Historic Boats for sale online

[David Mack]

I used to think that until I bought Badger. The cabin is wood, has been on the boat for years and, apart from one 18" length of the recessed panel edging (now fixed), is in perfect, waterproof condition.

 

George ex nb Alton retired

 

Fulbourne had a new wooden back cabin put on by Warwickshire Fly in about 1987. And it is still in fine fettle. The back doors and slide have been replaced, but otherwise it has required nothing other than regular painting, and the occasional bit of sealant in the joint with the steel engine room roof.

[Speedwheel]

Mark says the original was similarly boxy, which is interesting. Did they have an off day at Yarwoods (presuming that at least enough of the original steel engine room remained to base that on), or was there a particular reason, I wonder?

 

Tim

 

It was one of the first comments Simon Wain made when he saw it "I'm glad you kept the square shape of the cabin" - or words to that effect.

Edited January 29, 2014 by Speedwheel

[Speedwheel]

I used to think that until I bought Badger. The cabin is wood, has been on the boat for years and, apart from one 18" length of the recessed panel edging (now fixed), is in perfect, waterproof condition.

 

George ex nb Alton retired

 

The wooden cabin I had on Satellite was great (as was the wooden cabin on the wooden boat I had before that).

[Admiral]

I have a couple of pictures of France on the day I bought it but cant really see the cabin shape..

 

Edited January 29, 2014 by Admiral

[furnessvale]

I have a couple of pictures of France on the day I bought it but cant really see the cabin shape..

 

Appears to be more tumblehome than the present incarnation but I make no comment about "correctness" of either version.

 

George ex nb Alton retired

[Tiggers]

I think the greatest shame about France was that the original engine ole was removed not all that long ago

[magnetman]

I rather like this but my mooring is 13ft8 maximum

 

http://www.apolloduck.co.uk/feature.phtml?id=196998

[Speedwheel]

I think the greatest shame about France was that the original engine ole was removed not all that long ago

 

Agreed. Sadly it was way past saving.

[MtB]

I rather like this but my mooring is 13ft8 maximum

 

http://www.apolloduck.co.uk/feature.phtml?id=196998

 

Me too.

 

Amazing they reckon a JP2 can push 75 tons along at 9 knots!

 

MtB

[Timleech]

 

Me too.

 

Amazing they reckon a JP2 can push 75 tons along at 9 knots!

 

MtB

 

There is absolutely no way that it weighs 75 tons on a 2 foot draught.

Basic steel Sheffield keel hull & engine around 30 tons. We had, if I remember correctly, 20 tons of ballast in the Beecliffe for crossing the North Sea, making about 50 tons gross, and were drawing around 4' at the stern and 3' at the bows. With no ballast, maybe 3' at the stern and 18" at the bow

Either the draught or the displacement is way out. To weigh 75 tons there would need to be about 40 to 45 tons of fitout and ballast, and the draught would be as a guess more like 4' 6" all round.

7 foot draught fully laden with 100 tons of cargo.

 

Tim

[flatplane8]

There is absolutely no way that it weighs 75 tons on a 2 foot draught.

Basic steel Sheffield keel hull & engine around 30 tons. We had, if I remember correctly, 20 tons of ballast in the Beecliffe for crossing the North Sea, making about 50 tons gross, and were drawing around 4' at the stern and 3' at the bows. With no ballast, maybe 3' at the stern and 18" at the bow

Either the draught or the displacement is way out. To weigh 75 tons there would need to be about 40 to 45 tons of fitout and ballast, and the draught would be as a guess more like 4' 6" all round.

7 foot draught fully laden with 100 tons of cargo.

 

Tim

...and all at 450 rpm too

 

Interesting your comments about weight Tim. I've thought Misterton ( Lincoln keel, 75'x15' maybe 3' at the stern and 2' at the bow in terms of draft) weighs 70 tons - we have about 16 tons of steel bar as ballast plus fit out. But perhaps we are less? Misterton used to carry about the same as a Sheffield size keel at 100-120 tons, so given they are deeper there must be a similar amount of steel in their construction.

[MtB]

Well it's not difficult to calculate the volume of the water displaced, and hence the weight.

 

I'd say Misterton displaces about 70 cubic metres from your dimensions Flatplane, spookily close to 70 tonnes!

 

MtB

P.S. By 'I'd say', I mean my calculator says.

[flatplane8]

Well it's not difficult to calculate the volume of the water displaced, and hence the weight.

 

I'd say Misterton displaces about 70 cubic metres from your dimensions Flatplane, spookily close to 70 tonnes!

 

MtB

P.S. By 'I'd say', I mean my calculator says.

That's what I'd based my assumptions on, but even though Misterton is a keel, it's not a simple box, hence my interest in Tim's statement, as he's more experienced than me with the type.

[thorne lass]

Look at the run of the middle rubbing band, and compare with the gas cylinder, or the daffs. I'd say (not my calculator) that it is drawing about 3' aft, that 70 to 75 tons is about right and it probably has concrete in the bottom.

 

A JP2 will push that fine, just slow to get going and it won't stop, and it will go round in circles while it is trying, but it won't use a lot of fuel either. It looks as if it is at Gweek, so would be a problem to get a survey done. The nearest affordable slip would be Polruan (Fowey), which means going to sea again. Nice mooring though.

[Timleech]

That's what I'd based my assumptions on, but even though Misterton is a keel, it's not a simple box, hence my interest in Tim's statement, as he's more experienced than me with the type.

 

Not a simple thing to calculate.

Usually there's a vestigial 'keel' of about 4", so the first 4" of draught weighs 'nothing'. Then there's a shallow vee to the bottom, and round chines and forefoot, and usually quite a fine stern shape (see carlt's pic in another thread yesterday), and the hull sides all have a significant 'batter' , ie the hull is narrower at the bottom than the top.

30 tons was what we were told for the Beecliffe's hull and engine, we bought it from a scrap man who was regularly cutting them up so he wasn't going to underestimate when selling!

The Beecliffe had copper gauging strips screwed to stem & stern posts, going up to about 135 tons (of cargo) with the decks awash. I rather wish I had taken proper notes of what they showed for various draughts.

 

 

Tim

[BenC]

Look at the run of the middle rubbing band, and compare with the gas cylinder, or the daffs. I'd say (not my calculator) that it is drawing about 3' aft, that 70 to 75 tons is about right and it probably has concrete in the bottom.

 

A JP2 will push that fine, just slow to get going and it won't stop, and it will go round in circles while it is trying, but it won't use a lot of fuel either. It looks as if it is at Gweek, so would be a problem to get a survey done. The nearest affordable slip would be Polruan (Fowey), which means going to sea again. Nice mooring though.

To me it looks like its moored at Maylor Bridge. So plenty of boat yards around. Don't know what weight they can lift though, there's always Falmouth docks!!!

[PaddingtonBear]

Seriously cheap for what it is, based of course on photos only.

[BenC]

No windows though. Live on a beautiful creak but not see it. (Yes I know you can put some in).

[MtB]

No windows though. Live on a beautiful creak but not see it. (Yes I know you can put some in).

 

Or, ahem, portholes!

 

MtB

[Timleech]

 

Or, ahem, portholes!

 

MtB

 

Wash your mouth out!

This is the Beecliffe as it is now, with portholes.

IMO they, and the hideous colour scheme,really spoil it.

Mind you, windows would be worse

 

 

I do understand that it's now a semi-static home, so the inside is more important to current owners than the outside, but still...

Tim

Edited January 31, 2014 by Timleech

[MtB]

 

Wash your mouth out!

This is the Beecliffe as it is now, with portholes.

IMO they, and the hideous colour scheme,really spoil it.

Mind you, windows would be worse

 

 

Ok, point taken.

 

Maybe instead of portholes, they could fix tiny little videa cameras on the outside, with TV screens on the inside displaying what each camera is seeing

 

 

 

MtB

[carlt]

[flatplane8]

Wash your mouth out!

This is the Beecliffe as it is now, with portholes.

IMO they, and the hideous colour scheme,really spoil it.

Mind you, windows would be worse

 

 

I do understand that it's now a semi-static home, so the inside is more important to current owners than the outside, but still...

Tim

Although a lot of people do put them in the hull sides, we deliberately chose not to as I view the hull sides as pretty integral to the structure of the boat, and as we want to use ours, didn't want to compromise its strength. We also left the front bulkhead in place for the same reason. We have small portholes in the coaming sides, but they re not visible unless up close. We've had people ask what we are carrying, which is great as we're aiming to keep it looking more or less like a commercial boat. Interestingly, at a barge rally at west India quay in London this summer, Misterton was the only one that looked like this, all the Dutch barges there had large windows etc. etc.

 

Small porthole high up mean lots of excercise jumping up to see what is passing, or we can sit in the wheelhouse if we want a better view.

[Timleech]

Although a lot of people do put them in the hull sides, we deliberately chose not to as I view the hull sides as pretty integral to the structure of the boat, and as we want to use ours, didn't want to compromise its strength. We also left the front bulkhead in place for the same reason. We have small portholes in the coaming sides, but they re not visible unless up close. We've had people ask what we are carrying, which is great as we're aiming to keep it looking more or less like a commercial boat. Interestingly, at a barge rally at west India quay in London this summer, Misterton was the only one that looked like this, all the Dutch barges there had large windows etc. etc.

 

Small porthole high up mean lots of excercise jumping up to see what is passing, or we can sit in the wheelhouse if we want a better view.

 

Portholes or small windows in the coamings rather than the hull sides do look much better than in the hull sides, as well as having less effect on the structural integrity, especially if there is a welded steel top in place of the hatch boards.

 

Tim

[Derek R.]

I agree with Tim. DRAKE looks most business like as is, the wheelhouse on BEECLIFFE would be where to sit and savour the view. Glazed hull sides - ports or not, just kill a vessel.

 

If you really wanted to take a look quayside from a below saloon, why not install a periscope? Need only a fitting similar to a stove pipe above hatches.

Edited January 31, 2014 by Derek R.