max size boat for all network

[Scholar Gypsy]

37 minutes ago, Mike Todd said:

Most of the above replies indicate one thing: that it is always (when sitting an exam) best first to read the question and answer it, not, as with politicians, the one that you wish they had asked.

 

Had the question been along the lines of "What length boat do you recommend?" then much of the comment might be helpful but only represents an answer if you are also given an indication of what cruising pattern (including going nowhere except to the nearest water point) is envisaged. Otherwise, you have to answer the one set here: what length can go anywhere,

 

Of course, many here know that it is almost a trick question as few who ask it are aware that there are the two or three oddities, such as Brandon which mean that if you answer strictly then it is probably not helpful to the questioner.

 

The benefit, in this case, of answering the question as posed, is that it is largely a technical one - save for the fact that few of us really know how long our boat is and lock measurements are almost equally imprecise. Of course, most responses made another assumption about the question, that of width, focusing only on length!

 

Opinions on what is comfortable, worth doing, would I do it and so on are answers to a different question! Sitting here in Cornwall, if someone asks me how to get to London, it is not really helpful just to say, "Oh, I wouldn't go there, m'dear, its a terrible place"

 

OK, so this is a forum and not an exam and almost any reply is valid, but it may just confuse the unwary . . . 

Good points

 

. I also think it is helpful when answering to explain your thinking, ie the factors that you took into account in making a decision.  Others can decide if they think those factors are important.  I like my trad stern because I like cruising in the rain, have no dog, and regard steering as a solitary not social activity. Others will have other approaches.

 

There is no single right answer (look up Arrow's impossibility theorem if you don't believe me!)

[Keeping Up]

This is as far as you will get if you try to put a 67ft boat into Brandon Lock.

[WotEver]

39 minutes ago, Scholar Gypsy said:

There is no single right answer (look up Arrow's impossibility theorem if you don't believe me!)

I’ve looked it up (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrow's_impossibility_theorem)

 

and I’m no wiser. 

[Scholar Gypsy]

59 minutes ago, WotEver said:

I’ve looked it up (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrow's_impossibility_theorem)

 

and I’m no wiser. 

For a topical example: why Parliament is finding Brexit so difficult....  I will try and find a more accessible piece that explains what Arrow was on about. 

 

[mrsmelly]

1 hour ago, Keeping Up said:

This is as far as you will get if you try to put a 67ft boat into Brandon Lock.

Why didnt you just open the top gate and move forward a few feet then you could have closed the bottom gate ?

[system 4-50]

11 minutes ago, mrsmelly said:

Why didnt you just open the top gate and move forward a few feet then you could have closed the bottom gate ?

Nah, seal the stern, transfer all the ballast & the wife to the stern, and go in at steep angle. 45 degrees might do it.

[Scholar Gypsy]

52 minutes ago, mrsmelly said:

Why didnt you just open the top gate and move forward a few feet then you could have closed the bottom gate ?

With winches this might be possible, I think, though I think best to pull the boat right through rather than slam the pointing doors.

 

One would have to disable the interlocks which prevent raising the guillotine unless the  doors are shut.

 

The return journey downstream would be rather speedy I think.....

[ditchcrawler]

3 hours ago, mrsmelly said:

  there is a plaque nowadays for visiting tea rooms, each lock flight, canal etc etc. The weight would sink the bloomin boat.

Did you sell any?

 

[mrsmelly]

29 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

Did you sell any?

 

No ?

[magictime]

16 hours ago, mrsmelly said:

you are quite correct in that a short boat is required if you only cruise small areas all oop norrf. been there done that. However in my thirty years liveaboard experience I find having the extra space and just missing out ten percent of the waterways is by far for us the best way to go. We have travelled on our last two narrowboats  ( 70 and 68 feet ) everywhere between Leeds and London/Bristol and all points in between, the area is huge without compromising on comfort. No we cant do a couple of small canals or the L and L but having done them many times before in short boats we find missing them out and having much more space/comfort levels is what we prefer. Our first boat was 56 foot for the first five years, then we had a 42 footer then a 57 footer for more years. I will not be going back to one.

You've made the right choice for you, and fair enough. I'm just trying to put the short locks of the C&H and Huddersfield Broad in perspective for the benefit of someone who isn't yet resigned to a limited cruising range/wedded to extra boat length.

 

The Huddersfield Narrow and the Rochdale are two of the finest canals on the network, and two of only four routes between the north (A&C, Ouse, Lancaster etc.) and the rest - the others being the L&L and the tidal Trent.

 

Scribble out that section on your waterways map and those canals become inaccessible from the north, and dead ends from the south, meaning you can only cruise them if you turn straight round and head back the same way. To anyone with an interest in cruising regularly around the north, or between the north and the rest of the network, that is a big deal. It would be bit like trying to cruise around more southerly areas but with the stretches from Great Haywood Junction to Fradley Junction, or from Middlewich to Hardings Wood Junction, out of bounds. Yes you could still 'do' most of the network with a few lengthy detours and out-and-back trips, but by God it would be a ballache compared to having those stretches accessible.

[magpie patrick]

3 hours ago, magictime said:

Yes you could still 'do' most of the network with a few lengthy detours and out-and-back trips, but by God it would be a ballache compared to having those stretches accessible.

Having done the HNC in a 62 footer, and thus done a 40 mile 148 lock out and back I can only concur. My boat was the based in High Lane, so it was actually about 60 miles and 180 locks - in a week.... ?

Edited March 26, 2019 by magpie patrick

[Theo]

On 24/03/2019 at 22:14, Ex Brummie said:

With 57ft on the L&L, we managed every lock, but got very wet/full foredeck and were unable to escape leaking gates. With a 60 ft boat you can make most diagonally, but you would have to single lock, and have no leeway to escape leakage. For the sake of 3ft, err on the side of caution.

We didn't have to go diagonally in our 60' boat when transiting the whole length of the L&L

 

N

[WotEver]

24 minutes ago, Theo said:

We didn't have to go diagonally in our 60' boat when transiting the whole length of the L&L

But did you ever measure your boat, Nick? Perhaps it was only 58ft...

[magictime]

53 minutes ago, magpie patrick said:

Having done the HNC in a 62 footer, and thus done a 40 mile 148 lock out and back I can only concur. My boat was the based in High Lane, so it was actually about 60 miles and 180 locks - in a week.... ?

Yeah, that sounds like a trip and a half! We've just done the HNC again (almost - still in Stalybridge) and the locks certainly come thick and fast. Which kind of works, because in our experience the best way to do it is to have one person on foot the whole time working locks, while the other steers straight from lock to lock in the centre of the canal; going near the sides (even to use supposed 'lock landings') is a recipe for grounding! Absolutely stunning though - my favourite canal, I think.

[Nick D]

Our boat is 58’ plus button fenders. We have done L&L and shared majority of locks with a 60 footer with no problem.  I believe the Calder & Hebble has the shortest locks on the system and we managed this too. The only squeeze was the Salterhebble lock but still ok.

[Scholar Gypsy]

19 hours ago, WotEver said:

I’ve looked it up (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrow's_impossibility_theorem)

 

and I’m no wiser. 

Here's an example of this stuff in practice, I think. Sorry for the digression.  

• Suppose in a referendum there are three options, A and C are  two "clean" options and B is a messy compromise in the middle.
• If voters are offered a choice between A and B then they would vote A 40% B 60%, ie there is a majority against A
• If offered a choice between B and C then they would vote B 60% C 40% ie there is a majority against C (is this sounding familiar....)
• Voters use the single transferable vote system, where they rank the options 1st, 2nd etc preference.
• The pattern of first preference votes is A 40%  B 20%  C 40%, ie nobody really likes B.
• This is compatibile with the pairwise preferences noted above, ie all the 40% who voted for C would prefer B over A if C was not available; and the 40% who vote for A would prefer B over C, if A was not available.
• But under a STV system option B is eliminated, as it has the lowest number of first preferences, and when those 20% of votes are reallocated you could end up with A 52% C 48%, or vice versa.
• And so you end up with an answer (A or C) where the majority of the electorate would choose to ditch it and take the compromise option B (see above).

The point I am trying to make here is that there is no way to design a voting system in a situation like that that takes the preferences of individuals and aggregates them to design a "fair" voting system.

[Jen-in-Wellies]

You can get anywhere on the connected system in a wide beam boat, provided it is no more than 6'10" long. Taking up the bow and sternfenders when going through narrow locks allows you to have more cabin space.

 

Defining your boat as a 6'10" long brings the licence fee down to £512.14 (2019-20 prices with the prompt payment discount) and will still save you money when the 20% band 3 widebeam surcharge comes in for boats greater than 24'8" wide.

 

Jen ?

[Mike Todd]

3 hours ago, Scholar Gypsy said:

Here's an example of this stuff in practice, I think. Sorry for the digression.  

• Suppose in a referendum there are three options, A and C are  two "clean" options and B is a messy compromise in the middle.
• If voters are offered a choice between A and B then they would vote A 40% B 60%, ie there is a majority against A
• If offered a choice between B and C then they would vote B 60% C 40% ie there is a majority against C (is this sounding familiar....)
• Voters use the single transferable vote system, where they rank the options 1st, 2nd etc preference.
• The pattern of first preference votes is A 40%  B 20%  C 40%, ie nobody really likes B.
• This is compatibile with the pairwise preferences noted above, ie all the 40% who voted for C would prefer B over A if C was not available; and the 40% who vote for A would prefer B over C, if A was not available.
• But under a STV system option B is eliminated, as it has the lowest number of first preferences, and when those 20% of votes are reallocated you could end up with A 52% C 48%, or vice versa.
• And so you end up with an answer (A or C) where the majority of the electorate would choose to ditch it and take the compromise option B (see above).

The point I am trying to make here is that there is no way to design a voting system in a situation like that that takes the preferences of individuals and aggregates them to design a "fair" voting system.

On a rather smaller scale I have had experience of just that.

[TheBiscuits]

17 minutes ago, Mike Todd said:

On a rather smaller scale I have had experience of just that.

Yeah, I'm married too!

 

[IanD]

15 hours ago, magictime said:

Yeah, that sounds like a trip and a half! We've just done the HNC again (almost - still in Stalybridge) and the locks certainly come thick and fast. Which kind of works, because in our experience the best way to do it is to have one person on foot the whole time working locks, while the other steers straight from lock to lock in the centre of the canal; going near the sides (even to use supposed 'lock landings') is a recipe for grounding! Absolutely stunning though - my favourite canal, I think.

Pretty much what we did, but with two or three people on the bank -- one going ahead to set the next lock, not a problem with the tiny traffic levels. Plenty of walking but that burns off the beer. Fantastic canal, done it both ways now, also one of our favourites -- but you have to like locks, we did the ring with HNC and Rochdale in 9 days...

[doratheexplorer]

3 hours ago, Jen-in-Wellies said:

You can get anywhere on the connected system in a wide beam boat, provided it is no more than 6'10" long. Taking up the bow and sternfenders when going through narrow locks allows you to have more cabin space.

 

Defining your boat as a 6'10" long brings the licence fee down to £512.14 (2019-20 prices with the prompt payment discount) and will still save you money when the 20% band 3 widebeam surcharge comes in for boats greater than 24'8" wide.

 

Jen ?

This might be the best comment I've ever seen on this forum!

[Jen-in-Wellies]

1 minute ago, doratheexplorer said:

This might be the best comment I've ever seen on this forum!

Thank you ?. It can be the go too answer to every future "where can I cruise a boat of such and such size" question.

[WotEver]

11 hours ago, Scholar Gypsy said:

Here's an example of this stuff in practice, I think. Sorry for the digression.  

• Suppose in a referendum there are three options, A and C are  two "clean" options and B is a messy compromise in the middle.
• If voters are offered a choice between A and B then they would vote A 40% B 60%, ie there is a majority against A
• If offered a choice between B and C then they would vote B 60% C 40% ie there is a majority against C (is this sounding familiar....)
• Voters use the single transferable vote system, where they rank the options 1st, 2nd etc preference.
• The pattern of first preference votes is A 40%  B 20%  C 40%, ie nobody really likes B.
• This is compatibile with the pairwise preferences noted above, ie all the 40% who voted for C would prefer B over A if C was not available; and the 40% who vote for A would prefer B over C, if A was not available.
• But under a STV system option B is eliminated, as it has the lowest number of first preferences, and when those 20% of votes are reallocated you could end up with A 52% C 48%, or vice versa.
• And so you end up with an answer (A or C) where the majority of the electorate would choose to ditch it and take the compromise option B (see above).

The point I am trying to make here is that there is no way to design a voting system in a situation like that that takes the preferences of individuals and aggregates them to design a "fair" voting system.

Thank you. That makes perfect sense. I shall ponder it for a while

[aracer]

On 27/03/2019 at 09:36, Jen-in-Wellies said:

You can get anywhere on the connected system in a wide beam boat, provided it is no more than 6'10" long. Taking up the bow and sternfenders when going through narrow locks allows you to have more cabin space.

Surely you're still limited to 57 foot beam though for some locks?

[Alan de Enfield]

7 minutes ago, aracer said:

Surely you're still limited to 57 foot beam though for some locks?

No, the limiting length factor is 6' 10" as Jen correctly stated.

The maximum beam would be 57 feet bit that would be unusual on a canal boat.

 

Think outside the box !!!