Is it actually possible to steer a narrowboat when going astern ? ! ?

[furnessvale]

To where?!?!

 

Never heard it called Bugsworth Junction before. Surely you mean "Bridgemont Junction"

 

Everyone I know who lives in the area calls it Buggie Junction, ie the junction from where you can get to Buggie, which is quite normal terminology for a junction to a short branch with one destination. Buggie is so much easier to say than Bridgemont which has no natural shortened form unlike Buggie. This is probably why the junction is so named (by locals).

 

Admittedly, many years ago, under that terminology and when Buggie was the main line, it was probably called Whaley Bridge Junction.

 

George ex nb Alton retired

[Machpoint005]

>>Admittedly, many years ago, under that terminology and when Buggie was the main line, it was probably called Whaley Bridge Junction.<<

Without thinking much about it, that's what we call it! It's a junction and it's near Whaley Bridge...

[Athy]

.

 

an Ownerships boat (Stolen Time).

 

 

The name sounds more appropriate for a Challenger boat.

[mayalld]

The name sounds more appropriate for a Challenger boat.

 

Sister ship to "Doing Time"?

[mykaskin]

When travelling forward, has anyone tried getting the Butty steerer to steer the motor, when on cross straps, by pushing the Motor's back end around with the butty's fore end, while the Motor steersman goes onto the engine hole for a sh1t? Os was that just me and my brother!

 

For shorter periods when the Nuneaton's water intake bloked up. Surprising the amount of control, and you could see why having no butty steerer would be better than having a bad steerer!

 

Mike

[GUMPY]

Could that be due to barges being heavier or helix hitting the keel?

 

In deep water if prop is also deep then prop walk is negligible or non existent.

 

Well there's the rub the Yot has two keels one either side

And even in 35ft of water it still pirouettes

That's 33ft of water under the prop.

 

Prop walk is not always a function of the closeness of the bottom it doesn't help but there are other forces at work.

[nb Innisfree]

Well there's the rub the Yot has two keels one either side

And even in 35ft of water it still pirouettes

That's 33ft of water under the prop.

 

Prop walk is not always a function of the closeness of the bottom it doesn't help but there are other forces at work.

 

As I understand it prop walk is the result of blades at the top are near the surface and therefore in less dense water and not able to cancel out the opposite effect from the bottom blades, not really as a result of the proximity of the bottom, unless it is making contact with it.

 

Your yacht has keels which could be the cause of pirouetting caused by the helix hitting them on one side.

[Idunhoe]

As I understand it prop walk is the result of blades at the top are near the surface and therefore in less dense water and not able to cancel out the opposite effect from the bottom blades, not really as a result of the proximity of the bottom, unless it is making contact with it.

 

Your yacht has keels which could be the cause of pirouetting caused by the helix hitting them on one side.

 

 

'Prop walk' is also known as Paddle Wheel Effect and you are right it has nothing to do with depth of water and all to do with the differing pressures at the top of the prop and the lowest part of the sweep.

[jonk]

The big question....

 

Is it actually possible to steer a canal boat when going astern ?

If so how do you do it ?

 

Surely the answer is NO! Manoeuvre yes but steer no.

As I understand it steering is done by the water from the prop passing over the rudder, in reverse the water from the prop passes over the hull and so the hull becomes the rudder. Moving the rudder from centre will surely cause the bow to move out of line.

That is not say that you cannot reverse a narrowboat - just that you are not steering it but using it's shape and some odd compensations to keep it moving in the right direction.

I could be totally wrong but that is how I see it

 

John

[Liam]

People have said that it all depends on your boat and I couldn't agree more...

 

When I am reversing Ariel, I usually start off in the direction I want to go in reverse gear, and then pretty much just watch the bows. As soon as they start to move off course just a fraction I move the tiller to correct it. The most I've had to go backwards is around 800 foot, and did this in one go from my moorings to the work area. I have a theory that even if you go drastically off course, you'd be able to correct it eventually, but with the canal generally being a restricted channel you don't have the opportunity to put theory into practice, whether that's correct or not I don't know.

 

On the other hand I have steered some boats that as soon as you put them into reverse, they jump sideways. Impossible...

[Radio-Ga-Ga]

How did this topic get to 3 pages long without anybody daring to mention steering with a bowthruster?

 

Edited to add: I mean 4 pages now!

Edited April 20, 2010 by Radio-Ga-Ga

[Liam]

Because that is simply cheating!!!!

[Radio-Ga-Ga]

Because that is simply cheating!!!!

Yup! but it works!

[Liam]

Until it breaks down... and you've come so reliant on it that when it doesn't work you don't know what to do.

[johnmck]

Until it breaks down... and you've come so reliant on it that when it doesn't work you don't know what to do.

 

All propulsive systems are prone to" break downs" even Neddy, so i think Radio Ga Ga has a valid point.

 

John

[Liam]

Where as Mr GaGa has possibly two points of failure where he could only have the one...

 

I am a definate anti bow thrusterian, but each to their own etc. etc.

[DHutch]

In 19 years, cruising a large distance most years, but with very little use of the BT.

 

Main engine propulsion failures: 0

Bow thruster Failures: 3

 

 

I take both sides point, but owned a boat that has one, i have to admit there arnt the best piece of kit to rely on, or the most useful when working, nor certainly the cheapest. Three years ago when it last we where very close to binning it and welding up the bow tube. I think even now, one of the main things that swung it, was not having a welder to hand. (and the doggid determination of two engineers not to be beaten by simple mechanical object)

 

Further more, i actaully dont thing ive used it once, in the three years following other than at the start of each year while moored, out of curiosity as to if it worked still.

 

 

 

Daniel

[johnmck]

Where as Mr GaGa has possibly two points of failure where he could only have the one...

 

I am a definate anti bow thrusterian, but each to their own etc. etc.

 

So to quote Mr Ford.

 

"You can have any colour, as long as it's Black"

 

John.

[Québec]

So to quote Mr Ford.

 

"You can have any colour, as long as it's Black"

 

John.

Apparently he never said that.

[Naughty Cal]

How did this topic get to 3 pages long without anybody daring to mention steering with a bowthruster?

 

Edited to add: I mean 4 pages now!

 

Yes, spring is in the air and the marina is alive with the sound of harassed bow thrusters.

 

Why do people insist on using bow thrusters on straight sections of water when a simple turn of the wheel/tiller would suffice?

 

And has anyone ever seen anybody successfully pull off a manouvre with the "aid" of a bow thruster?

[alan_fincher]

And has anyone ever seen anybody successfully pull off a manouvre with the "aid" of a bow thruster?

Yes, regularly.........

 

I've seen a lot of "sensible" use of them recently, including by someone I would judge as more competent handling a narrow boat than most, but who has obviously decided there are times when occasional use of one will make the job easier. This was one of the most effecient crews I've worked with in a while.

 

I'm well convinced that person would survive, (and do better than most), if theirs stopped working.

 

Equally though, I have seen them used by people apparently totally reliant on them.

 

A classic case was seen in a flight on the Oxford, with a boat that had both bow and stern thrusters.

 

The steerer never made any attempt to pull up at a bank, or to manoeuvre away from one.

 

Instead he always pulled up untidily mid channel, using reverse to come to a full stop, then with masses of buzzing, whooshing, and frotherdup water, used the thrusters to move maybe 10 to 20 feet sideways, (sometimes even more).

 

Similar technique to get going.... Thrust heavily sideways away from bank, with both thrusters, then, when in mid-channel, engage forward gear.

 

Nowt wrong with it, I suppose - it's what large ocean going ferries do anyway, isn't it.

 

In fairness this guy must have had "industrial strength" thrusters, as his whole navigation technique seemed totally dependent on frequent, and long term use of them. Your normal lightweight Vetus electrical "jobbie" could not possibly have survived such heavy use.

 

I distinctly got the impression that if either broke he would have been shafted, but I suppose I actually have no basis for saying he could not have handled his boat OK if the worse had happened.

 

Some of our local hire boats now have bow thrusters, which does scare me, as the boat you think you are about to pass with feet to spare, can sometimes move suddenly to it's left into your bit of water, just as it's getting late to take avoiding action if they do. (OK they could do that with the tiller, but tend not to - completely unexpected use of the thruster, and in the "wrong" direction does occur!....)

[GSer]

Yes, spring is in the air and the marina is alive with the sound of harassed bow thrusters.

 

Why do people insist on using bow thrusters on straight sections of water when a simple turn of the wheel/tiller would suffice?

 

And has anyone ever seen anybody successfully pull off a manouvre with the "aid" of a bow thruster?

 

 

I use mine mainly just for sport, in a thames lock, with plenty of tupperware boats about, there is always competition to who leaves the lock first, often its a plastic boat that wants to jump the que to get in front of the steel slugs, so if they are being really selfish I wait till their stern is aligned with the bowthruster and i give it a little flick just enough to unbalance the 'rude' boat, the look on the already under pressure steerer is a real treat, it never fails to amuse me

[RLWP]

Yes, regularly.........

 

I've seen a lot of "sensible" use of them recently, including by someone I would judge as more competent handling a narrow boat than most, but who has obviously decided there are times when occasional use of one will make the job easier. This was one of the most effecient crews I've worked with in a while.

 

I'm well convinced that person would survive, (and do better than most), if theirs stopped working.

 

Equally though, I have seen them used by people apparently totally reliant on them.

 

A classic case was seen in a flight on the Oxford, with a boat that had both bow and stern thrusters.

 

The steerer never made any attempt to pull up at a bank, or to manoeuvre away from one.

 

Instead he always pulled up untidily mid channel, using reverse to come to a full stop, then with masses of buzzing, whooshing, and frotherdup water, used the thrusters to move maybe 10 to 20 feet sideways, (sometimes even more).

 

Similar technique to get going.... Thrust heavily sideways away from bank, with both thrusters, then, when in mid-channel, engage forward gear.

 

Nowt wrong with it, I suppose - it's what large ocean going ferries do anyway, isn't it.

 

In fairness this guy must have had "industrial strength" thrusters, as his whole navigation technique seemed totally dependent on frequent, and long term use of them. Your normal lightweight Vetus electrical "jobbie" could not possibly have survived such heavy use.

 

I distinctly got the impression that if either broke he would have been shafted, but I suppose I actually have no basis for saying he could not have handled his boat OK if the worse had happened.

 

Some of our local hire boats now have bow thrusters, which does scare me, as the boat you think you are about to pass with feet to spare, can sometimes move suddenly to it's left into your bit of water, just as it's getting late to take avoiding action if they do. (OK they could do that with the tiller, but tend not to - completely unexpected use of the thruster, and in the "wrong" direction does occur!....)

 

Perhaps he's a retired Harrier jump jet pilot. That's how they land IIRC

 

Richard

[Naughty Cal]

I use mine mainly just for sport, in a thames lock, with plenty of tupperware boats about, there is always competition to who leaves the lock first, often its a plastic boat that wants to jump the que to get in front of the steel slugs, so if they are being really selfish I wait till their stern is aligned with the bowthruster and i give it a little flick just enough to unbalance the 'rude' boat, the look on the already under pressure steerer is a real treat, it never fails to amuse me

 

Yes very funny, although why they would be under pressure steering is beyond me.

 

It is however sensible to allow the GRP boats out of locks first wherever possible. A GRP boat nudging a NB is going to do no harm, a NB nudging a GRP boat can cause damage.

[GSer]

Yes very funny, although why they would be under pressure steering is beyond me.

 

It is however sensible to allow the GRP boats out of locks first wherever possible. A GRP boat nudging a NB is going to do no harm, a NB nudging a GRP boat can cause damage.

 

 

Just not relaxed and possibly a little unsure of themselves I think, normally they will try and nudge out a little early in the que just so they can be in front on the next 'leg' failing to realise that we will more than likely share the next lock anyway.

 

As for contact between fibre glass and steel boats I have been on the recieving end of three collisions (none my fault) with plastic boats and each time i was the worst off resulting in permanent damage to my boat and costs well into thousands of pounds to repair. On each occasion the vessel at fault failed to stop.

 

Paul