Leaving lock gates open (again)

[Water Rat.]

So. Since there is plenty of water - I am ok to leave them open?

[nicknorman]

So. Since there is plenty of water - I am ok to leave them open?

No. As Ms Leo2 points out, it can be an issue of flooding as well as shortage. And how do you decide when a glut of water becomes a normal amount, and then a shortage? Unless everyone is of the same mind you are likely to get that label!

[Water Rat.]

No. As Ms Leo2 points out, it can be an issue of flooding as well as shortage. And how do you decide when a glut of water becomes a normal amount, and then a shortage? Unless everyone is of the same mind you are likely to get that label!

I think it is safe to say we have had a glut of water recently, however, since I always do, I shall continue to close up!

[GUMPY]

I have noticed over the last couple of days that the upper gates on the top lock at Stoke Bruerne have been left open (by single handlers) on a number of occasions and in one case it was both gates with all the paddles up. The lower gates leak a bit (well more than a bit) and with no by-washes on the flight there's a danger of flooding in the shorter pounds. There is no instruction to close the gates on leaving (not to self to ring CRT) but I would have thought common sense would have dictated that you would/should always close the upper gates of the top lock of a flight on leaving but it may be that I am just old fashioned in my views. I think it is especially important at this time of year when the volume of movements is not that great.

If the locks are of the same design as most others on the GU then there are bywashes there you just don't notice them.

The bywash is through the top gate sluice channel it weirs over through the sluice into the lock then when the lock is full over the bottom gates. However due to loads of factors some locks have the bottom gates replaced so they are to tall thus wrecking an intellegently designed working system.......

[bizzard]

If you want plenty of exercise visit the sunny river Stort where the locks are 80 odd feet long by 13 or so foot wide, not many cross over walkway bridges most entail walking out into a road at the tail of the locks to change sides and most are slow fillers.

[Leo No2]

If the locks are of the same design as most others on the GU then there are bywashes there you just don't notice them.

The bywash is through the top gate sluice channel it weirs over through the sluice into the lock then when the lock is full over the bottom gates. However due to loads of factors some locks have the bottom gates replaced so they are to tall thus wrecking an intellegently designed working system.......

You are quite right BUT two things to note are 1) the side ponds are no longer used and 2) you can find that the gates are almost impossible to open down the flight (17 - may be 18 - I think is a good example). The pound between 14 and 15 will flood quite easily and I'd rather buy a drink from the Navigation than have to wade through it! It may be that some of the lower gates are too tall but is it really too much to ask that the gates on the top lock are closed in order that we can take account of the design inefficiencies of the current system. It does seem to me to be not too much to ask

[luctor et emergo]

 

Not sure why you're saying that. I'm not advocating leaving gates open, just quibbling with the people who deny that time savings would be available should we all agree to leave gates open.

 

And they are not small savings, they would be quite large for me as a single hander. Instead of having to moor and leave my boat twice at every lock, I'd only need to moor and leave it once. Or even not at all on the 50% of times I arrive at a lock with gate open in my favour.

 

I reckon it would halve the time on average it takes an average single hander to work an average lock. Well worth the wait once in a blue moon while CRT re-fill a pound!

 

 

MtB

Mike, that is typical selfish talk of somebody who is lazy, and doesn't like to confirm to the educated knowledge of those who know better....

 

 

 

:wink:

 

 

 

 

 

I like boating on rivers, and really are going to like boating on the Bristol Channel.

[furnessvale]

You are quite right BUT two things to note are 1) the side ponds are no longer used and 2) you can find that the gates are almost impossible to open down the flight (17 - may be 18 - I think is a good example). The pound between 14 and 15 will flood quite easily and I'd rather buy a drink from the Navigation than have to wade through it! It may be that some of the lower gates are too tall but is it really too much to ask that the gates on the top lock are closed in order that we can take account of the design inefficiencies of the current system. It does seem to me to be not too much to ask

I have stated before that I DO close gates so I am not arguing against that.

 

Having said that I cannot see how leaving the top gates open can cause flooding. Even if the bottom gates were atrocious leakers, they would still only let water through at a trickle compared to emptying a full lock through its paddles, which is far more likely to be the cause of any flooding.

 

If excess water is coming down the canal, closing the top gates will only hold the excess back until such time as it flows down the bywash or overtops the gates. Either way, the same volume of water arrives in the lower pound at the same flow rate, whether the top gates or open or closed.

 

George ex nb Alton retired

Edited March 22, 2014 by furnessvale

[MtB]

Mike, that is typical selfish talk of somebody who is lazy, and doesn't like to confirm to the educated knowledge of those who know better....

 

:wink:

 

I know. I've been told THREE times now in this thread I'm lazy!

 

Only twice jokingly...

 

MtB

[alan_fincher]

You are quite right BUT two things to note are 1) the side ponds are no longer used and 2) you can find that the gates are almost impossible to open down the flight (17 - may be 18 - I think is a good example). The pound between 14 and 15 will flood quite easily and I'd rather buy a drink from the Navigation than have to wade through it! It may be that some of the lower gates are too tall but is it really too much to ask that the gates on the top lock are closed in order that we can take account of the design inefficiencies of the current system. It does seem to me to be not too much to ask

I think in general probably more of the "excess water" problems at Stoke Bruerne are caused by less than intelligent use of the back-pumps by CRT, than by any failure close gates at the top lock.

 

The baclk-pumps are regularly on when they certainly don't need to be, and this can, I think, be the prime cause of the cascades over the gates that make the flight a struggle, when it should be a pleasure.

 

What was really annoying was that even in the summer a couple of years ago, when the major flights on the GU had highly resticted opening hours, that water was plummeting over the gates all the way down the Stoke Bruerne flight, whilst boats that could have been going up the flight sat locked out, waiting at the bottom.

 

Buckby also suffers from similar issues of excessive back-pumping sometimes. At the very least CRT are presumably paying a lot for the electricity to pump water back up the flights, only to have much of it tumbling uselessly back down again!

[Tuscan]

Agree with Alan regarding SB although we have suffered from lack of water more at Buckby flight.

[Jim Riley]

using electrickery to back pump when water is cascading down? fit water wheels to pump it back for free?

[Leo No2]

I think in general probably more of the "excess water" problems at Stoke Bruerne are caused by less than intelligent use of the back-pumps by CRT, than by any failure close gates at the top lock.

 

The baclk-pumps are regularly on when they certainly don't need to be, and this can, I think, be the prime cause of the cascades over the gates that make the flight a struggle, when it should be a pleasure.

 

What was really annoying was that even in the summer a couple of years ago, when the major flights on the GU had highly resticted opening hours, that water was plummeting over the gates all the way down the Stoke Bruerne flight, whilst boats that could have been going up the flight sat locked out, waiting at the bottom.

Buckby also suffers from similar issues of excessive back-pumping sometimes. At the very least CRT are presumably paying a lot for the electricity to pump water back up the flights, only to have much of it tumbling uselessly back down again!

I have never seen the levels in the tunnel pound get too high - perhaps once during very heavy rain overnight although it did flood in Stoke Bruerne above the top lock in 1939 according to a local.

 

I did ask about the running if the back pumps. They do tend to run over night because they are on the equivalent of Economy 7 and they do come on when a level switch (positioned somewhere) is triggered. I have not seen it over flow the top gates of the top lock but it certainly does down the flight. I accept that there is a GU version of by-washes but it does seem at times that things don't work out quite as well as may be hoped for. The upper gates on 18 (I think it is) will open when you close them when the lock is full because they are not balanced properly and that will drain the short pound because the lower gates leak! I expect in reality that the Stoke Bruerne flight works well enough and that there are other locks/flights in need of more attention at the moment.

Edited March 22, 2014 by Leo No2

[MyLady]

My understanding too is that you were correct to leave a paddle on the bottom gates open.

Thanks for that. The reason given on the notice was: "to prevent the cellars of nearby houses from flooding." I thought that refered to houses on the next pound. My Mrs pointed out that it was more likely the ones next to the lock, so keeping the chamber empty finally made sense of which was 'the tail.'

 

If you want plenty of exercise visit the sunny river Stort where the locks are 80 odd feet long by 13 or so foot wide, not many cross over walkway bridges most entail walking out into a road at the tail of the locks to change sides and most are slow fillers.

An alternative would be the Huddersfield Narrow, let alone steering in a crouch for 2 or 3 hours through Standedge tunnel (thank goodness for the3 hard hats provided for when one doesn't crouch low enough) there are also several locks with chambers, or exits, about 6'11" wide, so if you leave your 2" fenders down, you are in for lots of exercise prising loose a well jammed boat. Finally, many of the pounds are so small that a lock full of water can lower the water level by 8", leaving the boat aground, which makes it difficult to enter the newly filled lock... We finally worked out that we needed to open the paddles to set the next lock before emptying the one we were in; that way the current lock-full didn't just pour away down the by-wash but went into the next lock! Even before the tunnel, there was one, climbing lock that leaked water faster than the upper paddles could fill it. That took a call to the CaRT emergency number, which (eventually, we were trying to get to the tunnel before the rain forecasted, so we started just before 7am; the lads didn't start work that early), so we had to wait 2 hours (distance successfully covered 100 yards) before 2 beefy lads showed up and pushed the gate open without equal levels. It turned out they were part of the tunnel team, so we didn't keep them waiting at the portal. In fact, they walked down with a boat that had come South through the tunnel in the morning to repeat their feat of strength, so as it happened we were in plenty of time. Today's descent also was helped (?!) by rain and hail until we reached a practicable overnight mooring (we tied up actually in a lock for lunch, one of few that miraculously didn't leak, as that was the only place available with sufficient water to stop). So if you want hard work, sorry, "exercise" try crossing the Pennines via the Huddersfield Narrow.

 

Roger

[Ange]

It really is about water conservation and it is perhaps time that some people accepted that the staff on the ground often (OK not always!) know more about their stretch of water than anyone else. The locks and canals have always been leaky and short of replacing them by hermetically sealed channels they always will be. The way they behave is not always the same and the optimum operation for water conservation is often best decided not on logic but by direct 'cut and try' and wathcing what actually happens.

 

In short, if CaRT advise, just do it and stop trying to be cleverer than they are.

Don't you just hate it when someone lectures you on doing something you've already said you do!

 

Read my post again - it clearly states I close the gates.

 

Go lecture someone who doesn't.

[Laurence Hogg]

When I was first taught to boat we never closed gates unless we knew there was a need to or we were told by a lock keeper to do so. When I hotel boated on the GU and Oxford it was the same, now we have locks without working side ponds, without gate paddles but with a nice ladder to get out of the chamber. I cannot see why it is necessary to close gates on a busy waterway when the odds of traffic coming at you is high, its courtesy to close them if someone's following (and draw half a paddle for them sometimes) as it makes sense. If CRT maintained its gates well ie no major leaks then we wouldn't get a soaking and they wouldn't drain off their pounds. I do think we need to look back, in many ways BW did a better job in the early years than the over sanitized enviro friendly crap we experience today. Forget "volunteers" who need a H&S briefing to pull up weeds and get proper employed lengthsmen back who know their waterway and can structure the maintenance required,

 

As the French Waterways described BW after a visit "a micky mouse operation" and so it is today imho.

Edited March 22, 2014 by Laurence Hogg

[nicknorman]

I do think we need to look back, in many ways BW did a better job in the early years than the over sanitized enviro friendly crap we experience today. Forget "volunteers" who need a H&S briefing to pull up weeds and get proper employed lengthsmen back who know their waterway and can structure the maintenance required,

 

As the French Waterways described BW after a visit "a micky mouse operation" and so it is today imho.

But don't forget that in the days to which you refer, the system was smaller and the amount of traffic (=wear and tear) much less. My rose tinted glasses are perhaps defective but I recall the system around here (midlands) being in a much worse state in the 70s than it is now. As to H&S mania, whilst I agree, I don't think the criticism can be levelled at CRT/BW, rather it is an indictment of the dumbing down of society in general and the proliferation of a general presumption that the great outdoors is an intrinsically safe place.

[jam]

Hire boaters are normally more responsible.

 

And I would put myself in this category but it galls me to see the way some hire boaters perform.

 

On Saturday last (28th March) early evening, I moored up for the night at the bottom of Bosley flight on the Macc. Went for a stroll up the flight to find a hire boat had just been through (last boat of the day) leaving all top gates open and a number of top paddles drawn. Pound between 3 & 4 was drained and a number of the others low. Went back up the following morning and the pounds were still low. The offending hirers (middle aged couple with 1 teenager and 1 youngster) had spent the night moored on the water point at the top. I gave him a piece of my mind, his comment 'not my fault, I was steering' Perhaps Black Prince should train their hirers a little more (The NB was 'Odette')

 

A couple of days later, the same crew spent the night on the waterpoint at Whaley Bridge but snuck off at daybreak.

 

As others have said (on canals) the best way is to close the gates after use where possible and ensure all paddles are down, many locks are not in the best of health.

[JC_Derby]

Heading downhill from Stoke bruerne. I left a gate open not sure whether paddles up or down or a narrowboat heading in. The woman on the boat started screaming at me. It had been a lovely week until then, but her attitude really miffed me, so she got both barrels in return, luckily her husband kept his mouth shut and to be fair looked rather embarrassed.

I might have been in the wrong? But it would have been better to explainit rather than a verbal tirade.

[Mike Todd]

Heading downhill from Stoke bruerne. I left a gate open not sure whether paddles up or down or a narrowboat heading in. The woman on the boat started screaming at me. It had been a lovely week until then, but her attitude really miffed me, so she got both barrels in return, luckily her husband kept his mouth shut and to be fair looked rather embarrassed.

I might have been in the wrong? But it would have been better to explainit rather than a verbal tirade.

We have just been up and back on the River Stort. As a river navigation, it is obvious that locals leave gates open as they depart from a lock, both up and down. There is no obvious need nor special benefit so it seerms to be a matter of "if we cand do it we will"

 

However, one lock has several clear notices requesting that the lock be left empty because of leakage through the lock walls. On both occasions we found it full with the top gates open.

[casper ghost]

I often do lock on my own and some locks I can close the gates whereas others it's not very easy without mooring up and going back to close them. I'm all in favour of leaving them open, at least then they will be right half the time, shut them and they'll leak so they're in no ones favour.

Casp'

[alan_fincher]

We have just been up and back on the River Stort. As a river navigation, it is obvious that locals leave gates open as they depart from a lock, both up and down. There is no obvious need nor special benefit so it seerms to be a matter of "if we cand do it we will"

 

However, one lock has several clear notices requesting that the lock be left empty because of leakage through the lock walls. On both occasions we found it full with the top gates open.

We were told by locals that it is normal to leave exit gates open on the Lee and Stort, and subsequently several different BW (for it was pre CRT) operatives told us the same.

 

Obviously that doesn't excuse failure to adhere to any special instruction, but now, other than at the "electric" locks, I would do as I have been told and leave exit gates open, unless there were specific signs saying otherwise.

 

(And what a pleasure it is to be able to boat straight into a waiting lock - long may it continue on those rivers!).

[matty40s]

After doing Buckby both ways quite a few times this winter on quite a few different boats, I would say Buckby has a severe water loss issue in the long pound above the garden centre. There is little visible leakage from the gates, but appears to be a low level sluice letting water flow through the lock to keep the bottom two pounds watered.

There seem to be two pumps, one from bottom to lock 8 and one to above top lock. The pumped water to lock 8 is not getting down to the long pound for some reason.

[Mike Todd]

We were told by locals that it is normal to leave exit gates open on the Lee and Stort, and subsequently several different BW (for it was pre CRT) operatives told us the same.

 

Obviously that doesn't excuse failure to adhere to any special instruction, but now, other than at the "electric" locks, I would do as I have been told and leave exit gates open, unless there were specific signs saying otherwise.

 

(And what a pleasure it is to be able to boat straight into a waiting lock - long may it continue on those rivers!).

But that delight is offset by arriving at a lock with the gates open at the far end. Remember that these locks are not quite double width and so both gates have be moved, if not fully opened even for a narrowboat. Also, there is no way to cross the lock at the top end so quite a lot of walking.

[alan_fincher]

Also, there is no way to cross the lock at the top end so quite a lot of walking.

You have obviously not seen my son!

But that delight is offset by arriving at a lock with the gates open at the far end. Remember that these locks are not quite double width and so both gates have be moved, if not fully opened even for a narrowboat.

But surely if you have to go walking around to operate a second set of gates, you do just as much of it if trying to leave all gates shut, as if you have to do if they are all open on arrival?