Widebeam question

[blackrose]

If you read one of my other posts I put a very rough list of what wider waterways I have been on...thought of a few more since then!

 

I also agree that the GU below Berko was classed as a wide waterway but I have also read of the problems caused when two wide boats met.....and that was when the hedges were trimmed and the canal dredged.....hence the majority of boats were pairs of narrowboats.

 

My point was more to do with wide boats on unsuitable waterways....although it may come as a shock to some on here I do realise that places like the Aire & Calder and Trent are suitable for wider boats....indeed I had great boat envy when moored next to a Lissen on the Severn last year. My other point about ugly was aimed at wide beam "narrowboats".....I would love a nice Tjalk but don't want to be limited to the wider waterways in the UK....but as you say it's very much a personal thing....like people it's a good job we don't all find the same things attractive.....now where's a single woman with a Tjalk who wants a stout hairy bloke....???

 

Ok fair enough, each to their own. My comment about boring boats was aimed at most narrowboats that I see.

[Lady Muck]

Well a big Tjalk just came past us, smashing its way up the river. I'm not sure they've done this before.....

[blackrose]

 

And the only boat which should have a stern with corners is a dinghy

 

I guess some of these sterns are wrong then.

 

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=ship+stern+square&hl=en-GB&qscrl=1&rlz=1T4GGHP_enGB423GB438&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=BWFnU7OAEZOu7AattYGwCA&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAQ&biw=1280&bih=608#hl=en-GB&q=ship+stern+&qscrl=1&tbm=isch

[Paul's Nulife4-2]

Isn't that part of A CArT pilot scheem for Vegetation management ! Lady Muck

[alan_fincher]

 

I didn't know this either until someone on the forum corrected my historical knowledge a few years ago, but the southern GU traditionally had 12ft wide beam boats plying their trade, whilst the Manchester, Bolton and Bury had the same. Many of the broad canals were designed for both wide and narrow boats.

 

Wide beam trading boats only used to work north as far as about Berkhamsted, and I believe even so not in particularly large numbers.

 

It was highly unusual for them to go much further North than that, and it is widely acknowledged that it would always have been nigt on impossible for two loaded barges to pass at most places in Tring summit, (and no doubt lots of other places too).

 

Trials with wide beam boats in both the 1930s, and later after nationalisation convinced those doing them that the fact that the canal had never been upgraded and widen to support this meant it was just not a go-er.

 

Mostl, other than in the London area, the GU is a canal suitable for a pair of narrow boats, not for barges. If that were not the case the use of barges would have spread, because they would have been far more cost effective, anywhere their use was a serious possibilty.

 

In my personal view the shallow draughted "leisure" wide-beams of up to about 10' 6" that now use the GU are reasonably OK, but those that push it to 12 feet or more are not really fit for purpose, once much North of Berkhamsted.

 

The new 12 foot wide hotel boat operating further up is a very good way of part spoiling the canal experience for others, whilst providing accommodation for a maximum of just 4 guests. Bonkers in my view.

 

 

[Paul's Nulife4-2]

My neighbours have household type double glazed windows which open outwards and upwards

 

If another boat passes them too close it will break all of the windows if the are open.

 

Its an unpowered wide bean so not too serious as they don't go anywhere but if they wanted a boat to stop alongside it could be very detrimental.

 

Wide beans IMO are fundamentally ugly but as Blackrose says its in the eye of the beholder as is everything else.

 

And the only boat which should have a stern with corners is a dinghy

How about 'Rounded Corners !' On a Widebeam as a acceptable compromise Magnetman ?

https://db.tt/cPLtTUdg

Edited May 5, 2014 by Paul's Nulife4-2

[magnetman]

Still prefer round stern myself

[blackrose]

 

In my personal view the shallow draughted "leisure" wide-beams of up to about 10' 6" that now use the GU are reasonably OK, but those that push it to 12 feet or more are not really fit for purpose, once much North of Berkhamsted.

 

 

I've been north of Berko on my 12ft widebeam and had no problems at all. But I took the precaution of going through the Tring cutting at 5am!

 

[John V]

And the only boat which should have a stern with corners is a dinghy

 

Thames barge, Leeds and Liverpool long boat, Wey barge, Trows, most Tamar barges, Lancaster barges......all transoms

[blackrose]

Wide beans IMO are fundamentally ugly but as Blackrose says its in the eye of the beholder as is everything else.

 

 

Since we all find different thing aesthetically pleasing (or not) then I don't think there's anything fundamental about it, at least not judging by most of the positive comments I get about my boat from passing boats. Then again I suppose it could be that the passing boaters who think it's pig ugly are keeping their thoughts to themselves, which isn't a bad idea really. I realise that openly insulting other people's boats is all part of what happens on an internet forum, but fortunately most of us have a sufficient level of decorum not to do that face to face.

Edited May 5, 2014 by blackrose

[magnetman]

Leeds and Liverpool Long Boat?

 

That's a new one for me..

[magnetman]

Blackrose I used IMO - In My Opinion.

 

IMO broad beam narrow boat style craft are fundamentally ugly, not all craft over 7ft.

 

Aiui this is the type of craft people refer to when they say 'wide beam'

 

[Bettie Boo]

 

 

Took this photo on my phone yesterday. Now that's what I call pig ugly!

 

 

 

If that's pig ugly - I'll take pig ugly any day

 

maybe with bigger windows though

[magnetman]

It is also interesting IMO that there is no real term for these boats they are a sort of oddity.

 

I remember a chap who had a 60x12 Liverpool boat after a lifetime of yotting he said its not a very nice boat but its great to live on which is what they are for, primarily.

[Lady Muck]

I actually don't mind them, at least they are designed for cruising our waterways unlike a lot of the Dutch craft - they are the ones I hear more about as far as encountering problems, due to size and shape.

 

For instance -

 

Seized engines due to being so deep draughted, they get a prop foul and the owner doesn't deal with it because they have to actually go in the water to clear the prop. Can think of 3 boats that this happened to.

 

Smashed wheelhouse or simply too high an airdraft so they damage bridges or tunnels or get stuck fast.

 

Catching on lock furniture again because they are so curved whereas our canal boats (be they short boats, widebeams or narrowboats) are more boxy, straight sided hulls.

 

ETA of course I'm refererring to London waterways, having boated up North, thse kinds of boats are much more suited to A&C etc.

 

The Lee might be a barge canal, too, but it's busy, it needs dredging and our bridges are really, really low.

Edited May 5, 2014 by Lady Muck

[Paul C]

I actually don't mind them, at least they are designed for cruising our waterways unlike a lot of the Dutch craft - they are the ones I hear more about as far as encountering problems, due to size and shape.

 

For instance -

 

Seized engines due to being so deep draughted, they get a prop foul and the owner doesn't deal with it because they have to actually go in the water to clear the prop. Can think of 3 boats that this happened to.

 

Smashed wheelhouse or simply too high an airdraft so they damage bridges or tunnels or get stuck fast.

 

Catching on lock furniture again because they are so curved whereas our canal boats (be they short boats, widebeams or narrowboats) are more boxy, straight sided hulls.

 

ETA of course I'm refererring to London waterways, having boated up North, thse kinds of boats are much more suited to A&C etc.

 

The Lee might be a barge canal, too, but it's busy, it needs dredging and our bridges are really, really low.

 

A Mercedes S class is more elegant than a BMW Mini but if it was driven into a gap too narrow for it, it would get stuck too......the boat can't be blamed for the issues, the boater can though.

[magnetman]

Going back to John V's post.

 

I think you are referring to wooden L&L Short boats which had transom sterns probably because it was cheaper to build like that. And the others you mentioned - were they wood as well?

 

Iron and steel inland vessels are almost always rounded at the stern, including L&L short boats. A square stern looks too much like a cheap option to me and just gives the impression that someone cut the back off.

All IMO of course

[John V]

Leeds and Liverpool Long Boat?

 

That's a new one for me..

 

Horse drawn...Leeds and Liverpool was intended for keels but traders on the canal developed there own keel type 62' to fit the smaller locks Wigan to Leeds on the Rufford branch..known as "short boats" The locks between Wigan and Liverpool being 72' a variant developed known as "long boats"

Short boats carried about 40 tons, long boats 70 tons with about 5' draught

 

editted to add "yes timber"

Edited May 5, 2014 by John V

[magnetman]

Thanks for that

Always good when the forum turns up new information and adds to knowledge even if it is unorthodox ways

[blackrose]

Blackrose I used IMO - In My Opinion.

 

IMO broad beam narrow boat style craft are fundamentally ugly, not all craft over 7ft.

 

Aiui this is the type of craft people refer to when they say 'wide beam'

 

Yes I was fully aware that you were offering your personal (and in my view flawed)opinion, which is precisely why there can be nothing fundamental about it.

It is also interesting IMO that there is no real term for these boats they are a sort of oddity.

 

I remember a chap who had a 60x12 Liverpool boat after a lifetime of yotting he said its not a very nice boat but its great to live on which is what they are for, primarily.

I disagree. A modern widebeam is no more of an oddity than a modern narrowboat. Both bear little resemblance to their working precursors. I've seen your boat and its just as much of an oddity as mine IMO.

Going back to John V's post.

 

I think you are referring to wooden L&L Short boats which had transom sterns probably because it was cheaper to build like that. And the others you mentioned - were they wood as well?

 

Iron and steel inland vessels are almost always rounded at the stern, including L&L short boats. A square stern looks too much like a cheap option to me and just gives the impression that someone cut the back off.

All IMO of course

Making the distinction between wood and steel makes no sense here. There are plenty of wooden boats with round sterns and plenty of steel boats with square sterns. Not IMO, that's just a fact. Anyway, you seem to have changed your stance on square sterns slightly. First it was only square stern dinghys that were allowed and now it's wooden boats too. Of course one is free to like or dislike whatever one wishes, but I find the sort of sweeping statements that you make rather blinkered. The skipper who took my boat across the Bristol channel told me my boat was at the better end of the range of wide boats he'd steered and better than a lot of narrow boats. This was after originally telling me he didn't like widebeams when he stepped aboard at Portishead. His change of opinion hardly points to widebeams only being good for accommodation. Edited May 5, 2014 by blackrose