CanalPlanAC

You'll note that Steve tells you how we did it, but doesn't mention that it was was me who did the work while he supervised from the cabin! It's the flow of blood to the head that gets to me - sitting on the weed hatch and bending down is not the most comfortable job in the world. The plate that the engine came with, 30+ years ago, was one with springs.

I think it's incredibly sensible. All of us with websites that have become part of people's on-line lives need to give a bit of thought to succession planning. None of us is obligated to keep things going when we no longer want to, but on the other hand letting things slowly age, or vanish when no-one is around to pay the fees, feels like letting people down.

I can't see any reason why not. That 2" is pretty important for historical boats. I really need to provide an easier way to set dimensions like 6'10" - at the moment you have to enter it as something like 6.84 feet. The same applies for boats as for canals.

I hope you'll excuse me posting something about planning trips, rather than actual boating, but there've been a few recent discussions here about using http://canalplan.org.uk to plan routes. One problem people were having was that the site was (for good reasons) refusing to plan routes for boats over 60 foot along the Whittlesey Dike. So I thought I'd tell you that I've now added "pinch points" to the system - you can set the overall dimensions of a waterway but mark specific places where some sizes of boats won't fit. For Briggate Bend I've set it as (in feet) 60x13 and 70x7. This means that if your boat is less-than-or-equal to both dimensions for either pair then you can fit through. So far I've added pinch points for Briggate Bend and the M53 bridges on the Ellesmere Port line of the SU. Add, or let me know of, any other important ones. This is probably a good place to mention that I've also recently added draught and headroom to the route planning. The amount of such data in the database is pretty sparse though. So if anyone is sitting around idly on a winter's evening and fancies doing something useful, spending half an hour adding waterway dimensions or pinch points would be a useful contribution to everybody's planning. In the next couple of weeks I plan to extend the technique I've used for pinch points to waterway dimensions. This will mean that the C&H, for example, can be set at 57x14ft and 60x7ft (since narrow boats can go diagonally in the locks). Nick

Guess what I've been working on? I've worked out how to do it, and got most of the deep code done. Now it's the user interface to let people set such things (which always takes longer than the actual calculation coding). What I'm doing is providing the ability to mark a place as a "pinch point" and give it dimensions smaller than those for the waterway. That will be a big improvement in itself, as it means that - say - the Chester Canal between Chester and Ellesmere Port can be restored to 14 foot with the motorway marked as a pinch point. But the neat thing is that a pinch point can have multiple sets of dimensions. As long as you can fit one of them, then you can fit through. So for Whittlesey we can have 60 foot by 14 foot and 70 foot by 7 foot and a 65 footer will be "allowed" to pass if 7 feet wide but not more. I've just recently added draught and headroom to the criteria you can use for planning. But the database is very sparse on data about these. If anyone feels like spending an idle hour on a winter evening ading these dimensions to the waterways it would be very much appreciated (and, obviously) useful to all.

If you put "Limehouse" into the general search box it will do that, because there is a boat called Limehouse but there isn't actually a placed called that. I've now tweaked the code so that it does what it always should have done and if you put "Limehouse" into a plan it will not check waterways, features or boats for matches.

Considering the way the canal was widened, you'd think there was a good chance of using the original lock entrances in a few places. If anyone finds a winding place that's workable, even if not full length, please add it to CanalPlan and set the limited width (log on, visit place, "edit and change", "edit place" and find the winding tick-box). Me, I'd like somewhere to wind a 52' between the top of Adderley and Audlem wharf.

It's not the most helpful message, is it. What happens is that the database has dimensions for entire waterways or chunks of waterways (and so has the whole Rufford Branch down as 62 foot max, even though - in theory - you could get as far as the top lock and back out again). So it rightly won't let you down the canal. But, when it comes to planning as soon as it starts down the waterway it discovers your boat won't fit and so tells you, using the very first chunk of the waterway that you don't fit. In this case it's the (immeasurably short length) between the junction and the bridge. So it's doing the right thing, but could be a bit clearer in the way it reports it. I'll add this to the list of things to improve. Hope this helps.

Thanks guys. I only drop in here from time to time to see what people are saying (I'm not much of a web forum chap - I've never grown out of Usenet) so thanks for the nice words.

Because endless people got utterly confused with the one-page screen and I spent an age explaining how to use it. The trick is to create an account and set it to log you on automatically tick "remember me". Then the first time you skip to "route editor" and say "don't do this" it will remember it forever.

I'd love to know what terms you used that couldn't find it, so I can try to tweak the site so others will find it. There's no point having a clever planner on line if people can't find it!

OK, here's where we are. The server that the "old" version (version 8.x) runs on has been very sick. It's been nursed back to health but is running on limited memory and has limited life. I'm therefore not going to point any of the canalplan.... urls at it, but those of you who have bookmarked mihalis.net will be able to use it for the time being. When a new server is installed there it won't be capable of running that version, instead I'll be porting the version you can see at canalplan.eu and all the other URLs (the "new" version, version 9.x) to the new server. Version 9 is a lot better in a lot of ways, it's easier to edit, the code is much more stable, and it's much more configurable and easy to expand (did you know you can now plan a route from Calais to Koblenz?). If there is anything that the "old" version did that the "new" doesn't, you can use the link on the home page of the "new" version (called "project page") to say what you want me to do next, and to vote for ideas that others have suggested, as well as to report bugs. Very soon that will have a friendlier name ("bugs & ideas") and will be available from every page of the site. In the meantime, I seet that e a couple of people have commented on not being able to save options between sessions. Well you canl, but you have to be logged on before you save the options. Once done, then the next time you log on your options will be restored. This is better than cookies if, say, you are travelling and using Internet cafés, or if you've planned your route on your home computer and want to look things up on a mobile device when travelling. Anyway, I don't intend to be regular here, but I'll try and pop in from time to time to keep you posted. Nick