koukouvagia Posted January 18, 2016 Report Share Posted January 18, 2016 I can't begin to contribute anything to the debate on the efficiency issues of an hydraulic drive, but I can share my experience of having one fitted to the elum of my Josher butty. (a) it goes like the clappers, but I've always attributed this to the fine lines of a Braithwaite and Kirk boat, rather than anything clever with the motor. (b ) a 1.8 bog standard BMC provides more than enough power for a 70' boat weighing about 25 tons. (c ) it needs minimum maintenance. I change the hydraulic fluid about once every five years. (d) the system (an ARS Anglian drive) was designed by hydraulic experts and fabricated by experienced boat builders. (e) I've never had problems with leaks, etc. of the tail shaft. (f) I replaced, after ten years, the hydraulic pipes - more a precaution than because they needed attention. (g) there is a high-pitched whine which can be annoying until you get used to it. (h) the motor is encased in a housing. This deals with Tony's point about interrupted flow onto the propeller. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 18, 2016 Report Share Posted January 18, 2016 Thanks for these fotos and your comments, now I can see Tony's concerns - apologies, Tony, I'd never seen that type of installation before, only the internal fit. The high pitched annoying whine (apart from the Mrs) - does this come from the engine driven pump or the propellor drive unit? Is your system ever inspected by the authorities, or do you need any pressure test certification? Much obliged Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
koukouvagia Posted January 18, 2016 Report Share Posted January 18, 2016 Thanks for these fotos and your comments, now I can see Tony's concerns - apologies, Tony, I'd never seen that type of installation before, only the internal fit. The high pitched annoying whine (apart from the Mrs) - does this come from the engine driven pump or the propellor drive unit? Is your system ever inspected by the authorities, or do you need any pressure test certification? Much obliged No need for any certification or pressure test. The whine comes from the propeller drive unit. It may be possible to deaden the noise by lining the inside of the hull with insulation material. I've never bothered, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 18, 2016 Report Share Posted January 18, 2016 No need for any certification or pressure test. The whine comes from the propeller drive unit. It may be possible to deaden the noise by lining the inside of the hull with insulation material. I've never bothered, though. I may be able to tune the whine so it cancels out that coming from elsewhere... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laurence Hogg Posted January 18, 2016 Report Share Posted January 18, 2016 (edited) All of you are overlooking the most successful narrow boat type of all as far as efficency, handling and ease of maintenance was concerned. The "River" class motor boats were an outstanding success, their manoeuvrability was superb and it is a pity that today none survive in original form. The boatmen moaned about them simply because they were different but talk to those who tested them out and a completely different view comes across. They had little wash, could turn on a sixpence and could be "sheeted up" in minutes. A superb design alas far too late. Here is "Lee" on test: And in the drydock showing the stern: An opportunity lost but too late, it is understood the principal target area for these boats was the BCN where trade still flourished in the late 1950's. Edited January 18, 2016 by Laurence Hogg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Mack Posted January 19, 2016 Report Share Posted January 19, 2016 All of you are overlooking the most successful narrow boat type of all as far as efficency, handling and ease of maintenance was concerned. The "River" class motor boats were an outstanding success, their manoeuvrability was superb and it is a pity that today none survive in original form. The boatmen moaned about them simply because they were different but talk to those who tested them out and a completely different view comes across. They had little wash, could turn on a sixpence and could be "sheeted up" in minutes. A superb design alas far too late. Here is "Lee" on test: But where would the steerer stand when it was raining, or how would he keep warm when it was cold? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek R. Posted January 19, 2016 Report Share Posted January 19, 2016 (edited) They'd have umbrellas and learned to clog dance. Did what most BCN boaters did - get wet and cold, or did what most outdoors folk as worked horses and open tractors on farms - get wet and cold. Been there, done the latter. Big coats and hats. PS: Good size blade there. Edited January 19, 2016 by Derek R. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark99 Posted January 19, 2016 Report Share Posted January 19, 2016 A triumph of function over form. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laurence Hogg Posted January 19, 2016 Report Share Posted January 19, 2016 (edited) But where would the steerer stand when it was raining, or how would he keep warm when it was cold? There were apparently two steering positions from what can be gleaned, ahead of the engine where there was a seat and two portholes, but also aft where the deck was open until someone fitted a canvas cover as shown. The steerer in the first two pictures is Arthur Goddard. The third one features Phil Garrett. An extract from the report on the craft from an original supplied by Pam Vernon-Jones (E C Jones daughter) ""The boats were not popular with the older more traditional boatmen as they were difficult to handle and steer due to the design at the of the stern keeping water away from the rudder and they were a breakaway form the old narrow boats. The younger boatman thought they were very good and performed well. A design modification to increase the rudder area was made but it was then more difficult to pass through short locks and the boats were heavier to steer. The Anne and Lee were built to a prototype design of a new canal boat that could have changed canal carrying had the circumstances been more favourable at the time. These craft were designed with a transferable cabin so no time was wasted loading or discharging of cargo; the cabin was transferred to another boat already loaded with her cargo. The cabin had four lifting rings so it could be transferred using a standard dockyard crane."" The Lee and Anne had a Harbourmaster 4 cylinder diesel outboard engine with a Voith reversible propeller for steering. The engine was mounted at the stern end and this could also be transferred from one boat to another. These boats were more manoeuvrable as the propeller always gave its thrust in the direction of travel, but the boats were slow to stop. Beryl was the butty to Anne and Ray was the butty to Lee. They were tested for 4 months carrying lime juice from Brentford to Boxmoor, then to carry a load of aluminium ingots from Regents Canal Dock to Birmingham, on the return journey carrying coal to Nash Mills. The trip to Birmingham took 6 days, 2 days longer than usual and the boats never seemed to have been brought into general service on a big scale. The River Class boats were used to transport cement from Rugby Cement works to Stockton and they were used for short journeys rather than long ones. The dimensions were Length 70ft. Beam 7ft. Draught 3ft. 26½ tons. Edited January 19, 2016 by Laurence Hogg 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archie57 Posted January 19, 2016 Report Share Posted January 19, 2016 There were apparently two steering positions from what can be gleaned, ahead of the engine where there was a seat and two portholes, but also aft where the deck was open until someone fitted a canvas cover as shown. The steerer in all these pictures is Arthur Goddard. The last one looks more like Phil Garrett to me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laurence Hogg Posted January 19, 2016 Report Share Posted January 19, 2016 The last one looks more like Phil Garrett to me! You commented before I had finished editing! It is Phil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djgoode1980 Posted January 19, 2016 Report Share Posted January 19, 2016 Many thanks to one and all for kind humour and sound advice! "digging up an old fencepost and sniffing the rotten end is not the same thing at all" priceless! It was never the advertised price that attracted me, it's her lines, she appears to sit so gracefully on the water - and THAT bow... Wow! - you're right Mike, definitely a female form! Now I did find a thread somewhere that suggests that the bow lines are not original but were fined (?) during a 1980's rebuild. Fortunately we are after a shorter hull, around 61' - shortening Beech would be a considerable undertaking and a huge investment - both of which are far from our intended plans for a peaceful retirement on the cut. However, a steel hull should mean that we spend more time on the water than in the boatyard... so... How would I go about commissioning a measure up of the hull, in particularly the first 20-25ft of her to capture the lines so that they could be reproduced in steel? (Sadly the guys at Dadford's Wharf are all busy with builds for the foreseeable (I've asked), otherwise that measure/replicate process could be far simpler!) Does anyone here have experience of measuring up with a view to replicating in metal? I wouldn't know where to start! Can anyone recommend such a person, maybe Laurence? Who do I need to speak to? Would I need to arrange for her to be lifted out? I'm waiting for the Owner "Vanessa" to mail me back... Thanks Guys Go see Paul Barber at Sheet Stores Basin on the Erewash if he and the team can't do it it can't be done Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archie57 Posted January 19, 2016 Report Share Posted January 19, 2016 There were apparently two steering positions from what can be gleaned, ahead of the engine where there was a seat and two portholes, but also aft where the deck was open until someone fitted a canvas cover as shown. The steerer in the first two pictures is Arthur Goddard. The third one features Phil Garrett. An extract from the report on the craft from an original supplied by Pam Vernon-Jones (E C Jones daughter) ""The boats were not popular with the older more traditional boatmen as they were difficult to handle and steer due to the design at the of the stern keeping water away from the rudder and they were a breakaway form the old narrow boats. The younger boatman thought they were very good and performed well. A design modification to increase the rudder area was made but it was then more difficult to pass through short locks and the boats were heavier to steer. The Anne and Lee were built to a prototype design of a new canal boat that could have changed canal carrying had the circumstances been more favourable at the time. These craft were designed with a transferable cabin so no time was wasted loading or discharging of cargo; the cabin was transferred to another boat already loaded with her cargo. The cabin had four lifting rings so it could be transferred using a standard dockyard crane."" The Lee and Anne had a Harbourmaster 4 cylinder diesel outboard engine with a Voith reversible propeller for steering. The engine was mounted at the stern end and this could also be transferred from one boat to another. These boats were more manoeuvrable as the propeller always gave its thrust in the direction of travel, but the boats were slow to stop. Beryl was the butty to Anne and Ray was the butty to Lee. They were tested for 4 months carrying lime juice from Brentford to Boxmoor, then to carry a load of aluminium ingots from Regents Canal Dock to Birmingham, on the return journey carrying coal to Nash Mills. The trip to Birmingham took 6 days, 2 days longer than usual and the boats never seemed to have been brought into general service on a big scale. The River Class boats were used to transport cement from Rugby Cement works to Stockton and they were used for short journeys rather than long ones. The dimensions were Length 70ft. Beam 7ft. Draught 3ft. 26½ tons. I don't know where this "Harbourmaster 4 cylinder diesel outboard engine" idea came from - these had Petter PD2s fitted to the drive units originally, the Thames Conservancy may well have replaced them when in their ownership. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark99 Posted January 19, 2016 Report Share Posted January 19, 2016 Go see Paul Barber at Sheet Stores Basin on the Erewash if he and the team can't do it it can't be done See post # 43. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laurence Hogg Posted January 19, 2016 Report Share Posted January 19, 2016 I don't know where this "Harbourmaster 4 cylinder diesel outboard engine" idea came from - these had Petter PD2s fitted to the drive units originally, the Thames Conservancy may well have replaced them when in their ownership. It came from the builder himself, it may well be the original engines were replaced with Petters? at some time or they specified to be used on the drive units. The company still exists making much the same units today. http://www.harbormastermarine.com/Marine_Outboard_Drive.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laurence Hogg Posted January 20, 2016 Report Share Posted January 20, 2016 It is odd that the report refers to a 4 cylinder engine, after examining all the test pictures of "Lee" there is no doubt that the Petter is fitted as new from the start. I can only summarize from this that the drive units were supplied without engines and the Petter was fitted here in the UK. Clearly visible "Petter" logo here: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek R. Posted January 20, 2016 Report Share Posted January 20, 2016 I can see why they may have been disliked by some. The PD2 is a comparatively noisy engine being air cooled, and stood or sat that close would have justified headphones at the least. In a boxed and sound insulated, it may have been more sufferable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laurence Hogg Posted January 20, 2016 Report Share Posted January 20, 2016 I can see why they may have been disliked by some. The PD2 is a comparatively noisy engine being air cooled, and stood or sat that close would have justified headphones at the least. In a boxed and sound insulated, it may have been more sufferable. It seems that given the picture below it had a casing which could have had some deadening effect, however on many of the pics underway this has been removed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FadeToScarlet Posted January 20, 2016 Report Share Posted January 20, 2016 Lee was in Cambridge until about 2010, and kept the Harbourmaster unit until about 2008/9. I'm pretty sure it had a 4 cylinder higher revving engine in the Harbourmaster unit by then; I'll try and contact the owner and see what it had. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Mack Posted January 21, 2016 Report Share Posted January 21, 2016 I imagine the wheel steering may not have been popular with older boatman. Even with the wheel, the need to swing the entire engine and transmission when steering must have made the steering heavy and tiring to use, and making the boats less responsive. Was this a factor in their lack of success? And just where are the Rivers Anne and Beryl? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billh Posted January 21, 2016 Report Share Posted January 21, 2016 And just where are the Rivers Anne and Beryl? Anne is a sometimes coal boat , usually at Poynton on the Macclesfield Canal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laurence Hogg Posted January 21, 2016 Report Share Posted January 21, 2016 I imagine the wheel steering may not have been popular with older boatman. Even with the wheel, the need to swing the entire engine and transmission when steering must have made the steering heavy and tiring to use, and making the boats less responsive. Was this a factor in their lack of success? And just where are the Rivers Anne and Beryl? Anne could be the river in New Zealand, as for Beryl theres a geyser in Yellowstone park with that name but my guess is a geezer down in Brentford forgot they were naming after rivers completely! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archie57 Posted January 21, 2016 Report Share Posted January 21, 2016 It seems that given the picture below it had a casing which could have had some deadening effect, however on many of the pics underway this has been removed. The hole for the cooling air inlet in front of the fan is clearly visible - but with the panels fitted, where was the hot air supposed to exit? (- given that in the picture of Phil Garrett, the panels appear to go around the rear of the unit) It must be that the panels were meant to be removed when the engine was running! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RLWP Posted January 21, 2016 Report Share Posted January 21, 2016 Out of the bottom of the case Richard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archie57 Posted January 21, 2016 Report Share Posted January 21, 2016 Not ideal as the hot air would want to rise and get drawn back in to the fan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Featured Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now