Hillmorton Locks - I should know this... :(

[Mike Todd]

On 02/03/2019 at 19:35, John Brightley said:

To be fair, when Loddon started boating it was normal to leave all gates open when exiting a lock. 

The general policy only changed in the late 1970's/ early 80's, when the lack of maintenance meant more lock gates were leaking badly and caused problems.

Most people including myself tend to close all gates as a routine these days, but it really doesn't matter if a small number of people don't.

It was certainly the case in 1967, when we started, that there was a well embedded expectation that boaters would close gates and paddles after use. I certainly do not recall Jack Monk telling us to do otherwise.

[Hudds Lad]

whilst we're on "normal" policy, what's with some people leaving the pawls off? 

 

going from the Macc to Middlewich the other week on half the locks were left this way

[Flyboy]

19 minutes ago, Hudds Lad said:

whilst we're on "normal" policy, what's with some people leaving the pawls off? 

 

going from the Macc to Middlewich the other week on half the locks were left this way

Perhaps Loddon had been through there, not as bad as leaving gates open though.

[ditchcrawler]

1 hour ago, Hudds Lad said:

whilst we're on "normal" policy, what's with some people leaving the pawls off? 

 

going from the Macc to Middlewich the other week on half the locks were left this way

At least you know the paddles are down, I did  4 locks after meeting a boat last week and on two of the locks the offside paddle was a turn off the bottom and lets face it, its no effort to flick them on before you wind. 

[GUMPY]

1 hour ago, Hudds Lad said:

whilst we're on "normal" policy, what's with some people leaving the pawls off? 

 

going from the Macc to Middlewich the other week on half the locks were left this way

Pawls should be left off as then you know that the paddle hasn't been left up notch or two.

I see it all the time here paddle looks down but isn't and the muppet that is trying to fill the lock just stands there wondering why he cant open the top gate, meanwhile the pound has dropped a foot.

[nicknorman]

1 hour ago, Loddon said:

Pawls should be left off as then you know that the paddle hasn't been left up notch or two.

I see it all the time here paddle looks down but isn't and the muppet that is trying to fill the lock just stands there wondering why he cant open the top gate, meanwhile the pound has dropped a foot.

On that point I agree. There is no need to put the pawl back on (for those types where it can remain off on its own) because there is no water loss issue for failing to do so, and in fact as you suggest a minor water conservation argument for not doing so.

[Chris Williams]

No-one has mentioned that Hillmorton Locks were supposed to be operated as side-ponds to each other.  Saving half a lock of water.  Or am I the only one who used them properly?   I believe the gear is no longer useable.  Why??  

Duh - wots a side pond?

[matty40s]

25 minutes ago, Chris Williams said:

No-one has mentioned that Hillmorton Locks were supposed to be operated as side-ponds to each other.  Saving half a lock of water.  Or am I the only one who used them properly?   I believe the gear is no longer useable.  Why??  

Duh - wots a side pond?

I used to use the one at Atherstone until they banned us from it by chaining the paddle mech shut. Some of the Hanwell flight ones are still operable.

[Mike Todd]

2 hours ago, ditchcrawler said:

At least you know the paddles are down, I did  4 locks after meeting a boat last week and on two of the locks the offside paddle was a turn off the bottom and lets face it, its no effort to flick them on before you wind. 

No you don't: some paddles will stick just open even with the pawl off. Always a good idea to do a visual check whatever the state of the pawl.

8 minutes ago, matty40s said:

I used to use the one at Atherstone until they banned us from it by chaining the paddle mech shut. Some of the Hanwell flight ones are still operable.

And mandated at Droitwich

[nicknorman]

41 minutes ago, Chris Williams said:

No-one has mentioned that Hillmorton Locks were supposed to be operated as side-ponds to each other.  Saving half a lock of water.  Or am I the only one who used them properly?   I believe the gear is no longer useable.  Why??  

Duh - wots a side pond?

Unfortunately CRT, and BW before them, didn’t understand side ponds. Let them fall into disuse and in fact actively discouraged their use. Which, bearing in mind that water is an issue virtually every year, is a bit daft!

[Ray T]

1 hour ago, Chris Williams said:

No-one has mentioned that Hillmorton Locks were supposed to be operated as side-ponds to each other.  Saving half a lock of water.  Or am I the only one who used them properly?   I believe the gear is no longer useable.  Why??  

Duh - wots a side pond?

When he worked for Waterways the narrow boat captain I visit was given the job to disable the gear and fill the connecting sluices with bricks and rubble.

That is why they aren't useable.

 

Side pond, you will find some out of use ones on the Atherston Flight. 

 

 

Edited March 4, 2019 by Ray T

[matty40s]

1 hour ago, Ray T said:

 

Side pond, you will find some out of use ones on the Atherston Flight. 

 

 

That was put stop to in 2017, I think I used it at the start of that year, it was locked off by May

[alan_fincher]

3 hours ago, Chris Williams said:

No-one has mentioned that Hillmorton Locks were supposed to be operated as side-ponds to each other.  Saving half a lock of water.  Or am I the only one who used them properly?   I believe the gear is no longer useable.  Why??  

Duh - wots a side pond?

The Hillmorton facility was disabled some considerable years ago.

Being pedantic it didn't save half a lock full of water.  If you half emptied one lock into the other when going downhill you might be tempted think so, but if an uphill boat then tried to use that water before taking any from the pound above, they could only quarter, not half, fill the lock before the two equalised.
 

Normal side ponds are usually a very much bigger area than the lock they serve, so work rather better - trying to use just a lock as a side pond to a similar sized lock probably doesn't save that much.

3 hours ago, nicknorman said:

Unfortunately CRT, and BW before them, didn’t understand side ponds. Let them fall into disuse and in fact actively discouraged their use. Which, bearing in mind that water is an issue virtually every year, is a bit daft!

I don't think many have fallen into disuse in CRT's tenure, because virtually all were out of operation long before CRT was even thought about.

 

Droitwich is about the only example I can think of where they are genuinely used as a water saving measure.

One odd one in the middle of a flight, as at Atherstone or at Hanwell ain't more than a showpiece really.

At some places that once had them, (e.g. Stoke Bruerne or Long Buckby), you could argue that back pumps have now rendered them unnecessary, (if you ignore electricity costs!).

[ditchcrawler]

13 minutes ago, alan_fincher said:

At some places that once had them, (e.g. Stoke Bruerne or Long Buckby), you could argue that back pumps have now rendered them unnecessary, (if you ignore electricity costs!).

Possibly cheaper to maintain the back pumping than all the side ponds and paddles, especially when used by people who dont know what they are ding and would have to follow instructions. 

 

[alan_fincher]

2 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

Possibly cheaper to maintain the back pumping than all the side ponds and paddles, especially when used by people who dont know what they are ding and would have to follow instructions. 

 

Also if you use side ponds as intended, (i.e. to maximum efficiency, and never with any other paddles also open), it massively slows down lock operations.  With volumes of boats through some of those flights on a busy day enforced proper use of side ponds would inevitably create much bigger hold ups.

 

When I was actively using them on the Southern GU in the 1970s, it was generally in conjunction with the regular paddles to get you through a lock a bit faster.  Doing that doesn't actually do much to meet the original water saving objectives though!

[Chris Williams]

6 minutes ago, alan_fincher said:

When I was actively using them on the Southern GU in the 1970s, it was generally in conjunction with the regular paddles to get you through a lock a bit faster.

The old boys on the GU did that when the lockie wasn't around.

[Chris Williams]

2 hours ago, Ray T said:

When he worked for Waterways the narrow boat captain I visit was given the job to disable the gear and fill the connecting sluices with bricks and rubble.

Official vandalism of a historic artefact.  If some toe-rag had done that he would be nicked.

[Mike Todd]

12 hours ago, alan_fincher said:

The Hillmorton facility was disabled some considerable years ago.

Being pedantic it didn't save half a lock full of water.  If you half emptied one lock into the other when going downhill you might be tempted think so, but if an uphill boat then tried to use that water before taking any from the pound above, they could only quarter, not half, fill the lock before the two equalised.
 

Normal side ponds are usually a very much bigger area than the lock they serve, so work rather better - trying to use just a lock as a side pond to a similar sized lock probably doesn't save that much.

I don't think many have fallen into disuse in CRT's tenure, because virtually all were out of operation long before CRT was even thought about.

 

Droitwich is about the only example I can think of where they are genuinely used as a water saving measure.

One odd one in the middle of a flight, as at Atherstone or at Hanwell ain't more than a showpiece really.

At some places that once had them, (e.g. Stoke Bruerne or Long Buckby), you could argue that back pumps have now rendered them unnecessary, (if you ignore electricity costs!).

Leaving reliability aside, the pumps have the advantage that they work just as well whatever the traffic flow. (ish!)

[cuthound]

15 hours ago, matty40s said:

That was put stop to in 2017, I think I used it at the start of that year, it was locked off by May

 

Yes, I always used to use the working sidepond at Atherstone, just because it was there.

 

Was working when we went up and down in March 2017 and locked off when we went up in June 2017.

[Chris Williams]

All very true, it would just be nice to have a few working properly, so that in a quiet period a boater could actually use them.

In the same way, I took 'Jaguar' through the middle of Huntley & Palmers factory, loaded, just because I could.

[nicknorman]

However I think I’m right in saying that if you have a flight of locks, and one lock somewhere in the middle has side ponds, you don’t actually save any water? A lockfull still comes down from above and if you don’t use all of it (due to using the side pond) it will just run over the bywash. Side ponds only save water when all locks in the flight have them.

[Mike55]

3 minutes ago, nicknorman said:

However I think I’m right in saying that if you have a flight of locks, and one lock somewhere in the middle has side ponds, you don’t actually save any water? A lockfull still comes down from above and if you don’t use all of it (due to using the side pond) it will just run over the bywash. Side ponds only save water when all locks in the flight have them.

Quite correct. The problem with side ponds from a water conservation point of view is that if they are used correctly they save water, but if used incorrectly they increase water usage. My understanding is that this was BW's justification for taking them out of use.

[matty40s]

3 hours ago, Mike Todd said:

Leaving reliability aside, the pumps have the advantage that they work just as well whatever the traffic flow. (ish!)

Not always - in 2016 (I think), Buckby locks had problems for most of the season as one of the pump houses was invaded by wasps - a large nest - and due to their environmental green policies, it was left in place rather than removed. This meant that nobody could access the pump control mechs during busier parts of the season so a couple of pounds regularly struggled with water levels.

[Victor Vectis]

6 hours ago, Chris Williams said:

< snip > I took 'Jaguar' through the middle of Huntley & Palmers factory, loaded, just because I could.

I wonder if anyone has tried that at the coal unloading station at Ferrybridge Power Station on the Aire?

[Sea Dog]

19 hours ago, Chris Williams said:

In the same way, I took 'Jaguar' through the middle of Huntley & Palmers factory, loaded, just because I could.

Nice one!  There's something for @TheBiscuits to aim for!