water would flow in a helical pattern down the boat. Perhaps it could incorporate or replace some of the usual bracing. Could never be retrofitted and does have some obvious potential drawbacks.

The only edit window that would really address my problem is several months, which for post editing might as well not exist. Possible solution to the mismatch here: https://invisioncommunity.com/forums/topic/458499-customize-edit-time-per-app/?do=findComment&comment=2847761 Duplicating the user group seems weird, I don't see why it can't be applied to the default group of registered users. Once I ran another IPB forum that I could poke around and test on, but no longer. 🙁 I quite like the 24h edit window for posts, often I post late at night, reread the next day and revise all my phrasing...

Following on from my other question I created a few events. The timer on how long one can edit a post for (a few hours?) seems to apply to them. I wanted to put things up early to make sure people know about them in good time, but there are various unconfirmed details (and a couple of confirmed-at-the-meeting-this-evening details) that I'd like to add. Can the editing restriction be removed from calendar events please?

I think that's fair comment tbh, and I'm guilty of it here. The steelwork on this build looks really well done. Nice smooth curves, nice smooth join. It's interesting to see this kind of project even if the client's taste doesn't agree with mine.

Closest is Martin Brookes' yard near Stourton, he cranes in/out sometimes. Not very frequently but you could be lucky. 07802 444370. Hawne Basin and Caggy's Yard both similar, about a day's journey because of all the locks. Sirius Marine at Stourport is a day away with a crane on site, but they lift into the river which is currently in flood. Alvechurch Marina has a crane on site and is a couple of days away.

I agree with the comments above, there should really be some form of exit usable inside a narrow lock. They're by far the most common location for rapid boat sinkings - meeting the letter of the (underspecified) BSS requirement shouldn't be a substitute for good practice. If the customer can't be persuaded to have a front hatch, maybe a Houdini hatch on the roof?

That's the one. Thank you.

Second-hand boats rarely sell immediately (nor even quickly), and transport or movement costs are high, so cruising a long way for a one-or-two-day event where the boat is unlikely to sell at the asking price is impractical. Trying to sell boats quickly at a short event would yield a lower price. The set of buyers changes constantly over time, and the boat market is small and varied. The person who'd most appreciate a boat probably isn't looking for one when it first comes on sale; waiting longer increases the odds of a buyer coming along who finds it 'perfect' rather than 'ok' and values it higher. The boats thus need to be on display for a while. The constant, year-round stream of boats being sold means they'll overlap into a continuous pool. CRT won't let boats sit around for display on high-demand basin moorings (and public basins simply aren't big enough for all the boats for sale at any one time) so the gathering has to be in a private marina whose owners want some money for that. Someone needs to do the organizing, and it's a pretty thankless task so they'll want a cut too. Often, but not always, it's easiest if those are the same people who manage the moorings that are occupied. Having allowed for reality, your regional event is now a marina-based brokerage. They're mostly distributed around the kind of popular hub locations you describe. Private owners bring their own boats there for sale, because as you say gathering dozens of boats for sale in one place makes it easier and more attractive for buyers. They pay for brokerage because there's no free supply of moorings or organizers, and because helping buyers by gathering boats together really is valuable to the seller so it's worth the relatively small fee to do so. Your idea isn't exactly wrong - it's just that in our non-Utopian world the only way to realize it is the system that currently exists.