What is a ''proper'' Trad Stern?

[Tam & Di]

Like you I have seen very few modern butty's that look "right", including the butty I used for camping which was built in 1972 (and my 1976 motor wasn't much better).

 

I would draw your attention to SISKIN built by Steve Priest about 20 years ago. This was built along the lines of a Large Northwich - although Large Northwich butty's were never originally built of course - and has had a full length house boat cabin since new. I think a 'Josher' butty was built by Brinklow Boat Services a few years ago and I am sure this would have been of a similar quality.

 

 

Our favourite butty was the middle Northwich butty Leonids. I know a lot of "born and bred" boatmen didn't like them as they thought they rolled. We didn't particularly find that, though we only really used it extensively on the barrels which had a fairly low centre of gravity. Who could build an economic version of these, with its rolled chines?

[Chertsey]

Its a shame that canal boat design in the last 20 years is based around building mock "traditional" boats from the olden days rather than building 21st century boats.

But what if the old designs are unimprovable? I cannot conceive of a boat that would swim or steer better than Chertsey, and wonder whether narrow boat design reached its apogee in the 1930s. (Owners of Joshers may wish to disagree of course). I can see that there have been advances in electrics, toilets, heating (perhaps)... maybe even engines - but given the size constraints, can you really build a better hull shape?

 

(although of course even the best replicas - well I know some are; can't be ceratin about all of them - are adaptations to suit shallower conditions so some of these advantages may be lost... )

Edited December 1, 2010 by Chertsey

[Guest]

At last - also a shrouded prop design that might prevent somebody being fataly injured if they go in over the stern.

 

I think I might of asked about this type of design in the forum before.

[Chertsey]

At last - also a shrouded prop design that might prevent somebody being fataly injured if they go in over the stern.

 

I think I might of asked about this type of design in the forum before.

I'm sure that has been discussed and was generally shown to be impracticable. In any case, the prop is only one danger of many. Even if not mangled by the prop you would still have to worry about drowning, cold, and being trapped under the boat, not to mention crushed in a lock. By far the best thing is NOT TO FALL OFF THE STERN, i.e. do not put yourself in a position where it is possible to do so. (Especially when reversing into large lumps of ice, ahem.)

 

And of course a trad stern is much the best for thus positioning oneself....

Edited December 1, 2010 by Chertsey

[Guest]

I'm sure that has been discussed and was generally shown to be impracticable. In any case, the prop is only one danger of many. Even if not mangled by the prop you would still have to worry about drowning, cold, and being trapped under the boat, not to mention crushed in a lock. By far the best thing is NOT TO FALL OFF THE STERN, i.e. do not put yourself in a position where it is possible to do so. (Especially when reversing into large lumps of ice, ahem.)

 

And of course a trad stern is much the best for thus positioning oneself....

 

My specific risk though was around being prop mangled .. all the other risks are a given...

Edited December 1, 2010 by MJG

[andywatson]

Its a shame that canal boat design in the last 20 years is based around building mock "traditional" boats from the olden days rather than building 21st century boats.

 

I think Chertsey has hit the nail on the head with the comment about the design of the old boats being unimprovable. Or at least close to.

It was in the operator's interest to have the most efficient boats to maximise their profits.

(-In efficiency include build and maintenance cost, hydrodynamic efficiency, ease of operation and load capacity)

The commercial realities of operating by carrying loads for maximum profit gave the operators the incentive to design the best boats and they put their money where their mouth was.

I don't think they were designed to look good, although I think that was a pleasant side effect.

 

IMO Whilst it could be possible to design the definitive boat for a modern leisure use there are so many different ideas of what that is that the design brief is almost impossible to define (compared to the design brief of carrying loads for profit).

 

eg A "21st century" boat was shown on Waterworld which was joystick steered, incorporated a computer and was effectively driven by 4 thrusters. It could do all sorts of clever manouvres but I'll bet it's been a lot more trouble than a simple engine, prop shaft and rudder.

[Dominic M]

Chertsey has it right. The hull designs haven't been improved upon, and in fact, few boat builders today can come close to replicating them, either for reasons of lack of skill or cost of doing so. There are shipwrights, and there are people who can weld bits of steel together. The former are few and far between these days. Against that, the latter float, and most people are happy with them. As already said, the advances have been in the technology of on board equipment, not in the way a boat swims and steers.

[RLWP]

My specific risk though was around being prop mangled .. all the other risks are a given...

 

Looking at the openness of the access to the prop, I think you are in more danger with that arrangement than on a counter stern with the prop tucked safely away underneath. Imagine falling in and sticking your foot through the prop*

 

Richard

 

*on second thoughts, don't imagine that

[ditchcrawler]

Looking at the openness of the access to the prop, I think you are in more danger with that arrangement than on a counter stern with the prop tucked safely away underneath. Imagine falling in and sticking your foot through the prop*

 

Richard

 

*on second thoughts, don't imagine that

Remember,you are steering a butty, not a motor, so you are not standing up high hopefully in the hatch, but in the well of the butty

[RLWP]

Remember,you are steering a butty, not a motor, so you are not standing up high hopefully in the hatch, but in the well of the butty

 

This is true.

 

Martin's point seems to be that a propeller like this is safer than a traditional one should you fall in the water. I disagree.

 

Richard

[andywatson]

This is true.

 

Martin's point seems to be that a propeller like this is safer than a traditional one should you fall in the water. I disagree.

 

Richard

 

Me also. A shroud might save you contacting the prop if you come against it from the side but if you are drawn into the prop with the water flow you have a greater chance of getting trapped by the shroud and blade tips.

[alan_fincher]

With a conventional prop, you can at least be sure where it is, and which way pointing. If you are the one in the cut, you know where to stay away from.

 

With these tiller mounted arrangements someone reacting to the fact someone is in the water could easily end up moving the tiller such that the prop got swung closer towards the person in danger.

 

I certainly can't see them being safer than a conventional counter arrangement.

[Doorman]

I'm sure that has been discussed and was generally shown to be impracticable. In any case, the prop is only one danger of many. Even if not mangled by the prop you would still have to worry about drowning, cold, and being trapped under the boat, not to mention crushed in a lock. By far the best thing is NOT TO FALL OFF THE STERN, i.e. do not put yourself in a position where it is possible to do so. (Especially when reversing into large lumps of ice, ahem.)And of course a trad stern is much the best for thus positioning oneself....

 

Don't mention the ice!

[Doorman]

Allegedly, one of the earliest trad stern motors made to power 'Joey' boats.

Note the pipe alternative to a skin tank for keel cooling!

And the Joey boat being converted for accommodation.

Both of which are over 100 years old.

[Speedwheel]

Allegedly, one of the earliest trad stern motors made to power 'Joey' boats.

Note the pipe alternative to a skin tank for keel cooling!

 

Is that the Lion, the 1940's built Hardy Spicer push tug? What ever it is it's not over 100 years old.

 

And the Joey boat being converted for accommodation.

 

Can't be a Joey - its metal.

Edited December 2, 2010 by Speedwheel

[Doorman]

Is that the Lion, the 1940's built Hardy Spicer push tug? What ever it is it's not over 100 years old.

 

 

 

Can't be a Joey - its metal.

 

I don't know the full origins of either boats, I only repeated what the friendly boat renovator told me. That's why I covered the statement with the term allegedly!

 

Whatever the truth is, the push tug is an incredible little craft. A few of the workers at the site where these pictures were taken, referred to the other boat and one like it (in the water) as 'Joeys'. Confused.com

[Speedwheel]

I don't know the full origins of either boats, I only repeated what the friendly boat renovator told me. That's why I covered the statement with the term allegedly!

 

Whatever the truth is, the push tug is an incredible little craft. A few of the workers at the site where these pictures were taken, referred to the other boat and one like it (in the water) as 'Joeys'. Confused.com

 

It is almost certainly the Lion. Built by Harris of Netherton in the 1940's. I tried to buy it a while back but the owner didn't seem interested at the time. Are those pics recent? Do you know who owns it now and where the work is being done? (It used to be based between Sandbach and Middlewich)

 

R.e. Joey. There are many theories where the name came from. The favourite seems to be that they were so called because of three generations of Joe Worseys who built wooden day boats at Worseys Dock. Hence wooden day boats became know as Joeys while iron day boats were called just day or open boats. (Just one story - others also exist)

Edited December 2, 2010 by Speedwheel

[Doorman]

It is almost certainly the Lion. Built by Harris of Netherton in the 1940's. I tried to buy it a while back but the owner didn't seem interested at the time. Are those pics recent? Do you know who owns it now and where the work is being done? (It used to be based between Sandbach and Middlewich)

 

R.e. Joey. There are many theories where the name came from. The favourite seems to be that they were so called because of three generations of Joe Worseys who built wooden day boats at Worseys Dock. Hence wooden day boats became know as Joeys while iron day boats were called just day or open boats. (Just one story - others also exist)

 

Hi,

 

only know the renovators christian name as Kevin. Apparently, he also worked a historic boat named Victoria.

 

The photo's were taken in September of this year, at Aqueduct Marina on the Middlewich Branch of the Shropshire Union. The guy said he was working towards getting the tug back into service, in order to push the other boat that was being converted.

 

Thanks for the info on the real Joeys.

 

Mike

[pete harrison]

 

Note the pipe alternative to a skin tank for keel cooling!

 

 

This method of keel cooling was used by Willow Wren Canal Carrying Company in the early 1960's (possibly late 1950's) when they fitted several of their motors with Bolinder 1052BR cold start diesels.

[mykaskin]

only know the renovators christian name as Kevin. Apparently, he also worked a historic boat named Victoria.

 

Not my Victoria, but possibly FMC Victoria.

 

Mike

[Speedwheel]

This method of keel cooling was used by Willow Wren Canal Carrying Company in the early 1960's (possibly late 1950's) when they fitted several of their motors with Bolinder 1052BR cold start diesels.

 

That's interesting. I have been told that there is either a 1053 or 1054 in Lion. (Though someone has also told me that it has a JP3 so I don't know for sure)

[pete harrison]

Not my Victoria, but possibly FMC Victoria.

 

Mike

 

Kevin must be very old then as F.M.C. Ltd.'s VICTORIA was decommissioned in July 1919 !

[mykaskin]

Kevin must be very old then as F.M.C. Ltd.'s VICTORIA was decommissioned in July 1919 !

 

I thought there was a later one? Perhaps I'm getting confused with FMC Linda... (for those not in the know, my Royalty Victoria was renamed Linda for awhile!).

 

Actually thinking about it, I think when Tim Carter took out the well deck and straighten the stern a little to put back on the rubbing strips, someone else was involved in the work... perhaps this is the time he was involved?

 

Mike

Edited December 2, 2010 by mykaskin

[alan_fincher]

That's interesting. I have been told that there is either a 1053 or 1054 in Lion. (Though someone has also told me that it has a JP3 so I don't know for sure)

Surprised you didn't mention existence of another old boat called Victoria ?

[pete harrison]

Surprised you didn't mention existence of another old boat called Victoria ?

 

Which one ? (I expect you are referring to the B.C.N. at Cassio Marina)

 

I have health registration and gauge details for about 50 'historic' boats named VICTORIA. Add to this a couple of B.C.N. day boat conversions named VICTORIA and you can see that there is plenty of scope for confusion !

Edited December 2, 2010 by pete harrison