Jump to content

Spitfire


Speedwheel

Featured Posts

In fairness president is at least the right shape ( except for the slightly extended engine room - which was specified by the "Friends ") and properly rivetted .
I only realised at braunston this year that kildare had a steel cabin to go with her steel bottom. I was never sure why presdents cabin was enlarged, given the amount of space (an junk) in there.

 

 

Daniel

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In fairness president is at least the right shape ( except for the slightly extended engine room - which was specified by the "Friends ") and properly rivetted .

 

Most *historic boats* have been in private ownership as pleasure boats for much longer than they were in use for proper commercial trade. Spitfire, for example, was a working tug on the BCN for less than 20 years, but has been a private pleasure boat for over 40 years (including a few years as a trip boat).

 

When people point out that a *historic boat* is painted in the wrong colours for the livery or has been modified from her original shape what do they expect? A boat in private ownership is exactly that. If I owned an old Victorian house I wouldn't be pleased if peopled poked their head through the bay window to tell me I have removed a classic period fireplace.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I owned an old Victorian house I wouldn't be pleased if peopled poked their head through the bay window to tell me I have removed a classic period fireplace.

But if that house was listed then you would have to get permission to remove the fireplace.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Only if it was grade 1 listed ............... (and there aren't many of those)

Sorry but you're wrong.

 

I owned a grade 2 listed cottage and was not allowed to change any external features and, if it was part of the listing, any original internal features, including fireplaces, doors, picture rails, etc.

 

This wasn't a problem as I bought the house knowing (and welcoming) the restrictions that listed status brings with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Only if it was grade 1 listed ............... (and there aren't many of those)

Carl is correct. If the fire place is of historic interest you would need Planning Consent to remove it from a Grade l, Grade ll*, or a Grade ll, listed building.

 

When I was Clerk to the Parish Council, I worked with the Planning Authority and the V&A museum to force a Building Developer to re-build an 18th century bread oven in a Grade ll listed building. Ironicly, the bread oven was actually of far more historical importance in what was otherwise a fairly ordinary domestic building.

 

Edited to correct the above statement:- The removal of a fireplace of historic importance from a grade ll building would actually require Listed Building Consent, it may or may not require planning Consent as well, depending on whether any other alterations were being undertaken at the same time.

Edited by David Schweizer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

(snip)

When I was Clerk to the Parish Council, I worked with the Planning Authority and the V&A museum to force a Building Developer to re-build an 18th century bread oven in a Grade ll listed building. Ironicly, the bread oven was actually of far more historical importance in what was otherwise a fairly ordinary domestic building.

 

This begs a difficult question. If the bread oven was not clearly visible from the road, or an external feature of the building, what difference would removing it make? Who is to know if only the residents, bona fide visitors, or prospective buyers - who may not see it as a 'feature' - know of its existence?

 

A tongue in cheek question perhaps, and I am personally all for keeping structures as they were constructed (provided they were designed and built with practicality of use and purpose to the fore, even purely decorative to a period), but if the item served no useful purpose - is bread to be baked in it? - unless the building is to be opened to the public as a museum/heritage piece, can it be explained why such features should remain? What purpose would all the blacksmith's forges be today, if all had been preserved as they stood - they might well end up as no more than vandalised bus shelters, much like the riverside wash house are in rural France - graffiti, smashed benches, and fired.

 

On the other hand, we have seen decimation of sturdy architecture, and the bastardisation within structures such as St Pancras and Marylebone Stations - structures still in the public eye and in use. Acres of glass and plastic might suit some, but it is not what the designers either had available, nor I fancy would they have used if they had (though arguable of course) - but the style - no, they wouldn't have done it like that. Take your eyes from the roof in St Pancras, and you might as well be in a modern abattoir. Staples Inn, Holborn also comes to mind. This is the Old Tudor building depicted on the 'Old Holborn' tobacco tins and pouches. Step inside and you would not tell the difference from a sixties tower block.

 

Rambling again. Yes, I am for keeping the internal fabric along with the external - and no flat screen TV's replacing family ancestors over the mantlepiece please! And who on Earth would want to bring a 'Privvy' inside the house??? :lol:

Edited by Derek R.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This begs a difficult question. If the bread oven was not clearly visible from the road, or an external feature of the building, what difference would removing it make? Who is to know if only the residents, bona fide visitors, or prospective buyers - who may not see it as a 'feature' - know of its existence?

 

A tongue in cheek question perhaps, and I am personally all for keeping structures as they were constructed (provided they were designed and built with practicality of use and purpose to the fore, even purely decorative to a period), but if the item served no useful purpose - is bread to be baked in it? - unless the building is to be opened to the public as a museum/heritage piece, can it be explained why such features should remain? What purpose would all the blacksmith's forges be today, if all had been preserved as they stood - they might well end up as no more than vandalised bus shelters, much like the riverside wash house are in rural France - graffiti, smashed benches, and fired.

 

On the other hand, we have seen decimation of sturdy architecture, and the bastardisation within structures such as St Pancras and Marylebone Stations - structures still in the public eye and in use. Acres of glass and plastic might suit some, but it is not what the designers either had available, nor I fancy would they have used if they had (though arguable of course) - but the style - no, they wouldn't have done it like that. Take your eyes from the roof in St Pancras, and you might as well be in a modern abattoir. Staples Inn, Holborn also comes to mind. This is the Old Tudor building depicted on the 'Old Holborn' tobacco tins and pouches. Step inside and you would not tell the difference from a sixties tower block.

 

Rambling again. Yes, I am for keeping the internal fabric along with the external - and no flat screen TV's replacing family ancestors over the mantlepiece please! And who on Earth would want to bring a 'Privvy' inside the house??? :lol:

 

Listed Building Status was introduced to prevent the uncontrolled destruction of our Architectural heritage. People who choose to purchase old buildings are only transient occupants, and have a duty to preserve that which is good for future generations to appreciate and enjoy. This includes the interior of the building as well as the exterior.

 

The case in particular was almost unique, as only one other example of the traditional central bread oven of it's type exists. The building, although a fairly ordinary Wiltshire vernacular building on the outside, contained a rare treasure, which was well recorded with detailed drawings and photographs being held by the V&A Museum. The developer knew this when he purchased the building and knew that he had a legal duty to preserve it within the modernisation of the cottage, however he chose to totally destroy this almost unique feature for financial gain, and even tried to suggest that the Ovens never existed in the first instance.

 

Unfortunately for the Developer, the Conservation experts were able to prove that the ovens still existed when the cottage was sold to him, and were able to identify a large number of dressed and uniquely carved stones which had been removed by the builder, amongst the rubble that filled several skips on siite. He was required to re build the ovens, using the detailed dfrawings and original stones, closely supervised by an Histioric Buildings Consultant Architect. It proved to be a very expensive venture for him , but the alternative was prosecution.

 

The cottage is now in private hands. The present owners are vey proud of their ovens, and will gladly allow people to view them by arrangement.

Edited by David Schweizer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course it is the owner's prerogative to do what he wants with his boat but this is a shocking desecration of an interesting and comparably rare type of boat. If he had to go to the extent of lengthening the boat and doing away with the round bilge then perhaps he should have bought another boat. Goodness knows what he'll do when he finds out that it is only 6ft 6ins across the beam - widen it?

 

But this sort of thing will carry on until real historic is valued over faux historic and such alterations are seen as financial madness because as things are at the moment Spitfire will still be considered "historic" without the inconvence of the round bilge and comparatively short length - and probably be seen by many as more desirable (and valuable) as a result.

 

Will Spitfire be included on the Historic Ships Register? Well she already is and apparantly "it is the current owner's intention to replace the engine with that of a more appropriate vintage and to rebuild the cabin to reflect the shape of the original." Frankly as long as you told them your Springer was built in 1940 they'd include you.

 

Historic Narrow Boat Owners Club membership? Yes - if your boat incorporates at least 50% of the length of an old boat you're eligible for membership.

 

BW licence discount? Almost certainly as this is almost entirely on the basis of "looking the part." So there are boats which are almost entirely replicas who get the discount and some very original boats with almost all original gear intact (wooden bottoms, cants, back cabin, original engine insatllation) but happen to be converted that do not. It has little or nothing to do with origial content.

 

I can't see any kind of listing ever coming in we just have to hope that enough people will see keeping as much original content of a boat as possible as being more important than the marginal convenience of a "modernised" one. But butties are still being cut up and yards such as WFBCo and Brinklow are being asked to over-restore boats to be "as good as new." (Er - buy a new boat then.) So I think it is a losing battle at the moment.

 

Incidentally (before anyone comments) my own boat has been shortened but that was in 1964. I'd never had done it myself but I am glad it was done - that's why I bought it. When the back cabin is reskinned next year it will be in timber not steel - I certainly want to keep what originality there is and there is a darn sight more than with most of the heritage boats.

 

Paul H

Edited by Paul H
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course it is the owner's prerogative to do what he wants with his boat but this is a shocking desecration of an interesting and comparably rare type of boat.

 

He was presumably the only one who was interested enough to cough up the cash and buy it.

Some people find that it's all too easy to spend other people's money for them, IMO.

 

If you don't like it (anyone expressing disquiet, that is - nothing personal) then why didn't you buy the boat and preserve it?

 

The 'listed building' argument doesn't hold much water, either: do you prefer an attractive but redundant old building to be used for something (with modifications), or would you just let it rot away? That's often the stark choice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He was presumably the only one who was interested enough to cough up the cash and buy it.

Some people find that it's all too easy to spend other people's money for them, IMO.

 

If you don't like it (anyone expressing disquiet, that is - nothing personal) then why didn't you buy the boat and preserve it?

 

The 'listed building' argument doesn't hold much water, either: do you prefer an attractive but redundant old building to be used for something (with modifications), or would you just let it rot away? That's often the stark choice.

As far as I am aware it wasn't actually advertised for sale. The vendor was a committee member of the HNBOC who I am pretty sure would never have sold it if he knew of the buyer's intentions - if only becasue he is presumably pretty embarassed now.

 

Paul H

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't see any kind of listing ever coming in we just have to hope that enough people will see keeping as much original content of a boat as possible as being more important than the marginal convenience of a "modernised" one. But butties are still being cut up and yards such as WFBCo and Brinklow are being asked to over-restore boats to be "as good as new." (Er - buy a new boat then.) So I think it is a losing battle at the moment.

I'm very anxious not to over-restore Chertsey. At least one and possibly both of the yards you mention (although I may be doing Brinklow a disservice), when I went to discuss it with them, tried to talk me into having steel gunnels fitted, promising that no one would be able to tell the difference. Despite the fact that the boat has had hardly anything welded on it, at least not above the waterline. It is a minefield I'm striding into here, because I am not best placed to judge the practicalities of things; I just know I don't want to ruin what's survived thus far of the boat.

 

By the way, anyone on here who has experience and knowledge of these things, I would love to pick your brains, if you would PM me and let me know if you are willing to have them picked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He was presumably the only one who was interested enough to cough up the cash and buy it.

Some people find that it's all too easy to spend other people's money for them, IMO.

 

If you don't like it (anyone expressing disquiet, that is - nothing personal) then why didn't you buy the boat and preserve it?

 

The 'listed building' argument doesn't hold much water, either: do you prefer an attractive but redundant old building to be used for something (with modifications), or would you just let it rot away? That's often the stark choice.

But its people like this who come along with more money than conscience and buy a perfectly serviceable historic boat for an inflated price and then proceed to ruin it with very little or no thought for the history they are destroying. If this boat hadnt been allowed to be altered in such a manner the price would have been at a level where someone with the interest in historic boats and the interest of the boat at heart. Its all well and good people rolling out this 'wheres the enthusiasts when a boats for sale' argument, again nothing personal more a generalisation of course, it tends to be that the enthusiasts know the value of a boat but someone who wants to pose on an historic boat but have no real feel for what they own come along and inflate the prices beyond what a boat is worth. I dont agree that a boat is worth what someone will pay for it in these instances, because the true worth of a boat like Spitfire isnt measured in pounds shilling and pence but in the significance it has in the history of the canals and boats in partic. This particular boat is one of a few, and maybe the last one left, built in this style by Harris Bros and to see it chopped about like this on a whim of some philistine who didnt like the way the boat rolled is a disgrace and anyone who cant see that is as bad as the person who has perpetrated this act. If a boat like this rolls too much then as others have said buy a different ****ing boat and leave our history alone.

 

I apologise if I have upset anyone with this post unless its the person who has performed this butchery in which case tough!

:lol:

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm very anxious not to over-restore Chertsey. At least one and possibly both of the yards you mention (although I may be doing Brinklow a disservice), when I went to discuss it with them, tried to talk me into having steel gunnels fitted, promising that no one would be able to tell the difference. Despite the fact that the boat has had hardly anything welded on it, at least not above the waterline. ledge of these things, I would love to pick your brains, if you would PM me and let me know if you are willing to have them picked.

 

Please please please please don't put metal gunwhales on Chertsey. Wood is nice, nice bit of green French oak, cheap as chips, bit of proper creosote from Liver Grease with a topping of tar.

 

Steel does not look right or behave in the same, elastic way as oak gunwhales. I can think of reasons to do it but to say you would not tell the difference is ignorant.

 

Same goes for breast pieces and cants.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please please please please don't put metal gunwhales on Chertsey. Wood is nice, nice bit of green French oak, cheap as chips, bit of proper creosote from Liver Grease with a topping of tar.

 

Steel does not look right or behave in the same, elastic way as oak gunwhales. I can think of reasons to do it but to say you would not tell the difference is ignorant.

 

Same goes for breast pieces and cants.

I agree with Chris, furthermore you could probobly do the job yourself, saving the cost of labour. If you need a supplier of green oak, contact me, there is a very good hardwood yard only a few miles from where I live, and they will mill it up to size for a modest price. If you need it, I can let you have can of real Creosote which has been hanging around my workshop for twenty years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please please please please don't put metal gunwhales on Chertsey. Wood is nice, nice bit of green French oak, cheap as chips, bit of proper creosote from Liver Grease with a topping of tar.

 

Steel does not look right or behave in the same, elastic way as oak gunwhales. I can think of reasons to do it but to say you would not tell the difference is ignorant.

 

Same goes for breast pieces and cants.

No, no, absolutely no way; that was the first thing I stuck at. It's a perfect candidate for wooden ones and that is what it will have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm very anxious not to over-restore Chertsey. At least one and possibly both of the yards you mention (although I may be doing Brinklow a disservice), when I went to discuss it with them, tried to talk me into having steel gunnels fitted, promising that no one would be able to tell the difference.

 

You spoke to the steel boys then, rather than to Rex. I'm sure Rex would be more than happy to fit you wooden gunnels.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You spoke to the steel boys then, rather than to Rex. I'm sure Rex would be more than happy to fit you wooden gunnels.

 

I thought it was me who suggested wooden gunwhales and cabin to you in the first place,

 

come and see my own boat, Aquila, if you want to see what wooden decks, cants, gunwhales and cabin are like

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the gunnels of a hold I personally would opt for wood. Where access from beneath is restricted such as along the back cabin, it may be a different question. Removing the range, table cupboard, bed'ole lining (ditto though easier the other side) every score years to replace due to rot - perhaps just in one area - certainly tipped the scales for me.

 

More on the 'Northwich Gunnels' thread.

 

Derek

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.