Lancaster Canal Article in The Guardian

[Tim Lewis]

A nice read:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/travel/2024/feb/17/after-five-years-on-a-narrowboat-ive-finally-reached-the-end-of-the-canal-network-lancaster-canal

[Mike Hurley]

Agreed, enjoyed that.

[IanD]

2 minutes ago, Mike Hurley said:

Agreed, enjoyed that.

An accurate and unbiased article about the canals in the press, what a rarity 🙂

[PCSB]

Good read, very enjoyable.

 

I noted he blocked his scuppers ... why would you do that? Surely scuppers are ther to let the water out! (at least they have been on the boats I've been to sea on).

[David Schweizer]

2 hours ago, IanD said:

An accurate and unbiased article about the canals in the press, what a rarity 🙂

 

Agreed, but it is the Guardian. I enjoyed reading it.

[Puffling]

15 hours ago, PCSB said:

Good read, very enjoyable.

 

I noted he blocked his scuppers ... why would you do that? Surely scuppers are ther to let the water out! (at least they have been on the boats I've been to sea on).

Would have been more effective to have blocked the engine room vents. He mentions the boat heeling strongly on the turn to  Savick Brook. Water entering the engine space at this point would be a potential source of swamping, unless a good bilge pump were working.

[Stroudwater1]

On 17/02/2024 at 18:48, IanD said:

An accurate and unbiased article about the canals in the press, what a rarity 🙂

Well not totally accurate as they mislabelled Crooklands  village as being South of Lancaster when it’s in Cumbria. 
 

It was a nice read though. 

[midnight cowboy]

On 17/02/2024 at 18:54, PCSB said:

Good read, very enjoyable.

 

I noted he blocked his scuppers ... why would you do that? Surely scuppers are ther to let the water out! (at least they have been on the boats I've been to sea on).

When we started shipping water in the Bristol Channel from the weed hatch (due to hammering the flood tide) and nearly capsized the scuppers certainly didn't help

[Ianws]

2 hours ago, midnight cowboy said:

When we started shipping water in the Bristol Channel from the weed hatch (due to hammering the flood tide) and nearly capsized the scuppers certainly didn't help

On a narrowboat aren't the scuppers and weedhatch usually at opposite ends of the boat?

[StephenA]

They miscaptioned their photo of the top lock of the Rufford Branch

[TheBiscuits]

On 17/02/2024 at 18:54, PCSB said:

I noted he blocked his scuppers ... why would you do that? Surely scuppers are ther to let the water out! (at least they have been on the boats I've been to sea on).

 

I put external flaps on mine for a rough crossing to stop waves coming into the well deck.

 

Nothing fancy - a bit of milk carton plastic, top hinged with gaffer tape - to reduce water intake from waves but allow water out (mostly) as usual.

 

I don't think I'd want them sealed watertight though!

[PCSB]

3 minutes ago, TheBiscuits said:

 

I put external flaps on mine for a rough crossing to stop waves coming into the well deck.

 

Nothing fancy - a bit of milk carton plastic, top hinged with gaffer tape - to reduce water intake from waves but allow water out (mostly) as usual.

 

I don't think I'd want them sealed watertight though!

That makes more sense to me than sealing them.

[midnight cowboy]

12 hours ago, Ianws said:

On a narrowboat aren't the scuppers and weedhatch usually at opposite ends of the boat?

Yes of course, but the water coming in made the boat heel until the port scuppers let more in

[David Mack]

15 hours ago, midnight cowboy said:

When we started shipping water in the Bristol Channel from the weed hatch (due to hammering the flood tide) and nearly capsized the scuppers certainly didn't help

Why was water coming in the weedhatch? Was it not properly sealed?

[PeterScott]

15 hours ago, StephenA said:

They miscaptioned their photo of the top lock of the Rufford Branch

Yes, they bought the image from Alamy, here. Alamy say "Captions are provided by our contributors" which in this case was

"Lock No.1. Glasson Branch, Lancaster to Kendal Canal, Galgate, Lancashire, England, United Kingdom, Europe."

which the Grauniad abbreviated to

"Lock No 1 of the Lancaster Canal at Galgate."

and also didn't mention the photo was taken on 9Jun2011: canallers know that canal-scenes don't usually change much in a dozen years; maybe the sub-editor is a canaller ?? Geograph can do slightly better with a pic from 17Sep2018 © Copyright MatFascione and licensed for reuse under this Creative Commons Licence.

 

 

 

 

[midnight cowboy]

3 hours ago, David Mack said:

Why was water coming in the weedhatch? Was it not properly sealed?

Yes - many people bend the weed hatch retaining bar by over tightening.  On the non tidal cut not fully tightening us not an issue, but to tackle the flood tide of the Severn we had the motor on full for over an hour and suspect the extra pressure from the prop rotation caused the leak.  Not helped that the seal strip was worn in places 

[Mike Todd]

35 minutes ago, PeterScott said:

Yes, they bought the image from Alamy, here. Alamy say "Captions are provided by our contributors" which in this case was

"Lock No.1. Glasson Branch, Lancaster to Kendal Canal, Galgate, Lancashire, England, United Kingdom, Europe."

which the Grauniad abbreviated to

"Lock No 1 of the Lancaster Canal at Galgate."

and also didn't mention the photo was taken on 9Jun2011: canallers know that canal-scenes don't usually change much in a dozen years; maybe the sub-editor is a canaller ?? Geograph can do slightly better with a pic from 17Sep2018 © Copyright MatFascione and licensed for reuse under this Creative Commons Licence.

 

 

 

 

There were two lock pix in the original article - this is the first which is correctly described as Lock 1 at Galgate - ie on the Glasson Arm just after the junction.

 

The second was supposed to be at Tarleton but actually the first lock where the Rufford connects to the main L&L. It should have been the lock onto the tidal river.

[PeterScott]

2 hours ago, Mike Todd said:

... The second was supposed to be at Tarleton but actually the first lock where the Rufford connects to the main L&L. It should have been the lock onto the tidal river.

Yes, Grauniad also bought this one from Alamy here.  Alamy's caption was

"This historic branch of the Leeds - Liverpool canal passes through the Lancashire countryside on its way to Tarleton, Lancashire."

which was abbreviated by the subeditor to

"The historic Leeds & Liverpool Canal at Tarleton, where a lock joins it to the Lancaster Canal"

which loses something in the translation.  In the context of the article, showing the wellie needed for the incoming tide would have been more fun ...

 

[Mike Todd]

1 hour ago, PeterScott said:

Yes, Grauniad also bought this one from Alamy here.  Alamy's caption was

"This historic branch of the Leeds - Liverpool canal passes through the Lancashire countryside on its way to Tarleton, Lancashire."

which was abbreviated by the subeditor to

"The historic Leeds & Liverpool Canal at Tarleton, where a lock joins it to the Lancaster Canal"

which loses something in the translation.  In the context of the article, showing the wellie needed for the incoming tide would have been more fun ...

 

They may have bought it but it does not appear in the cited article

[PeterScott]

The article had nine photos, of which two were credited to the author Paul Miles and the others were stock photos from the Alamy agency, cited as "Roger Goodwin/Alamy" or similar. As discussed above, the subeditors have amended the Alamy titles to make them less accurate, in canalling terms, compared with the photographers' submitted titles. Alamy claims "362,089,282 stock photos, 360° panoramic images, vectors and videos"