"British Waterways" Name

[alan_fincher]

I have a picture taken in what I am fairly certain wwas 1963 at Brentford showing the front end of what I think is either Sickle of Theo'. Not my copyright unfortunately so I can't post it.

And........ ???

 

(Does it have them ?!?).

 

More to the pont, if it is 1963, does it have an ice-ram ?

 

I thought I had been told that "Sextans" and "Theophilus" still had theirs when Wyvern Shipping acquired them circa (IIRC) 1964. But on reflection, I think that can't be true.

[Speedwheel]

And........ ???

 

(Does it have them ?!?).

 

More to the pont, if it is 1963, does it have an ice-ram ?

 

I thought I had been told that "Sextans" and "Theophilus" still had theirs when Wyvern Shipping acquired them circa (IIRC) 1964. But on reflection, I think that can't be true.

 

Yes it has the rails, the frames are wider that those on Tycho. No it doesn't have an ice ram.

[alan_fincher]

Yes it has the rails, the frames are wider that those on Tycho. No it doesn't have an ice ram.

I think the A-frames on Theophilus were, (at one point at least!) like those Tycho still has.

 

So if you have a picture f a boat in the London area with wide frames like those in the picture that Laurence has posted, then I believe there is a very good chance it is Sickle.

 

But if you have reasonable front-end picture there is a very much easier way of telling the difference between Sickle and Theophilus..........

 

Far, far more of Theophilus' ram was left in place when it was torched off. Sickle's bears a rough approximation now to a normal Yarwoods stem, (though was cut very crudely), whereas Theophilus has quite a few more inches still present, looking quite different to Sickle's cut blade, (or to the one on Sextans).

 

Theophilus (no others have a stem like this)

 

 

Sickle

 

 

Sextans (featuring a recently "cleaned up" front, with those extra plates that used to brace the ram no longer present)

 

Edited September 15, 2011 by alan_fincher

[carlt]

Lovely paint job, hope you get a few questioning comments about the colours and you can put them straight.

 

Great to see you back, Andy!

 

You've been missed.

[Speedwheel]

I think the A-frames on Theophilus were, (at one point at least!) like those Tycho still has.

 

So if you have a picture f a boat in the London area with wide frames like those in the picture that Laurence has posted, then I believe there is a very good chance it is Sickle.

 

But if you have reasonable front-end picture there is a very much easier way of telling the difference between Sickle and Theophilus..........

 

Far, far more of Theophilus' ram was left in place when it was torched off. Sickle's bears a rough approximation now to a normal Yarwoods stem, (though was cut very crudely), whereas Theophilus has quite a few more inches still present, looking quite different to Sickle's cut blade, (or to the one on Sextans).

 

No you can't see the stem. The picture is of another boat and was taken standing on the cabin top of which ever one it is.

 

When did Theophilus lose her deck lid? The one in the picture I have still has it's original lid.

 

Also Theophilus'(s?) T-stud is on the wrong way.

 

Theophilus has some guard irons removed from along the side where wood would be attached to break the ice as the boat was rolled side to side. I remember Derek saying that Tycho has evidence that the same was done on that but from the pictures I have seen the guards don't appear to have been messed with. Were they removed then replaced at a later date or attached differently? What about Sickle?

Edited September 16, 2011 by Speedwheel

[alan_fincher]

When did Theophilus lose her deck lid? The one in the picture I have still has it's original lid.

 

Also Theophilus'(s?) T-stud is on the wrong way.

 

Sorry, I have no real knowledge of Theophilus between 1970s Wyvern days and fairly recent times.

 

I have no pictures of Theophilus as a Wyvern Boat, (and only a poor brochure image, uncaptioned, of what was clealy Sextans/Hesperus).

 

No idea about decks or T-studs, (but do re-call it was a feature of the Severner boats that the front T-stud was at 90 degrees to "normal"!).

 

Theophilus has some guard irons removed from along the side where wood would be attached to break the ice as the boat was rolled side to side. I remember Derek saying that Tycho has evidence that the same was done on that but from the pictures I have seen the guards don't appear to have been messed with. Were they removed then replaced at a later date or attached differently? What about Sickle?

 

I think there is evidence that all the boats had the full length guard that sits around 9" down the hull-side removed. Sickle shows as having hers missing until the Parrott's rebuild, and I think Sextans re-acquired hers when Brinklow (?) rebuilt it, (possibly when it gained the extra 10 feet ?) You would need to ask Derek for chapter and verse on when Tycho re-gained it. Only Theophilus is still without it. Pictures of Sickle look like it could well have had bolts rather than rivets in some holes around this height, and I suspect that a lot of rivets it has acquired since that appear not to do a lot, are simply filling these old holes. (Some just have a small square of steel, about 2" each way attached inside the hull). I have yet to see any picture of any of these 4 boats with these alleged timber widenings attached though!

 

Alan

[Hairy-Neil]

 

 

and I think Sextans re-acquired hers when Brinklow (?) rebuilt it, (possibly when it gained the extra 10 feet ?)

 

 

 

IIRC the restoration of Sextans spanned the move from Stockton to Brinklow.

[Chertsey]

Theophilus'(s?)

I love this question.

 

Oxford University Press's style guide says that if the name ending in s is one syllable, it should take an apostrophe and an s; if more than one syllable, then an apostrophe only.

 

so Theophilus' is correct, but if it was Grus it would be Grus's.

If it were Bootes I suppose it would depend on your preferred pronunciation.

[alan_fincher]

I love this question.

 

Oxford University Press's style guide says that if the name ending in s is one syllable, it should take an apostrophe and an s; if more than one syllable, then an apostrophe only.

 

so Theophilus' is correct, but if it was Grus it would be Grus's.

If it were Bootes I suppose it would depend on your preferred pronunciation.

Well you really do live and learn, don't you!

 

I have never heard the "single syllable" rule before, so I would have incorrectly (it appears!) said written Grus'.

 

(and indeed probably Oxford University Press' :lol)

[Derek R.]

To avoid possible incorrect English, I will state the top guard on TYCHO was absent during the days when Matty owned her, but present from 1980 on.

 

Is it; Thomas's; Thomases' or Thomases. Plural, or possessive? Don't you dare ask "is what Thomas's?"

The book belonging to Thomas, is Thomas's. But the family Thomas, are the Thomases. But is the furniture belonging to the Thomas family the Thomase's?

[Chertsey]

To avoid possible incorrect English, I will state the top guard on TYCHO was absent during the days when Matty owned her, but present from 1980 on.

 

Is it; Thomas's; Thomases' or Thomases. Plural, or possessive? Don't you dare ask "is what Thomas's?"

The book belonging to Thomas, is Thomas's. But the family Thomas, are the Thomases. But is the furniture belonging to the Thomas family the Thomase's?

No, it's the Thomases'

In fact, according to OUP (which is not necessarily definitive), it should also be Thomas' book though I agree that when saying it out loud one would tend to pronounce an additionial final s.

 

It's more interesting if the family are called Jones. Mr Jones's book; the Joneses' books.

 

But it would always be an apostrophe without an additional final s when the owner is plural, regardless of the number of syllables. e.g. the dogs' bones.

 

I may not have many skills, but I do know where to stick an apostrophe.

Edited September 16, 2011 by Chertsey

[jake_crew]

Laurence you have PM.

[fanshaft]

The boats were at first painted in the predominantly yellow and blue livery with "British Waterways" on the cabin with the roundel saying "DIWE", I have one of those roundels here if anyone needs a scan.

Soon afterwards the more well known blue and yellow "traffic" livery appeared, there was a set of rules in place for what went where although the further north you tarvelled the more variations appeared.

Brilliant job, at last a livery which hasnt been reproduced before!

 

I have often wondered why it is that some boats in the 'Blue and Yellow' BW colour scheme have the yellow border, top and bottom, apparently disappearing off the end of the engine room side and into thin air (which to me looks quite odd and 'unfinished'), while others have the yellow border dropping down to complete the rectangle. Was this a feature of certain yards, or did it depend what class of boat? Maybe I've missed something really obvious.

As an aside I always think it is ironic that the BW livery which was (at least from reading IWA Bulletins of the time) universally derided, hated even, and which (as Nick Hill tells us) was removed as a first priority by owners of ex BW boats, seems so popular now with lots of boats in this colour scheme. (Admittedly most are in the later 'more acceptable' version of the livery). Yet Willow Wren (the darling of the time, and seen as the 'saviour' of narrow boat carrying) is hardly acknowledged despite both liveries having appeal (IMO).

Another thing that puzzles me is the GU 'wartime' livery. Why is the white border only painted along the top of the main cabin side panel? It cannot possibly be to save paint or time, as the saving would be so small in the context of the whole job - a skilled painter would complete the borders in no time. Did FMC adopt a similarly utilitarian scheme?

I agree with Laurence - nice to see Chertsey 'different' yet authentic!

 

regards

 

David

[c c]

We took the GU wartime colours shown in a photo of Jack James on Badsey at the time where the cream border to the red panel is a copmlete rectangle - top & bottom & both sides to seperate from the blue. Also the "EY" at the end of the boat name on the cabin side is NOT repeated on the inside of the engine room door.

[Laurence Hogg]

I have often wondered why it is that some boats in the 'Blue and Yellow' BW colour scheme have the yellow border, top and bottom, apparently disappearing off the end of the engine room side and into thin air (which to me looks quite odd and 'unfinished'), while others have the yellow border dropping down to complete the rectangle. Was this a feature of certain yards, or did it depend what class of boat? Maybe I've missed something really obvious.

As an aside I always think it is ironic that the BW livery which was (at least from reading IWA Bulletins of the time) universally derided, hated even, and which (as Nick Hill tells us) was removed as a first priority by owners of ex BW boats, seems so popular now with lots of boats in this colour scheme. (Admittedly most are in the later 'more acceptable' version of the livery). Yet Willow Wren (the darling of the time, and seen as the 'saviour' of narrow boat carrying) is hardly acknowledged despite both liveries having appeal (IMO).

Another thing that puzzles me is the GU 'wartime' livery. Why is the white border only painted along the top of the main cabin side panel? It cannot possibly be to save paint or time, as the saving would be so small in the context of the whole job - a skilled painter would complete the borders in no time. Did FMC adopt a similarly utilitarian scheme?

I agree with Laurence - nice to see Chertsey 'different' yet authentic!

 

regards

 

David

Some wartime boats did have the white all the way round the panel and this is seen in some pictures. What is not generally known is the predominantly yellow and blue livery was the new livery for the GUCCCo Ltd and was adopted by BTC. It survived on the Regents Line ships of the Grand Union Shipping Ltd until the late 50's

[Laurence Hogg]

The "Regents Line" emblem of Grand Union Shipping Ltd clearly shows the origin of the yellow and blue livery. Even the ships were named after towns too, Knebworth, Marsworth etc,

 

[Heartland]

The late Laurence Hogg original post remains a useful guide to understanding the reason why British Waterways was on gthe cabin side of the boats from Docks & Inland Waterways times. Those remaining in the fleet of BW after 1963 seem to have had the legend British Waterways Board on the side of the cabin and plain blue without lining

 

The Yellow and Blue also seems not confined to the boats but was also a feature of signage for locks, junctions etc