Jump to content

Would you ?


Featured Posts

It's increased his turning circle. The only saving grace is that the platform is "flying" and perhaps won't add potential to cill his boat much more than normal. There is no baseplate neither so its a leaf and dead dog collector.

Edited by mark99
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this is from the "friendly narrowboat forum" on Facebook. I know someone who raised concerns about another fabrication done by the same welder who when they and others pointed out the flaws in the design in an evidence based way  was banned from the site temporarily and the comments deleted. It's a joke forum populated in general (80%) with mainly backslapping clueless people ripe for targetting by traders who are allowed to advertise and delete comments re their rubbish work. 20% on this site appear to be very knowlegeable. In general this site has a very low quality content. Any site that dissallows peer reviews is worthless.  You have been warned!  ;)

 

Edited by mark99
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's the one. The poster, who was advertising to be honest deleted all replies suggesting it may not be optimal!

 

There was another one too. But a wooden version by another builder. So many "wows that's fantastic how dare you other lot raise concerns".

 

 

Edited by mark99
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Leggers do it lying down said:

Good if you are sitting  on it drinking cocktails in the sun!. ?

But turning it in a tight winding hole would be interesting!.?

Cuts down your" maneuverability" in tight spaces too.?

 

And puts up your licence and mooring costs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CompairHolman said:

Probably this cabin extension ?

Seems to have been built without knowing bridge holes are arched ?

120630902_755535881693796_3684577852186191403_n.jpg.9522574320e56a1caa4902d8f9966a8e.jpg

Is the deck that profile along the whole length of the boat!?..Been built not knowing the rest of the deck is arched!????

Edited by Leggers do it lying down
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where this modification (high and forward cabin extension) is especially vulnerable is, when you put the boat at the bottom of a high lock which coincides with a bridge and someone <or the steerer> empties the lock.

 

The force of the water can draw the bow into the side at an angle and bring the protrubing cabinside into the bridge arch.

 

On that site, comments pointing anything like this out or explaining the evolved design with genuine forward cabins (forepeak) are different being very low with a good inward slope are deleted.

 

 

 

 

Edited by mark99
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, mark99 said:

I think this is from the "friendly narrowboat forum" on Facebook. I know someone who raised concerns about another fabrication done by the same welder who when they and others pointed out the flaws in the design in an evidence based way  was banned from the site temporarily and the comments deleted. It's a joke forum populated in general (80%) with mainly backslapping clueless people ripe for targetting by traders who are allowed to advertise and delete comments re their rubbish work. 20% on this site appear to be very knowlegeable. In general this site has a very low quality content. Any site that dissallows peer reviews is worthless.  You have been warned!  ;)

 

 

11 hours ago, David Mack said:

And puts up your licence and mooring costs.

When I asked on Friendly Narrowboat Forum whether the owner had declared it and paid the extra fee I received a lot of abuse so left the not so friendly forum.

 

So only 19% knowledgeable members now.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, CompairHolman said:

Probably this cabin extension ?

Seems to have been built without knowing bridge holes are arched ?

120630902_755535881693796_3684577852186191403_n.jpg.9522574320e56a1caa4902d8f9966a8e.jpg

Is this not simply continuing the original roof line? Early Springers had a peaked roof; it would have looked odd of the extension had been curved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Athy said:

Is this not simply continuing the original roof line? Early Springers had a peaked roof; it would have looked odd of the extension had been curved.

 

Well it will certainly look odd when that flimsy looking handrail (and possibly the corner of the cabin extension) gets crushed against the arch of a low bridge

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, cuthound said:

 

Well it will certainly look odd when that flimsy looking handrail (and possibly the corner of the cabin extension) gets crushed against the arch of a low bridge

:D

The CanalTime boats, similar in frontal contours apart from the roof shape, seem to do all right. They do crash into everything else, mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Athy said:

:D

The CanalTime boats, similar in frontal contours apart from the roof shape, seem to do all right. They do crash into everything else, mind.

There is some narrowing of the cabin front on the Canal Slime boats which probably prevents too many impacts with the bridges. Either that or the silly names on the bow flanks frighten the masonry away!

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Tracy D'arth said:

There is some narrowing of the cabin front on the Canal Slime boats which probably prevents too many impacts with the bridges. Either that or the silly names on the bow flanks frighten the masonry away!

I actually like their 45-foot S.W. Durham boats and have sometimes toyed with the idea of trading 'Trojan' in for one. But so far I've always made a full recovery.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Athy said:

I actually like their 45-foot S.W. Durham boats and have sometimes toyed with the idea of trading 'Trojan' in for one. But so far I've always made a full recovery.

:clapping:  Now I know you are a joker, they are 'orrible boats.  A Gardner in one would go straight through. !

Edited by Tracy D'arth
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You got to imagine the ellipse "described" by a bow rolling around the bank. Then superimpose the bridge profile to get a 3d map of the danger zone. The reason why cabins stop where the bow starts to converge. Or the cratch end board is triangular.

 

If one insists on a very forward cabin, its normally low and comes with significant tumblehome. Ref historic butties etc. At this point on that mickey mouse facebook site I would be banned for criticising the fabricator (who is trying to drum up more business and could not defend his design when asked lots of times) in an "unfriendly" manner. ;)

Edited by mark99
  • Greenie 1
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.