C&RT wants boater input on pawl catch design.

[Tim Lewis]

Sensible response from the IWA that will carry weight with CRT due to the numbers they represent.

 

How do us mere mortals respond to CRT over this?

 

The contact address for responses is detailsed in Post #1

 

Tim

[cuthound]

The contact address for responses is detailsed in Post #1

 

Tim

Doh, couldn't see the wood for the trees! Thanks Tim

[DHutch]

Sensible response from the IWA that will carry weight with CRT due to the numbers they represent.

Fully agree.

 

The contact address for responses is detailsed in Post #1

Indeed to, to which I and others I hope, have replied.

 

 

Daniel

[Alan Saunders]

The IWA response is pretty much my thoughts. As I have two children they sometimes find they need to use two hands to wind a paddle down, so as to have full control. Othe paddles fitted with the stop on the pawl I wince every time their fingers are so close to the moving gears. Also if you accidentally let go of the pawl there is the risk of damage when it hits the gear, with bits of metal flying out as the gear breaks.

Yes, many K&A ground paddles had twin spindles parallel to the canal and my 9 and 12 year-olds could fit their windlasses either side at 90 degrees. Now the ground paddles have a single, poorly maintained, geared spindle on the land side that I find harder work and slower than the original gear.

 

There are obvious, avoidable hazards when operating old-fashioned lock gear but CRT seem intent on making it harder and more dangerous. Lose a few fingers to save a drop of water! The original canal owners were not so stupid or heartless!

 

Alan

[Doodlebug]

I was just thinking about the design of the Pawl and have a suggestion.

 

What about a system like that on car seat belts. Hard to explain without a sketch but three pawls mounted inside a cylinder.

 

If wound slowly or lowered slowly the pawl would be sprung to stay still in the middle. If something were to come off - centrifugal force would spin the pawl outwards locking it in position.

 

Not sure of the exact method of manufacture but its a thought. And it solves all the problems listed here.

[mayalld]

The IWA response is pretty much my thoughts. As I have two children they sometimes find they need to use two hands to wind a paddle down, so as to have full control. Othe paddles fitted with the stop on the pawl I wince every time their fingers are so close to the moving gears. Also if you accidentally let go of the pawl there is the risk of damage when it hits the gear, with bits of metal flying out as the gear breaks.

 

Well, despite the IWA getting it wrong a lot of the time, they are absolutely spot on the money here.

[GUMPY]

Its not the first and it wont be the last

https://twitter.com/IWA_UK/status/621714546210807808?s=09

[DHutch]

https://www.waterways.org.uk/news/view?id=226&x%5B0%5D=news/list&utm_content=buffer68575&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

 

Paddle Pawl Design Contributes to the Near Sinking of a Narrowboat15 July 2015

Following on from IWA’s recent report on its concerns about CRT’s proposals to implement new paddle pawl designs, an incident was reported to the Association at the end of June that illustrates IWA’s unease at the introduction of a paddle pawl design that would prevent paddles being wound down using two hands.

 

Boaters who regularly visit the UK’s waterways from New Zealand were boating down Baddiley No3 Lock on the Llangollen canal. Two ladies were operating the difficult lock, needing two hands to move the paddles just one click at a time. The boater left his boat to assist them but suddenly noticed that the bow was hung up on the lock. He asked for the paddles to be dropped as quickly as possible, which proved very difficult as the ratchet on these locks cannot be thrown back but must be held back as the paddle is lowered. Those operating the lock struggled with this as they had insufficient strength in just one hand to lower the paddle. Fortunately, the boater had the foresight to open the upstream paddles whilst the other paddles were lowered, which put more water into the lock than was going out and avoided disaster. A less experienced boater may have been less fortunate.

 

The boater readily admitted that they should not have had the boat so far forward but also highlighted that if the paddles had been easy to operate he would not have left the boat to help and those operating the lock would have seen the boat was hung rather than putting all their energy into moving the paddles. Furthermore, if the ratchet lock had been like most that can be lifted clear the paddles could have been lowered with two hands more quickly.

 

This incident illustrates IWA’s concerns about CRT’s proposals and emphasises not just the benefit of having ratchets that can be flipped back rather than having to be held up but also the importance of having locks that are easy to operate as even experienced boaters can find themselves in tricky situations.

I disagree about the comment the the boat should not have been forward in the lock, as going down that is exactly where it should have been. But otherwise the article highlights exactly what we have been saying.

 

 

Daniel

[exfire]

When I came through Wigan the other day a Lock that had had 1 those new pawls on had been "altered" so it was missing the stop. not sure who had done that but it was better

[Ray T]

 

An elastic band between the two little rods should keep the pawl clear of the ratchet wheel.

 

Piccy from the IWA link above.

Edited July 16, 2015 by Ray T

[exfire]

 

An elastic band between the two little rods should keep the pawl clear of the ratchet wheel.

Maybe that's why the 1 in Wigan was altered as the stop was were the rusty mark is on the catch. only just allowing you to clear the teeth

[Rick-n-Jo]

 

An elastic band between the two little rods should keep the pawl clear of the ratchet wheel.

 

Piccy from the IWA link above.

Five minutes with a hacksaw, problem solved. I've got one on my boat, have you?

 

Seriously, that's an awful thing, for all the reasons stated so far. Why shouldn't we take action to protect our own safety?

[DHutch]

Five minutes with a hacksaw, problem solved.

Or if you wanted to do it in 5 seconds.

 

 

 

Daniel

[Rick-n-Jo]

Or if you wanted to do it in 5 seconds.

 

61mA+l7f8KL._SY355_.jpg

 

 

Daniel

I want one!

[Ray T]

Perhaps CRT should reintroduce this type of pawl mechanism: