Jump to content

What Engine & Stern Should I Go With On My Narrowboat


Featured Posts

20 minutes ago, peterboat said:

Engine wise it has to be modern as the RCD now demands it, but I would go electric as I like the silence 

 

Stupidly you can have a vintage engine as a generator that charges batteries to run an electric motor, but you can't have one that can power the electric motor directly!

 

I do like the idea of zooming past moored boats when they can't hear you coming and seeing if they still spill their brew when they don't expect you ...

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, TheBiscuits said:

 

Stupidly you can have a vintage engine as a generator that charges batteries to run an electric motor, but you can't have one that can power the electric motor directly!

 

I do like the idea of zooming past moored boats when they can't hear you coming and seeing if they still spill their brew when they don't expect you ...

 

 

Yup very strange, my whispergen has an oxygen sensor in it! Allegedly it burns very clean and this last year infrequently!

If I was doing what the OP was doing it would be solar and a LPG genny built in to give emergency power and hot water from the cauliflower 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, TheBiscuits said:

 

Stupidly you can have a vintage engine as a generator that charges batteries to run an electric motor, but you can't have one that can power the electric motor directly!

 

I do like the idea of zooming past moored boats when they can't hear you coming and seeing if they still spill their brew when they don't expect you ...

 

 

IIRC the regs say that you can't do that if the purpose of the generator is to change batteries used for propulsion...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, IanD said:

IIRC the regs say that you can't do that if the purpose of the generator is to change batteries used for propulsion...

How about if its purpose is to power an oven/fridge/water heater and you ‘might as well’ charge some batteries while you’re at it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, IanD said:

IIRC the regs say that you can't do that if the purpose of the generator is to change batteries used for propulsion...

 

56 minutes ago, WotEver said:

How about if its purpose is to power an oven/fridge/water heater and you ‘might as well’ charge some batteries while you’re at it?

 

An engine installed or intended for installation to be used both for on-board generator and for propulsion purposes, for example diesel electric systems combined for propulsion and general electric generation, falls within the scope of the Directive. 
 
An engine installed or intended for installation to be used exclusively for operating as an on-board generator, is outside of the scope of the Directive provided that there are batteries between the generator and the electric motor then it is only a generator charging the batteries.

 

If the generator serves primarily to supply electricity to the motor, then the generator is in scope.

 

Hurrah!  We have at long last found a good reason to go all electric cooking on a boat - so you can claim the SuperWhizzGen driven off the Kelvin is mainly for the electric grill and in no way just to drive the electric motor for the boat.

 

One for the lawyers again I think, because you can read different sections different ways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, TheBiscuits said:

 

 

An engine installed or intended for installation to be used both for on-board generator and for propulsion purposes, for example diesel electric systems combined for propulsion and general electric generation, falls within the scope of the Directive. 
 
An engine installed or intended for installation to be used exclusively for operating as an on-board generator, is outside of the scope of the Directive provided that there are batteries between the generator and the electric motor then it is only a generator charging the batteries.

 

If the generator serves primarily to supply electricity to the motor, then the generator is in scope.

 

Hurrah!  We have at long last found a good reason to go all electric cooking on a boat - so you can claim the SuperWhizzGen driven off the Kelvin is mainly for the electric grill and in no way just to drive the electric motor for the boat.

 

One for the lawyers again I think, because you can read different sections different ways.

You're right, those three clauses seem to contradict each other. Should keep the lawyers happy and rich...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, TheBiscuits said:

An engine installed or intended for installation to be used exclusively for operating as an on-board generator, is outside of the scope of the Directive provided that there are batteries between the generator and the electric motor then it is only a generator charging the batteries.

That’s the one! :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, WotEver said:

That’s the one! :)

When I had my CRT and BSS inspection they were looking for just that, as it happens my solar is the only source of charging for the electric drive motor so they wernt concerned, given that I get 25% discount on my license you can understand why. The whispergen interested the BSS guy because it was so silent and clean allegedly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, WotEver said:

That’s the one! :)

Does amuse me that one.

 

A connection going Generator -> Batteries and a separate connection going Batteries -> Motor puts the Kelvin out of scope of the RCD, so permissible in a new boat.

 

If the connections go Generator -> Batteries -> Motor it's in scope so not permissible.

 

I think this might mean that a Travelpower on the Kelvin driving a mains charger to the batteries is allowed, but a big alternator connected to the batteries isn't ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, TheBiscuits said:

Does amuse me that one.

 

A connection going Generator -> Batteries and a separate connection going Batteries -> Motor puts the Kelvin out of scope of the RCD, so permissible in a new boat.

 

If the connections go Generator -> Batteries -> Motor it's in scope so not permissible.

 

I think this might mean that a Travelpower on the Kelvin driving a mains charger to the batteries is allowed, but a big alternator connected to the batteries isn't ...

I’m not sure you’re right. The wording “used exclusively for operating as an on-board generator” appears to me to mean “if it drives an alternator of some kind, and has batteries being charged by said generator”. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 21/05/2020 at 13:44, mrsmelly said:

Oohhhh NNnoooooooooooo I spose they have ten minutes experience and like to pass it on? ?

nope, they have been boating for quite a few years and had a new boat fited out [very nice and modern] by Bickerstaff, very smart, they liveaboard. They vlogged the build, disussing pros and cons. I think keeping a high gloss finish on the paintwork must be a challenge, no brass to polish.

They do have a pram hood, but as those thigs go, quite pretty, practical when you liveaboard, and cc with a mutt.

Edited by LadyG
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is an example of idiotic rulemaking at its finest. If the aim is to reduce emissions/pollution (perfectly valid) it shouldn't matter whether the engine drives directly or via a generator or via batteries or is a standalone generator, in a new boat it should meet the emissions regulations. If there's going to be an exception for genuine replicas (similar engine/hull/construction to a historic boat) then this should only apply to a propulsion system similar to the original, which means no electric motor or massive generator in a narrowboat -- but you can fit a Bolinder if you can find one ?

 

If you want to then make the possibly legitimate case that they might have fitted a generator in later years, then this should count as a modern add-on which would have to meet the latest emissions laws (if it's a new generator), just like on modern boats. If you're allowed to fit an old existing non-compliant generator then this should apply to both, ditto if you're not.

 

If the rules had been written like this then both the intention and the letter of the law would have been clear and there would be little ground for people to argue or try and evade them. Instead they've served up a self-contradictory mess which people will try and find loopholes in... ?

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, WotEver said:

Thank the EU. 

Was it really the EU's fault, or our home-grown bunch of idiots? I thought the exceptions for replica/old boats were proposed by the UK government at the behest of UK boat owners, in which case we got what our own politicians agreed to...

  • Greenie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, IanD said:

Was it really the EU's fault, or our home-grown bunch of idiots? I thought the exceptions for replica/old boats were proposed by the UK government at the behest of UK boat owners, in which case we got what our own politicians agreed to...

Or we got the best that we could get...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, WotEver said:

Or we got the best that we could get...

Let me guess, you're not a fan of the EU and love blaming them for everything including banning bendy bananas and conkers against the will of the plucky Brits... ?

 

There's no reason whatsoever the EU would have objected to clear well-drafted logical exceptions like I proposed, they make far more sense than the current ones and have less wiggle room for evasion. If we got rubbish laws, that's very probably because that's exactly what we asked for, the EU said yes, and we agreed. Whose fault would that be?

 

Credit (or blame) where credit (or blame) is due...

 

[I suspect there are people on this forum who know exactly what happened, let's see if they want to chime in and confirm which of us is correct...]

Edited by IanD
  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, IanD said:

Let me guess, you're not a fan of the EU and love blaming them for everything including banning bendy bananas and conkers against the will of the plucky Brits... ?

Yes to the first bit and no to the next three.

 

I suppose you're now going to say that the EU has nothing to do with the situation regarding red diesel.

 

I have no idea why generators aren't included in the regulations but I don't believe for one moment it was because we asked for it to be so written.

Why would we?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, IanD said:

Was it really the EU's fault, or our home-grown bunch of idiots? I thought the exceptions for replica/old boats were proposed by the UK government at the behest of UK boat owners, in which case we got what our own politicians agreed to...

I would think that there are far more 'historic' vessels built in the likes of Holland and Belgium than there are in Britain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, WotEver said:

Yes to the first bit and no to the next three.

 

I suppose you're now going to say that the EU has nothing to do with the situation regarding red diesel.

 

I have no idea why generators aren't included in the regulations but I don't believe for one moment it was because we asked for it to be so written.

Why would we?

No I'm not going to say that about red diesel, because I believe in facts not things written in the Daily Mail. You could also say that all they did was close a historical tax loophole which was unfairly advantageous to UK boaters who in reality paid less tax on fuel for heating than people in houses, and of course UK boaters didn't like this -- but maybe I've got the wrong end of the stick here...

 

We could/should have asked for generators (and hybrid drives, and diesel-electrics, and...) to be included if we actually wanted to deal with emissions in a way that was fair to everybody. What the rules read as is that our politicians (who don't really understand the problem) asked for a couple of badly-thought out exemptions which turn out to be unclear and open to misinterpretation/rule-bending, and that's exactly what we got. If that's what happened, I can't see how that can possibly be the EU's fault...

29 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

I would think that there are far more 'historic' vessels built in the likes of Holland and Belgium than there are in Britain.

Maybe, but IIRC it was the UK who specifically asked for the exemptions, partly driven by the narrowboat community. Am I wrong?

Edited by IanD
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, IanD said:

If that's what happened, I can't see how that can possibly be the EU's fault...

Huge IF, that.

20 minutes ago, IanD said:

You could also say that all they did was close a historical tax loophole which was unfairly advantageous to UK boaters who in reality paid less tax on fuel for heating than people in houses,

You could, but you'd be wrong.  Fuel Oil for houses is far cheaper than what boaters traditionally pay for red.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, IanD said:

No I'm not going to say that about red diesel, because I believe in facts not things written in the Daily Mail. You could also say that all they did was close a historical tax loophole which was unfairly advantageous to boaters who in reality paid less tax on fuel for heating than people in houses, and of course boaters don't like this -- but maybe I've got the wrong end of the stick here...

 

We could/should have asked for generators (and hybrid drives, and diesel-electrics, and...) to be included if we actually wanted to deal with emissions in a way that was fair to everybody. What the rules read as is that our politicians (who don't really understand the problem) asked for a couple of badly-thought out exemptions which turn out to be unclear and open to misinterpretation/rule-bending, and that's exactly what we got. If that's what happened, I can't see how that can possibly be the EU's fault...

Maybe, but IIRC it was the UK who specifically asked for the exemptions, partly driven by the narrowboat community. Am I wrong?

If it hadn't been for some people on here we would not have narrowboats at all and we can blame the EU for that very nearly happening!

For me for the rest you are more than likely right,  rcd 2 allows for making boats cleaner without been for inspection, but you can't go dirtier which again I agree with.  We are I feel going in the wrong direction if Hydrogen can be produced cleanly (surplus green electric) boats like ours would make excellent use of this for drive and heating.  With the addition of solar we would have extremely clean vessels. However we both know the screaming from on here would be deafening ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, WotEver said:

Huge IF, that.

You could, but you'd be wrong.  Fuel Oil for houses is far cheaper than what boaters traditionally pay for red.

Don't houses use heavier fuel oil, not diesel?

 

Also I thought that the new regulations still allowed low-tax red fuel for boat heating so long as it's in a separate tank? What they don't allow any longer is buying low-tax fuel, putting it in one tank, claiming without real proof that you're using it for heating, then using it for propulsion.

 

On the EU RCD laws yes it is a big IF but I think that's what happened (I'd love more info from somebody who knows more), which has more basis in fact than your "it's the EU's fault" claim. But if I'm wrong I'll happily admit it ?

Edited by IanD
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.