Jump to content

C&RT's most useless signs and money wasted


Midnight

Featured Posts

14 minutes ago, dmr said:

so the only thing that comes close would be a Gardner 2LW and they cost arms and legs.

 

 

I think 3LWs are cheaper, but quite a bit larger than your JD3 so mebbe wouldn't fit... I'm sure you will have considered this already.

 

I happen to know of a Ruston 3VSO tucked away in a dusty corner of a boatyard, a lovely grunty engine that would surely go in a treat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TheBiscuits said:

 

If the owner fitout doesn't have a full RCD I think you'll be OK.  The annex III on the hull doesn't qualify as a full RCD from back then, and if Vox wasn't "placed on the market" for 5 years it's all kosher.

 

Buy another boat with a 2LW in it - preferably a less than 60 footer so you can play on the shorter canals - and swap the engines over as part of your rebuild project ...

 

Owning two boats is a serious and expensive liability but is an option always under consideration 😀

Keeping the JD3 in the main residential boat would then make more sense, and having the vintage engine in the "hobby" boat. However in this case the Gardner is less attractive and Lister JP's and even Kelvins start to look good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

 

I think 3LWs are cheaper, but quite a bit larger than your JD3 so mebbe wouldn't fit... I'm sure you will have considered this already.

 

I happen to know of a Ruston 3VSO tucked away in a dusty corner of a boatyard, a lovely grunty engine that would surely go in a treat.

 

The 3LW is just too long, but as you know I feel that the main advantage of a vintage engine is the lovely sound and this really requires a two cylinder jobbie, a bit like yours really.

Tangent currently have a 3LW for just £23,500 😀

We met Ezra last week and it might just be for sale again soon, a lovely boat, but its very short and the lack of a bathroom is just too big of an issue, but its very tempting..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, dmr said:

 

Will likely rebuild but If I replace the block like for like then that's just a very big rebuild? and nobody will know, have not yet met anybody checking engine numbers 😀.

 

I personally would have no problems putting a different engine in, even if that was a little bit illegal. However we have got very fond of  the huge power that the JD3 makes so the only thing that comes close would be a Gardner 2LW and they cost arms and legs. We have rescued two aground boats this year, including a hire boat seriously aground above Lechlade and that needed every bit of power that we have.

Vox is 2001, the shell sort of has an RCD but the owner fit out does not.

Time to go electric me thinks. 
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Goliath said:

Time to go electric me thinks. 
 

 

 

Not for a long time yet, all electric boats end up running a big diesel generator to make the electricity to drive the electric motor. It works on the railways buts that different.

Horses, thats the way forwards, or huskies, they are really popular, put 'em to work..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, dmr said:

 

Not for a long time yet, all electric boats end up running a big diesel generator to make the electricity to drive the electric motor. It works on the railways buts that different.

Horses, thats the way forwards, or huskies, they are really popular, put 'em to work..


Sophie?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, dmr said:

 

The 3LW is just too long, but as you know I feel that the main advantage of a vintage engine is the lovely sound and this really requires a two cylinder jobbie, a bit like yours really.

Tangent currently have a 3LW for just £23,500 😀

We met Ezra last week and it might just be for sale again soon, a lovely boat, but its very short and the lack of a bathroom is just too big of an issue, but its very tempting..

 

Tangent used to have some very ambitious pricing, and I don't trust them an inch.

 

I passed Ezra the other day too but never got the chance to chat!  I could easily have to buy that as a fourth boat lol!!

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

Tangent used to have some very ambitious pricing, and I don't trust them an inch.

 

I passed Ezra the other day too but never got the chance to chat!  I could easily have to buy that as a fourth boat lol!!

 

 

 

Its a lovely boat but just too short, it needs a stretch but that would be difficult to do without losing its lovely shape and character.  I think 10 foot to put in a proper bathroom and a galley extension would do it, but it has no gas and not sure about the water tank, Still tempted.

11 minutes ago, Goliath said:


Sophie?

 

Lurchers take life easy, they don't do boat pulling 😀

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 26/09/2021 at 15:53, jetzi said:

There was a thread about this a few weeks back, talking about the "swing bridge ahead" for paddlers on the L&L. I hope that it at least slowed the epidemic of paddlers paddling full pelt into the bridges?? These signs really are infuriating to see, completely useless being that they are within line of sight of the swing bridge, and since a few of the duly signposted swingbridges are in fact disused. So actually less than useless - inaccurate signage is even worse than useless signage. My pet peeve is shops that have a permanently illuminated "Open", which in my experience make up the larger proportion. It renders all "open" signs redundant because you can never know if it is accurate or not.

Whenever I see signs such as that referred to here it induces two thoughts: the first is to wonder how anyone could be so stupid as (semi)consciously do such a thing and the second is to doubt whether putting up a sign is likely to cause anyone to stop and think. 

 

However, whenever there is an accident (especially serious perhaps fatal one) there is usually the outcry "They must do something about it". 'They' often have only two things, short of closing the facility, either make a rule/law/code of practice/admin procedure or put up a notice. In fact, the latter is not really an answer and, in appropriate contexts, organisations have been prosecuted (I understand so don'; ask me to quite detail!) on the basis that a notice and no protective action is not a defence, You have to assume that people are just plain stupid.

 

In the case of advance warnings I assume that at least one person has been involved in such an incident

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Mike Todd said:

Whenever I see signs such as that referred to here it induces two thoughts: the first is to wonder how anyone could be so stupid as (semi)consciously do such a thing and the second is to doubt whether putting up a sign is likely to cause anyone to stop and think. 

 

Whenever I see such a sign, it's usually placed 25 metres or more from the swing bridge or lock.  It's supposed to inform the paddlesport user that this is a portage exit point, before the bridge/lock landing.

 

The other one that amuses me are the regular complaints about such signs having strange times on them - "how can it be 35 minutes when the lock is right there!" - from people who don't understand that's an estimate of how long it will take to portage a canoe past the whole flight of locks.

 

The ones with a pedestrian on them are an estimate of how long it will take to walk the flight.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Instead of all these silly signs I wish they put more effort into putting visible lock numbers on the gates.

 

I'm not talking about those large oblong signs they mount on posts next to the lock chamber, but just a simple number on each side of the balance beam.  The times I'm in the middle of a long flight of locks and have difficulty identifying how I'm progressing. Many do have them but a lot don't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Grassman said:

 

 

Instead of all these silly signs I wish they put more effort into putting visible lock numbers on the gates.

 

I'm not talking about those large oblong signs they mount on posts next to the lock chamber, but just a simple number on each side of the balance beam.  The times I'm in the middle of a long flight of locks and have difficulty identifying how I'm progressing. Many do have them but a lot don't.

It does happen. Boating up Tardebigge a few weeks ago two CRT chaps walked up the towpath carrying an oval number plate and a cordless drill. While I was in the lock they proceeded to screw the number plate to the balance beam.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Grassman said:

 

 

Instead of all these silly signs I wish they put more effort into putting visible lock numbers on the gates.

 

I'm not talking about those large oblong signs they mount on posts next to the lock chamber, but just a simple number on each side of the balance beam.  The times I'm in the middle of a long flight of locks and have difficulty identifying how I'm progressing. Many do have them but a lot don't.

I’d like tunnel signage to be a certain distance before the tunnel, not at the entrance. To have the pertinent info be legible from a boat on the cut and not just to someone a foot away on the towpath. I’d also like it not obscured by foliage.

 

I’ll not hold my breath.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The worst waste-of-money signs must include the ones one the GU down to Hanwell which say "You have now walked 250m of the [xxx] trail" -- so memorable I can't even remember the name.

 

What on earth is the point of these? They carry no useful information whatsoever even to people out for a stroll along the towpath. A complete and stupid waste of scarce CART money... 😞

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, IanD said:

The worst waste-of-money signs must include the ones one the GU down to Hanwell which say "You have now walked 250m of the [xxx] trail" -- so memorable I can't even remember the name.

 

What on earth is the point of these? They carry no useful information whatsoever even to people out for a stroll along the towpath. A complete and stupid waste of scarce CART money... 😞

They have them at the Anderton lift as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's happening up here on the Worcester Birminhgham canal. This was replaced with a nice shiny blue one. I took the original picture becuse I saw two CRT people with a tape measure. One to measure and one to write it down I presume.

 

 

 

IMG_20210711_145237downsized.jpg.3f977155b234ce8173d5633c67d7f674.jpg

 

P1070506.jpeg.6d286b5ea571a3234f51c97d0ac214d2.jpeg

 

 

Even better the no fishing signs have been replaced. They didn't spot the post was rectangular when they made the new ones. 

The piece ow wood fitted as a spacer is only ply, so unless it's waterproof it won't last long.

 

 

IMG_20210911_150532.jpeg.1f0e47cb7c89a5904d8a087bcd4a3dcd.jpeg

 

IMG_20210911_130525.jpeg.1e9eaaaae7c8134214388ae69a4c894e.jpeg

 

 

As usual it's nice to know my money is being spent carefully.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, davewally said:

 

Even better the no fishing signs have been replaced. They didn't spot the post was rectangular when they made the new ones. 

The piece ow wood fitted as a spacer is only ply, so unless it's waterproof it won't last long.

 

 

IMG_20210911_150532.jpeg.1f0e47cb7c89a5904d8a087bcd4a3dcd.jpeg

 

IMG_20210911_130525.jpeg.1e9eaaaae7c8134214388ae69a4c894e.jpeg

 

 

As usual it's nice to know my money is being spent carefully.

 

 

That is because the signs were made to fit on the front of the posts, you will probably still be able to see the screw holes, but the fisher persons couldn't see them as they approached them. So they moved the signs to the side and fitted the packers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 27/09/2021 at 21:16, David Mack said:

 

English Heritage are responsible for the list of listed buildings (and for adding buildings to the list). 

It's Historic England that is responsible for the statutory list.   English Heritage cares for over 400 historic buildings blah blah

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, IanD said:

At least those signs do serve some useful purpose -- preventing exceptionally stupid fishermen from killing themselves -- unlike the "You have walked xxx metres..." ones 😞

 

I do find myself wondering how many fisherman deaths were happening before the signs went up....

 

 

I hold that there were probably none and the point of the signs is to put up the CRT logo at any and every possible opportunity, for branding and marketing purposes. Nothing to do with safety.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, MtB said:

 

I do find myself wondering how many fisherman deaths were happening before the signs went up....

 

 

 

It's all about duty of care. I'd rather CRT managed to prevent a death (and avoided huge legal costs) and if that means posting signs, so be it.

 

Regarding the flat sign on a round post question, isn't it likely to be the cheapest option to have a whole bunch of standard signs rather than making them individually?

In other words, in this instance the signs are not useless and the money has been spent prudently (see thread title).

  • Greenie 2
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.