nicknorman

And as another follow up, initially when I turned on the caravan microwave via inverter (about 103A) the BMS SoC instantly plummeted to 0% and stayed there. But after the full cycling of the battery, it now behaves as it should. So anyone getting one of these would be advised to fully cycle it once so that the BMS “learns” the battery.

Our boat is 2’8” and I like it. There are + and - points, the main plus is that it doesn’t skitter sideways in strong winds compared to shallower boats, and it can swing a big prop which is more efficient. minus points are of course that it tends to ground more easily, but we don’t find that a significant problem. Probably the biggest issue would be the Llangollen above Trevor, but we still managed it (with some difficulty). You can easily check the draft by opening the weed hatch and putting a steel tape measure down to hook under the skeg, and reading off at the top of the water. To check if the boat is properly ballasted, look at how far submerged the back corner is (the counter). It should be a couple of inches below the water. If it is less, air will be sucked in in reverse and the boat will be harder to stop. If much more, this creates extra drag and means that hull fittings (exhaust, ventilation etc) might be closer to the waterline than the designer intended.

However with speed relating to the cube root of the power, you are not going to go much faster at 2700.

Thanks for the tips, I was planning on a couple of weeks. With the limited passage timings you can’t really do any less, unless you just go for a few days.

Yes we weren’t flat out on the Trent, but a steady 2200rpm for a few hours, temp didn’t move off 75c. Never tried it absolutely flat out for long periods but I doubt it would actually go much faster through the water. We also have engine to CH heat exchanger and of course the option to dump heat via hot water, neither of which were needed at 2200.

Thanks for that. Beta 43 with correct sized skin tank - never had a hint of overheating on tidal Trent so that bit doesn’t worry me too much.

I went to book the ribble link for next summer, but it won’t let me - draft too great, maximum 0.69 metres. So I wondered whether this really was an issue - ie whether our boat should miraculously lose some draft (on paper), or whether we might get stuck somewhere if it did? I’m fairly sure other people with Hudsons have made the passage sucessfully.

However if the hot water supply to the shower and bathroom sink can only supply “very warm” water, this creates a legionella risk. Probably not going to happen, but if it did it could kill you or your loved ones. So my point is that that setup is not ideal.

Yes a thermostatic mixer is much, much better than 2 taps / manual flow control. Bearing in mind the calorifier hot water temperature can be VERY HOT expecially if you don't have a mixer on the calorifier outlet, then I would say it is pretty foolhardy to have a non-thermostatic shower whereby slight mismanagement of the taps could scald you badly. And even if you don't scald yourself, getting the right temperature is fiddly. However the mixer you have shown is quite expensive considering there is no shower hose, head or rail - as far as I can see it is just the bare mixer. You can get much better value from eg Screwfix for £75 upwards, although admitedly more if you are desperate for brass.

You are obviously quite happy with the current disparity whereby people with home mooring contribute more to CRT than those without. A fair minded person lacking self-interest would see the CC surcharge as a good thing to go some way to redressing this unfair imbalance. But a self interested person just wants the cost for their little group to be minimised - let someone else pay.

Oh dear resorting to sarcasm already! There is no shortage of home moorings in general, though if you are London based I can see why you might think it. Speaking for myself I don’t have a mooring out of any philanthropic tendency. I have a home mooring because we live a long way away from our boat. But regardless of why people have a home mooring, the FACTS are that most people with home moorings pay additional money to CRT. Either because the moorings are owned and managed by CRT or because the marina is forced to pay 10% of the mooring fees to CRT - a sort of “marina tax”. We are in the latter category and so pay roughly an additional £300 annually to CRT via our mooring fees. This is more than the CCing supplement and so even with the supplement, we are still paying CRT more to use the system less, including using less water, sewage and rubbish facilities, compared to a live aboard CCer. And yet you still moan about how unfair it is for you! Just to sum up, CRT receives more money from me than from you so I don’t think you should feel too hard done by.

Regarding your big question, what is the source of your data that CCers only last an average of 1.5 years? But I think the main point is that CRT are not interested in whether living as a CCer is a ”great deal” vs living ashore. They are only interested in balancing their books and getting a fair income for services and maintenance costs generated. Remember that most marina based boats end up paying CRT far more than a CCer even with the surcharge. And the other point is that lots of CCing boats do not have people living aboard, they are simply storing their boats on the towpath when not in use because it is cheaper than paying for a mooring.