Pluto

Hudswell Clark, the Leeds locomotive makers, built the first Tom Puddings and tug in 1864. IIRC, just previously they had built some narrow boats for the L&NWR which were to be used on building the new railway tunnel at Standedge, including a steamer.

But the displacement of the boat will have raised the lower pound by an equivalent amount, the actual variation being affected by the length of the lower pound, and whether water is running to waste. So due to displacement, there will be a different fall depending upon whether a boat is in the lock or not, and of course there needs to be a similar calculation for the level of the upper pound.

The first part of the basin as you enter from the river is described as New Dock on the 1850 OS map. I suspect Clarence Dock came about when the dock was extended southwards, with the Potato Wharf being the small dock on the righthand side as you enter from the river. The Old Dock was the original terminus basin on Dock Street, which has now been isolated from the river. The weir was always Leeds Weir, with Leeds Lock bypassing it. There were numerous water-powered mills on the town side of the river between the lock and the entrance to the L&LC. The original A&CN was built very simply, and Leeds Lock is typical of the setup, with a lock and short canal section avoiding mill weirs. The navigation was improved in the 1770s, and the disused chamber here is probably the last surviving one from that time. It has the same dimensions as the L&LC, the canal being built to accept the then current size of boats working on the navigation and down the Humber.

From a canal maintenance viewpoint, trees were traditionally seen as a problem. That is why the best canals employed one man per mile of canal towpath on maintenance (those in workshops were additional to this), one of their main jobs being to keep trees from self planting and damaging the infrastructure. Horse boating today can be a real problem because of self seeded trees growing on the canal edge. Some areas are better than others for controlling such growth. Although I would not necessarily advocate going back to those days, trees do need to be managed as part of a conservation policy for both natural and built environments. I have been suggesting this for Bingley 5-rise for a number of years, and did meet the local council's tree officer, who did not see any particular problems. However, the difficulty in working with some natural environmentalists with regard to conserving the built environment is often seen as a reason for not addressing the problem.

Forty or fifty years ago, there were far fewer trees alongside canals, with tree cutting being one of the jobs done by the (at that time, many more) men on the bank.The photos below show Armley in 1975 and then in 2010. I would rather see the old warehouse than the new trees. If trees are to be cut back, it needs doing in an organised way, such that no rubbish goes in the canal and, where suitable, trees continue to grow, but far enough back so that there is sufficient navigable water space. There also should be open views, such as one used to get from the canal below Armley, which are now blocked by trees. Basically, there needs to be some management which is understood by all. Agreement would be too much to ask!

Actually, I have virtually stopped boating because, with the arthritis I suffer, I feel that I can't react quickly enough in an emergency. However, over the years I have seen a number of people who have had problems when wearing glasses, and what about if there was a fisherman's hook stuck in an overhanging branch? I notice you don't say anything about offside vegetation causing navigation problems, it terms of reducing visibility, which is probably the greater danger.

It's not scratching a boat that is the problem, more the likelihood of having your eyes scratched by overhanging branches. I have had my glasses virtually ripped off on occasion when having to take to the trees to keep out of the way of oncoming boats. The problem is far worse today than it was forty years ago. On the L&LC, there are places where it has become difficult to navigate safely with a full width boat, something I cannot remember when I started boating with a L&LC short boat over forty years ago.

I think that one reason for extending the tunnel was to allow the brook to flow over the canal rather than into it at the tunnel mouth, as quite a lot of silt was being deposited. The feed into the canal was then moved further towards Preston Brook where the brook was flowing more slowly and thus it was easier to keep the silt out of the canal.

Why use the base ten, which can only be divided a couple of ways, when base eight is much more easy to divide. However, the old imperial systems did ensure that the majority of children had a good grounding in simple maths before they left school, whether they realised it or not.

I wouldn't want to stop people clearing overhanging vegetation, just be careful there are no fishing hooks when you grab a branch.

I'm not sure of the latest figures for carrying on the A&CN, but would expect them to be around 750,000 tons per annum. When the coal traffic was still around the figures were more like 3 million tons, which astounded a German professor of transport I met some years ago, who thought that there was no traffic on English waterways. Our governments, of all hews, doesn't like to admit that we still carry significant tonnages by inland waterways. If you look at continental figures, there are many commercial canals which carry less than 1 million tons annually, so the tonnage carried on the A&CN is significant internationally. European figures are always skewed by the tonnages on the Rhine, over 200 million tons annually. I am sure there are others with better modern figures than those I have quoted as my interests are more historical.

Turbines were often used to replace waterwheels in mills. I suspect that is the reason for the OP's one, which will probably be for display or use in the local mill. Below is a turbine used for generating electricity which has a canal connection. The turbine is at the Eder Dam, in Germany, one of the dams destroyed by the Dam Busters. The dam was originally built as part of the water supply for the MIttellandkanal, with water from the dam passing down the Weser to Minden where it was pumped up into the canal. The photo was taken when I visited the dam with a group of German engineers and water industry managers who were fascinated by the bouncing bomb.

The problem is the north/south divide. The south has grabbed most of the economic benefits, leaving those in the north less well off, and thus much less likely to own a boat. There is also the common sense problem, where most common sense has remained in the north. What northerner likes to pay for things like a boat safety certificate, where local common sense is a much better and cheaper solution. If you don't know what's wrong with your boat, you shouldn't have bought it in the first place.

As one of the Kennet volunteers, I have to raise a tentative hand as causing the water point problem. Kennet had been tied at the top of the locks for a few days, with a padlock and chain for security. When the community boat arrived on Sunday morning, a search had to be made for the padlock key so that we could move Kennet towards the lock and give sufficient room for the community boat plus access to the water point. We have two groups of volunteers, one who move Kennet, and one who staff openings and educational events. Group two were there on Sunday, and we were unsure where the key to the padlock had been stored, so moving Kennet took a bit longer than it should. However, I don't think those on the community boat would have been too worried about people accessing the water point across their boat; not the best long-term solution, but surely OK in the short-term. Having worked on the L&LC as both a professional and a volunteer for over forty years, I do wonder about the way new volunteers - and staff - are being introduced to the canal. There does need to be more co-ordination between the various volunteers on the canal, for example with those whose interests lie more with the natural environment being educated about the built environment, and vice versa. Unfortunately, as with most British management, there are very few people with an extensive detailed knowledge of the many aspects of their business, in this case canals. People tend to have one speciality, and little knowledge outside of that speciality. The result is that volunteers either don't recognise when boats need help, or are expected to stick to their particular volunteering area. That is a specific example of how things are run today, with some areas or businesses being better than others in the way volunteers are organised and educated. Unfortunately, there does not seem to be a simple cheap solution. However, we are always looking for people to join the L&LC Society and to help on Kennet! (see www.llcs.org.uk)

For more information about timbers, have a read of 'The Wheelwrights Shop' by George Sturt. Usage could depend upon whether the tree grew in a wood, where it was faster growing with fewer branches, to hedge grown, with many branches and less straight grain. The timber varied in individual hedge-grown trees, with the wood from the north facing side of the tree having growth rings closer together, making it harder. Technical detils are just a small part of the book, which is an evocation of life in timber-working trades in the early 20th century.

The location is possibly the Selby Canal, as the four slides numbered before this one were all at Selby. There is then a gap in the numbering - I don't have Geoff's trolleybus or railway slides - with Norton Canes being the next numerically, with six slides 'missing'.

The lower photo is definitely 1968, and comes from Geoff Wheat's collection. Although his full listing of what he photographed could not be found after his recent death, his slides were kept in year files. There are a few others from the same trip which are also dated 1968.

That's why health and safety people always travel by public transport, it's much safer than by car..... .... well they should travel by public transport if they want to be as safe as possible. It's just that in life people, even h&s people don't always want to be that safe.

A photo of Saturn around 1968 on the Shroppie: The other Saturn photographed in 1968, but on a different canal - which one?

The Duke of Bridgewater, who had extensive holdings in the area, had a boatyard at Bangor-on-Dee where his men built flats for use on his canal. They must have gone straight over the weir as they would probably have been too large to use the water gate, though I do not know when that was installed.

That's narrow boats you're talking about, on L&LC boats there was no external brass to polish. Engines were another matter; you had to have something to do whilst sat on your bucket. On earlier cars it ought to be nickel, rather than the more modern chrome.

At the moment they are quite large as I did them for printing. I could save them at a size suitable for using on screen. Widdop mainly made for the maritime market, with four or six cylinder engines being used by schooners and the like. They also made deck winches and generating sets.

I have three 1930s Widdop catalogues in digital format, as well as a more modern one for the larger boat engines - too large for canal use - if he is interested.

For those who don't know the water gate in the weir at Chester, these photos give some idea. One problem is that because the gate is, in effect, at right angles to the river, the length of boat which can use it is restricted to less than 72 feet.