TWT Planning a bonfire!

[Laurence Hogg]

Its a pity that the work of the original BMS has seemingly been forgotten. TWT were disgusting custodians and no priority was given to the importance of the most vunerable craft. Do we really want to see naother restored Josher sitting decaying in the museum? These boats should be leased to orginisations or individuals with the responsibility of upkeep and mobile display around the country as part of the deal, there would be planty of takers then the boatyard could get down to the hard stuff, the wooden boats.

 

Whilst its seems nice to restore a museum boat to fine fettle, look what happened to the "restored" Sevener at Gloucester!!

[Tiggers]

I think the intention is that Ferret could potential spend her time boating around the system acting as a floating museum which I think is a brilliant idea. That leaves mendip to be on display and used occasionally and shad to remain as the boat that volunteers use for demonstrations etc.

I'm sorry that I come across quite strong on the matter, but people fail to understand just how much love and passion the people who work here have. I personally sobbed my heart out the other week when we raised merope and Aries, every one of us want to see these boats return to their former glory.

I agree TWT did not run this place right, and that is why BMS never did transfer ownership of the boats over to them. I sorely hope CRT make a better job, and at the moment they are helping. I know BW have done some appalling things in the past, but I am willing to give them a chance with the museum.

We also have some brilliant new volunteers and between them and Dave, for the first time, a proper 20 year maintenance program has been drawn up for all the boats

[AMModels]

And you forget that restorations within a museum can sometimes be more expensive as we are duty bound to restore the boats it a traditional manner that they were originally built in, that means taking no short cuts that is so often the case now adays. We also have a duty to use things like timber from sustainable sources only etc which private individuals aren't bound to do.

Please feel free to name the boatyards and boats which have been restored in the manner to which we are discussing, that is fully and with respect to the original construction, without using traditional methods. As you should know with your boat Keays yard at Carl St worked til the late 70's so therefore any tools which were in use up till then can be considered traditional or authentic, Im presuming when the museum comes to restore the boats they are not going to make a steam chest out of wrought iron with heavy duty walls insulated with asbestos and powered by coal fired burners? If not then it is not traditional nor authentic in which case what is the museum going to do?

What short cuts have been taken by people such as Chris Collins, Jem Bates, the wooden canal boat society to name but three in the restoration work they have undertaken? and I believe they would use sustainable timber sources too.

 

Other than her history being steered by Charlie Atkins how is Mendip more important than any other josher on the system? She isnt but the work she did can be argued to be, as custodian of these boats the museum has a duty to look at the boats regardless of their working life but as an example of a certain type and as such Mendip is just another josher motor. Otherwise we could all put forward an argument that x boat is nationally important because she worked on a certain traffic for so many years and therefore should be prioritised.

How about USK she worked for over 30 years as a youth boat, longer than Mendip was in traffic commercially, is this less important? Introducing generations to the canals. With apologies to Carl for bringing up sad times she was destroyed by fire and then broken up.

VULCAN the only experimental gas powered josher, converted to a steamer then a motor and finally worked for 20 years as another youth boat. Vulcan survives just as well in private hands as any museum boat.

Arcturus was a trip boat in Cass for many years, became synonymous with canals in that area for many many people, again introducing thousands to the canals. Shes a small ricky but was deteriorating the last I heard so not doing too well.

There really are too many metal boats in good order round the canals to mention, and that is the crux of it, in private hands metal boats will do just fine but wooden boats are vulnerable, it is imperative that the museum recognises this and encourages all these people who put their hands into their pockets to give instead to the restoration of the rare ones not the shiny ones which look so pretty and therefore reflect well on them.

[AMModels]

This isnt a personal attack on you Tigger nor anyone else it is though an attack on the priorities that seem to be in place at the museum, time will tell whether the management shuffle will bring about any significant change but thats the one thing the boats mentioned dont have.

As you can probably tell I am also a little passionate about working boats and I dont doubt that the volunteers also feel the same way however I think its imperative that pressure is kept on the museum and that that pressure is felt by everyone who are part of the museum so that it can be passed on to the management committee so they are aware that the travesty we have seen over the past 20 odd years will not be accepted any more and they will be held to account for any more losses.

[Pluto]

As someone who worked for many years on the restoration of old machinery and boats for both museums and the private sector, I would say that virtually no private boats are being conserved or restored correctly. One thing which should happen with museum boats/exhibits is that a complete record is kept of original state and any restoration, along with justification for the work done during restoration. This is not the case with private boats.

 

Private boats are usually restored for travelling along the canals, keeping the traditions of working boats alive. This requires a different approach to a museum exhibit, such as Friendship, which is preserved with as little alteration or enhancement in its original condition at the time it became a museum object. Then again, conserving the traditional methods used in a boatyard requires a different approach to the conservation of boats. Producing the plan for conservation/restoration, including research, can be very time-consuming and expensive. Working professionally on a museum boat can be, and is, very different to working on a private boat, and more funding is usually required for the former. In museums, I have tried working with volunteers, who can be both enthusiastic and helpful, but proper conservation requires work of a professional standard, and there are not many with such skills.

 

About fifteen years ago, Tony Conder, as Curator of the Waterways Museum, did draw up a priority list for the retention/conservation/restoration of inland waterways boats nationally. Only now are the problems addressed by him beginning to be addressed. Even then, there will always be anomalies, give the problems in finding funding for specific projects.

[carlt]

We also have a duty to use things like timber from sustainable sources only etc which private individuals aren't bound to do.

Sorry but if you are using the correct timber then you are using a sustainable source.

 

Could you point me towards an active wooden boat restorer who is unconcerned about the source of their timber before levelling such allegations?

 

These days it is harder to find irresponsibly sourced English Oak than it is to find timber from sustainable sources and, even when sourcing the cheapest possible wood, I always find evidence that the sources are sustainable.

 

I also object to the insinuation that private owners or restorers do not use traditional methods and materials especially as, with a very few exceptions, the traditional methods and materials are cheaper and easier than modern ones.

 

I assume the museum are not digging saw pits or hollowing dug-out canoes with mammoth thigh bones, of course.

[Timleech]

Sorry but if you are using the correct timber then you are using a sustainable source.

 

 

I don't believe wide boards of English Elm are available from any sustainable source.

 

Tim

[carlt]

I don't believe wide boards of English Elm are available from any sustainable source.

Define "sustainable".

 

Obviously English Elm is not being renewed "like for like" because the young trees would just succumb as their predecessors did but felling and planking a dead Elm and replacing with with one or more young healthy trees, even if they are a different species, is as "sustainable" a source as is possible, under the circumstances, and there are several timber yards doing just that.

for the first time, a proper 20 year maintenance program has been drawn up for all the boats

How do I get a copy of this plan? Edited October 17, 2013 by carlt

[Tiggers]

I must clarify myself better! When referring to traditional methods, I was predominately talking about boats such as Shad, where there back end has been rebuilt the way Yarwoods did it, as opposed to just making it all out of steel which is so often the case with the majority of these boats that are being restored in private ownership, along with steel cabins and steel bottoms.

I have the upmost respect for the work people like Chris Collins is doing, it is truly amazing, and I am aware that there are a handful of people still doing it right, but the fact is it's only a handful of people at the moment.

I think Pluto has made a good point, and we are working along the NHS guidelines, and full photographic surveys and written accounts are being made of everything we do and justification as to why we are doing it. This of course means that things take a lot longer (and again, I'm not comparing up to the work say on progress!).

It's all well and good saying that all the museums boats should go into private ownership, but then for those people who don't have a boat or have no knowledge of the canals, where do they go?

And Carl, my reference was to the fact that we will not be using opepe for the boats bottoms as you cannot get it from a FSC Certified source. I believe this is what is being used for most boat bottoms now a days

Don't get me wrong, although I have used a brace and bit a few times, but not all the time!

It would be nice if people did notice the good things try are doing here. The fact they have just taken on the second set of young trainees to teach them traditional skills that are dying out I think is amazing, not many places doing that now a days

And even more impressive is not one of us have lost a finger yet!

[carlt]

And Carl, my reference was to the fact that we will not be using opepe for the boats bottoms as you cannot get it from a FSC Certified source. I believe this is what is being used for most boat bottoms now a days

Opepe is hardly a "traditional" material for English inland boats and there are certainly other approved timbers available.

 

Personally, if I didn't have a source of Elm, I would use that traditional English boat-building timber...Oak.

 

I would add that the majority of wooden boats currently being restored are being done properly, with photographic records kept.

 

I cannot speak for the metal boats being restored, of course, as they are of little interest to me but, particularly after the mistakes made by the Raymond lot, the wooden boat fraternity are trying doing to do the job properly and even those who are doing a "rolling" restoration are at least carrying out some maintenance on their boats, unlike the museum's wooden boat collection left to rot and sink.

 

I have little respect for an organisation that tells us how great it's doing for its flagship vessels whilst equally important, but less sexy, boats are left to rot.

 

There is no need for me to give credit for the little they are doing when you are doing a fine job yourself.

 

As I said, could I see a copy of this "maintenance program" for all the museum boats and then, maybe, you can prove me wrong?

Edited October 17, 2013 by carlt

[Timleech]

And Carl, my reference was to the fact that we will not be using opepe for the boats bottoms as you cannot get it from a FSC Certified source. I believe this is what is being used for most boat bottoms now a days

 

 

Private owners can do what they like, and often do so, without proper regard for history.

 

I used to do a fair amount of boat repair for BW, when they were in a phase of caring about such things. We used opepe then, it's a very good timber for the job, possibly better than elm. BW used it themselves for other jobs, and their rules required that it came from a certified sustainable source (which mine wasn't). I was told by someone at BW who ought to know that they ordered from a certified supplier, who simply bought the timber from my supplier and magically applied the necessary certificate as well as a large percentage increase on the price.

 

Tim

[Ian Mac]

Any idea how much it'd cost to restore a wooden boat?

Yes - it all depends on the cost of the labour, It takes approx three man years worth of effort of a skilled boat builder to build a new wooden narrow boat, for reasons, alluded to by Pluto earlier in the thread it takes about 7 man yrs to do a wide boat. Then there is then cost of the materials, about £50K for a narrowboat. Given that all the wooden boats would be total new builds, using a few bits left over from the old boat, which is a shame. so are they then museum boats? Are they not just a new boat?

So a total rebuild will cost you 3 man years at 40K per year (very cheap in my opinion), extras 20K of odd jobs and stuff, plus £50K in timber and goods = not much change out of £200K

and a wide boat £40K*7 plus £30K for extras plus £120K for timber may be cheaper if its shorter so lets say over £400K for a broad beam boat.

Given these prices it would have been a lot cheaper to maintain them in fair condition and use them, rather than to have them in exceptional condition once every 30 yrs and then just for them to rot away They would still be in fair condition now at well less than half these numbers for total costings in my opinion.

[carlt]

It's all well and good saying that all the museums boats should go into private ownership, but then for those people who don't have a boat or have no knowledge of the canals, where do they go?

I don't think all the museum's boats should go into private ownership but perhaps those they restore should be sold on, with a covenant, to preserve those they appear to not be bothered about.

 

The museum has more boats than it can cope with so some should be passed on either to fund more restorations or to be saved before they are lost forever.

 

I'll have Aries and, if CRT give me a bit of hardstanding for a year or two, I'll put it back in the water and show it to far more people than the museum ever would.

Private owners can do what they like, and often do so, without proper regard for history.

Does leaving the national collection rotting away show "proper regard for history".

Shes a small ricky but was deteriorating the last I heard so not doing too well.

Both Arcturus and Sirius are under new ownership and are being worked on.

 

Clicky

 

Edited October 17, 2013 by carlt

[Ian Mac]

Personally, if I didn't have a source of Elm, I would use that traditional English boat-building timber...Oak.

With due respect I don't believe you know what your talking about there. Elm was used for three reasons,

It was very cheap

it was very wide

it likes being in water

The biggest problem with bottoms is abrasion, so having a cheap abrasion resistant cross gained material was good. Oak would not really up to the job as it may well crack, when point loaded, its also dear and doesn't come in that wide a plank that can be used.

Opepe is the current saviour, although we are wooried about its long term resistance to point load failure. One can still buy elm but the cheap bit has vanished, its now very very dear, if you can get someone to haul it down from scotland or even more costly over from Norway, you can have some and I know of some which is over 2ft (still narrow) wide.

I am not aware of a single wooden boat which isn't floating on opepe, or will be soon!

 

Museums are allowed to cast things is aspic if they wish, but real boats that are used aren't like that, cost matters, wooden boats were built because they were cheap, there is no reason why a modern wooden boats should also not be cheap. Use of modern materials is a must, modern glues, squirty foam, and glue guns to plug nail holes are an absolute, time of labour being the driving cost using the correct modern material and the use of power tools really helps save time and therefore money. Also some material have vanished and are things of the past (nearly) coal tar is now totally illegal throughout the EU, oakum can no longer be bought coated in it, and is now coated in Stockholm tar which is not up to fresh water. This is a major problem for the wooden boat owner. What does one paint the sides in now?

What I believe we are preserving is the skills and attitude of the old boat yards, some, Claytons for example, were very good at keeping boats floating, very cheaply, lots of short cuts were taken, isn't it this skill and judgement that we should be looking after. rather than it should be as in 1953. These days one would be mad not to galvanise every bit of iron anywhere near a wooden boat. If your building a work boat why bother its only got to last 20 yrs, it would just be additional cost.

[carlt]

With due respect I don't believe you know what your talking about there. Elm was used for three reasons,

It was very cheap

it was very wide

it likes being in water

With due respect I don't think insults are really necessary in what is a friendly discussion.

 

Elm was used for four reasons.

 

It was very cheap

It was very wide

It liked being in water

It was essential that it took the strain of 20 tons of cargo being chucked on top of it.

 

It is not necessary to have that fourth requirement any more (unless you are planning on carrying a load) and oak is more than up to the job for the other 3 (though not the cheapness).

 

I am not aware of a single wooden boat which isn't floating on opepe, or will be soon!

 

Hood has Oak bottoms and I understand it hasn't sunk yet.

 

As for Coal tar I have easily a lifetime's supply of Keyes Imperial no.1 for several boats in store and, contrary to what you claim, coal tar is still very much available, though not to DIYers.

 

As for Stockholm Tar coated oakum it has been used for years in fresh water and whilst not ideal is perfectly adequate, especially if protected from that nasty fresh water with lashings of coal tar varnish.

Edited October 17, 2013 by carlt

[Tiggers]

I don't think all the museum's boats should go into private ownership but perhaps those they restore should be sold on, with a covenant, to preserve those they appear to not be bothered about.

 

The museum has more boats than it can cope with so some should be passed on either to fund more restorations or to be saved before they are lost forever.

 

I'll have Aries and, if CRT give me a bit of hardstanding for a year or two, I'll put it back in the water and show it to far more people than the museum ever would.

 

Ok, so the museum give a whole load of boats away, and are then accused of selling off the family silver, much like what happened when BW auctioned off the majority of their historic boats recently.

A number of the boats have actually been offered up to people with no avail. If you are that interested in Aries, why not approach the museum? I'm sure they would listen to a sensible proposal, particularly as they have merope and Merak, also little rickys (and in my opinion, far nicer boats and far better built)

[carlt]

Ok, so the museum give a whole load of boats away, and are then accused of selling off the family silver, much like what happened when BW auctioned off the majority of their historic boats recently.

There is a huge difference between BW selling off serviceable working boats and the museum admitting that they cannot cope (which is pretty obvious).

 

There is also a difference between "giving a whole load of boats away) and releasing some that they are not capable of saving, with binding covenants, and selling off shiny boats to polish up the rest of the collection.

 

To be honest I was more concerned about BW selling their brand new workboats than them sending their historic ones to a better home.

 

 

If you are that interested in Aries, why not approach the museum? I'm sure they would listen to a sensible proposal, particularly as they have merope and Merak, also little rickys (and in my opinion, far nicer boats and far better built)

I wouldn't qualify because I would never be part of a trust or committee and they wouldn't release a boat to an individual.

[Tiggers]

I wouldn't qualify because I would never be part of a trust or committee and they wouldn't release a boat to an individual.

And you know that for certain do you or are you merely guessing?

And again, they have tried to give boats away that they are not capable of saving before and no one took them up (do not quote me but I'm pretty sure these included certain wide boats and Basuto)

[carlt]

And you know that for certain do you or are you merely guessing?

It was the policy of their predecessors so admittedly it is a guess now (though an educated one I think),

 

Wide boats are a totally different prospect to narrow boats and, though I would love to have a crack at one, I'm pretty sure I couldn't do it the same justice that Chris has done to Progress without a lot of help.

 

If I wasn't so far away, though, and they said they were going to restore a wooden wide beam I would most definitely be there to chip in.

[Ian Mac]

Elm was used for four reasons.

 

It was very cheap

It was very wide

It liked being in water

It was essential that it took the strain of 20 tons of cargo being chucked on top of it.

 

It is not necessary to have that fourth requirement any more (unless you are planning on carrying a load) and oak is more than up to the job for the other 3 (though not the cheapness).

 

 

Hood has Oak bottoms and I understand it hasn't sunk yet.

 

As for Coal tar I have easily a lifetime's supply of Keyes Imperial no.1 for several boats in store and, contrary to what you claim, coal tar is still very much available, though not to DIYers.

 

As for Stockholm Tar coated oakum it has been used for years in fresh water and whilst not ideal is perfectly adequate, especially if protected from that nasty fresh water with lashings of coal tar varnish.

Its also the problem of point loading whilst traveling along the cut, having had to repair two composites quick, due to bottom boards (thin elm) cracking due to hitting objects in the cut, I am sure wide Oak planks would not be up to it. If you know where to get wide good oak in 8ft buts them I'm interested, but uptil they are planked I wouldn't trust them. Elm you just bought the but had it planked and put them on the boat. simple, same with opepe.

 

Its been illegal to store cold tar since the first of Jan this year there are NO exemption, so make sure they are hid well. and don't leak. This ban has severly efeected the production of several medical product, particularly the one for serriosis, where it is the only known treatment bring back the singing detective.

 

We and several others including the WBCS are having lots of problems with Stockholm Tar coated oakum, we have been back to the sole uk importer and discussed it with him several times, It seems to depend on the water quality and type in each region. Its grand in salt water, which is why it changed - for the yatching types caulking there decks,

[carlt]

Its also the problem of point loading whilst traveling along the cut, having had to repair two composites quick, due to bottom boards (thin elm) cracking due to hitting objects in the cut, I am sure wide Oak planks would not be up to it.

On the contrary I would say that the higher modulus of an Oak board would make it more durable than a worn thin Elm plank with its lower modulus, in the circumstances you describe.

 

As to the ban on Coal Tar I would need to look into that but, if you are correct, I have no problem with arranging for its disposal and finding an alternative.

 

 

 

Edited because I got my highs and lows back to front.

Edited October 18, 2013 by carlt

[AMModels]

On the contrary I would say that the relatively low modulus of an Oak board would make it more durable than a worn thin Elm plank with its much higher modulus, in the circumstances you describe.

 

As to the ban on Coal Tar I would need to look into that but, if you are correct, I have no problem with arranging for its disposal and finding an alternative.

Dont dump the coal tar yet Carl, the legislation hasnt changed per se.

 

 

From 01 May 2013 wood preservatives containing creosote will need to be authorised for use in the EU. In the meantime national legislation will continue to apply, and creosote wood preservative products will continue to need approval under the Control of Pesticides Regulations (COPR) before they can be advertised, sold, supplied, stored or used in the UK.

Under COPR creosote containing products are approved for use in the UK by professionals as part of their work.

 

pretty much what it has been for years, which is what I think you were referring to.

 

Ok, so the museum give a whole load of boats away, and are then accused of selling off the family silver, much like what happened when BW auctioned off the majority of their historic boats recently.

A number of the boats have actually been offered up to people with no avail. If you are that interested in Aries, why not approach the museum? I'm sure they would listen to a sensible proposal, particularly as they have merope and Merak, also little rickys (and in my opinion, far nicer boats and far better built)

 

There is a difference between what I proposed and what you misunderstood, unless you are offering a strawman argument which I doubt. My point was that the museum have 3 boats the same, why restore all 3 and leave boats where there are not as many left in private ownership such as the rickys.

 

As Carl said

 

 

There is also a difference between "giving a whole load of boats away) and releasing some that they are not capable of saving, with binding covenants, and selling off shiny boats to polish up the rest of the collection.

With the correct explanation given no one would question why boats are being loaned out essentially as opposed to what BW were doing.

 

Yes - it all depends on the cost of the labour, I takes approx three man years worth of effort of a skilled boat builder to build a new wooden narrow boat, for reasons, alluded to by Pluto earlier in the thread it takes about 7 man yrs to do a wide boat. Then there is then cost of the materials, about £50K for a narrowboat. Given that all the wooden boats would be total new builds, using a few bits left over from the old boat, which is a shame. so are they then museum boats? Are they not just a new boat?

So a total rebuild will cost you 3 man years at 40K per year (very cheap in my opinion), extras 20K of odd jobs and stuff, plus £50K in timber and goods = not much change out of £200K

and a wide boat £40K*7 plus £30K for extras plus £120K for timber may be cheaper if its shorter so lets say over £400K for a broad beam boat.

Given these prices it would have been a lot cheaper to maintain them in fair condition and use them, rather than to have them in exceptional condition once every 30 yrs and then just for them to rot away They would still be in fair condition now at well less than half these numbers for total costings in my opinion.

Therefore as I stated earlier if you remove the labour costs £40K per man year as you would be using volunteers you reduce the cost by £120K which leaves approx £80k for a wooden narrow boat, even better than I thought.

 

£150K for a wide beam when you have removed the labour costs again doesnt seem as bad as it could be.

 

Where are the museum getting the wrought iron sheets from to repair the boats they are doing and what is the cost?

Edited October 18, 2013 by AMModels

[carlt]

Dont dump the coal tar yet Carl, the legislation hasnt changed per se.

 

I could only find that reference too and I don't actually own any creosote based wood preservatives, apart from the 5 litres of nut brown in the garden shed.

 

I can't find anything about coal tar as a raw product other than asphalt recycling and road repairs.

 

I have my old research engineer colleague looking into the actual legislation for me and I'll act on his advice unless Google comes up with something sooner.

 

Edited October 18, 2013 by carlt

[Tiggers]

We have a handful of volunteers come into the yard twice a week, and a lot of their time is spent on maintenance. I can't think of that many who have hands on experience of restoring wooden boats. So how do you propose they restore something like Aries and make that £40k saving? Dave and us three trainees are paid members of staff, so wages are not £0..

[carlt]

We have a handful of volunteers come into the yard twice a week, and a lot of their time is spent on maintenance. I can't think of that many who have hands on experience of restoring wooden boats. So how do you propose they restore something like Aries and make that £40k saving? Dave and us three trainees are paid members of staff, so wages are not £0..

You are merely reinforcing my point that these boats are in the wrong hands and I don't understand how you can say " for the first time, a proper 20 year maintenance program has been drawn up for all the boats " when you acknowledge that there isn't the expertise there.

 

You still haven't expanded on this "proper 20 year maintenance program" either.

 

I would really like to have a look at it and see what plans there are for the wooden boats (all of them).