Boats without a well deck

[rogher]

I like the idea of reverse layout, with a double bed right in the bow

but this blocks access to the well deck, if there is one.

Some boats push the bed so far forward into the pointy end that there's barely anything to stand on and nothing to sit in.

Others don't provide any practical access through the boat to the bow, anyway.

 

I'm wondering what experience anyone has of this kind of arrangement and how awkward it may be for the less agile?

I don't see much of an issue on canals if you take a long rope from the bow to the stern, 

but it may be more of an issue on rivers where you need to tie up at both ends in deep and potentially turbulent locks.

 

 

[doratheexplorer]

20 minutes ago, rogher said:

I like the idea of reverse layout, with a double bed right in the bow

but this blocks access to the well deck, if there is one.

Some boats push the bed so far forward into the pointy end that there's barely anything to stand on and nothing to sit in.

Others don't provide any practical access through the boat to the bow, anyway.

 

I'm wondering what experience anyone has of this kind of arrangement and how awkward it may be for the less agile?

I don't see much of an issue on canals if you take a long rope from the bow to the stern, 

but it may be more of an issue on rivers where you need to tie up at both ends in deep and potentially turbulent locks.

 

 

My boat is reverse layout.  The bedroom is at the front but you can still access the bow through the bedroom and there is a small well-deck, under the cratch.  I'll be honest, I never access the bow this way whilst boating anyway.  For me it's far quicker to get to the bow via the gunwales.  Importantly I have proper handrails on my roof though, not just a 'lip'.  The well deck is simply used for passengers to sit at while cruising and for storage of a few things.  If I had a bespoke boat made, I'd probably have what you describe and push the bed right into the bow, with an emergency fire escape window above it.  That way I'd be maximising internal space and could have a centrally positioned bed with a which could be accessed from both sides.

[rogher]

Some boats don't even have that emergency escape.

In my bespoke design, I have the bed lifting out of the way. It would only be in that position when needed, though, when travelling.

The stern would be used for enjoying the view from, so bow access would not be a regular requirement.

It's safe access for tying-up the bow that was concerning me most.

[Alan de Enfield]

31 minutes ago, rogher said:

I'm wondering what experience anyone has of this kind of arrangement and how awkward it may be for the less agile?

 

Most water tanks are in the bow, and not having bow-access would make opening the filler a bit awkward, and probably impossible if you needed to do any work clearing a blockage, replacing the filler pipe etc etc.

 

If the filler is one 'one side' (as normal) you be unlikely to be able to reach over, so you'd have to ensure you turned the boat around so the filler side was against the bank.

 

I had a GRP boat that had a very short bow and you could not access it or get to stand on it - it had a big opening window so that you could get your head and shoulders out to do any work in that area.

The NBs I have seen with the short bows, such as the 'Durham' boats the bows were extreemely difficult to get to , and they are not the worst !

 

[IanD]

I have a boat like this (reverse layout, bedroom at front, closed bow, no well deck), built like this deliberately -- the bow cabin is internal storage in the bedroom with a water tank underneath, there's a side hatch exit in the bedroom (opposite the lengthwise bed) for emergencies. It's easy enough to get onto the bow for things like tying up or accessing the bow locker. I don't miss not being able to run through the boat to the well deck to get off, even with a boat with this I always found I went along the gunwale -- and I've rarely had to do this, I normally get on and off at the stern. Water filling is a bit awkward if it's on the offside, but it's not so difficult to reach sitting on the bow cabin (it's on the port gunwale next to it).

 

Another advantage is that the bows are completely waterproof, which is really useful going up leaky locks, especially if you have to go close to the top gate -- the boat is 60' and was designed to go through all the Calder and Hebble locks, which it did -- just... 😉 

 

Edited February 13, 2025 by IanD

[rogher]

Here are some other examples

Access through a tiny opening does not seem practical, nor to be clambering over the bed!

10 minutes ago, IanD said:

I have a boat like this (reverse layout, bedroom at front, closed bow, no well deck), built like this deliberately -- the bow cabin is internal storage in the bedroom with a water tank underneath, there's a side hatch exit in the bedroom (opposite the lengthwise bed) for emergencies. It's easy enough to get onto the bow for things like tying up or accessing the bow locker. I don't miss not being able to run through the boat to the well deck to get off, even with a boat with this I always found I went along the gunwale -- and I've rarely had to do this, I normally get on and off at the stern. Water filling is a bit awkward if it's on the offside, but it's not so difficult to reach sitting on the bow cabin (it's on the port gunwale next to it).

 

Another advantage is that the bows are completely waterproof, which is really useful going up leaky locks, especially if you have to go close to the top gate -- the boat is 60' and was designed to go through all the Calder and Hebble locks, which it did -- just... 😉 

 

Nice looking boat, Ian.

 

Next time, I'd specify a water filler on both gunwales (- like you did for the pump-out ?-)

[IanD]

17 minutes ago, rogher said:

Here are some other examples

Access through a tiny opening does not seem practical, nor to be clambering over the bed!

Nice looking boat, Ian.

 

Next time, I'd specify a water filler on both gunwales (- like you did for the pump-out ?-)

Thanks -- and yes, that would have been a good idea... 🙂 

 

Not quite as important as the pumpout though -- a single water filler is still fine to use, I just run a hose across and can quite easily reach the filler. Getting to pumpout fittings on the offside gunwale is a whole different ballgame though, and many boatyards won't do it and ask you to turn the boat round -- as I've found a couple of times on hire boats in the past.

 

A roof fitting on one side helps but doesn't always avoid this, sometimes they still won't reach across -- and you have to get the pipes up to the roof inside the boat, and any leakage ends up on your roof not the gunwale where it's easier to clean off. DAMHIK... 😞 

[doratheexplorer]

49 minutes ago, IanD said:

Thanks -- and yes, that would have been a good idea... 🙂 

 

Not quite as important as the pumpout though -- a single water filler is still fine to use, I just run a hose across and can quite easily reach the filler. Getting to pumpout fittings on the offside gunwale is a whole different ballgame though, and many boatyards won't do it and ask you to turn the boat round -- as I've found a couple of times on hire boats in the past.

 

A roof fitting on one side helps but doesn't always avoid this, sometimes they still won't reach across -- and you have to get the pipes up to the roof inside the boat, and any leakage ends up on your roof not the gunwale where it's easier to clean off. DAMHIK... 😞 

Reason #245 for not having a pumpout toilet.

[ditchcrawler]

3 hours ago, IanD said:

I have a boat like this (reverse layout, bedroom at front, closed bow, no well deck), built like this deliberately -- the bow cabin is internal storage in the bedroom with a water tank underneath, there's a side hatch exit in the bedroom (opposite the lengthwise bed) for emergencies. It's easy enough to get onto the bow for things like tying up or accessing the bow locker. I don't miss not being able to run through the boat to the well deck to get off, even with a boat with this I always found I went along the gunwale -- and I've rarely had to do this, I normally get on and off at the stern. Water filling is a bit awkward if it's on the offside, but it's not so difficult to reach sitting on the bow cabin (it's on the port gunwale next to it).

 

Another advantage is that the bows are completely waterproof, which is really useful going up leaky locks, especially if you have to go close to the top gate -- the boat is 60' and was designed to go through all the Calder and Hebble locks, which it did -- just... 😉 

 

Graham Booth built a boat, Tarn, with doors located where yours are just ahead of the bed to give access escape at that end

3 hours ago, rogher said:

Here are some other examples

Access through a tiny opening does not seem practical, nor to be clambering over the bed!

 

It is if your bum is on fire

 

[IanD]

23 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

Graham Booth built a boat, Tarn, with doors located where yours are just ahead of the bed to give access escape at that end

It is if your bum is on fire

 

Exactly -- the doors (on the walkway side of the bed, not over it) are there for emergency use to meet the BSS rules, not for regular access.

 

Before anyone points out they can't be opened in a narrow lock, they do meet the BSS rules -- in fact exactly this configuration is noted as being acceptable, with a footnote about locks -- and my view is that there are extremely few cases where you'd ever need to get out at the bow in this case, especially fires which is the main reason for this exit requirement. It's legal, I'm aware of all this, and I'm happy with it... 🙂 

 

And now I expect someone will come up with one case from ten years ago which shows how such side doors lead to disaster in a lock... 😉 

[magnetman]

4 minutes ago, IanD said:

Exactly -- the doors (on the walkway side of the bed, not over it) are there for emergency use to meet the BSS rules, not for regular access.

 

Before anyone points out they can't be opened in a narrow lock, they do meet the BSS rules -- in fact exactly this configuration is noted as being acceptable, with a footnote about locks -- and my view is that there are extremely few cases where you'd ever need to get out at the bow in this case, especially fires which is the main reason for this exit requirement. It's legal, I'm aware of all this, and I'm happy with it... 🙂 

 

And now I expect someone will come up with one case from ten years ago which shows how such side doors lead to disaster in a lock... 😉 

 

Its not a problem if the Boat is on fire and sinking in a narrow lock as long as the lock is full. 

 

When it happens in an empty lock is the real dodgy scenario. 

 

Examples 

 

here

here 

 

and here 

 

 

 

a clear advantage of sinking in an empty lock however is it does not go down far but with the galley being on fire one still perishes due to smoke inhalation. 

 

 

 

Forward facing exits are very bad when people are panicking as they run out and jump off the front then get crushed against the cill by the bows. 

 

What is ideal is to have a rocket powered ejector module with a parachute. 

 

 

[rogher]

I think the logic for allowing side doors as a means of escape is that an impassable fire might develop whilst asleep, cutting you off from your 'normal' route out. If awake, you might have more warning and a better chance of escape before it gets too bad. As you don't normally sleep within the confines of a lock, that scenario should not normally occur. The doors could, however, foul whatever you have tied-up to whilst not in that lock. Luckily, Sod will ensure that the hatch is on the other side and you will leap into the cut (which could be useful in the case of a fire).

My concern would be that I'd knock myself out in the mad rush to get out. At least I'd not remember anything else, though.

[magnetman]

I agree with side doors but I like to also have a door out in line with the Boat in both directions. 

 

There could be the ironic scenario where someone turns up the fire a lot because it is really cold then retires for forty winks during which time the lining around the flue catches fire. Moored to high piling. The person leaps out of the offside door and into the canal where they get struck by a passing Boat and end up dying from hypothermia clinging onto a swan. 

[ditchcrawler]

45 minutes ago, magnetman said:

I agree with side doors but I like to also have a door out in line with the Boat in both directions. 

 

There could be the ironic scenario where someone turns up the fire a lot because it is really cold then retires for forty winks during which time the lining around the flue catches fire. Moored to high piling. The person leaps out of the offside door and into the canal where they get struck by a passing Boat and end up dying from hypothermia clinging onto a swan. 

What about being eaten by crocodiles, you missed that bit 

[rogher]

Too cold for crocs, but I have heard of whales in th BCN...

[magnetman]

There was recently a seal near Sunbury on Thames eating all the fish (fresh water). 

 

 

48 minutes ago, rogher said:

Too cold for crocs, but I have heard of whales in th BCN...

 

 

I have seen Wales on a branch of fhe Shropshire union. 

 

[jpcdriver]

I would not like to cruise without a well deck and good access to it through the boat. We normally operate with crew getting on and off at the stern. However, when it is safer to operate from the bow (high landing stages/banks for example) I don't want crew walking the full length of the boat along the gunnel. Also when needing to handle bow and stern ropes (e.g. when asked to use ropes on risers in large river locks) I would not be comfortable with crew doing this from a small bow area without a well deck.

 

This is just my personal preference and thoughts, but it seems that the current trend is to maximise internal space without considering ease of cruising.

[TheBiscuits]

1 hour ago, magnetman said:

 

I have seen Wales on a branch of fhe Shropshire union

 

Golly!

[Alan de Enfield]

2 hours ago, magnetman said:

I have seen Wales on a branch of fhe Shropshire union

 

And, I have seen 'England' on the same bit of canal.

[Adam]

6 hours ago, IanD said:

Exactly -- the doors (on the walkway side of the bed, not over it) are there for emergency use to meet the BSS rules, not for regular access.

 

Before anyone points out they can't be opened in a narrow lock, they do meet the BSS rules -- in fact exactly this configuration is noted as being acceptable, with a footnote about locks -- and my view is that there are extremely few cases where you'd ever need to get out at the bow in this case, especially fires which is the main reason for this exit requirement. It's legal, I'm aware of all this, and I'm happy with it... 🙂 

 

And now I expect someone will come up with one case from ten years ago which shows how such side doors lead to disaster in a lock... 😉

Just remember to moor the right way (even stern against the flow) on a high river wall, or even some of the higher canal walls to make sure your escape hatch still opens.

[IanD]

11 minutes ago, Adam said:

Just remember to moor the right way (even stern against the flow) on a high river wall, or even some of the higher canal walls to make sure your escape hatch still opens.

I can't remember the last time I moored against such a wall, if ever...

[ditchcrawler]

Just now, IanD said:

I can't remember the last time I moored against such a wall, if ever...

I have side hatches and have often been unable to close them without slackening the mooring lines but I may be a bit lower than you .

[IanD]

4 hours ago, jpcdriver said:

I would not like to cruise without a well deck and good access to it through the boat. We normally operate with crew getting on and off at the stern. However, when it is safer to operate from the bow (high landing stages/banks for example) I don't want crew walking the full length of the boat along the gunnel. Also when needing to handle bow and stern ropes (e.g. when asked to use ropes on risers in large river locks) I would not be comfortable with crew doing this from a small bow area without a well deck.

 

This is just my personal preference and thoughts, but it seems that the current trend is to maximise internal space without considering ease of cruising.

I did consider ease of cruising; I also realised that in the last few years of holiday trips, I'd hardly ever had to get off at the bows. So I decided that a better internal layout that made a difference every single day was better than an open bow that might prove useful once in a blue moon -- especially given the advantages of a closed bow I referred to earlier.

 

Everything to do with boats is a compromise, and different people prefer different solutions, whichever one suits them better. It doesn't necessarily mean they're thoughtless or stupid... 😉

Edited February 13, 2025 by IanD

[magnetman]

Limehouse lock with the wires would be interesting. 

 

I always find it is best to not have crew but means one must get to the front quite quickly to put the line around the wire after putting the back one on. 

 

 

 

Always a bit of movement in these types of lock. 

 

 

[rogher]

19 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

I have side hatches and have often been unable to close them without slackening the mooring lines but I may be a bit lower than you .

 

I, too, have been unable to open a side hatch. Not just because of a high bank, but also due to the unfortunate positioning of a vertical obstruction. It's not been a common experience and, fortunately, the need to evacuate quickly has never occurred at all. I continue to assume that the need for evacuation is most unlikely and for that to coincide with being unable to use an escape hatch. The odds of both happening together seem most unlikely and I have more important things to keep me awake at night, when I feel that way inclined.