Atherstone nightmare

[Top cat]

I has just taken us 5 1/2 hours to descend the Atherstone flight (normally we do it in 2 1.4 to 2 1/2hrs). We arrived at 9:30 to find ourselves 6th in the queue and started into the top lock by 11 meanwhile the queue had stretched back to the previous bridge. Progress through the flight was glacial with further queues at every lock , sometimes there was now where to go on exiting the lock. When we finally got to lock 11 we found that only 1 upper paddle was working sothe lock took 9 minutes to fill.

 

So was that he cause of all the delay - No I don't think so but it really didnt help and it been like that for some time I'm told.

I rather suspect the limited opening times had an effect by concentrating the traffic. And why is this "water saving" measure still in effect when the summit pound has been at normal level for the past 10 days and water was going over the spilways down the flight.

 

So given the two issues were any BW bods about to speed traffic and save water - no not a soul in sight.

 

It's about time BW stopped fiddling about with sculptures and fiddling about with what to call themselves when they get privatised ( sorry third sectored)and actually got on with running the waterways.

 

Regards

 

TC

[haggis]

I has just taken us 5 1/2 hours to descend the Atherstone flight (normally we do it in 2 1.4 to 2 1/2hrs). We arrived at 9:30 to find ourselves 6th in the queue and started into the top lock by 11 meanwhile the queue had stretched back to the previous bridge. Progress through the flight was glacial with further queues at every lock , sometimes there was now where to go on exiting the lock. When we finally got to lock 11 we found that only 1 upper paddle was working sothe lock took 9 minutes to fill.

 

So was that he cause of all the delay - No I don't think so but it really didnt help and it been like that for some time I'm told.

I rather suspect the limited opening times had an effect by concentrating the traffic. And why is this "water saving" measure still in effect when the summit pound has been at normal level for the past 10 days and water was going over the spilways down the flight.

 

So given the two issues were any BW bods about to speed traffic and save water - no not a soul in sight.

 

It's about time BW stopped fiddling about with sculptures and fiddling about with what to call themselves when they get privatised ( sorry third sectored)and actually got on with running the waterways.

 

Regards

 

TC

I think the secret of getting up or down Atherstone is to arrive early afternoon and plan to stop half way if you get held up. We came down half way on saturday and finished the job yesterday. No queues at all, just meeting boats at locks which makes life easier. Going up, however, we arrived at the bottom about 8.45 and waited well over 2 hours to start.

That paddle on the bottom lock seems to have been out of use for a while and we found that applying many bums to the lock gate when the lock had a couple of inches to go, opened the gate OK. It made a huge difference to the locking time as it was the last couple of inches which seemed to take forever.

When things get a bit slow in a flight of locks, it can often to traced to boaters who will only work their own boats and don't think to lend a hand to help things along.

 

haggis

[Domino_2]

We went down the Atherston flight on Saturday 3rd Sept. Like you Top Cat we arrived at 9.30am. When we arrived there was one boat entering the top lock, and as we did the top lock a boat came up behind us. As we left the lock, we met the first of the boats coming up the locks - they had started the locks at 7.30 when BW waved them in.

 

We met one BW worker - doing essential painting at lock 5.

 

It took us about 3 1/2 hours, which is pretty standard for us doing that flight.

 

Yes the ground paddle at the bottom lock being out of action did slow us down, it slowed everyone down. Yes its been out of action for far too long. Is there any sign of BW dealing with it? No, and its not listed in their winter stoppage program either.

http://www.waterscape.com/media/documents/24432.pdf

 

So Top Cat, I think you were just unlucky to find such a queue.

[Bob18]

Yes Atherstone is a nightmare.

 

 

 

 

Oh, you meant the Atherstone Locks. I thought you meant the town.....

[Timleech]

I has just taken us 5 1/2 hours to descend the Atherstone flight (normally we do it in 2 1.4 to 2 1/2hrs). We arrived at 9:30 to find ourselves 6th in the queue and started into the top lock by 11 meanwhile the queue had stretched back to the previous bridge. Progress through the flight was glacial with further queues at every lock , sometimes there was now where to go on exiting the lock. When we finally got to lock 11 we found that only 1 upper paddle was working sothe lock took 9 minutes to fill.

 

So was that he cause of all the delay - No I don't think so but it really didnt help and it been like that for some time I'm told.

I rather suspect the limited opening times had an effect by concentrating the traffic. And why is this "water saving" measure still in effect when the summit pound has been at normal level for the past 10 days and water was going over the spilways down the flight.

 

So given the two issues were any BW bods about to speed traffic and save water - no not a soul in sight.

 

It's about time BW stopped fiddling about with sculptures and fiddling about with what to call themselves when they get privatised ( sorry third sectored)and actually got on with running the waterways.

 

Regards

 

TC

 

Maybe they should reinstate the side ponds, and of course help people to learn how to use them.

 

I haven't been there for over 20 years, but I've always understood that the locks were designed with side ponds in mind, with smallish top & bottom paddles but big side pond paddles. If they're serious about water conservation there......

 

Tim

[churchward]

Maybe they should reinstate the side ponds, and of course help people to learn how to use them.

 

I haven't been there for over 20 years, but I've always understood that the locks were designed with side ponds in mind, with smallish top & bottom paddles but big side pond paddles. If they're serious about water conservation there......

 

Tim

Yes the side pounds back in action would help if they were all working.

 

Mind you we should count our good fortune if all we have to worry about is a slow trip down the Atherstone flight to spoil our day.

[Hairy-Neil]

 

So Top Cat, I think you were just unlucky to find such a queue.

 

A friend messaged me this morning to say he was 13th in the queue... I think it was compounded today by a group of historic boats, probably returning from the Shackerston weekend.

 

Yes the side pounds back in action would help if they were all working.

 

 

 

I believe there's one on the flight in working order...

[alan_fincher]

I believe there's one on the flight in working order...

Yes,

 

I think it is just one.....

 

 

Not a lot of help in the whole flight, if no others work.

 

These would save water, but I'd be amazed if all were workable, and used as intended, that you would get people through faster. Almost certainly slower, I'm guessing!

[Timleech]

Yes,

 

I think it is just one.....

 

 

Not a lot of help in the whole flight, if no others work.

 

These would save water, but I'd be amazed if all were workable, and used as intended, that you would get people through faster. Almost certainly slower, I'm guessing!

 

Depends what 'used as intended' means

 

Tim

[alan_fincher]

Depends what 'used as intended' means

 

Tim

'Used as intended' in my comment meant that if a side-pond paddle is open no paddle at either end of the lock will be. Side pond firmly closed off, before any water is taken from an upper pound, or emptied into a lower pound.

 

Their intended purpose, (as I'm certain you know), was to save water, not to speed passage through a lock.

 

I am fully aware that judicious use of side-pond paddles at the same time as "normal" paddles, can get you through a lock faster, but the same water saving is not then achieved.

 

We used the latter approach all the time in the 1970s at side-pond equipped locks on the Southern GU. We got along a bit faster, (quite a bit faster on the "slowest" locks that had top gate paddles removed), but were not operating in a manner that reduced water usage all that much.

 

Do we understand each other ?

[churchward]

'Used as intended' in my comment meant that if a side-pond paddle is open no paddle at either end of the lock will be. Side pond firmly closed off, before any water is taken from an upper pound, or emptied into a lower pound.

 

Their intended purpose, (as I'm certain you know), was to save water, not to speed passage through a lock.

 

I am fully aware that judicious use of side-pond paddles at the same time as "normal" paddles, can get you through a lock faster, but the same water saving is not then achieved.

 

We used the latter approach all the time in the 1970s at side-pond equipped locks on the Southern GU. We got along a bit faster, (quite a bit faster on the "slowest" locks that had top gate paddles removed), but were not operating in a manner that reduced water usage all that much.

 

Do we understand each other ?

 

Your first explanation is what I always understood as the "correct" method. I can easily imagine though that many working boatman used the later to speed them along after all time was money to them and I certainly have when boating in my early days in the later 70s

 

Oddly enough when going down Foxton this year Chris was trying to use the correct method but one of the lock keeper assistants kept whacking open the gate paddles straight away.

[alan_fincher]

Oddly enough when going down Foxton this year Chris was trying to use the correct method but one of the lock keeper assistants kept whacking open the gate paddles straight away.

Are you sure you mean Foxton ?

 

Surely there are no gate paddles on the Foxton locks ?

[Timleech]

'Used as intended' in my comment meant that if a side-pond paddle is open no paddle at either end of the lock will be. Side pond firmly closed off, before any water is taken from an upper pound, or emptied into a lower pound.

 

Their intended purpose, (as I'm certain you know), was to save water, not to speed passage through a lock.

 

I am fully aware that judicious use of side-pond paddles at the same time as "normal" paddles, can get you through a lock faster, but the same water saving is not then achieved.

 

We used the latter approach all the time in the 1970s at side-pond equipped locks on the Southern GU. We got along a bit faster, (quite a bit faster on the "slowest" locks that had top gate paddles removed), but were not operating in a manner that reduced water usage all that much.

 

Do we understand each other ?

 

Yes we do, of course. The water saving should still be significant, especially (as I said at the beginning) if what I was told many moons ago is true, that that flight in particular was designed with modestly-sized top & bottom paddles along with good-sized side paddles, maybe even in the full knowledge that in practice all three paddles would be drawn at the same time. That's why it is a fairly slow flight to work without the side ponds.

 

Tim

[14skipper]

'Used as intended' in my comment meant that if a side-pond paddle is open no paddle at either end of the lock will be. Side pond firmly closed off, before any water is taken from an upper pound, or emptied into a lower pound.

 

Their intended purpose, (as I'm certain you know), was to save water, not to speed passage through a lock.

 

I am fully aware that judicious use of side-pond paddles at the same time as "normal" paddles, can get you through a lock faster, but the same water saving is not then achieved.

 

We used the latter approach all the time in the 1970s at side-pond equipped locks on the Southern GU. We got along a bit faster, (quite a bit faster on the "slowest" locks that had top gate paddles removed), but were not operating in a manner that reduced water usage all that much.

 

Do we understand each other ?

Hmm forgive my ignorance but no !

14Skipper

[Theo]

Your first explanation is what I always understood as the "correct" method. I can easily imagine though that many working boatman used the later to speed them along after all time was money to them and I certainly have when boating in my early days in the later 70s

 

Oddly enough when going down Foxton this year Chris was trying to use the correct method but one of the lock keeper assistants kept whacking open the gate paddles straight away.

 

But Foxton has side pounds as opposed to side ponds. Side pounds just replace the pounds between the locks so that a staircase operates like a normal flight.

 

N

[ditchcrawler]

But Foxton has side pounds as opposed to side ponds. Side pounds just replace the pounds between the locks so that a staircase operates like a normal flight.

 

N

But there is still no gate paddles, they are all ground paddles

[Guest]

But there is still no gate paddles, they are all ground paddles

 

Indeed and what's the little ditty again - something like...

 

'Red before white and you'll be all right; white before red and you'll wish you were dead'

[WotEver]

Indeed and what's the little ditty again - something like...

 

'Red before white and you'll be all right; white before red and you'll wish you were dead'

That's exactly what it is

[Proper Job]

You can't go using the side ponds for locking!

 

This element of our waterways heritage now belongs to the 'nature' side of the brave new world of mixed canal beneficiaries.

 

If you start letting water in and out of them you'll upset the frogs and newts and dragonfly's and rushes and................

 

[Iain_S]

Yes we do, of course. The water saving should still be significant, especially (as I said at the beginning) if what I was told many moons ago is true, that that flight in particular was designed with modestly-sized top & bottom paddles along with good-sized side paddles, maybe even in the full knowledge that in practice all three paddles would be drawn at the same time. That's why it is a fairly slow flight to work without the side ponds.

 

Tim

 

Did the Atherstone flght ever have top gate paddles? The locks seem to empty fairly quick, but are slow fillers.

 

Iain

[Top cat]

We use the one working side pond and it really doesn't seem to make much difference I suspect its badly silted up.

 

Got a bit of compensating good luck today when we went down Glascote top lock full and gate opened for us . second lock had oncoming boat coming out at the right time plus another one ready to come in as we left took about 10 minutes to do them both

 

TC

[Theo]

But there is still no gate paddles, they are all ground paddles

 

Quite so, but I meant to draw attention to the fact that their use is quite different from the water saving side ponds.

 

N

[mayalld]

We use the one working side pond and it really doesn't seem to make much difference I suspect its badly silted up.

 

 

Side ponds do silt up, particularly if they aren't used.

 

For that reason, even if the sidepond is full, and the weirs running, use it, because doing so will scour the silt, and clear the pond.

[mayalld]

I has just taken us 5 1/2 hours to descend the Atherstone flight (normally we do it in 2 1.4 to 2 1/2hrs). We arrived at 9:30 to find ourselves 6th in the queue and started into the top lock by 11 meanwhile the queue had stretched back to the previous bridge. Progress through the flight was glacial with further queues at every lock , sometimes there was now where to go on exiting the lock. When we finally got to lock 11 we found that only 1 upper paddle was working sothe lock took 9 minutes to fill.

 

So was that he cause of all the delay - No I don't think so but it really didnt help and it been like that for some time I'm told.

I rather suspect the limited opening times had an effect by concentrating the traffic. And why is this "water saving" measure still in effect when the summit pound has been at normal level for the past 10 days and water was going over the spilways down the flight.

 

So given the two issues were any BW bods about to speed traffic and save water - no not a soul in sight.

 

It's about time BW stopped fiddling about with sculptures and fiddling about with what to call themselves when they get privatised ( sorry third sectored)and actually got on with running the waterways.

 

Regards

 

TC

 

Atherstone Bottom Lock, Lock 11

 

Tuesday 13 September 2011 - Tuesday 13 September 2011 A stoppage is required at this lock to enable essential maintenance works to the paddle due to a broken paddle rod. These works will take place between 4pm and 7pm. The towpath remains open.

 

The pound above lock 11 and below Lock 10 will be dewatered.

 

 

 

[Smelly]

You think that's a nightmare? We're moored at the bottom of Stoke locks on the W&B and have walked for nearly 2 hours to find a pepper (fail) and an amenable pub...

 

The horror!