Jump to content

A-Level Project


H01ppy

Featured Posts

22 hours ago, H01ppy said:

 My main ideas are more looking at some form of seat on the roof of the boat between the hatch and the gunnel, that can be sat on by other passengers or leant on by whoever is manning the tiller.

As you have clarified that you actually are talking of a traditional narrowboat in the style of an ex-working boat, and Ray and others have supplied pictures of working boatmen sitting on the side of the hatch.

18 hours ago, Ray T said:

Alice Collins and Bob Grantham.

 

MB Birmingham Bob Grantham.jpg

 .... there is no way that any 'passenger' could be sat like that with the steerer stood at the tiller.

 

Tam

Edited by Tam & Di
lousy spilling
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mark99 of this parish has made a seat for putting between the slide runner and the gunnel. I suggest you contact him.

I have copies of his pictures but they are not mine to post.

 

There is this but I would not recommend sitting like this at all.

Steam Boat Jason.jpg

Edited by Ray T
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Murflynn said:

what class of degree?

 

Wiki:  Johnson was awarded an upper second-class degree, and was deeply unhappy that he did not receive a first.

 

that says a lot IMHO  :rolleyes:

Drat, I've just been looking it up, and I get back to find that you've answered your own question!

Yes, a 2.1, presumably a B.A. Certainly your quote suggests that he was academically strong and aimed high, but they don't give upper seconds away like sweeties at Oxford, so it was a very creditable achievement.

   I don't know if he went on to get an M.A. At Cambridge back then, the rule was that after you graduated a certain number of terms "must elapse" (six, I think), you then paid the University some money, and you automatically qualified for an M.A. As I'm more of a Cambridge man myself, I don't know if Oxford had the same system.

Edited by Athy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Athy said:

Drat, I've just been looking it up, and I get back to find that you've answered your own question!

Yes, a 2.1, presumably a B.A. Certainly your quote suggests that he was academically strong and aimed high, but they don't give upper seconds away like sweeties at Oxford, so it was a very creditable achievement.

   I don't know if he went on to get an M.A. At Cambridge back then, the rule was that after you graduated a certain number of terms "must elapse" (six, I think), you then paid the University some money, and you automatically qualified for an M.A. As I'm more of a Cambridge man myself, I don't know if Oxford had the same system.

Paid for MA,, must have "cantab" suffix

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Athy said:

Drat, I've just been looking it up, and I get back to find that you've answered your own question!

Yes, a 2.1, presumably a B.A. Certainly your quote suggests that he was academically strong and aimed high, but they don't give upper seconds away like sweeties at Oxford, so it was a very creditable achievement.

   I don't know if he went on to get an M.A. At Cambridge back then, the rule was that after you graduated a certain number of terms "must elapse" (six, I think), you then paid the University some money, and you automatically qualified for an M.A. As I'm more of a Cambridge man myself, I don't know if Oxford had the same system.

Interesting. When I got my second class BA at Oxford in 1979 - in Physics - there was no subdivision into 2.1 and 2.2. I didn't bother with the MA upgrade, but I remember it was available to buy after two years.

 

Wiki: Historically, the University of Oxford awarded Fourth Class Honours degrees and, until the late-1970s, did not distinguish between upper and lower Second Class Honours degrees.

 

Does this mean that all this time I have had a 2.1 equivalent after all?

Edited by Richard Carter
because I went to wikipedia ...
  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Richard Carter said:

Interesting. When I got my second class BA at Oxford in 1979 - in Physics - there was no subdivision into 2.1 and 2.2. I didn't bother with the MA upgrade, but I remember it was available to buy after two years.

How come you got a B.A. rather than a B.Sc. in physics?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I went to Oxford in the late 70s.  I think it was a Thursday as it was half closing.

 

I am pleased to witness OP approaching A levels with the planning that further and higher education will dictate.  I do question if the choice of boat has the widest field of options open to exploration and improvement.  It concerns me the project report may be very short concluding that due to potential risks to life, the current design met the need and was the safest for the risks that were acceptable at the time.

Semi-trad and cruiser sterns only having been around since the late 50s still have storage, seating, social area, weed hatch, engine access, bottled gas storage, drainage etc. to play around with.

 

The so called "traditional" back end of a working boat was designed totally for utility and practicality over a hundred years ago.  The counter was dangerous and not even intended for the steerer to stand while working.  So not suitable for seating..  As for the roof or cabin sides, you rarely see photos of working families perched up there unless they were babies chained to the chimney, or everybody's posing in their Sunday best for a christening camera.

Meanwhile I'd have to know a stretch of canal extremely well before chancing my life obstructing the steerer's view while risking getting squashed under a bridge.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, zenataomm said:

I went to Oxford in the late 70s.  I think it was a Thursday as it was half closing.

 

I am pleased to witness OP approaching A levels with the planning that further and higher education will dictate.  I do question if the choice of boat has the widest field of options open to exploration and improvement.  It concerns me the project report may be very short concluding that due to potential risks to life, the current design met the need and was the safest for the risks that were acceptable at the time.

Semi-trad and cruiser sterns only having been around since the late 50s still have storage, seating, social area, weed hatch, engine access, bottled gas storage, drainage etc. to play around with.

 

The so called "traditional" back end of a working boat was designed totally for utility and practicality over a hundred years ago.  The counter was dangerous and not even intended for the steerer to stand while working.  So not suitable for seating..  As for the roof or cabin sides, you rarely see photos of working families perched up there unless they were babies chained to the chimney, or everybody's posing in their Sunday best for a christening camera.

Meanwhile I'd have to know a stretch of canal extremely well before chancing my life obstructing the steerer's view while risking getting squashed under a bridge.

 

Pretty much my thoughts re the narrowness of the project. Probably fine of O level but A level? The survey seemed not to have much depth as well. I don't necessarily blame the OP but wonder about his advice and supervision.

 

FWIW I think standing in  front of the tiller arc thing is more then a little overstated. I say this having been pushed in by the tiller a single time and that was when trying to control the engine and tiller while looking up the side of the boat to take up slack to pull another boat off the mud. The vital thing is, in my view, to never stand in the tiller arc when reversing or swinging the stern around. Stepping forward in those situations should be second nature. I don't see how the tiller can possibly throw you over the side in ahead and in more or less a straight line, that includes going around normal canal bends.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I tried to do the survey but gave up.  Too many yes/no options, when my answer would be 'it depends'.  For example: "3. If there were some form of seating would you use it?".  Well it depends doesn't it?  If the seat was comfortable and safe, I might use it.  If not, I wouldn't.

On 10/01/2021 at 09:16, Tony Brooks said:

 

 

FWIW I think standing in  front of the tiller arc thing is more then a little overstated. I say this having been pushed in by the tiller a single time and that was when trying to control the engine and tiller while looking up the side of the boat to take up slack to pull another boat off the mud. The vital thing is, in my view, to never stand in the tiller arc when reversing or swinging the stern around. Stepping forward in those situations should be second nature. I don't see how the tiller can possibly throw you over the side in ahead and in more or less a straight line, that includes going around normal canal bends.

Agree.  I'd love to know whether anyone has ever been knocked in by the tiller while going forwards.  Also, in the situation you're highly unlikely to come into contact with the prop even if you did fall in.  People fall of the stern of boats all the time, and it's mainly from things like tripping and slipping.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/01/2021 at 09:16, Tony Brooks said:

FWIW I think standing in  front of the tiller arc thing is more then a little overstated. I say this having been pushed in by the tiller a single time and that was when trying to control the engine and tiller while looking up the side of the boat to take up slack to pull another boat off the mud. The vital thing is, in my view, to never stand in the tiller arc when reversing or swinging the stern around. Stepping forward in those situations should be second nature. I don't see how the tiller can possibly throw you over the side in ahead and in more or less a straight line, that includes going around normal canal bends.

Phew, some balance.

 

I'm a newbie so was wondering why our trad stern has a stool if it's so dangerous. I sit on it if I just need to nudge the tiller occasionally with my elbow. Otherwise I stand in the engine bit. We do have gennie cables as an exciting trip hazard, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 09/01/2021 at 16:46, Athy said:

How come you got a B.A. rather than a B.Sc. in physics?

The hangovers from being one of the oldest institutions. Physics was taught before BScs were invented, and before they were invented Oxford didn't allow you to study hard science until you had studied a liberal art (too difficult, innit). Hence, to allow an undergrad physics degree, it has to be a BA. But, you can get an MSc in a hard science because by then you would have studied a BA (a hard science one or not).

 

Another example: most doctorates are not in philosophy in the modern sense, but they are in the old sense. So you get a PhD, unless you do it at Oxford, in which case it's a D.Phil...

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Thomas C King said:

The hangovers from being one of the oldest institutions. Physics was taught before BScs were invented, and before they were invented Oxford didn't allow you to study hard science until you had studied a liberal art (too difficult, innit). Hence, to allow an undergrad physics degree, it has to be a BA. But, you can get an MSc in a hard science because by then you would have studied a BA (a hard science one or not).

Strange things can also happen with new subjects. I graduated in Computer Science in 1982 from York, as part of one of the first coherts to be allowed to study full Computer Science (rather than in combination with another subject). I was given the choice to have BA or BSc on my degree certificate, as there was still ongoing debate as to whether it was a hard science. I chose BSc.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, jpcdriver said:

Strange things can also happen with new subjects. I graduated in Computer Science in 1982 from York, as part of one of the first coherts to be allowed to study full Computer Science (rather than in combination with another subject). I was given the choice to have BA or BSc on my degree certificate, as there was still ongoing debate as to whether it was a hard science. I chose BSc.

Personally I think the hardest bits of Comp. Sci. are actually formal-philosophical. A mixture of mathematical formalisation, with philosophical analysis, and theorems that have deeply philosophical implications.

 

And most of the science bits, in the sense of empirical science, are really about using computers as a modelling tool for x (e.g., society), which isn't comp. sci. any more than astronomy is telescope science. The other science bits around how people use computers, including empirical science around the usability of languages, is partly psychology, and in some cases wholly.

 

It's a mish mash.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Thomas C King said:

Personally I think the hardest bits of Comp. Sci. are actually formal-philosophical. A mixture of mathematical formalisation, with philosophical analysis, and theorems that have deeply philosophical implications.

 

Nah, it's creative writing combined with creative accounting.

 

Oh, hang on that's big IT projects not computer science ... :D

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, TheBiscuits said:

 

Nah, it's creative writing combined with creative accounting.

 

Oh, hang on that's big IT projects not computer science ... :D

 

Yes, the geeks are still at the bottom of that hierarchy. But all modern Comp. Sci. degrees have a bit of 'real world' stuff where you learn how to alienate your team mates.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re the tractor seat solution, one if the hire boats I was on in the late 1970's had a removable seat for the steerer consisting of a circular metal disc attached to a metal pole that fitted into a deep socket recessed in the deck. It did have a large rear deck and the seat was well inside the rear rail.  

Edited by Ronaldo47
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.