Robin2
-
Posts
933 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Gallery
Blogs
Store
Posts posted by Robin2
-
-
A radical change of charging for the use of the system will have to be considered and introduced PDQ.
Isn't that what I and everybody else pays their licence fee for.
Or do you envisage a charge per canal and if the fees collected are insufficient the canal will be allowed to close?
I can't get my head around the notion that collecting money by a different means is more effective than simply raising the licence fee for which all the administration arrangements already exist.
Or are you hoping that a different charging system would be less expensive for you and more expensive for others?
-
Now that's a good idea.
... SNIP ....
Robin's superb suggestion of using a car A/C compressor suddenly makes it seem much more practicable.
Hold on now ... I said I found the idea, I didn't say that I thought it would work ...
-
Being moored on a river, I should like to construct a river-source heat pump for heating the boat. Not only would the river provide warmth, but also motive power to run the compressor.
All it needs is a few pipes filled with refrigerant, and a propellor-driven compressor.
A bit of idle Googling came up with the possibility of using a car air-con compressor to raise the temperature ??????
-
All in all the figures for where the money to keep the cut open get ever more nebulous.
Surprise - Surprise!
The real purposes of the scheme are/were twofold -
1 - the most senior managers wanted an intellectually stimulating task with attendant peer admiration (i.e. from City business types) (which fixing locks does not do);
and
2 - it suited the Treasury to agree because it will simplify the politics of future spending cuts on canals that have become the responsibility of an arms-length charity rather than Government
-
Interesting, though I can't believe that a propellor designed for both water and wind would be as effective as one designed purely for one or the other.
I might try and get one of their propellors as a spare, though, to try out.
AFAIK you there is a separate water propeller - but parts of their website don't seem to work.
-
On your first point you are wrong but as that would just go to far
to argue I will leave that for another day.If you are trying to make the trivial point that canals were originally made for cargo rather than leisure, of course you are correct. But mostly all that we have now is leisure boating, and if boating is not central to the existence of canals, what is?
On your second point I think you are beginning to understand the dangers of what quite a lot of people are asking for that is 1 membership = 1 vote. As I said before with a scheme like that members interested in Towpaths will far out number members interested in the actual water in the canals.
I don't think I have given any cause for the the use of the word "beginning". I have always held that view - which is the whole point of my comment about boat licences and votes.
-
Sebrof, you say moored on a river, whats the water flow rate?. I was thinking that if you have decent flow rate, fit a prop shaft mounted alternator, as your prop should be able to turn one reasonably easily. If seen this done on many sailing craft, When under sail the prop turns, and runs the alternator. (unless of course you have a folding, or self feathering type of prop.
You could even try this one. It can work in water or wind.
Caution - I don't know whether it works economically
-
I think you might find that your licence is to allow you to use the waterways and its facilities and is therefore not a membership. If I was an Angler, cyclist or walker I might well say "hang on" I do not use Elsan Points, Water or for that matter I do not take up between 20ft and 70ft of bank/towpath. If you want to take the National Trust example when they raise funds for a particular project/restoration I do not extra votes for the money I contribute, I still only get the 1 member = 1 vote. I have a life membership to the NT that I bought about 7 years ago that cost me £1,500 that still only gives me the same vote in any given year as someone who pays less than £50 for one years membership and might never renew again.
I see no reason why my licence can't double as my membership - especially as my use of the canals as a licensee is the principal reason the canals exist.
If it becomes accepted that boating is incidental to membership of the canal charity what's to stop a future membership vote turning the whole lot into roads?
-
If this is just about rivers ...
What about putting a large paddle wheel beside the boat with a 30mm diameter axle running through the cabin just above the gunwale. When you were cold you could warm your hands by trying to stop the axle rotating.
-
To start with, why doesn't my annual boat licence include membership? I see no reason why there should be a separate membership fee. If, in general, there is a need to raise more money then just raise the licence fee (not that I want that to happen).
Secondly, why shouldn't each member have 1 vote for (say) every £10 he pays - so if my boat licence costs £600 I get 60 votes. That's roughly how shareholders' voting rights work. It would seem to be a way to maintain balance with other groups (e.g. anglers) where the fees are much smaller but there may be many participants.
It would probably be a good way to give representation to hire-companies and marinas also.
-
Get real chaps, a visit to a National Trust property will cost you £20 (non Members) and that's only for a short visit.
That's why I don't go. £20 is the price of a pair of shoes, diesel for a week or dinner for a week.
On the more general issue ...
It seems that the OP believes that boaters should pay more to BW - and perhaps he envisages that the extra burden should fall mostly on some sub-catgeory of boaters.
If so lets have a debate about the general principle - how much more and who should pay - before there is any discussion of the mechanism.
And ...
Surely the whole point of the canal system is that it is an 18th century design. Why should be be trying to automate it?
-
This is what CanalScape-BCN set out to do. It has worked really well so far getting BW out and to the waterway. Through this we have managed to get things done otherwise seemingly impossible, ie spot dredging the Walsall Canal.
Working with the local BW can be fruitful and enjoyable, they learn from us and we get to know their problems and obstacles. Between us there is often a solurtion.
Interesting - have you a website link?
I presume that group is only concerned with the BCN?
-
Ah yes the classic "it's ok because it's evening and I'll be off straight after breakfast" line.
The point of moving off is that another boat may wish to pass through later or to make an early start (we do both from time to time) and they should be able to do so without struggling because some arrogant fool has decided that the world should keep to their idea of cruising hours.
So you insist on 100% certainty for everything? Have you ever crossed a road when there was a car coming in your direction?
-
It won't be the ONLY place to moor. You could always press on for another mooring.
In theory ...
... what would be the point in moving on if staying would almost certainly cause no problem to anyone?
-
People, including you and me, respond to incentives. Some of these are created in our minds (want to be seen to be generous, serious, successful etc) and others come from the external environment - have a better suit, watch, car, kitchen than X, earn more money to afford said car, kitchen etc.
The trick for us boaters is to create an incentive that drives BW management in the direction we would like. This is not easy, but by no means impossible.
Pages of negative comment (while it may help us by letting off steam) will get us nowhere.
I think it would be helpful if we could adopt realistic and achievable goals for different bits of canal and put them in the public domain. The whole collection of goals must be realistic and achievable - the list would be useless if it was clearly only possible to achieve part of it.
Indeed it would probably be most successful if the list of goals was relatively easy to achieve - in other words a list of goals that BW could achieve and still have resources for other things. The important thing from the boaters' perspective would be that a substantial part of BW funds would be dedicated to the things that are most important to us.
-
2
-
-
come April next year the same Fat Cats will be lapping up the milk and nothing will change other than an expensive makeover,
Isn't that what is meant to happen? ---- So perfect score for a bonus -----
-
& my addiction to house/decor/homewares sites & similar magazine subscription tells me that such things are very fashionable at the moment -
petit maman (?) ir preserving jars popular...
I wonder if you mean "Bonne Maman"...
... and does anyone know why no UK shops/supermarkets stock their marmalade? - which is excellent.
-
Canalplan runs on a twin core AMD64 running at 1GHz with 1GB ram with 1.5TB of disc (canalplan uses about 7GB) Its a mix of Sqlite and Mysql accessed through a pile of cgi scripts. The Stats for each place are held in a table which currently holds over 5 million rows and they're compiled on the fly. The server is also running a couple of other websites and a mail server.
Ruby on Rails forever
-
That was the thread that started me thinking. I did PM Dutch but not heard back on the success of the baffle plate. I guess as it's Dutch it's probably works just fine.
I think the current plan is to make a tight fitting baffle plate with about a 1mm clearance around the rudder stock then wells thismto the bottom of the boat (uxtor plate?). Then if this permits water up the tube in a problem match way look at pouring down some silicone rubber stuff. I will pre sheeth the shaft with tin foil first.
What's you all think?
What would be wrong with O rings? They keep oil in hydraulic systems - they ought to stop splashes of water.
-
Often overlooked but always good to settle a point with, "The Boater's Handbook". Page 9.
The problem with this, and lots of other DO and DON'T instruction lists, is that it doesn't explain why or even give an indication of how close is too near. A small diagram showing the turning requirements of a 70' boat would provide a lot of information.
On the other hand ...
If the only nearby place to moor for the night is a bit close to a bridge you have to take account of the low probability of a long boat coming along before you move off next day.
The ones that annoy me are the apparently long term moored boats (not necessarily officially) that are tied up in awkward places when they could just as easily be 100 metres further from the obstacle. But, as I said on another thread, you have only to observe behaviour on a town footpath to see how so many people are totally unconscious of the inconvenience they cause to others around them.
-
Or you may wish to go and lie down in a darkened room after reading this. bizzard.
Not sure its your readers who need to lie on the couch
-
The pipe insulation sounds like a good idea.
AFAIK the normal pipe insulation does NOT use closed cell foam so it will absorb water like a sponge and then allow all sorts of things to grow in it resulting in a stinky mess ???
If all you want to do is stop splashes coming up the tube there was another thread recently where someone had fitted a thin disc around the rudder stock at the bottom of the rudder tube.
-
Ok. I'd like to be able to plan a long cruise. I'd like a detailed itinerary with:
1. The distance and number of locks between points of interest
2. The total distance and number of locks travelled
You should go back to computer fundamentals ... what do you want this system for?
More specifically, what would you do differently if you had it, compared to what you do now?
I suspect the real answer is that you would miss out all the interesting bits.
... in the same way that people miss all the interesting local shops as they drive to B&Q or Tesco.
... and think of the fun there used to be in navigating the roads with a map before satnav.
... and feed into a decently designed Oracle database (not the best but the most common of the decent ones).
Wouldn't MySQL or SQLite be much cheaper?
-
I still think this is a wind-up ....
to argue I will leave that for another day.
TIME FOR CHANGE - BW CULTURE CHANGE - WANTED NOW
in General Boating
Posted · Edited by Robin2
Do you intend this system to collect more or less money than the present system?
If you intend it to collect extra money then, because the relatively little used boats will save money by paying less those who use their boats (i.e. CCers) will have to pay what the little used boats save PLUS the extra PLUS what they already pay.
If that's what you mean, come out and say so and don't try to hide the issue behind "modern infrastructure".