David Mack
Patron
-
Posts
20,309 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
6
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Gallery
Blogs
Store
Posts posted by David Mack
-
-
Surely you can empty most of it by simply running a cold tap and using your existing water pump.
-
3
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, IanD said:
So on the same principle, if I pay (for example) 3x as much tax as somebody else, should I get (for example) 3 votes in the next GE?
Or if I make a substantial donation to the political party in government, do I get to put my point of view directly to ministers on the issues of the day?
-
1 hour ago, cuthound said:
BW didn't build that. It and the nearby Summit Tunnel over the Old Main Line were built in the mid 1970s to accommodate the road now named Telford Way, to provide more traffic capacity, and also to remove heavy vehicles from Galton Bridge.
It was said at the time that a bridge of similar span to Galton Bridge had been considered during the design stages, but rejected as more expensive than constructing a tunnel. But by the time it was built, the 1973 oil crisis had put up the cost of transporting the imported fill material so much, that a long span high level bridge would have been cheaper!
It was also rumoured that the road builders had offered to put in twin towpaths, but BW said not necessary. Pathways over the portal each end were built to connect to the two truncated ends of the other towpath, but they don't seem to have been much used, and now the other towpath is completely overgrown and impassable.
-
40 minutes ago, MtB said:
Still more than twice the price of the freestanding cooker I linked to earlier.
I wonder how that electronic clock/timer copes with 240Vac from a boat inverter.
-
6 hours ago, Clanky said:
https://www.smlmarinepaints.co.uk/products/anti-skid
different grades depending on how ‘grippy’ you want
That has to be applied to the wet paint with a sieve. Going to be fun trying to do that on 4 inch wide gunwales without losing most of it over the side!
-
23 hours ago, PeterScott said:
That footbridge seems to have been closed for ages. What is actually wrong with it?
I guess with there being a swing bridge alongside it is a low priority for repair, so will just moulder away until it becomes unsafe and is demolished.
-
I'm curious what issues you are having between Rochdale and Manchester. There are no stoppages listed on the CRT website. Although it is heavily locked, it's less than two days run from Rochdale to Castlefield and there are few places on this length where I would be willing to leave a boat unattended while waiting for a boat mover to be available.
If you must leave the boat, the only places I would consider would be above Slattocks or by the Irk aqueduct.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, Jon57 said:
Why not just do all the boat in glass😁 supposed the design of a canal boat is perfect as it is. As they say if it's not broken why fix it. 🤣🤣
There's lots of glass boats out there.
They just have the glass in fibre form, encased in resin.
-
Well I responded to your first post, then got my head snapped off for not having reflected your later post. Makes me wonder why I bothered really!
-
2 hours ago, Peanut said:
Occupancy is harder to establish, and may vary frequently, value is much easier to establish, and property values tend to move together and so the banding remains equivalent between properties.
True. Although the Poll Tax relied on occupancy information - presumably the electoral roll with some follow up checking to ensure people weren't ducking the electoral roll to avoid the Poll Tax. It wouldn't be that difficult to merge the ER data and council tax valuation data to levy a tax per occupant at a level based on the house valuation.
-
48 minutes ago, PeterScott said:
On this day 2019
Perhaps inspired by this at Hyde Lock on the Staffs & Worcs:
There were gates like this here in the 1980s, which later disappeared (or perhaps just rotted away). But when I was there last year I saw they had been reinstated.
-
4 hours ago, BoatinglifeupNorth said:
In other words can’t be bothered to provide a service to boaters.
They are a business. And they are located at the end of a branch so much of the passing trade never gets to their location. I guess they make far more money letting the berth out as a permanent mooring than reserving it for diesel sales. Then there are cost savings in not having to maintain a diesel tank and pump, no need to comply with all the relevant safety regulations or trading standards requirements to have the pump calibration checked. And probably cheaper on the insurance too.
I suspect that only those boatyards that have a hire fleet can actually justify running a diesel supply service.
-
3
-
-
6 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:
Yes - but they do not meet the specification for boat wiring.
May not comply with the ISO, which would be advisable (but not mandatory) to comply with the RCR/RCD. But no such requirement under the Boat Safety Scheme, which permits single core domestic twin and earth cable.
-
2 hours ago, Jen-in-Wellies said:
Not a heating engineer, but my understanding.
Ignore the caulflower. Once it is up to temperature, it takes no more heat from the heater.
Find the specifications for your radiators. If not available, then use near equivalent. Eg, Screwfix 600x1400mm double rad, gives a heat output of 8165btu. <pedant>Btu (energy) should actually read btu/hr (power). </pedant>
Add them all up, then convert from btu/hr to kW by dividing by 3412. One of the radiators above uses 2.4kW, for example.
That calculation tells you what heat output the radiators can produce (at the water temperatures assumed by the radiator manufacturer). It doesn't tell you whether that heat output is sufficient to keep the boat warm, which depends upon the boat size, how well insulated it is, level of ventilation, single or double glazed windows etc.
-
We just fitted one of these on Fulbourne.
https://www.argos.co.uk/product/2209658
Fitted with jets for natural gas, but comes with jets for lpg.
The igniter needs 240Vac so either you need an inverter or a separate gas lighter.
-
1 hour ago, mrsmelly said:
It would make much more sense to have a system based on occupancy rather than property value. Four adults pay double what two do etc etc. some people have expensive houses but are skint themselves so should pay the same for services as anyone else. The usual cop outs could still be applied. I am not moaning but I pay considerably more than my neighbour who is also a retired couple simply because my house is two bands higher than his. The use of services etc is identical. Maybe a system called poll tax or similar would be fairer.
The current Council Tax is based on the property valuation and doesn't vary with the number of occupants (apart from the single occupancy discount). The Poll Tax was based solely on occupancy and didn't vary with property value (or any other measure of income or wealth). I wonder how a charge which varied both with occupancy and property value would have gone down?
-
2 hours ago, MtB said:
Yes they do, once in a while.
I've had CRT demand to see my insurance certificate at least once.
As I said, they check a sample. And on one occasion that included you.
-
35 minutes ago, Rincewind said:
Boaters that buy a normal license have to prove that they have insurance, a home mooring and a BS certificate otherwise they do not get issued with a license.
No they don't. Boaters applying for a licence have to declare that they have insurance and, if appropriate, a home mooring and provide relevant details as part of the application process. If the boat is already registered with CRT the BSC details should have been uploaded to the system by the Examiner. CRT only check a sample of the insurance and mooring info provided, so in most cases that information is not proved.
-
53 minutes ago, Iain_S said:
I'd have thought it would be perfectly possible to cruise around the canal system while having a permanent address on the bank, and not living on the boat. Cruise for a few days, moor up for a week or so and return to home address, return to the boat and carry on with the journey. Even just boating at week ends while on a progressive journey would comply with both the letter and spirit of the legislation, in my opinion.
And indeed this is the only way that boatowners who are tied to a Monday to Friday job are likely to be able to boat those parts of the network more than a day or two away from their home mooring.
38 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:Mine is that that cannot in any way be seen as a continuous cruise. Largely because it isn't continous, it's continually inerrupted.
But again the 95 Act specifically provides for a continuous cruise to be interrupted by periods of up to 14 days (or such longer period... etc.)
-
3
-
-
14 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:
CC licences should only be granted to those who actually live on board for the duration of the licence. Anything else is daft.
But the 95 Act doesn't say that. Having or not having a home mooring is independent of whether the boat owner is a liveaboard or not. CRT has no legal power to restrict 'CC' licences to liveaboards.
And in practical terms it would be difficult to do so when many ccing liveaboards simultaneously claim to be living at a friend or relative's land address for the purposes of banking, insurance, registering with a GP etc.
-
Also worth adding that this is nothing new. As the linked article explains, CRT has simply retendered a series of framework contracts, which will run for up to 8 years, the previous contracts time being up. The only significant difference is that this time they have appointed a number of firms to the framework rather than a large single source option, so overall a wider range of skills and resources to call on and avoids an eggs-in-one-basket situation, but does put more of an onus on CRT to coordinate the different inputs effectively.
-
2 hours ago, Kh1 said:
Is it just me or does this sound like the typical ‘ let’s spend all the money on quangos and hold meetings ad infinitum’ codswallop? Surely it’s not necessary to appoint so many private companies to consult on the network?
Firstly, none of these is a quango. And secondly its called outsourcing - having a number of specialist companies available on an as-and-when-required basis to advise on a while range of matters. Every organisation does it. Nothing to see here.
-
3
-
-
2 hours ago, Paul C said:
Of course, the way the rules are structured is that its the responsibility of the boater to correctly declare the split, and its nothing to do with the vendor. Neither can/should they restrict the availability of splits. Their only legal obligation is to record the boat number and some other personal details as required by legislation on red diesel sales to boats.
I seem to recall someone queried this with HMRC when the split declaration was first introduced. They said that it was permitted for suppliers to sell only at a fixed split if they wished. In which case the customer either has to accept the supplier's split or buy elsewhere.
-
2
-
-
51 minutes ago, Tony Brooks said:
Are you reading the regs as outside diameter and not conductor cross-sectional area? 25 sq mm CCSA would have an OD of about 16mm
https://www.autoelectricsupplies.co.uk/p/battery-cable-flexible gives the outside diameter for different cross sectional areas of typical battery cables. This is only one particular supplier and other brands may vary, but it will give you an idea of the conductor cross sectional area for a particular outside diameter.
Pop riveting windows
in Boat Building & Maintenance
Posted
Don't think you could pull up a series of rivets a bit at a time with that one. Looks to be all or nothing.