Entitled Historic Boat Owners

[BoatinglifeupNorth]

3 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

There has been a thread on FB about them mooring on water points and by the Greyhound at Hawkesbury overnight on their way to Braunston. Its things like this that cause the ill feeling between private boaters and owners of historic craft 

Aren’t owners of historic craft private boaters? Or are the majority owned by share owners/historic groups/society’s, wanting to play the part of a working boatman in a bygone era?

[roland elsdon]

3 minutes ago, BoatinglifeupNorth said:

Aren’t owners of historic craft private boaters? Or are the majority owned by share owners/historic groups/society’s, wanting to play the part of a working boatman in a bygone era?

most are mature age people who choose to have an old boat for a range of reasons. Frequently because thats what they have done for 30 plus years, and have no desire for a modern boat.

They do not carry , do not play at carrying, are careful with their boats, and act in a fashion not dissimilar to the owners of other craft.

Personally I do not own a waistcoat a bowler hat nor a red neckerchief, and I did not wear such items even when I was making a living on the boats.
 

 

[BoatinglifeupNorth]

16 minutes ago, roland elsdon said:

most are mature age people who choose to have an old boat for a range of reasons. Frequently because thats what they have done for 30 plus years, and have no desire for a modern boat.

They do not carry , do not play at carrying, are careful with their boats, and act in a fashion not dissimilar to the owners of other craft.

Personally I do not own a waistcoat a bowler hat nor a red neckerchief, and I did not wear such items even when I was making a living on the boats.
 

 

The way the post I replied to was worded, there seemed to be a distinguishing between privately owned boats and owners of historic boats, that’s why I asked about the ownership shareowners/historic groups/society’s, are there re-enactors playing the part?

Edited June 29 by BoatinglifeupNorth

[Tam & Di]

24 minutes ago, roland elsdon said:

Personally I do not own a waistcoat a bowler hat nor a red neckerchief, and I did not wear such items even when I was making a living on the boats.

 

I've seen photos, but could not discern the colour of any neckerchief, and if any working boatmen did wear such apparel they are long since dead. Having been on canals since the 50s and worked on them in one way or another since the late 60s I can say that no boatmen we know or saw ever dressed up in such gear. We mostly wore things like donkey jackets which soaked up the rain very well and could be dried in the enginehole over night.

 

8 minutes ago, BoatinglifeupNorth said:

The way the post I replied to was worded, there seemed to be a distinguishing between privately owned boats and owners of historic boats, that’s why I asked about the ownership shareowners/historic groups/society’s, are there re-enactors playing the part?

I suppose to some extent that is exactly what they are doing, in the same way as painting their craft in the trim of some carrying company. We did paint all our boats loosely following the idiom of earlier companies, and I can't see anything wrong with those who can spend the time and money to do so, and I guess that the clothing goes along with that.

 

 

Edited June 29 by Tam & Di

[stagedamager]

45 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

There has been a thread on FB about them mooring on water points and by the Greyhound at Hawkesbury overnight on their way to Braunston. Its things like this that cause the ill feeling between private boaters and owners of historic craft 

As I understood it, no boats were moored on water points, or in areas which there were no mooring signs, to the point where the poster deleted his post when many told him the weren't moored incorrectly. It would have been interesting to see if he has posted the same critical musings if it wasn't all historic boats. Happy to be proved wrong........

[Arthur Marshall]

6 minutes ago, stagedamager said:

As I understood it, no boats were moored on water points, or in areas which there were no mooring signs, to the point where the poster deleted his post when many told him the weren't moored incorrectly. It would have been interesting to see if he has posted the same critical musings if it wasn't all historic boats. Happy to be proved wrong........

I suspect he would have done. Boats parked on water points and lock landings are a pain in the neck, whether they're 70 foot long or 30 and made of fibreglass. Most of the culprits are hirers who don't know any better and so can be cursed and forgiven. Experienced boaters deserve more criticism.

[Ray T]

18 minutes ago, Tam & Di said:

 

"I've seen photos, but could not discern the colour of any neckerchief, and if any working boatmen did wear such apparel they are long since dead. Having been on canals since the 50s and worked on them in one way or another since the late 60s I can say that no boatmen we know or saw ever dressed up in such gear."

Photo from a book. William Humphris (1906-1968) on the butty John. what initially looks like a neckerchief appears to be a scarf as it is tucked into his waistcoat 

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

9 minutes ago, Ray T said:

Photo from a book. William Humphris (1906-1968) on the butty John. what initially looks like a neckerchief appears to be a scarf as it is tucked into his waistcoat 

there looks to be a big heavy T stud on that hatch, could you explain please ?

 

and I’ll wild guess Uxbridge Lock. 

[Ray T]

13 hours ago, beerbeerbeerbeerbeer said:

there looks to be a big heavy T stud on that hatch, could you explain please ?

 

and I’ll wild guess Uxbridge Lock. 

 

The boat Jack was a horse boat. The running line went from the T stud through running blocks and the mast to the horse. The running line was released slowly when the horse started the tow so to ease the strain of starting from stationary. The T stud was removable.

 

12 hours ago, Ray T said:

 

 

Another picture.

Edited June 30 by Ray T

[Rob-M]

Running blocks are still used by some pairs but catching a finger in the line as you wrap it around the T stud is a high possibility.  This allows the butty steerer to control the length of line between motor and butty so they can shorten or lengthen the distance between the boats as required.

[David Schweizer]

30 minutes ago, beerbeerbeerbeerbeer said:

there looks to be a big heavy T stud on that hatch, could you explain please ?

 

and I’ll wild guess Uxbridge Lock. 

 

The T stud on Butties was used in exactly the same way as described by RayT, except the "strain" was from the motor. Rose Whitlock used this method on Lucy, I am fairly certain that she was the last person to do so on a carrying working boat.

 

 

Edited June 29 by David Schweizer

[Victor Vectis]

On 28/06/2024 at 13:35, beerbeerbeerbeerbeer said:

As you know I like a mooring outside the pub.

 

So do we.

 

Edited June 29 by Victor Vectis

[ditchcrawler]

1 hour ago, BoatinglifeupNorth said:

The way the post I replied to was worded, there seemed to be a distinguishing between privately owned boats and owners of historic boats, that’s why I asked about the ownership shareowners/historic groups/society’s, are there re-enactors playing the part?

I think you knew exactly what I meant

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

44 minutes ago, Victor Vectis said:

 

So do we.

 

Nice one 👍. 

This from back in April:

 

I’ll be going home via Rugby so will miss the Cape. But hope to get outside the Greyhound, we’ll see. 
 

You need to take a better photo, show off that new paint job as best you can. Looks good 👍 

[Victor Vectis]

Yes.

And thank you!

🍺

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

why they can’t fill a pint up I don't know, 

 

[MtB]

"Landlord, do you think you could fit a double scotch in there?"

 

"Yes Sir..."

 

Well then, bloody fill it up with beer....

 

 

 

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

😃 on that we can agree,

 

 

 

[BoatinglifeupNorth]

2 hours ago, ditchcrawler said:

I think you knew exactly what I meant

Not really. You said:

 “Its things like this that cause the ill feeling between private boaters and owners of historic craft”

 It sort of reads you think Historic boaters/boats are not just normal individual boaters but something else, that’s why I asked if historic boats are more owned by society’s/share holders than normal leisure boats owned by an individual. Maybe it was just your inclusion of the word “private” instead of just saying boaters?

[Hyperion 53]

13 hours ago, Ray T said:

 

The boat Jack was a horse boat. The running line went from the T stud through running blocks and the mast to the horse. The running line was released slowly when the horse started the tow so to ease the strain of starting from stationary. The T stud was removable.

 

 

Another picture.

Running blocks were never used on a single horse boat. When the horse goes into draught it is important that the line can not slip as the horse could easily lose balance.

 

Ofcourse a pulley block was used on certain canals (ie Worcester and Birmingham) to create a 2:1 ratio to help the horse in getting the boat started out of a lock quicker.

 

With a pair of horse boats, the second boat would have had running blocks which the steerer would control by means of the T stud mounted on the cabin top.

[Ray T]

14 hours ago, David Schweizer said:

 

The T stud on Butties was used in exactly the same way as described by RayT, except the "strain" was from the motor. Rose Whitlock used this method on Lucy, I am fairly certain that she was the last person to do so on a carrying working boat.

 

 

 

Rose on Lucy

[David Schweizer]

17 hours ago, beerbeerbeerbeerbeer said:

there looks to be a big heavy T stud on that hatch, could you explain please ?

 

and I’ll wild guess Uxbridge Lock. 

 

Almost certainly not Uxbridge lock. We moored Pisces immediately below Uxbridge lock on the offside during the 1960's/70's, so I know it well. Whilst the bridge in the photo is just below the bottom gate as at Uxbridge, it also gives the impression that there are two arches, one for the canal and one for the towpath. The towpath at Uxbridge does not pass under the bridge, but across the track at the end of the bridge, and photograhs in my collection show no indication of a blocked off second arch. Unless the bridge was substantially altered or rebuilt between the time that the photo was taken, and the 1960's, it is most unlikely that it is Uxbridge lock, there are other factors which support that suggestion, but they are minor detail differences rather than major structural variations.

 

 

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

Yes, I can see you’re right. 
The type of paddle gear, wide lock and bridge made me snap at Uxbridge. But clearly with more thought that ain’t the same bridge. 
So where is John ?

Somewhere on the GU??

Does look like a second arch. 

[GUMPY]

3 hours ago, beerbeerbeerbeerbeer said:

So where is John ?

Somewhere on the GU??

Does look like a second arch. 

Only one I can think with a second arch is Marsworth Bottom Lock but the bridge is unpainted.

 

[Stroudwater1]

8 minutes ago, GUMPY said:

Only one I can think with a second arch is Marsworth Bottom Lock but the bridge is unpainted.

 

I think possibly it once was? Like many painted bits of the network the paint has faded, gone or been removed. Bratch was mostly all white at one point I think into the 80s. I believe that removal was  deliberate 
 

This is Marsworth bottom lock bridge but from the other side-  looks like it’s faded nearly back to brick?