CanalplanAC - Site off air

[alan_fincher]

Does CanalPlanAC have incorrect and misleading information of that nature?

Dunno, I'm afraid, (and can't check 'cause it's down )

 

I only use the planner, which is very good, but not always 100% spot on. (As I said, for any one way trip, I don't think it's ever been mre than 2 locks out, one way or the other).

[StephenA]

I saw on that site:

"Dukinfield

Max boat length of 56 feet on the Huddersfield canals"

 

That is incorrect in many ways. The maximum boat length on the Huddersfield Narrow Canal is 70 ft. The maximum length of a wide beam boat on the Huddersfield Broad Canal is 57' 6" although narrowboats of up to 60 ft can navigate it with care.

 

I also see on that site:

"Getting through Manchester has its own set of hazards. Locals being one of them.

(especially if approaching via Dukinfield aka Ashton Canal)"

 

That is misleading and insulting. There are regular threads here and elsewhere about the Ashton Canal and it is no worse than many other urban canals. The overwhelming majority of the "locals" are friendly, helpful and certainly not a hazard to boaters. Who wrote that stuff?

 

After reading those things, I didn't bother looking any further at the site.

 

Does CanalPlanAC have incorrect and misleading information of that nature?

 

 

Not as far as I know and it doesn't sound like Nick's writing.. but I'll get Nick to check.

[carlt]

Who wrote that stuff?

A Liverpool fan?

[rix]

OK, to respond to some of the items above.

 

As per accuracy, it should be roughly equivalent to CanaPlanAC with default settings.

It provides those numbers, almost instantaneously and via a graphical interface.

Thus it works for sketching out a trip very quickly, then it can be refined later.

 

As to comments about Manchester - they were taken from Nicholson's if I recall correctly.

I can remove them if you believe them to be inaccurate. But there are special requirements

for the locks and a high likelihood of damage to unattended boats IS mentioned in at least

one publication on the subject. But, don't take that comment *toooo* seriously, fellas :-)

 

As to boat length, it is outside of the scope of this program to define every nuance.

It would require a lot more integration into the planner itself to do that. It could be

done (and hopefully it may some day), but it cannot be done at this stage.

The warning is there simply to direct users that there *might* be an issue.

 

As to loading the canal planner backend - That won't work *because* the site is down.

That's why it takes so long, it is looking for a site that doesn't exist.

The comments on the start up page do mention that these will not currently work.

Removing them would be a lot of work to handle what should be a temporary condition.

 

Add any other coments (or send via the site address) and I will address them.

Fair enough ?

 

As I say a program that might be useful for temporary use to check out a few

numbers (how far from A to .

[nipper]

While we all wait for nick to get back to us, one could always try the 14 day trial of cannal planner7

That is, if you can get it to work!

nipper

[MartinClark]

As to comments about Manchester - they were taken from Nicholson's if I recall correctly.

I can remove them if you believe them to be inaccurate. But there are special requirements

for the locks and a high likelihood of damage to unattended boats IS mentioned in at least

one publication on the subject.

 

You must be looking at a very old edition of Nicholsons. Let me quote a little from the version I have here:

"Local children preyed upon you as you tackled the Ancoats, Beswick and Clayton flights, leaping across the locks fron one side to another, begging for lifts, and picking up anything you might have left lying around....

"It is, thankfully, VERY different now, and the city passage is very attractive, interesting and enjoyable. Just take the usual precautions." [book 5, 2003 edition, page 155]

 

But, don't take that comment *toooo* seriously, fellas :-)

 

Why not? It's misleading and insulting.

 

As to boat length, it is outside of the scope of this program to define every nuance.

It would require a lot more integration into the planner itself to do that. It could be

done (and hopefully it may some day), but it cannot be done at this stage.

The warning is there simply to direct users that there *might* be an issue.

 

The boat length comment appears when you hover over Dukinfield and Huddersfield. I don't see how correcting the information has anything to do with integrating into the planner. The figure of 56 ft is just plucked from the air. It is completely inaccurate. Who wrote it? Where did they get 56 ft from?

[Biggles]

Having read this thread it is clear how much people rely / enjoy this programe and Nic's work. I for one definitely do and I enjoy sending in photos as I travel. It is an excellent resource and it deserves all our support.

 

I hope the same will click on the Donate tab when it comes back on line.

 

I hope my point is made!!!

[rix]

It's no longer there. But I will quote from Edition 2006, page 161:

 

"BW advise that you cruise early in the morning and avoid school holidays.

Moor only at recognized sites in this area and do not offer anyone you do not

know a ride"

 

The boat length issue is a gross approximation and is little more than a footnote.

If you are familiar with the restrictions, then you can pay them no heed.

If you are not familiar, then 56ft will get you through. The same thing applies

elsewhere on the canal system where you can get a 60 ft boat through various

locks by cleverly waiting for the right tide and opening both gates. But this goes

well beyond the idea of a SIMPLE interface.

 

Integrating into the planner to account for all kinds of permutations is necessary

as that provides the raw data that is needed to properly account for these things.

 

As someone who has contributed to the canal planner, I am am familiar with

the way it works and have a pretty good idea how to integrate it. However,

everything is down right now, so nothing is going anywhere at the moment.

If it ever does. These are just some ideas of mine that I put together to solve

a specific problem. Some of my ideas got incorporated into the CanalPlanAC,

some didn't. That's fine. I would really appreciate a little more in the way of

positive, or at least objective, comments.

 

I didn't realize that anyone would pay so much attention to footnotes. The idea

was to be able to allow someone to quickly lookup how long it would take them

to get from Brauston to Worcester, for example. May be some already know that.

This program was for those that don't. And it's free.

[MartinClark]

It's no longer there. But I will quote from Edition 2006, page 161:

 

"BW advise that you cruise early in the morning and avoid school holidays.

Moor only at recognized sites in this area and do not offer anyone you do not

know a ride"

 

Is that on the pages about the Rochdale Canal?

I would say that it is sensible advice on the canals in Manchester and also on a number of other urban waterways, such as large parts of the BCN, areas of Leeds, Leicester, etc.

 

Thank you for amending the footnotes. Perhaps you would consider a further amendment so that the Huddersfield note reads something like "Note that there are boat length restrictions on the Huddersfield Broad Canal and Calder and Hebble Navigation."

[NB Alnwick]

Having read this thread it is clear how much people rely / enjoy this programe and Nic's work. I for one definitely do and I enjoy sending in photos as I travel. It is an excellent resource and it deserves all our support.

 

I hope the same will click on the Donate tab when it comes back on line.

 

I hope my point is made!!!

 

Is anyone on here in touch with Nick? I would be more than happy to buy his Canal Planner as a stand-alone program on CD for those times when I cannot get an Internet connection - perhaps this would help him.

[StephenA]

Is anyone on here in touch with Nick? I would be more than happy to buy his Canal Planner as a stand-alone program on CD for those times when I cannot get an Internet connection - perhaps this would help him.

 

The problem is that CanalPlan AC uses things like google maps which needs an API key to work. Also its all driven through a web server which means installing Abyss onto your PC (or something bigger like WAMP).

 

Nick and I are working on getting the standby setup running on my server (but some things like photo uploading and data maintenance would be disabled).

[stort_mark]

Add any other coments (or send via the site address) and I will address them.

Fair enough ?

 

I think it looks like an excellent start....I used it for a few minutes and got a bit lost in all the abbreviations, but otherwise....it could be very nice indeed.

[stuart]

Theres basic route planning capability here as well, expect it to increase in features in the coming weeks.

http://www.waterexplorer.co.uk/routing/routingstart.aspx

 

 

Just shows how popular this forum is - I've had over 300 hits on this since Friday!

 

Stu.

[rix]

Is that on the pages about the Rochdale Canal?

I would say that it is sensible advice on the canals in Manchester and also on a number of other urban waterways, such as large parts of the BCN, areas of Leeds, Leicester, etc.

 

Thank you for amending the footnotes. Perhaps you would consider a further amendment so that the Huddersfield note reads something like "Note that there are boat length restrictions on the Huddersfield Broad Canal and Calder and Hebble Navigation."

 

 

That refers to the Ashton canal. You also need handcuff locks and one of the bridges is noted as very low

and passage through locks 1-18 should be before 10.00. Yes, I admit that I lumped all this detail under

one hazard notice for one location. We have yet to get to the issues of the crossing the ship canal etc.

 

However, I would caution that the footnotes are not complete, nor would they ever be. There are too

many odd little restrictions here and there that are best done from inside of a more data intensive

application. This app is designed to be fast and lightweight and easy to use. Having said that, everything

is ultimately solvable. The timelines for that are so far off, though, they probably don't count for much

at the moment.

 

Adding your C&H comment should be OK, though.

 

 

 

I think it looks like an excellent start....I used it for a few minutes and got a bit lost in all the abbreviations, but otherwise....it could be very nice indeed.

 

Well, thank you. I am glad that it worked. If you run into problems, let me know.

 

I have used this for a while, as do family members, but I always find something I

want to change. Ideally, I would spend a little more time on it, but it seemed like it

might serve an emergency need for now.

[MartinClark]

That refers to the Ashton canal. You also need handcuff locks and one of the bridges is noted as very low

and passage through locks 1-18 should be before 10.00. Yes, I admit that I lumped all this detail under

one hazard notice for one location.

I have now found what you are referring to. It is on page 155 in the 2003 edition.

 

It doesn't say that passage through locks 1-18 should be before 10.00. It say that passage through locks 1-18 should be commenced before 10.00 am. Even that is a bit unnecessary in my view and a later start should be fine.

 

There are many locks elsewhere that also require handcuff keys, including many rural sections of the Leeds and Liverpool. Anyone boating in the north should have one with them. I believe they are appearing in the Midlands now as well. Bridge 7 on the Ashton is pretty low, as well, so I wonder why does Nicholsons not mention that?

 

We have yet to get to the issues of the crossing the ship canal etc.

What issues of crossing the ship canal?

[rix]

I have now found what you are referring to. It is on page 155 in the 2003 edition.

 

It doesn't say that passage through locks 1-18 should be before 10.00. It say that passage through locks 1-18 should be commenced before 10.00 am. Even that is a bit unnecessary in my view and a later start should be fine.

 

 

There are many locks elsewhere that also require handcuff keys, including many rural sections of the Leeds and Liverpool. Anyone boating in the north should have one with them. I believe they are appearing in the Midlands now as well. Bridge 7 on the Ashton is pretty low, as well, so I wonder why does Nicholsons not mention that?

 

 

What issues of crossing the ship canal?

 

Correct. It says commenced. Hopefully anyone who is contemplating a trip

in that area is consulting the same or similar book to ensure that they have

the correct info.

 

Well, if you have to cross it, it is an issue. Again, people need to find out those

details from the appropriate authorities, as noted in (eg) Nicholsons.

 

My point was that I DON'T cover those issues. It was meant to be an example

of things that aren't covered and aren't likely to be. There is no intention to

try to replicate the functionality of CanalPlanAC. That has all the features in

there to handle all of these issues appropriately. Unfortunately, it is down

right now and there is not much that we can do about that. I am assuming

it will be back reasonably shortly. If that happens, and it works as it did before,

all of these items can be checked out by submitting the route to the planner.

 

Issues around Manchester are probably the most tricky on the system. Most

other areas are fairly straightforward by comparison. Ideally this would be

handled as a separate issue in its own right.

[alan_fincher]

Very good news!

 

It seems to be back, still at....

 

http://www2.mihalis.net/canal/cgi-bin/index.cgi

 

No obvious information page about the outage, or if it's now re-hosted.

 

Just tried the trip we did a couple of weeks back, from the GU, through London, up the Lee and on to the Stort - return by same route.....

 

Says 155 miles (fine!) but 157 locks. How can you go out, and come back the same way, and do an odd number of locks ?

 

Still I'm not quibbling over 1 lock - I think it's pretty wonderful, really!.....

[Olliebone]

 

Well - thank goodness for that. Losing Canalplan made me join the forum. As newbies last year Canalplan has been our bible. Welcome back sanity!

Welcome back Nick et al.

[StephenA]

Very good news!

 

It seems to be back, still at....

 

http://www2.mihalis.net/canal/cgi-bin/index.cgi

 

No obvious information page about the outage, or if it's now re-hosted.

...

 

Chris was moving house and this is his latest post on uk.rec.waterways:

 

I finally got connectivity and hence the canalplanner is (or should be back in action). Turns out to have been faulty wiring by the local phone company. I expect this is deliberate and designed to foil wholesale DSL and server-allowed independent ISPs.

 

After I booted up the server one of the first things to show up in top was the canal planner software. Looks like people spotted it pretty quick "

Edited June 12, 2008 by StephenA