Regent's malicious lock-keeper flooding & dual lock design tales

[1st ade]

14 hours ago, Francis Herne said:

I did wonder why, when separate windlasses are the norm. To accomodate craft coming off the river that don't carry one?

There's probably a whole thread on this single topic (@magpie patrick - you listening?)

 

Logically, separate windlass's should not be the norm - if someone asked you, without prior knowledge, to design a sluice, would you not have a fixed handle or crank to operate it (I've never seen, for example, a bucket in a well with a removable handle)

 

I assume (but that's all it is) that at some point someone said, "what if someone unqualified came and operated the sluice?" and the obvious answer in a pre-stilsons era was to remove the handle and give "qualified people" their own handle to bring with them.

[Battle Cruiser]

Windlasses for officials only does make sense to me actually. Has anyone seen a photo of fixed windlasses? 

I did hear a story (that I immediately discounted!) about boaters putting padding on the horses' feet to they could creep through locks at night so as not to wake up the lock-keepers and avoid paying tolls.... 

 

Anyways, back to the two tales I originally mentioned. Any thoughts on the veracity of these?

[magnetman]

There are fixed windlasses on one of the River Wey flood locks but presumably not for public use.

 

 

[Pluto]

The L&LC had fixed windlasses, with sufficient lockeepers for working 24/7. Some flights had lighting where night working was normal. When regular traffic ended on the Wigan flight post 2WW, windlasses were removed from the locks and stillsons were often used as replacement paddle gear drives were not standardised. Double-headed windlasses for two sizes of square drive were made, but L&LC windlasses were too heavy for carrying any distance.

[magnetman]

2 hours ago, Battle Cruiser said:

Windlasses for officials only does make sense to me actually. Has anyone seen a photo of fixed windlasses? 

I did hear a story (that I immediately discounted!) about boaters putting padding on the horses' feet to they could creep through locks at night so as not to wake up the lock-keepers and avoid paying tolls.... 

 

Anyways, back to the two tales I originally mentioned. Any thoughts on the veracity of these?

Flooding the station is an interesting theory. 

 

It seems to me that the water would get around St Pancras and City Road locks before getting high enough to flood surroundings. 

 

I've never investigated this. The Canal museum is quite low. 

 

I think @Tim Lewis knows a bit about that area. Maybe there is a depression in the land somewhere there which could lead to flooding especially due to the tunnel most probably restricting the flow. 

 

I think it is an apocryphal tale. 

 

 

 

[Battle Cruiser]

Yes, if it true I'm sure the tunnel played a part. If it is true!

[magpie patrick]

7 hours ago, 1st ade said:

There's probably a whole thread on this single topic (@magpie patrick - you listening?)

 

Logically, separate windlass's should not be the norm - if someone asked you, without prior knowledge, to design a sluice, would you not have a fixed handle or crank to operate it (I've never seen, for example, a bucket in a well with a removable handle)

 

I assume (but that's all it is) that at some point someone said, "what if someone unqualified came and operated the sluice?" and the obvious answer in a pre-stilsons era was to remove the handle and give "qualified people" their own handle to bring with them.

 

I think there is a history to all this and it could be worth a new thread  - for what it's worth on this one I have seen (on the connected canal system of England and Wales - go any further and it gets very complicated!)

 

Windlasses held on with a nut - sometimes removed overnight*

Windlasses held on with a nut that was then welded in place

Windlasses welded on to the spindle

Paddles operated by devices that aren't windlasses

 

I've been on and off boats all my life, first boat holiday sometime around my 1st Birthday. Instances of windlasses being fixed have declined markedly in my lifetime.

 

On windlasses being fixed in place but removed overnight, I remember childhood holidays (on the A&C I think) where we used standard windlasses and the paddles were very hard work because the normal windlasses were much longer throw. 

 

Of none-windlass devices I've seen wheels and the curious horns used on the L&L. The horns (basically a long bar with the eye in the middle) were used on the worm gear where the plane of winding is horizontal rather than vertical - these horns were on the eastern end even though the type of paddle gear was in use along the entire canal. 

 

I can't recall ever seeing fixed windlasses on the midlands canal system nor have I seen old pictures with this - I don't think it was ever a narrow canal "thing" - nor was it a thing on most of the Irish canals

 

 

[Derek R.]

When leaving the L & L in Leeds, the first lock on the River had fixed windlasses.

 

On the Rufford branch:

 

 

[Tim Lewis]

On 06/11/2023 at 17:53, Tim Lewis said:

From Wikipedia:

 

interestingly in the last few years some of the weirs on the old lock chambers have been adapted with ‘sawtooth’ overflows to allow a greater flow of water over them.^[2]

Mile End lock today

[mykaskin]

On 07/11/2023 at 21:42, magpie patrick said:

There was a time when Struncheon Hill Lock in the Driffield Navigation didn't have bottom paddles - to fill the lock you opened the top paddles and to empty it you closed them....  

Thats going back some time before the 'new' gates were installed. It think there were paddles on them, but not worth operating as you say.

[David Mack]

3 hours ago, mykaskin said:

Thats going back some time before the 'new' gates were installed. It think there were paddles on them, but not worth operating as you say.

Some years ago we went down the Nene when the river was high and water was coming over the top gates at most of the locks. We didn't bother with the top paddles then.

[Scholar Gypsy]

Not very relevant, but this graph shows how Three Mills lock on the Olympic waterways was working on Wednesday this week (I was operating the lock after the FBW protest cruise!).

There was a strong tide, which mean that the weir lifted (the red line) at 1300 to keep out the tide. Then the impounded level (between Three Mills and City Mill) gradually rose, filled with fresh water from the Lea,  which meant City Mill lock could not be operated (it locks out when the water is at 2.9m). At about 1530 the weir lowered automatically, and an hour later the boats were on the move - having spent three hours in the lock!

[magpie patrick]

1 hour ago, Scholar Gypsy said:

Not very relevant, but this graph shows how Three Mills lock on the Olympic waterways was working on Wednesday this week (I was operating the lock after the FBW protest cruise!).

There was a strong tide, which mean that the weir lifted (the red line) at 1300 to keep out the tide. Then the impounded level (between Three Mills and City Mill) gradually rose, filled with fresh water from the Lea,  which meant City Mill lock could not be operated (it locks out when the water is at 2.9m). At about 1530 the weir lowered automatically, and an hour later the boats were on the move - having spent three hours in the lock!

 

Which level has to reach 2.9m? The tidal or the non-tidal side? 

[Scholar Gypsy]

2 hours ago, magpie patrick said:

 

Which level has to reach 2.9m? The tidal or the non-tidal side? 

 The non-tidal side - strictly speaking the level at City Mill lock, a few hundred metres above Three Mills. If the water is above this level, then the headroom on the A11 road bridge is too low. Also the water level may be above the level in St Thomas's Creek - in which case the lock (which only has one pair of gates pointing that way) would not work either.  It's quite a complex system, with not a lot of room for things to go wrong.