Working Boat-Pros and Cons

[mykaskin]

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.

 

<snip lots of really good stuff>

 

Interesting, I wonder if they called the bit forward of the stock anything?

 

I know about the "E" types, but never really put two and two together. So in this order:

 

A - George and Mary

B - Other narrow royalty's made by Yarwoods and Pollocks.

C - Wide royalty never made (wonder what they would have called this? - Elizabeth (the first - never married!)

D - 'Stars'

E - 'Middle Northwiches'

 

and did the towns get called:

F - 'Towns'

 

You don't happen to know if they continued this notation with the newer boats? - Admirals etc...

 

I assume the working boatmen (for want of a better name) called them Stars/Towns etc, therefore the names are "historic" as used in parlence of the day - which is more than good enough for me.

 

Another thing though - I thought the George and Mary were built to rent out to another carrier, but they didn't want them (not surprised being some what different to any other boats). If they were designed for running down to Tilbury for example then it would be odd for them to be built to rent to someone else unless this other company wanted them to do this task which would be a little odd.

 

Cheers,

 

Mike

 

ps, must buy the plans off you sometime - expect an order soon!

[pete harrison]

 

I know about the "E" types, but never really put two and two together. So in this order:

 

A - George and Mary

B - Other narrow royalty's made by Yarwoods and Pollocks.

C - Wide royalty never made (wonder what they would have called this? - Elizabeth (the first - never married!)

D - 'Stars'

E - 'Middle Northwiches'

 

and did the towns get called:

F - 'Towns'

 

You don't happen to know if they continued this notation with the newer boats? - Admirals etc...

 

Cheers,

 

Mike

 

Your guess is partially correct. This is the actual format from original G.U.C.C.Co. Ltd. records:-

 

A - GEORGE and MARY - delivered to the Grand Union Canal Company and leased to their carrying subsiduary

B - all other 'Royalty Class' boats (motors and buttys)

C - all Small wooden prototype boats from Harland & Wolff Ltd., W.H. Walker & Bros. Ltd., E.G. Woods

D - all other Small ('Star Class') boats excluding "E" Middle Northwich boats

E - all Middle Northwich boats

F - all Large ('Town Class') boats

 

The five motors and seven buttys acquired from other carriers were not included in the lettering format. The G.U.C.C.Co. Ltd. did not have any boats newer than the 'Town Class' so the lettering sequence could not have been continued !

 

The 'Admiral Class' were a completely different type of boat and had nothing whatsoever to do with the G.U.C.C.Co. Ltd..

 

Please also bare in mind that "Class" is an 'enthusiast' term.

 

 

edit - to improve terminology (it was early in the morning when I posted !)

Edited June 5, 2011 by pete harrison

[Tam & Di]

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!

 

It was not unknown for a boat to be sat on the cill of a G.U. lock for 'adjustments' like that. We've done it ourselves for particularly recalcitrant bladefuls such as a tangle of barbed wire on occasion.

Edited June 5, 2011 by Tam & Di

[Laurence Hogg]

(Interesting, I wonder if they called the bit forward of the stock anything?)

 

Most boatbuilders term this the "flight" plate

 

(You don't happen to know if they continued this notation with the newer boats? - Admirals etc...)

 

No it ceased with GUCCCo, technically the next boats due were given a class name, they were the "County" class. drawings exist, both prototype and production but no boat was ever built. They were to be 4ft 6" deep of welded and rivetted build.

 

(I assume the working boatmen (for want of a better name) called them Stars/Towns etc, therefore the names are "historic" as used in parlence of the day - which is more than good enough for me.)

 

Most working boatmen referred to them as "small" and "large", Woolwich, Northwich or Rickmansworth. "Star" and "Town" were never heard, this is a modern thing.

It was the same for Joshers, most went by the HP of the engine there was no "Fish" class etc.

 

(Another thing though - I thought the George and Mary were built to rent out to another carrier, but they didn't want them (not surprised being some what different to any other boats). If they were designed for running down to Tilbury for example then it would be odd for them to be built to rent to someone else unless this other company wanted them to do this task which would be a little odd).

 

The George and the Mary were built for the Regents Canal Company as a trial on the intended expansion of waterborne trade, they proved sucessful with a carrier and a further order was placed using a modified design for the second run "B" boats. whilst George & Mary was hired out to a carrier initially for proving and may have had a different livery however the carrier did not keep them and they were absorbed into the Associated Canal Carriers fleet later.

Edited June 5, 2011 by Laurence Hogg

[madcat]

Some thoughts, firstly Liam I thought you had given up the plan to change your 3:1 for a 2:1 after not hearing from you about a swap,I was up for it but never heard no more.

 

Secondly all the stuff about towns n big uns,I tend to think of the "big nasty " as a big Northwich and sometimes as that ffffffffing big northwich when it has done one of its periodic raids on my piggy bank and Iam skint again.

[mykaskin]

Talking to a BW man at Stoke Bruerne today - I think owns a historic boat as he was saying he may bring it down for the weekend, and I think I recognised him, but I'm terrible at names and not much better at faces! - anyway - he said that Ike Argent said that the royalty boats were built for carrying coal down to Battersea Power Station. It's a new one on me, and I thought they brought it down in coasters from the NE? I wouldn't have thought it was worth unloading a piddly 50 odd ton from two narrowboats, but thoughts or comments anyone?

 

Cheers,

 

Mike

[Derek R.]

Battersea power station consumed 1,000,000 tons of coal annually (according to Wikipedia), and most came by 'Flat Iron' colliers (the lack of superstructure enabling them to go under bridges gave them the nick-name) and by rail.

 

I doubt the grabs at Battersea would have been to kind to a tiny Royalty Class narrow boat.

 

 

Courtesy Wikipedia. Unknown origin.

 

PS: 20 second long Pathe clip of 'Sir Joseph Swan' collier being unloaded. Good shot of the grab. Pretty big.

 

http://www.britishpathe.com/record.php?id=54337

 

Bit of a digression I know, but a page from the 1930's on Battersea Power Station. Mentions 5 ton grabs, but they are the smaller ones. Fabulous inside at one time.

Edited June 6, 2011 by Derek R.

[Josher]

I would like to know what the pros and cons are off owning a converted working boat. Please state the bleeding obvious too as I am sure I missed something

You get to put on your Sunday best!

 

 

Stoke Bruerne Canal Festival.Keith and Jo Lodge on board Hadar in traditional canal clothing.

 

Article: Buckingham Today Monday 6 June 2011 09:00

[alan_fincher]

You get to put on your Sunday best!

 

 

Stoke Bruerne Canal Festival.Keith and Jo Lodge on board Hadar in traditional canal clothing.

 

Article: Buckingham Today Monday 6 June 2011 09:00

Ahem!

 

That's a new build boat, not a historic one!

 

(Edited to add: It's a 2007 build apparently....)

Edited June 6, 2011 by alan_fincher

[Yellowback]

Ahem!

 

That's a new build boat, not a historic one!

 

 

Replica boatmen, in replica clothes, on replica boats.....

 

are surely better than nothing to entice and bring in people to help save the canal system....

 

So the real historic boatmen wearing historic clothes on historic boats will have a canal to sail on.

[Liam]

When I see that particular costume I think 1900's horse boating rather than 1930's Grand Union boat.

[Derek R.]

It's easy to criticise, but as an example of turn of the Century canal dress, it's a good effort. And if they are enjoying some role playing for a little education - fair play.

 

Nice tidy straps with a neat back-splice too.

 

Me - I'll wear my free-bee suit that actually fits, and let wear and tear do the rest. (Now that's traditional!).

 

Strayed a bit off the OP's query, but such is the variety of life.

[pete harrison]

You get to put on your Sunday best!

 

 

Stoke Bruerne Canal Festival.Keith and Jo Lodge on board Hadar in traditional canal clothing.

 

 

Seeing boats like this makes me glad I don't go boating any more, but at least its well built (by Roger Fuller) and probably makes them happy.

 

I wonder if Keith and Jo Lodge know that HADAR's gauge number is that of a mud hopper ! (GU12345 - 08 March 1934 - HOPPER No. 50 - Grand Union Canal Company)

Edited June 6, 2011 by pete harrison

[David Schweizer]

Seeing boats like this makes me glad I don't go boating any more, but at least its well built (by Roger Fuller) and probably makes them happy.

 

I wonder if Keith and Jo Lodge know that HADAR's gauge number is that of a mud hopper ! (GU12345 - 08 March 1934 - HOPPER No. 50 - Grand Union Canal Company)

I suspect that they do, Keith has been around boats a long time (he started on Pisces in the late 1960's) and probably knows a lot more than many of the recently experienced "experts".

 

Edited to add:- Just wish to clarify that the above comment is not intended to be slur on Pete's encyclopaedic knowledge of former working boats.

Edited June 6, 2011 by David Schweizer

[Pluto]

Talking to a BW man at Stoke Bruerne today - I think owns a historic boat as he was saying he may bring it down for the weekend, and I think I recognised him, but I'm terrible at names and not much better at faces! - anyway - he said that Ike Argent said that the royalty boats were built for carrying coal down to Battersea Power Station. It's a new one on me, and I thought they brought it down in coasters from the NE? I wouldn't have thought it was worth unloading a piddly 50 odd ton from two narrowboats, but thoughts or comments anyone?

 

Cheers,

 

Mike

Quite a lot came through Goole, after passing down the Aire & Calder in Tom Puddings, so canal boats were involved in the trade.

[pete harrison]

I suspect that they do, Keith has been around boats a long time (he started on Pisces in the late 1960's) and probably knows a lot more than many of the recently experienced "experts".

 

Edited to add:- Just wish to clarify that the above comment is not intended to be slur on Pete's encyclopaedic knowledge of former working boats.

 

I do not have an encyclopaedic knowledge of former working boats, I have a computer where my research is all stored.

 

I do realise that my words about HADAR's presentation are uncomplimentary, but I am being honest. I am also prepared to justify myself if required.

[David Schweizer]

I do not have an encyclopaedic knowledge of former working boats, I have a computer where my research is all stored.

 

I do realise that my words about HADAR's presentation are uncomplimentary, but I am being honest. I am also prepared to justify myself if required.

I can guess what your objections might be, but would be interested to know whether it is the costumes, the boat livery, or the building of a replica boat. or all three.

 

At least Hadar is actually used to trade as a working boat, which is more than how most restored ex working boats are used.

[Chertsey]

I can guess what your objections might be, but would be interested to know whether it is the costumes, the boat livery, or the building of a replica boat. or all three.

 

At least Hadar is actually used to trade as a working boat, which is more than how most restored ex working boats are used.

Possibly that it's potentially misleading, especially as it trades as (and tbh is often presented as) a 'working boat' people might think its a genuinely old one, and also think that that's how people dressed on GU boats in the 30s. Does that matter? For some reason I can't quite articulate, I think it does.

[Pluto]

Possibly that it's potentially misleading, especially as it trades as (and tbh is often presented as) a 'working boat' people might think its a genuinely old one, and also think that that's how people dressed on GU boats in the 30s. Does that matter? For some reason I can't quite articulate, I think it does.

One problem is that many people do not recognise change over time, and that they need to understand that what is portrayed is what happened at one particular point in time. Even then, it can just be one person's interpretation. I have a similar problem with the use of roses and castles on new material related to the Leeds & Liverpool Canal, rather than the traditional Brightwork. Local individuality needs to be preserved, and there are often local traditions which are not well known which are being destroyed by the introduction of more widely publicised traditions from outside the immediate area.

[Derek R.]

In one way, it is like dressing in the uniform of a First World War soldier driving a second World War vehicle. Boating in such a dress style needs a clear statement of connectivity with a vessel and time slot. In Keith and Jo's case this clearly is not so - but who is to say they shouldn't enjoy some dressing the part of a time gone by? On an early 20thC. horse boat, it would be correct (bar maybe a black bonnet in respect of the late Queen Victoria). Precious few would dress so in the late thirties - pinafore dresses were the norm for the Ladies and they lasted right through the fifties - not specific to boaters either. The men wore whatever was available from the likes of Millets or the Jumble sale, ex-service uniform trews and great coat.

 

The boat is very fine, and all credit to them - and it is a 'working' boat, (so is the Cheese and the Fudge boat come to that!) Keith and Jo were depicted in the Julia Bradbury 'Canal Walks' series, and I feel their choice of clothing in that episode was just right for the job in hand - sensible working clothes - and it suited the boat too.

 

It is easy to criticise, but at the same time, hard to dampen someone's spirit of wishing to display a costume from the past. The question might be asked - "Do we need to be so accurate in dressing for the boat?" One other unknown factor might be, that they were dressed so as part of an exhibition of a 'different' boat, and just happened to be on their own for the photo!

Edited June 7, 2011 by Derek R.

[alan_fincher]

Possibly that it's potentially misleading, especially as it trades as (and tbh is often presented as) a 'working boat' people might think its a genuinely old one.......

Or alternatively, I suppose it is a new boat, but genuinely "working" unlike old boats dubbed "working boats" which on the whole no longer are, and are really only someone's play-things if we are honest!.......

 

Anyone who had seen Richard Horne's modern "Arundel" loaded to the gunwales on the London aggregate run would be hard pressed to argue it is not more a "working boat" than most, despite being rivet-free, and being built comparatively recently.

Edited June 7, 2011 by alan_fincher

[FadeToScarlet]

Maybe we should have "workingboats" and "working boats" like we have "narrowboats" and "narrow boats"

[Hairy-Neil]

I can guess what your objections might be, but would be interested to know whether it is the costumes, the boat livery, or the building of a replica boat. or all three.

 

 

Unlikely. Not so long ago, Pete was on about having a replica Admiralty Class boat built for himself.

[pete harrison]

Unlikely. Not so long ago, Pete was on about having a replica Admiralty Class boat built for himself.

 

Your correct, it is not that the boat is a replica. It is also not that the owners are dressed up, although their clothing is 'out of sorts' with a 1930's styled motor boat. Personally I prefer to go boating in jeans and a 'T' shirt, and I have little interest in what other people choose to wear.

 

What bothers me is that this boat, although undoubtedly well built is dressed up to be something that it is not - and badly so. As Hairy-Neil says, I do not object to replica boats at all - providing they are true replica's, and yes the replica Pimblott's Admiral motor remains on my wish list (but I have just bought a Jaguar XK instead). From this point things go down hill rapidly as although HADAR is dressed up to be the former G.U.C.C.Co. Ltd. motor that it is not, where did that blue come from ? Certainly not from the G.U.C.C.Co. Ltd. 'coronation' livery ! Then if it is going to be in the G.U.C.C.Co. Ltd. 'coronation' livery why does it have the address on the cabin side that is only associated with the previous G.U.C.C.Co. Ltd. two tone blue livery ? Then why does HADAR have the Grand Union gauge number of a Grand Union Canal Company wide beam maintenance hopper, which again it clearly is not and never was. There are un-issued Grand Union gauge numbers from the correct period that could have been selected and not looked quite so daft - although as HADAR is a modern boat (2007) it should not carry a gauge number anyway.

 

Personally I am not bothered whether or not an owner wishes to use their 'historic' or modern boat for carrying, showing or using as a holiday home. What does concern me more is how an owner presents their boat, and that is "what separates the men from the boys" so to speak. It is the detail that counts with any boat, both in the way it is presented and boated - something that is all too often lacking nowadays (and probably always has !).

 

Perhaps if the owners of HADAR had chosen their own livery I would have simply noticed it as being a nice boat, as I do with most of Mr Fuller's boats. Interestingly HADAR is not the only one of Mr Fuller's boats to carry a controversial livery - in my opinion.

Edited June 8, 2011 by pete harrison

[alan_fincher]

It is the detail that counts with any boat, both in the way it is presented and boated - something that is all too often lacking nowadays (and probably always has !).

I have just read through Roger Alsop's book "Working Boats", (publ 1988). He mixes accounts of an attempt to do a coal run to the Colne Valley sewage works in 1985 on a similar schedule to that which would have happened in Willow Wren days, with reminiscences of former boatmen about how it was towards the end of commercial long distance carrying in the late 60s.

 

It gives a perhaps more realistic view of some of the boatmen of the day, and their techniques.....

 

For example of Ted Ward.....

 

He was called "Mad Ted", and he had a reputation as an engine smasher, which I could understand, having seen him operate. He was rough on his boats......

 

So, (as is not surprising), it seems not all had the same level of prowess!.......