Fat boats on the North Oxford

[Big Bob W]

I just can not comprehend why anyone would go through the hassle and expense of having one of these monstrosities craned into a canal that they can not cruise! Whats the point?

 

[ditchcrawler]

32 minutes ago, Big Bob W said:

I just can not comprehend why anyone would go through the hassle and expense of having one of these monstrosities craned into a canal that they can not cruise! Whats the point?

 

Lots of people have them and never move out of the marina regardless of the size of the waterway

[meerdog]

Have travelled from Hawkesbury to Rugby today and there was no sign of any wide boat are we talking about the same route?

[MtB]

1 hour ago, Big Bob W said:

I just can not comprehend why anyone would go through the hassle and expense of having one of these monstrosities craned into a canal that they can not cruise! Whats the point?

 

 

Surely the whole point is that you cannot cruise so have to stay in one location.

 

I remember forecasting on here about five years ago this might happen, that a widebeam would be craned in between two narrow locks and claim to be CCing as far as possible.

[Alan de Enfield]

3 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

Surely the whole point is that you cannot cruise so have to stay in one location.

 

I remember forecasting on here about five years ago this might happen, that a widebeam would be craned in between two narrow locks and claim to be CCing as far as possible.

 

But in the last 5 years C&RT have amended their T&Cs to include a requirement that "the boat must be suitable for the wateway in which it is intended to be used" (or words to that effect, CBA to look up the exact words)

Problem is they do little or nothing to enforce it, as there is no requirement on the licence application where you must state your cruising area.

[zenataomm]

19 minutes ago, meerdog said:

Have travelled from Hawkesbury to Rugby today and there was no sign of any wide boat are we talking about the same route?

 

Is this a leg pull then?

[MtB]

3 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

But in the last 5 years C&RT have amended their T&Cs to include a requirement that "the boat must be suitable for the wateway in which it is intended to be used" (or words to that effect, CBA to look up the exact words)

Problem is they do little or nothing to enforce it, as there is no requirement on the licence application where you must state your cruising area.

 

That's always been the case, and as you say they never enforce it. 

 

 

 

IIRC the GU was designed for pairs of NBs, not 13ft WBs. 

[ditchcrawler]

10 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

That's always been the case, and as you say they never enforce it. 

 

 

 

IIRC the GU was designed for pairs of NBs, not 13ft WBs. 

Waterways World has published an extract from "Arteries of Commerce" state that the new locks between Braunston and Birmingham were to accommodate boats12ft 6in wide. (not the exact wording)

 

[Lily Rose]

9 hours ago, zenataomm said:

Well, I think the time has come to actually see evidence of this mythical beastie.

Has no one been through this section over the last few days? 

I travelled from Hawkesbury Junction to Brinklow Marina on Tuesday this week and did not see any sign of the widebeam I had previously read about in this thread. 

 

Perhaps someone was seeing things after one too many in The Greyhound?

[Rob-M]

Perhaps two narrowboats had breasted up and was mistakenly thought to be one fat boat.

[MtB]

11 hours ago, ditchcrawler said:

Waterways World has published an extract from "Arteries of Commerce" state that the new locks between Braunston and Birmingham were to accommodate boats12ft 6in wide. (not the exact wording)

 

 

The locks may have been upgraded but as I said, the canal itself was designed for narrow boats. 

[dmr]

20 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

The locks may have been upgraded but as I said, the canal itself was designed for narrow boats. 

 

Think I read somewhere (on this forum) that the locks were upgraded to take a pair or a widebeam, and some trials were done with a wideboat, but the plan to upgrade the canal itself was never carried out.

[MtB]

1 minute ago, dmr said:

 

Think I read somewhere (on this forum) that the locks were upgraded to take a pair or a widebeam, and some trials were done with a wideboat, but the plan to upgrade the canal itself was never carried out.

 

Yes that's my understanding too, and what I meant to say but failed to spell out as articulately as you  

[dmr]

Just now, MtB said:

 

Yes that's my understanding too, and what I meant to say but failed to spell out as articulately as you  

 

Thank you for the compliment. Another issue is that the canals were designed for moving working boats, and its likely that there would be no moored boats during the working day. Now there are moored boats everywhere. In many places it is no longer easy or even possible for two narrowboats to pass each other due to lines of moored boats.

[David Mack]

17 minutes ago, dmr said:

 

Think I read somewhere (on this forum) that the locks were upgraded to take a pair or a widebeam, and some trials were done with a wideboat, but the plan to upgrade the canal itself was never carried out.

The GUCCC had a 12 ft 6 ins widebeam Progress built for the widened route to Birmingham, seen here at the opening by the Duke of Kent of the widened Hatton Locks.

 

Progress was not a commercial success and was transferred to maintenance duties. It was later owned by @Tam & Di. There was a thread on the forum on its restoration but it hasn't been updated for a long time.

 

Progress was a fine lined round bilged boat, and much more suited to a narrowish channel than the slab sided blunt ended wide boats being built today.

 

Found the restoration thread:

 

Edited August 13, 2021 by David Mack

[Mike Todd]

3 hours ago, dmr said:

 

Thank you for the compliment. Another issue is that the canals were designed for moving working boats, and its likely that there would be no moored boats during the working day. Now there are moored boats everywhere. In many places it is no longer easy or even possible for two narrowboats to pass each other due to lines of moored boats.

When we came down a couple of weeks ago the difference above and below the Port of Berkhsmpstead was very obvious. Whilst above meeting a moving WB oo even passing a poorly moored one was  always disruptive. Below it was much more acceptable.

[Ray T]

5 hours ago, dmr said:

 

Think I read somewhere (on this forum) that the locks were upgraded to take a pair or a widebeam, and some trials were done with a wideboat, but the plan to upgrade the canal itself was never carried out.

 

The trials were with the wide boat Progress and the wide butty Eagle.

 

One of the problems being Eagle had to be bow hauled through the locks.

 

Photo: Waterways World April 1991.

 

Edited August 13, 2021 by Ray T

[ditchcrawler]

11 hours ago, MtB said:

 

The locks may have been upgraded but as I said, the canal itself was designed for narrow boats. 

 

23 hours ago, ditchcrawler said:

Waterways World has published an extract from "Arteries of Commerce" state that the new locks between Braunston and Birmingham were to accommodate boats12ft 6in wide. (not the exact wording)

 

The book was published by the Grand Junction Canal Company after the work was complete to say what the canal was now capable of. Maybe they lied and it wasn't possible to take a 12 foot 6 inch boat through. they just told people they could

[magpie patrick]

10 hours ago, ditchcrawler said:

 

The book was published by the Grand Junction Canal Company after the work was complete to say what the canal was now capable of. Maybe they lied and it wasn't possible to take a 12 foot 6 inch boat through. they just told people they could

 

We're drifting  here but you could (and probably still can) get a boat 12 foot 6 inch beam to the top of Camp Hill Locks. FMC actually registered one at Leicester for trade to London but the Leicester Line was never widened

However the wide beams couldn't pss each other in bridge holes whereas pairs of narrow boats could, so the capacity of the canal was higher if narrow boats were used, even though the capacity of a wide beam or a pair of narrow boats was about the same. 

[Rose Narrowboats]

I've never heard or seen anything to suggest that working narrowboats passed each other in bridgeholes. I'd imagine the wide boats when laden would have been a lot slower through most bridges though as there's very little room for water to move round them.

 

The modernisation work done by the GUC in the 1930s was funded by government money, which ran out before the job was completed. As a consequence there were many sections where the channel was not regarded as wide enough for loaded wide boats to pass, and one bridge in B'ham (before Sampson Road Depot)  which was too narrow.

 

BWB ran some further trials in the 1950's and reached the same conclusions.

[Ray T]

On 13/08/2021 at 08:27, Rob-M said:

Perhaps two narrowboats had breasted up and was mistakenly thought to be one fat boat.

 

Wot, like this?  

[Lily Rose]

11.15AM today in Braunston, i.e. a Saturday morning in mid-August.

 

I'm at the water point near Midland Chandler's and am about to leave and go through the turn towards Napton. There's another boat on the water point behind me and another ahead that has just gone into the turn. Suddenly he starts reversing back out.

 

Why?

 

It's good old fatboat "miles away" (I wish he was!) coming through Braunston turn from Napton direction to head up to Dunchurch Pools. He's well known there, I'm told, because he doesn't stay there. He regularly comes out and heads down to Braunston and towards Napton without giving a damn about the trouble he causes to everyone else. He does not give way but expects everyone else to somehow get of his way. Allegedly.

 

Anyway, he couldn't squeeze past (it transpired after he tried to, albeit not without scraping alongside me) so of course others had to shuffle about so he can get through. I'm also told that he can't get round the turn without making contact so presumably it's not unknown for lumps of the concrete edge to become cracked, dislodged and going splash. No wonder it's in a bit of a state there. Probably some of the bridges don't fare any better.

 

Is it worth complaining to CRT and, if so, who to?

 

Anyway, here's a photo or two...

 

 

[ditchcrawler]

Just come from Hawkesbury Junction to Rose Narrowboats and no sign of any fat ones. I thing we were on a bum steer 

[Markinaboat]

On 12/08/2021 at 21:40, meerdog said:

Have travelled from Hawkesbury to Rugby today and there was no sign of any wide boat are we talking about the same route?

I think widebeams are restricted beyond Dunchurch Pools marina (going north). They have to book with CRT if they want to cruise between the marina and Braunston Turn.

[Lily Rose]

Here's another photo. This is how far he got past me before he could get no further and had to reverse back. I started to leave at the same time. If I hadn't I don't know what would have happened.

 

An extended period of chaos presumably.