Working Boat-Pros and Cons

[Hairy-Neil]

Yes please!

 

 

Me too.....

Edited June 2, 2011 by Hairy-Neil

[mykaskin]

So why am I always fighting with Sickle?

 

I'm not sure, while I've only steered full length working boats, stars and towns are really light, and (towns especially) almost steer like a hire boat. Joshers are slightly different in the way the steering is heavy but has for a similar movement of the tiller the same effect as the stars.

 

If you want a real fun, try Victoria, loaded. If there was room stopping her would involve a full 360 degree turn!

 

Remember that because you are filling the channel more completely restrictive channel effects (sucking) are far greater. Try to react quickly, and especially with a short boat, more by feel. When manoeuvring try to utilise paddle wheel effects rather than fight it where possible.

 

Mike

 

ps. At Cowroast at the moment, will be on her over the weekend moving her to Stoke, so if you want to try her Alan, pop down Saturday morning. PM me if you want my phone number.

[Redeye]

Fair enough, but for Mike's benefit was fully advertised in latest HNBOC magazine.

 

Not sure what I feel about Sextans, to be honest.....

 

Like Sickle it was cut to 40 feet when only 6 or 7 years old, and had spent the vast majority of it's life as a 40 foot boat, so in a way that's whrere I see it's history as being.

 

Somehow adding 10 feet to it seems a shame to me, even if it is, (as I understand it), finding a good home for 10 feet of hull cut from another Middle Northwich boat.

 

I echo the comment about boats not being actively advertised. Our first thoughts on buying an old boat related to a tip off about a boat not actively being marketed, (but almost certainly still for sale, eventually). (See our blog).

 

I also understand that a forum member has recently bought Bison, but I was unaware of it being for sale.

 

I don't think Bison was ever actively marketted but I managed to come across her while talking to the guys down at Stockton Dry dock Bison will be going into the dock around September time for further work so I hope to be at Braunston next year.

 

As a matter of interest I saw Admiral this morning fully loaded with coal out for a spin, she looked awesome fully painted in Barlow colours.

 

Cheers

 

Andy

Edited June 2, 2011 by Redeye

[Laurence Hogg]

I'm not sure, while I've only steered full length working boats, stars and towns are really light, and (towns especially) almost steer like a hire boat. Joshers are slightly different in the way the steering is heavy but has for a similar movement of the tiller the same effect as the stars.

 

If you want a real fun, try Victoria, loaded. If there was room stopping her would involve a full 360 degree turn!

 

Remember that because you are filling the channel more completely restrictive channel effects (sucking) are far greater. Try to react quickly, and especially with a short boat, more by feel. When manoeuvring try to utilise paddle wheel effects rather than fight it where possible.

 

Mike

 

ps. At Cowroast at the moment, will be on her over the weekend moving her to Stoke, so if you want to try her Alan, pop down Saturday morning. PM me if you want my phone number.

 

Both the small and larger Harland and Wollf & Yarwoods built ex GUCCCo boats have balanced rudders, if they are still fitted and in good order thats why you feel the steering is "light", its due to the tapering weights fitted at the top and bottom of the plate one top, one bottom. This counteracts the prop wash and helps centre up the rudder. The hydrodynamics have always bemused me but it does work, someone back then knew a bit about rudders and props.

[Speedwheel]

I don't think Bison was ever actively marketted

 

It was certainly advertised on Warwickshire Flys website.

[mykaskin]

Both the small and larger Harland and Wollf & Yarwoods built ex GUCCCo boats have balanced rudders, if they are still fitted and in good order thats why you feel the steering is "light", its due to the tapering weights fitted at the top and bottom of the plate one top, one bottom. This counteracts the prop wash and helps centre up the rudder. The hydrodynamics have always bemused me but it does work, someone back then knew a bit about rudders and props.

 

They have a small balance, but a fairly small rudder area also, which makes them light. Also the water through the prop is partially pulled from underneath thus reducing the amount of lateral force on the rudder from the prop pulling water just to the side of it.

 

Victoria's rudder is the size of a Joshers' but is balanced. Turns on a Sixpence, but sucks even more from the bottom of the cut then other GU boats. I find Joshers tend to pull a lot of water from the sides making their unbalanced rudders even heavier to handle, especially if you fall to the edge of the channel!

 

GUCCo got in a 'proper' marine architect to design their boats. It's not what you know, but who you know... however he seems to have known his stuff for deeper waters.

 

Mike

[Laurence Hogg]

They have a small balance, but a fairly small rudder area also, which makes them light. Also the water through the prop is partially pulled from underneath thus reducing the amount of lateral force on the rudder from the prop pulling water just to the side of it.

 

Victoria's rudder is the size of a Joshers' but is balanced. Turns on a Sixpence, but sucks even more from the bottom of the cut then other GU boats. I find Joshers tend to pull a lot of water from the sides making their unbalanced rudders even heavier to handle, especially if you fall to the edge of the channel!

 

GUCCo got in a 'proper' marine architect to design their boats. It's not what you know, but who you know... however he seems to have known his stuff for deeper waters.

 

Mike

 

I think you are misunderstanding the word "balance" here, the GU rudders I am talking about have a cast weight top and bottom one side only (and it tapers) to counteract the pitch of the prop so making steering easier. I am not sure if the original "Royalty" boats had this. It has nothing to do with being balanced so it turns easy, its more about self centering. Remember these boats were designed for optimum efficency when loaded, as you will probably know a they steer exceptionally well laden.

below is a picture showing the lower weight (arrowed) on the other side it is at the top. Doesnt show well here but the weight tapers away from the rudder post.

 

Edited June 2, 2011 by Laurence Hogg

[Max Sinclair]

One thing to bear in mind, is the expense of riveting, if you were to go that direction. If you are happy enough to have any (future) work on the hull simply welded, it should cost no more than an ordinairy boat. And iron outlasts steel considerably...

 

Buying a historic boat, expensive.

 

Owning a real old, riveted boat, priceless.

 

Les Allen showed me a small shovel full of towpath ash will stop any rivet hole. Pull the hull up at an angle on the ground and tap the rivet tight.Good Luck.

 

Go for it.

[Tam & Di]

 

So why am I always fighting with Sickle?

 

Coming up here on Chalice we encountered Ian Tyler as one of two BW men on duty at "Three Locks". Ian is Sickles former "skipper", so I said to him.....

 

"I really haven't got the hang of her yet, Ian, I think I need you you give me some lessons - it doesn't matter what I do, every time I try to stop in a straight line, the bow swings hard to the left"

 

I was hoping for some words of wisdom from someone who had handled her for years....

 

Ian's reply ??

 

"Yes, she does that!"

 

So what's the difference from the hire cruiser conversions I steerred in the 1970s ? I think it's the bloody great 3 pot Lister, probably the wrong reduction of the gearbox (?). and a very meaty prop on a boat only 40 foot long.

 

I'm a bit late coming to this. I would not think there is necessarily anything wrong with the engine/reduction/blades ratio. She certainly always used to go very well when I knew her with BW, but do bear in mind she was engined to tow mud hoppers etc, and maybe you should ballast Chalice so the gunwhales are awash and tow it. A couple of possibilities: it is a good idea as already suggested to push the tiller over so she begins to come to starboard (right) before putting her into reverse. She could just then pull back into line rather than swing to port. (sorry, got used to that terminology now). You presumably have a left handed prop, as that would make the arse end swing to the right when you chuck back. You should find it easiest to come against the right hand wall of a (wide) lock as the bias will throw the stern that way. I find that if you come in at a reasonable speed, slightly to the middle of the lock, and then steer the bow into the right hand wall as you go into reverse it should fetch up nicely lined up along on the righthand side. You then need to put the elum over the other way somewhat to hold the stern there as the paddles are drawn.

 

It's not very easy to put this sort of stuff into words. I'd love to play, but a] it was probably said in jeast, and b] we're not in the UK very often now.

 

edited to try to stop b/bracket turning into an icon!

Edited June 2, 2011 by Tam & Di

[mykaskin]

I think you are misunderstanding the word "balance" here, the GU rudders I am talking about have a cast weight top and bottom one side only (and it tapers) to counteract the pitch of the prop so making steering easier. I am not sure if the original "Royalty" boats had this. It has nothing to do with being balanced so it turns easy, its more about self centering. Remember these boats were designed for optimum efficency when loaded, as you will probably know a they steer exceptionally well laden.

below is a picture showing the lower weight (arrowed) on the other side it is at the top. Doesnt show well here but the weight tapers away from the rudder post.

 

 

Hi Laurence,

 

Nice picture, and no thats not what I call the balance on a rudder, it's the plate in front of the pivot point which means there is presure both directions on the rudder which makes it easier to turn. The asymetrical iron on the rudder, as you rightly say, is to remove the rotation of the prop wash due to "paddle wheel" effect, allowing one to let go of the tiller and have the boat head in a straight direction. I don't know, but I think it's unique to GU boats - Victoria also has the same - see:

 

6mins 42 secs

 

Surprised your drawings don't show it.

 

Which boat/class is it BTW - Star? Looks big from down there don't it!

 

Cheers,

 

Mike

Edited June 2, 2011 by mykaskin

[alan_fincher]

BW's heritage boat, 'Swift' was like this. I mastered it by steering to the right slightly before/as you hold back....

Yes,

 

I'm increasingly trying this - with some, but not yet total success!

 

He couldn't steer a boat, but watch Harry H. Corbett in 'The Bargee' attempt to stop his pair by forcing the rudder from straight ahead 90° one way, then through 180° to the other. The effect is similar to using an air brake on aircraft when landing. The boat will want to go first one way then the other, but heaving it back and forth to its extreme repeatedly and holding it there a few seconds at each extreme, has the effect of slowing down a moving boat without any paddle wheel effect (provided the prop isn't turning).

 

Trying this now too!

 

ps. At Cowroast at the moment, will be on her over the weekend moving her to Stoke, so if you want to try her Alan, pop down Saturday morning. PM me if you want my phone number.

 

Nice offer, but will be boating until (probably) Sunday ourselves.

 

Will be running South from here with just Chalice, by then - will keep an eye out for you!

 

I'm a bit late coming to this. I would not think there is necessarily anything wrong with the engine/reduction/blades ratio. She certainly always used to go very well when I knew her with BW, but do bear in mind she was engined to tow mud hoppers etc, and maybe you should ballast Chalice so the gunwhales are awash and tow it. A couple of possibilities: it is a good idea as already suggested to push the tiller over so she begins to come to starboard (right) before putting her into reverse. She could just then pull back into line rather than swing to port. (sorry, got used to that terminology now). You presumably have a left handed prop, as that would make the arse end swing to the right when you chuck back. You should find it easiest to come against the right hand wall of a (wide) lock as the bias will throw the stern that way. I find that if you come in at a reasonable speed, slightly to the middle of the lock, and then steer the bow into the right hand wall as you go into reverse it should fetch up nicely lined up along on the righthand side. You then need to put the elum over the other way somewhat to hold the stern there as the paddles are drawn.

 

Some good advice there, which I'll read a few times, and see if it sinks in - though as you say, always hard to put into words.

 

The engine / gearbox in Sickle is not a BW one, although I think the blades may be ?

 

We met Dave Parrott who was resposible for her restoration, and his unprompted opinion was that she would probably be better with a 3:1 reduction than the current 2:1.

 

I'm not suggesting this would suddenly change to many of her handling "features", but with a greater reduction, it might be possible to pass moored boats in gear on tick-over without regularly feeling the need to pull her out of gear, because she really can't go very slowly with drive engaged!

 

I've not been shouted at, (yet!), but her minimum in gear speed makes it a distinct possibility!

[Liam]

If you want to swap your 2:1 for my 3:1 let me know

[Tam & Di]

 

The engine / gearbox in Sickle is not a BW one, although I think the blades may be ?

 

We met Dave Parrott who was resposible for her restoration, and his unprompted opinion was that she would probably be better with a 3:1 reduction than the current 2:1.

 

I'm not suggesting this would suddenly change to many of her handling "features", but with a greater reduction, it might be possible to pass moored boats in gear on tick-over without regularly feeling the need to pull her out of gear, because she really can't go very slowly with drive engaged!

 

I've not been shouted at, (yet!), but her minimum in gear speed makes it a distinct possibility!

 

We seem to have moved from History and Heritage to Boat Handling, but it does sort of go with the OP's question about ex-working craft.

 

I do prefer an over-bladed prop myself, but it is a possibility that the reduction is not right if the engine was changed but not the prop. Can the engine get up to near max revs in deep water? (You might need to go back onto the Thames to try that ). Do you get black smoke from the exhaust when you wind it up? The advantage of a slightly over-bladed prop is that although your acceleration will not be quite so good, you can stop on a sixpence. It gives you (well, me) a great sense of power to handle a boat like that.

 

I'm sure you're not about to make any hasty decision on it, but you'd probably be best to play with Sickle for some while and find out what the boat can really do, and what you can do with it. At the moment your comparison is going to be Chalice, which is bound to be very different. If you get chance to play with another short powerful boat such as Tycho you'd have a better idea.

Edited June 3, 2011 by Tam & Di

[Laurence Hogg]

Hi Mike,

The boat pictured is a "D" type (commonly called in error "star class") all the metal boats seem to have this rudder, however the two Rickmansworth motor boats I had did not. The drawing exists as a seperate drawing of the stern components. The weights are marked as thus.

 

"Victoria" is a "B" type boat fo the correctly named "Royalty" class (George and Mary were the "A")and has other features which were designed for estuary / river work. It is a mis conception that these boats were built for higher tonnage, they were constructed as modern craft with a wider trading range. They had more freeboard and you will note that the engine room comings are built up too at the doors. This was deliberate to prevent waves entering the engine room and can also be seen on the vee bottom type "E" boats built by Yarwoods, (commonly mis called middle Northwiches).

I understand that trading was to be as far as Tilbury and to towns on the Medway and this was in mind when the "Royalty" class was designed. It is a great pity that the wide beam "Royalty" was never built (plans exist to it still) as this would have been quite a sight. When GUCCo designed "Progress" once again it had features for use wider afield. Although we commonly think GUCCCo ceased all trading at nationalisation, its trading subsidery "Grand Union Shipping" went on until the mid 1950,s operating its "Regent Line" ships the parent company obviously had salt water routes in mind from early days.

 

The reason I have used the correct type letters is to emphasise that the GUCCo and the GUCCCo used this notation, the only mention of a named class is the second batch of "Royalty" boats. On no original drawings does the name "Star" or "Town" appear, also their ships were named after towns and not referred to as "Town class".

Edited June 3, 2011 by Laurence Hogg

[Derek R.]

There you go - I've always wanted an 'E' Type. Not one of those 'Middle Jaguars' , a proper 'E' type!

Edited June 3, 2011 by Derek R.

[alan_fincher]

I think it's a bit churlish to call the use of the names "Town Class" or "Star Class" or even "Middle Northwich" "errors" or "miss callings".

 

It seems a bit like telling a railway enthusiast they can't call a locomotive a "Jinty" or a "Black 5". OK, Fowler or Stanier probably never used those names but they are in popular usage, and few would object to that.

 

Clearly "Star" or "Town" is a bit broad brush, and covers several classes. But I bet more narrow boat enthusiasts can quickly work out what is a "Middle Northwich" than would instantly know what is an "E type".

[alan_fincher]

If you want to swap your 2:1 for my 3:1 let me know

I'll bear it in mind, thanks, but I do feel we need to get a better handle on things first, as people have suggested.

 

Tam's suggestion that I would loose some of the capacity to pull up very abruptly, (albeit rather uncontrolled abruptly at the moment ), is a valid one.

[Tam & Di]

"Victoria" is a "B" type boat fo the correctly named "Royalty" class (George and Mary were the "A")and has other features which were designed for estuary / river work. It is a mis conception that these boats were built for higher tonnage, they were constructed as modern craft with a wider trading range. They had more freeboard and you will note that the engine room comings are built up too at the doors. This was deliberate to prevent waves entering the engine room and can also be seen on the vee bottom type "E" boats built by Yarwoods, (commonly mis called middle Northwiches).

 

 

As I understood it boatmen with boats "formerly known as star or town class" were issued with short planks at Bull's Bridge if they were going out onto the tideway that fitted into the engineroom doorways to deter ingress of water.

[Laurence Hogg]

As I understood it boatmen with boats "formerly known as star or town class" were issued with short planks at Bull's Bridge if they were going out onto the tideway that fitted into the engineroom doorways to deter ingress of water.

 

Hi Tam,

I have heard of that too, actually on the "B" series drawings which were sent to the various builders the wooden motors show a raised coming at the engine room doors. Walkers certainly didnt follow this as far as the boats I knew, not sure whether Woods did or not.

Edited June 3, 2011 by Laurence Hogg

[onionbargee]

in which case, depending on class of working boat, additional headroom is good (i'm 6' 3"!) BW license discount, owning a part of history, and in one form or another, allowing it to continue and adding to it, i personally would jump at the chance, they tend to be harder work to steer than modern boats, but in my eyes the pros outweigh the cons, but like any boat, get a survey, the footings go and the bends on the knees, but all can be rectified, if not already done (depending on fit out of course). Expect some dents on the hull, or as i like to call it, character!!

Dan

They are not harder to steer.

[David Schweizer]

I had a very intreresting chat with Ron Withey at Braunston a few weeks ago, he spent some time giving me details of how different props on working boats affected performance, and how many working boatment had them altered to suit their own preferences. To be honest much of the detail went over my head, but it may be worth seeking him out when you are next in Braunston to gain the benefit of hs advice. I am sure that he will be around during the Historic Boat Gathering, but he can usually be found any early evening standing on one of the bridges between Bottom lock and the Marina.

[alan_fincher]

I am sure that he will be around during the Historic Boat Gathering, but he can usually be found any early evening standing on one of the bridges between Bottom lock and the Marina.

I feel it's more than possible we may bump into him!

 

Did he explain how he came to ram his steer into the opposite bank last year, as he failed to make the turn from the marina out under the ladder bridge.

 

I must admit watching a real pro cock it up does give me some hope!

[Timleech]

If you want to swap your 2:1 for my 3:1 let me know

 

An HA3 with 3:1 reduction does need a fairly chunky propeller (in the Narrow Boat scale of things).

Why would you want to swap, Liam? The HA2/ 3:1 combination works well IMO in a (real) Narrow Boat.

 

Tim

Edited June 4, 2011 by Timleech

[mykaskin]

An HA3 with 3:1 reduction does need a fairly chunky propeller (in the Narrow Boat scale of things).

Why would you want to swap, Liam? The HA2/ 3:1 combination works well IMO in a (real) Narrow Boat.

 

Tim

 

I get the impression that it's underprop'd, and with the right prop would be better with the 3:1, especially with a high rev'ing engine like the HA. Seemed to be pulling Emily Anne about OK when I saw them though.

[mykaskin]

I had a very intreresting chat with Ron Withey at Braunston a few weeks ago, he spent some time giving me details of how different props on working boats affected performance, and how many working boatment had them altered to suit their own preferences. To be honest much of the detail went over my head, but it may be worth seeking him out when you are next in Braunston to gain the benefit of hs advice. I am sure that he will be around during the Historic Boat Gathering, but he can usually be found any early evening standing on one of the bridges between Bottom lock and the Marina.

 

Ron's told me about some of his exploits with props and engines also. I just wish I had a better memory. I do remember him telling me that when at Bulls Bridge he wanted a particular prop on his boat, and through some wrangling managed to get it put on. It was completely wrong for the boat, and he really struggled, but IIRC he managed to dock it without the management finding out and hammered out some of the pitch!

 

Yes, he's often out walking 'Jackdog'.

 

Mike