The Proposed Grand Contour Canal

[stripey]

I first read about the proposed Grand Contour Canal in an old Waterways World that I picked up at Barbridge Junction, where there was half of a two-part article about this fascinating idea.

 

I have tracked down the title of the book in which the proposal was first made:

 

JF Pownall, The Projected Grand Contour Canal to Connect With Estuaries and Canals in England, published by Cotterell & Co in 1942.

 

However, searches on all the usual second-hand book search engines have produced nothing, although there does appear to be a copy in the British Library.

 

So I am posting this in case anyone has ever seen or read this book or knows of a copy of it anywhere in the world.

 

In case this is new to anyone reading, the idea was for a major ship canal at the 300 foot level, with no changes of level, running from Newcastle-upon-Tyne to Hampshire, and with connections made to the rest of the inland waterways system.

 

It might have been wonderful or terrible - I want to read the book and make up my own mind - but what a bold idea!

[Guest]

I first read about the proposed Grand Contour Canal in an old Waterways World that I picked up at Barbridge Junction, where there was half of a two-part article about this fascinating idea.

 

I have tracked down the title of the book in which the proposal was first made:

 

JF Pownall, The Projected Grand Contour Canal to Connect With Estuaries and Canals in England, published by Cotterell & Co in 1942.

 

However, searches on all the usual second-hand book search engines have produced nothing, although there does appear to be a copy in the British Library.

 

So I am posting this in case anyone has ever seen or read this book or knows of a copy of it anywhere in the world.

 

In case this is new to anyone reading, the idea was for a major ship canal at the 300 foot level, with no changes of level, running from Newcastle-upon-Tyne to Hampshire, and with connections made to the rest of the inland waterways system.

 

It might have been wonderful or terrible - I want to read the book and make up my own mind - but what a bold idea!

 

Well speaking from the North East perspective and somebody who is a good lump away from the main system I think it would have been a darn good idea.....

[magpie patrick]

All I can say is I've tried searching for the book too and drawn a blank.

 

Shame the Victorian's didn't think of it, they'd have built it...

[Pluto]

Pownall's was one of a series of plans to provide a modern canal system in the UK. There is an article in the first issue of Waterways Journal, which should still be available from the Boat Museum Society, which covers a number of these. Pownall's scheme was first suggested by him in the 1935 in an article in Modern Transport, and there are copies of his book in several university libraries. Probably easier to order it through your own library and get it from the British Library.

[Bugsworth Tippler]

Well speaking from the North East perspective and somebody who is a good lump away from the main system I think it would have been a darn good idea.....

 

A couple of years ago when Benny Graham and Johnny Handle performed their show "They're Coming Back to the Water" at the NCCC Benny revealed a 'secret plan' to flood the north-east coal mines and connect to the rest of the waterway system by submarine. Brilliant - they could get a government grant for that!

[carlt]

This is a map of the system Pownall proposed:

 

 

 

 

(Taken from Eric de Mare's "Canals of England)

[Guest]

That would have been perfect - puts me only about 30 munites away from a canal -

[magpie patrick]

This is a map of the system Pownall proposed:

 

 

 

 

(Taken from Eric de Mare's "Canals of England)

 

 

That's pretty much as I remember it.

 

A few technical issues occur to me. This thing was going to be for water distribution as well as navigation. Even a supposedly still water canal has a backwater curve between locks (a very slight one, 3 inches between Tyrley and Wheaton Aston for example) but once you start moving the stuff around you get a more significant gradient which would probably make the level vary by several feet if left unmanaged across that lot. I wonder how that was going to be managed.

 

I can see the point of boat lifts where it meets other waterways, but I wonder how useful it was at the coast, unless in reality the lift was a few miles inland and the waterway would then extend at sea level to the coast. Even in the 1940s there were ships too big for the Manchester Ship Canal, and this canal would not have been built that big, as the land take and bridge clearances would have been excessive

[journeyperson]

I can see the point of boat lifts where it meets other waterways, but I wonder how useful it was at the coast, unless in reality the lift was a few miles inland and the waterway would then extend at sea level to the coast. Even in the 1940s there were ships too big for the Manchester Ship Canal, and this canal would not have been built that big, as the land take and bridge clearances would have been excessive

 

300ft is a heck of a lift too, Anderton is 50ft, so nothing of any size would ever have got onto it. Manchester Ship Canal was in full use for about 80 years, this would have been a white elephant before it was finished; probably one of many reasons it was never taken up. Maybe if it had pumping stations in the right places it could have kept the Leeds & Liverpool Canal open this year.

[mykaskin]

Actually, this is more of a plan for what the motorways do now. As far as I can see it's more about moving goods internal to the country with transhipment from larger vessels. However (and I've not read the book so don't know) it may in a size that something like a coaster could use directly.

 

All the sea level lifts seem to be joining rivers with tall valley sides.

 

It is a real shame that it wasn't built as it could be an answer to reducing motorway traffic. Since it's lock less the amount of flow is small, so doesn't need to have any built in slope. I am surprised if it didn't need tunnels and embankments though, it would cirtainly be a brilliant feat of engineering to pull it off.

 

Cheers,

 

Mike

[Pluto]

The final section about Pownall's scheme in Waterways Journal 1 is as follows:

 

It was envisaged that trains of barges would travel along the system at regular intervals. By using lifts water loss would be kept to a minimum. The size of the canal would be such that any envisaged increase in vessel size would be accommodated, with the waterway 100ft. in width and 17ft. in depth with a clear headroom of 25ft. The lifts would be 250ft. long x 35ft. wide x 14ft. deep, connecting with the existing canals. They would be of a size necessary to handle the vessels using that waterway. It was anticipated that narrow boats and 14ft. barges would continue to be used, but towed in trains. They would be ‘slipped’ like a railway coach when they reached the existing canal that they needed to access, without stopping the tow.

A coastal vessel of up to 1500 tons displacement would be able to use the terminal lifts. Consequently, the principal cities of London, Birmingham, Manchester & Bristol would all be linked to the continent by vessels able to move across the sea into the continental waterways. With the lack of constricting structures, the waterways could also be used for transporting “out of gauge” materials, too big for the railways or the road system.

It was also proposed that pipes could be laid under the canal to carry liquids and gases, thus improving the transport infrastructure.

The canal was also seen as a conduit for water distribution about the country, helping to replenish permeable rocks. By developing underground storage it could be used for town supplies and by agriculture in times of drought.

[mykaskin]

Sounds like we need it today... lets build it instead of HS2 - it's bound to be a cheaper alternative! :-)

Edited August 11, 2010 by mykaskin

[magpie patrick]

The final section about Pownall's scheme in Waterways Journal 1 is as follows:

 

It was envisaged that trains of barges would travel along the system at regular intervals. By using lifts water loss would be kept to a minimum. The size of the canal would be such that any envisaged increase in vessel size would be accommodated, with the waterway 100ft. in width and 17ft. in depth with a clear headroom of 25ft.

 

Except for the headroom that's about the size of the G&S, a bit shallower perhaps, and how much frieght uses that? and when was the last time it saw a ship

 

Mind, given the popularity of the G and S for cruising, and it's huge capacity for pleasure boats, it would have been one heck of a leisure resource!

 

Grand Contour Canal Society anyone?

[mykaskin]

Except for the headroom that's about the size of the G&S, a bit shallower perhaps, and how much frieght uses that? and when was the last time it saw a ship

 

Mind, given the popularity of the G and S for cruising, and it's huge capacity for pleasure boats, it would have been one heck of a leisure resource!

 

Grand Contour Canal Society anyone?

 

Yes, but the G+S don't really go any where useful do it? It probably doesn't help that stuff from the continent needs to go around a large land mass either.

 

GCCS - sounds good.

 

Mike

Edited August 11, 2010 by mykaskin

[magpie patrick]

Yes, but the G+S don't really go any where useful do it? It probably doesn't help that stuff from the continent needs to go around a large land mass either.

 

GCCS - sounds good.

 

Mike

 

I think the good burghers of Gloucester would dispute that!

 

Shipping now doesn't work below 3,000 tonnes, unless it's under 900 tonnes when a genuine door to door coastal shipping service can be offered. the running costs of say a 1500 tonner are more or less the same as a 3000 tonner and the extra range of ports available doesn't outweigh this. Yes, you can get to Gainsborough instead of Keadby but unless your customer is in Gainsborough this isn't much help

 

While it would take a while to go round a land mass, unless it's tierra del fuego or cape horn shipping normally prefers to do it rather than muck about with inland waterways. The Grand Contour Canal would have been for internal use, whatever was intended.

 

So where do we go with the Grand Contour Canal Society? I'm quite capable of being talked into overcommitting myself for unrealistic projects (I'm Chairman of the Somerset Coal Canal Society)

[mykaskin]

I guess that at the end of the day movement of Containers (as that is most of what consitutes freight these days) and some minor bulk stuff would still be worthy on such a sized waterway (1500 tons) - especially since lack of locks would mean that small crews would only be needed.

 

Even if it just came from the coast to the DIRFT near Rugby for onwards lorry journey to superstores and the like. That would surely reduce the number of lorries on the road.

 

Mike

[magpie patrick]

I guess that at the end of the day movement of Containers (as that is most of what consitutes freight these days) and some minor bulk stuff would still be worthy on such a sized waterway (1500 tons) - especially since lack of locks would mean that small crews would only be needed.

 

Even if it just came from the coast to the DIRFT near Rugby for onwards lorry journey to superstores and the like. That would surely reduce the number of lorries on the road.

 

Mike

 

Mike, don't get me wrong, I wish it had been built, and in principle it's still a good idea

 

I just suspect the "Grand Contour Canal Company" would have gone bust

 

make it big enough for 48 TEU and it will get used

[luctor et emergo]

Look how much use they make in Holland and Germany (don't know directly about Belgium and France, so can't comment) of the rivers and canals. Anything that can be shipped in bulk, or containers, is shipped over water. Fuel, aggregates, containers, wheat, etc,etc...

 

I don't suppose that you could ever build another canal system, to such specifications, ever again, but just imagine if we could...

 

Mind you, a barge uses a lot less fuel than a train, and is much more flexible....

[Pluto]

Today I found that I have a photocopy of the first two chapters of Pownall's book. I have scanned them and made them into a pdf. You can download it at http://www.mikeclarke.myzen.co.uk/1942%20Pownall%202.pdf

[mykaskin]

Today I found that I have a photocopy of the first two chapters of Pownall's book. I have scanned them and made them into a pdf. You can download it at http://www.mikeclarke.myzen.co.uk/1942%20Pownall%202.pdf

 

Thanks for that - a most interesting read.