Steve Priest

Damn, wrong boat. I’m sure he pointed at this one, but all little Woolwiches look the same when you’ve had a few. Ah well, never mind, Anyone up for crowdfunding?

Try as hard as we might, some boats are too far gone to do anything with and there is no alternative but to scrap them. Unfortunately, this little Woolwich motor is one such boat. We do hope, however, to be able to re-use some parts in the restoration of others. 9B6BD2B4-B40F-4920-B316-342F612E1C30 by Steve Priest, on Flickr 7996D17F-9521-4C3B-9B1A-B66E67CC1BB0 by Steve Priest, on Flickr

Margaret Clark and Myself have been campaigning to get something done with lock 9 for the past couple of years, since Margaret’s boat Mercury has not been able to get through, and I have had trouble with Aquila coming down. We have asked a lot of people who have got stuck to report it to Neil Owen, the CRT engineer who has been monitoring it. As of last Autumn, it had become clear that boats were getting stuck quite regularly, and had become a higher priority and Neil Owen conducted a series of laser surveys to establish whether the wall was still moving. I haven’t contacted him about it for some time, and frankly with the Middlewich breach to sort out I didn’t think that there was much likelihood of anything happening in the immediate future, but it is included in the Autumn stoppage list, commencing in early November. The stoppage notice says that they intend to take down and rebuild the towpath side chamber wall, and the offside entrance walls, so hopefully we will be ok by next Spring

No, the two plates are riveted to the butt strap with the edges of the plates butted together, the caulking is done by burring the edges together with an air chisel with a vee shaped or slightly rounded head. If you look carefully you can still see a faint line which is the edges of the plates. There is no separate caulking material, although I have occasionally come across a small fillet of steel let into fill the gap when they have made a mess of fitting the plates together. On a seam like this you would rarely find anything between the plates, sometimes tar paper or boilermakers felt might be used, but nothing substantial as a gasket because it would compromise the tension formed between the pates as the rivets cool, and hence the strength of the joint itself.

That is a caulked seam

Where the plates meet on the outside of the butt straps the detail that you have noticed is caulking, not welding.Have a look at post 18, BEngo has described this process, but basically the plates are burred together with an airchisel with a slightly v or u shaped head. When BW did a lot of platework on the ex GU boats, either themselves at Bull’s Bridge or farmed out to others, they did tend to weld over the joints between the plates rather than caulk them, but more often than not these welds were not particularly neat.

Although I have not had any contact with Neil Owen recently regarding lock 9, I understood that resolving the problem had been given a higher priority, but with the Middlewich breach I thought it unlikely that the funding would be available.to do anything about it However, it is included in the Winter stoppage programme, the intention is to take down and rebuild the towpath side chamber wall, and the offside approach walls, starting in November. So, perhaps the South Oxford may not be a no-go zone for those of us that have had problems there by next Spring

I have taken a picture but don’t seem to be able to get it on, but I will be at Braunston for he do, if you want to have a look you are welcome. They were, as far as I know, fitted to all GU boats with Nationals and RN’ s .They were a fairly generic throttle, fitted to a lot of things (Ron Wilson once told me he worked a RB dragline with one fitted), and I would presume they were supplied with the engines. They would take a Bowden sheathed cable, but I doubt that the boats had anything other than a simple bare wire cable, there is a passage in “ Idle Women” describing having a problem with the throttle cable and mending it with a safety pin. The first speed-wheel fitted to a GU boat, so legend has it, was a modified winder for opening and closing high level windows in factories, found in the scrap. It worked well, and they started to make and fit them to many of the boats. The lever, I find, is easier to use, but works on friction, so I carry a spanner in the ticket draw to nip it up if it gets slack and won’t hold

I think that the answer to the position of Belfast’s exhaust position is that on a National the exhaust ports are on the bottom side of the cylinder head, and the manifold is vaguely V shaped, ending with a horizontal flange to stbd of the centre of the heads. The exhaust pipe is threaded into a similar flange bolted to the manifold flange with two bolts. The pipe was then offset to the expansion box which was fitted to exit on the centreline just in front of the pigeon box. It would seem, from the number of boats altered, that some did not like the central exhaust, and all that needed to be done to alter it is to turn the exhaust pipe where it is threaded into the flange, put a new hole in the roof, and fit a collar. The exhaust could be altered to anywhere on the radius of the offset, rotating it approx 30 degrees to stbd would get it to the position shown on Belfast. Regarding the water outlet the position shown on Belfast is exactly correct, the bilge outlet for a National is on the same side, just in front of the rear engine room bulkhead. RNs had outlets on opposite sides just in front of the engine room doors, cooling to stbd, bilge pump to port - I think The paintwork on Belfast seems to show the wartime livery with a white border all round, I have seen this before on photographs, but not as common as the usual top line only. Aquila has a lever throttle, initially I would have preferred a speedwheel but as Aquila has never had one I kept it, taking the view that if the boat still has original bits after 80 plus years it deserves to keep them. Now I have got used to it I find that I prefer it anyway.

I think that you are right, I don’t think such things were available off the shelf, perhaps the yards sorted it theirselves or perhaps smaller, local rolling mills were more prepared to produce small batches of non standard items. It wasn’t exclusively boatyards that had a need for such sections, any company involved in fabrication and riveting would have similar requirements. Whatever the answer is, the boatyards found such items readily available and it wasn’t a problem to them. When I was looking for angle I did consider having 90 degree opened out, but the problem with that is that the heel of the angle, where it is strongest, will remain at 90 degrees and the flanges will curve outwards. Therefore, along the centreline of the flange, which is also the rivet line, there will be a gap between the plate and the angle. A significant portion of the strength of a riveted joint is provided by the friction between the two surfaces, from the tension of the rivet contracting as it cools, so it is important that the two surfaces are bolted together tightly before being riveted. Such an angle could be ground flat but frankly, I’d rather fabricate it. I had never thought of it before but it is strange, isn’t it, that to consider undertaking a riveted job you might end up fabricating the necessary sections by welding, it is the skills to do otherwise that we are in danger of loosing Having said that the cost of a new riveted boat would be astronomical, it is interesting to look at the costs of Grand Union boats when they were built. Big Northwich and Woolwich motors were £900 each, I understand about the cost of two suburban semis. I know property prices don’t reflect true inflation over that time, but even so they were far from cheap

The major issue in building a new riveted boat is that the sections required are no longer readily available, as they have been rendered obsolete by welding. I remember Ian Kemp saying to me several years ago that he believed that most people regarded wooden boatbuilding as a dying skill, but wooden boats are still built in large numbers all around the world, and whilst each type of boat has it’s own idiosyncrasies the principles remain the same. In his opinion, iron boat building, as he called it, was the skill that we were really in danger of loosing. I hadn’t thought of it that way before, but found that I agreed with him entirely. In terms of sections, what I mean is the angles, knee sections etc that you need for a riveted boat but not a welded one. Some years ago I had to replace, by riveting, the chine angle on a Josher over the length of the straight sides. This angle is not a right angle, but comes out at about 100 degrees, and I needed somewhere in the region of 90 feet of it. I spoke to railway locomotive restorers, traction engine restorers, boilermakers, and heavy section benders, but pretty much drew a blank, in the end I had to fabricate it myself. There was as much fabrication and welding to achieve this as there would be to fit and weld the side to the bottom on a welded boat, and that is before we started punching it out, fitting the footings and riveting. I was lucky that I did not need to replace the angle at either end, where it curves in and the angle opens out at the same time. The same thing would apply to the gunwhale angle, normally an unequal angle again of about 100 degrees, curving in, and up, and flaring out at the same time as it reaches the fore end. Plating wise, the straight sides may present few problems, but the plates at the fore and stern ends may require a plate forge to shape them. When we build the fore ends of welded josher copies most of us fabricate and weld a series of horizontal strips to form the shape, fabricating the same shape by riveting would mean using substantially larger individual plates and would require a plate forge to shape them, and of course, the skill to use it. It would also require a higher standard of fitting, welding plates together can be much more forgiving in terms of gaps. There are also the forged items to consider, the stempost, with hoodings to accept the fore end plates, and the sternpost and skeg. I think another thing to consider is that those of us who do this sort of work are small concerns of one, two, or three people trying to replicate work that was done by shipyards, namely Yarwoods and H&W, and all the resources that they had to hand. It is a big ask. That is not to say that we are not able to replace significant portions of boats, Ian Kemp has replaced the straight sides and knees on several boats, and substantial rebuilds on fore and stern ends, we at Brinklow have lengthened three boats between us by riveting ( Antlia, Sextans, and my Dutch barge Trijntje), replaced side plates, swims and counters, chine angles, areas of gunwhale angle, swims etc. But perhaps a new riveted hull is a step too far. Possible, of course, everything is possible, but the cost would be astronomical. In terms of riveting work on new built boats, I have riveted an engine room and back cabin on a new little Northwich copy, but, having noticed discussion on another thread I can say that there was no real riveting on our little Woolwich copy Astraea, we did fit a portion of knee in the well deck area, along with a butt strap, gunwhale angle etc but these were with rivet heads fitted from the inside as a late addition to the job. It took me ages! Steve

I am afraid that I can’t say too much at the moment but I can put your minds at rest. Talks have taken place, Belmont will not be scrapped and will probably have left Snibston by Christmas. Steve

Regarding the problems with lock 9, I first got stuck there when I first bought Aquila in '93. She had spent years in Oxford and on the Thames and had not had bracing chains in for ages and had spread to 7' 4'' I managed to get a couple of inches off, but she was still well over 7' and we had bother in several places north of Banbury, so I thought little of getting stuck in no 9. After Aquila was rebuilt, we went through Napton again at Easter 2012. Heading south, we had no trouble, didn't even touch, but when we returned, coming down the lock, we got stuck. I had a winch with me, and with winching and flushing we got out in about 30 mins. I didn't bother CRT or even report it at the time. Margaret Clark attempted to take Mercury up no9 last September to see if she could do it, and failed to get in, I think Richard Parry was with her at the time, as was Steve Powell, and some other local CRT men. Margaret then began to campaign for something to be done, and I joined her in this, especially after it was rumoured that something might be done during the stoppage of last November, but wasn't. My next trip through Napton was last new year. This time, I nipped very slightly whilst going up, but on coming back down I got well stuck. We got through with the same method as before, but it took a good bit longer, with as much strain on the boat as I would want to give it. I reported this to CRT, and Margaret and I had a meeting with Richard Parry at Braunston during the show weekend to discuss it with him Incidentally, one of the CRT dredgers, Petra, I think, won't go through either On a personal basis, what would do it for me is that there is a patch of relatively new brickwork just inside the chamber from the offside bottom gate which seems to me to be proud. If this were cut back, I believe I would be ok. The engineer in charge is Neil Owen, He has said that he is undertaking a series of laser surveys of the chamber to see if it is moving or not, and with that knowledge will decide what could be done. I believe that he completed this series of surveys in July, so he should now be in a position to make that decision, and the more reports of people having problems there, the better the chances that the problem will be resolved. From my experiences I believe that it is moving, and will begin to affect more boats if nothing is done So, if you have had, or do have, any problems there, please report it to Neil Owen, and copy in Richard Parry, and Mike Carter of the Navigation Advisory Group. Their email address are :- Neil.Owen@canalrivertrust.org.uk Richard.Parry@canalrivertrust.org.uk mc@marinesurveysltd.co.uk Steve

Well yes, we find it works, but to clarify, I mean the Yarwoods version, not the Pimblotts. However, one thing that does need tweaking is that I find the clearance between the rudder shaft and sternpost a little tight and I prefer to add a couple of inches to this

Thank you for your comments

I've come to this post a little late, and perhaps it has moved on from the original comments, but as I have been mentioned a few times, I thought I might join it. I am interested by your comments concerning our little Woolwich copy. Few yards make as much effort to get shapes accurate as we do at Brinklow Boats, and the little Woolwich copy, which was named Astraea, was measured from my own boat, Aquila. Allowing for tweaking the width, depth and length to those more typical of a new built boat, the shape is accurate. If sheer is what you want perhaps our tunnel tug Hasty is more to your taste ( google tunneltug Hasty) In this case we used original photos as a concept, and developed the shape from there. I don't recognise the josher copy attributed to me, it could be one of Simon's The Admiral copy (which was named Pellew) was built using copies of Yarwoods drawings (probably from you, Laurence?) . Whilst the internal framing was different, the external hull shape is correct, including the counter bottom and swim. In fact, we have now adopted this swim shape in most of the boats that we build. Anyway, Beech. I went to see Beech when she was for sale at Les Allens, I think in the winter of 1976, following an advert in the Exchange and Mart. In those days most boats were advertised in the Exchange and Mart, or in Motor boat and Yachting. The boat looked marvellous, straight, and immaculately painted, with a largely rebuilt JP2 and an asking price of £3500. I made an offer, and was second in line, but didn't get it. Ian Kemp owned it for a while, after he sold it, it did a couple of seasons as a camping boat in the WFBCo fleet, by then it was clear that there was a lot of filler under the paintwork. A few years later on Ken Ward ended up with it, and moored it at the WFBCo. I used to keep an eye on it for him and pump it out when it needed it. By that time although it still looked quite good it was clear that there was a lot of work to be done, and Ken, amazingly undaunted, took it to Charity dock ( if I remember correctly) and got on with what became a complete rebuild. He was always clear that he didn't intend to retain the exact shape, he wanted to make re fore and stern ends finer, and also give the hull sheer along its length. I mean it as no disrespect to the work that Ken did, but the shape is not really typical of a wooden Josher any more, including the amount of sheer that the hull now has. I hope that Beech ends up with an owner that can do the work that is necessary and can give the boat a good future, not only for the sake of the boat, but also in memory of Ken, and I wish you all the best with whatever you decide to do. I have heard it said several times that whilst Beech was a maintenance boat at Hillmorton, the Bolinder was taken out and went to the museum at Stoke Bruerne, and is the one that now sits in the corner of the tea shop. Steve

I have no experience of the Woolwich prototypes, so I'm afraid I don't know how the tanks were set up, but I would not expect to find the locking bar on anything but a big boat

With regard to Woolwich tanks, the overall height of the big boat tanks is the same as that of little boat ones, but the horizontal portion of a big boat tank is much deeper than a little one, with the vertical triangular part proportionately shallower. Consequently, the big boat tank holds quite a bit more diesel. The fillers and vents are as shown in Fulbourne, the fillers have a male thread which screws into an insert soldered into the tank top. The diameter of the filler is about 4'' bsp but interestingly enough little boat and big boat filler caps are not interchangeable, the big ones being very slightly bigger, the look the same, but they aren't. Woolwich vent fittings are 1'' bsp, with a 180 deg female/female return bend. With regard to Northwich boats, again the horizontal portion is a lot deeper in a big tank than in a little one, but the vertical portion is a similar height in both, so they look to have a similar height in relation to the gunwhale. Again, the big tanks hold quite a bit more than the little ones. I am honestly not sure how middle boat tanks are, but I think they are similar to little ones Fillers are, I think, 5'' bsp and are a stub of pipe with a male taper thread, and a cap with a female thread in it. I have made Northwich style fillers using 4''bsp fittings, using a barrel nipple cut in half and extended with 41/2'' tube for the stub pipe, and a 4'' socket cut in half to make the caps. The vent pipes are 1'' bsp capped with two 1'' bsp wrought female /female elbows joined with a running nipple. The caps are, as Madcat says, in a different position on each side, one side by the bulkhead, the other by the side, and yes, Flamingo's tanks are original. Big boat tanks, Woolwich and Northwich, were made lockable, little and middle ones weren't. The Northwiches had a hasp welded to the tank top that closed onto a tab on the cap, Woolwiches had a hinged locking bar that went across the top of the cap and closed onto a tab on the other side. Big boat tanks are deeper because the engine beds are deeper and the floors fitted higher than in little boats, because the thickness of the wooden bottoms in little boats had to be allowed for, in relation to the postion of the skeg. I have fitted new Northwich style tanks to the Antlia, Scorpio, and Sextans, but have only ever made one Woolwich tank, that being for the Greenock.

105 referred to the cylinder bore, 105mm, the 111 series was a development with a bore of ( to state the obvious) 111mm. Volvo bought out BM in 1950 but they continued to trade under the BM name until, I think, 1970. My luxemotor is fitted with a Volvo Penta MD67C which I think was produced between 1954 and 1966, ( the automotive version of this engine was fitted to the early Volvo Viking truck.) It is a six cylinder engine, 6.7 litres, 96hp at 1700 rpm, It has a bore and stroke indentical to the BM 111 series, and seems to me to be Bolinders technology under a Volvo Penta badge. I have a feeling that I may struggle to go slowly, though!

I was about to say that The cabin doors were replaced around a year ago, but looking at some photos that I took at the same time it would seem to be over three! They were painted by Ron Hough whilst off the boat, before their final fitting. I think Robert Macintyre did the graining. I agree with Phil that the weather board is definitely Dennis Clark, and I had thought that the table was as well, but I take Phil's point, Ron's early work is a possibility. I'm not sure about the castle on the table, it is very basic and seems to have been done very quickly but think it does have a Braunston feel to it in spite of this. I agree with Tony Dunkley that the coal box is much more recent. I don't recognise the painter but I think that Carol Leech ( Ivor and Carol had the boat converted) did do some painting, perhaps it is her work Steve

Lapwing was built as a motor, at Saltley, 1913, one of the first batch of Bolinder boats ( Linda, Lynx, Laurel, Lily, Lupin etc)

You may have joined it late Paul, but not as late as me! Years ago I had heard rumours that G U boats originally had a cable throttle control but didn't think much about it until I bought Aquila back in 93. At the time I was disappointed that the boat didn't have a speedwheel, but looking at the lever and cable I began to think that Aquila probably has never had one. I talked to quite a few people about it, I remember Ian Kemp and Tom Lapworth in particular, and the story I was coming up with is that the lever and cable version was original, the speedwheel was a later modification, and that the speedwheel was first fitted by a boater who had found one of those upper window opening mechanisms that used to be fitted to high factory windows and adapted it and fitted it to his boat, the engineers saw it and decided to start making them to replace the cable throttles. The picture of Sun is not very clear, but I can make out that it is a lever and is the same as the one I still have in Aquila. They are fairly small, brass, or bronze, and have no ratchet, they work by friction. Tom Lapworth said that a few boaters preferred them, and so some did survive. He told me that he used one himself at one time. They have a small screw or bolt in the centre, which needs to be nipped up from time to time to stop the throttle slipping, so I keep a spanner in the ticket draw so that I can do so whenever needed. They seem to have been made for a Bowden type sheathed cable, but I think they were fitted with a bare cable working over a small pulley on the engine room roof. Originally, I kept the one in Aquila because I am pretty sure it has always been here but I'd have to say that I have got used to it and now prefer it, I would post a picture but I haven't a clue how to. I think Nutfield still has one, and we fitted one to Antlia which was actually being used as a stop lever when the front half was a separate boat. I also remember Ron Wilson, who was a dredger and dragline driver for BW at one time, telling me that they were fitted to Ruston Bucyrus draglines, so they may well have been a standard throttle lever available at the time

I don't know what this boat is, but it isn't Malvern. The shape of josher motors evolved over the years, and the very late boats were distinctive in the shape of both ends, especially the counters, the top band of which was much deeper than any of the earlier boats. My feeling is that this boat is an early Yarwoods boat and would date from the mid nineteen twenties

Yes, it is Argo, it has a recent wooden bottom in opepe, but poorly fitted, so Roger is replacing it with steel. As far as I know it is for sale as is but with the demand for butties being what it is at the moment it would seem likely to be cut in half. It would be a shame, it's a really nice boat, but probably inevitable, I had my eyes on it for a while, but I bought a Dutch boat two years ago and I think three boats is probably enough! However, if anyone would prefer a Northwich butty we still have Lupus at Brinklow