What A "Middle Northwich" Boat Looks Like Out Of Water

[Athy]

O.K., thanks. I've seen chains across a boat, pulling the sides in so they will fit through locks, but never seen vertical ones before.

[alan_fincher]

O.K., thanks. I've seen chains across a boat, pulling the sides in so they will fit through locks, but never seen vertical ones before.

 

Steelworkers us a whole variety of ways to form plates and pull them into the shapes required

 

To be absolutely clear, what you see in the pictures of Sickle's rebottoming are a temporary feature whilst the work in in progress, and not a permanent feature.

 

Small pieces of steel will have been temporarily welded to the parts in question to attach the chains to, and subsequently cut off, (and ground down if you are lucky, but quite possibly not!). Such techniques are regularly used not just renovating old boats, but also when building brand new modern ones, and the likelihood is that hidden behind the panelling in a posh lined leisure boat there will be some evidence of these techniques having been used during the building of its shell.

I am not quite sure how well you can see the hull profile in the (rather poor quality) photo of Sickle when she was a display feature at Sawley Marina :-

 

Was the bow fender a safety requirement of it beeing there?

[Athy]

 

 

 

To be absolutely clear, what you see in the pictures of Sickle's rebottoming are a temporary feature whilst the work in in progress, and not a permanent feature.

 

 

Now I had not realised that, thanks for the information.

[Laurence Hogg]

O.K., thanks. I've seen chains across a boat, pulling the sides in so they will fit through locks, but never seen vertical ones before.

The chains are for pulling the sides tight against the cross beams thus holding them in place and retaining correct width.

[David Mack]

 

I can see a strip of metal rivetted to the top surface of the chines along the inside edge. It looks to me as if that is the remains of the original bottom plate, the rest being cut out. But the new bottom plate looks to be located below the chine angle (which would make it easier to fit, but historically incorrect). Have I got that right?

 

Fulbourne has rounded chine plates (but smaller than Sickle's) which are rivetted onto the outside of the side plates and below the bottom plate. As the bottom is getting thin in places we are wondering how best to replace it when the time comes.

[alan_fincher]

I can see a strip of metal rivetted to the top surface of the chines along the inside edge. It looks to me as if that is the remains of the original bottom plate, the rest being cut out. But the new bottom plate looks to be located below the chine angle (which would make it easier to fit, but historically incorrect). Have I got that right?

I think the picture shows "work in progress, but not the final outcome.

 

You are correct that the riveted raised strips on each side of the rounded chines are the sides of the original bottom.

 

However what I think happened in respect of the new bottom, but not yet done in these pictures is that it was cut to fit within those parts, and drawn fully up to bring it into contact with the knees. The new bottom is welded to the chines, but with no overlap on to them. I'm pretty sure it is welded both from on top and below.

 

This has to be the explanation, as there is no gap between the new baseplate and the knees. (If there were rainwater would run to the back of the boat, rather than puddling forward of each and every such knee!)

[paddles up]

This hardly necessary is it?

 

You can surely express a view without the need to be rude to somebody else?

My apologies Alan, I am just growing tired of people within this industry who confidently spout information about boats or subjects upon which they clearly know nothing about.

[WotEver]

I'm impressed with how neatly all those rivets have been stuck on...

[Jay4424]

My apologies Alan, I am just growing tired of people within this industry who confidently spout information about boats or subjects upon which they clearly know nothing about.

 

cheers. I'm relatively new to things and so learning. ... I DO know of a middle that uses supports when going on dock so thought it was norm. and a requirement. oviously I was wrong.

 

sorry for posting my inaccurate information. I shall keep my trap shut in future.

 

 

 

 

 

 

on another note, thank you Alan for sticking up for me :-)

[Athy]

The chains are for pulling the sides tight against the cross beams thus holding them in place and retaining correct width.

Yes, that's what I said - the only occasion on which "correct" width would be crucial would be when the boat was going through a lock, isn't that so?

[Ray T]

 

cheers. I'm relatively new to things and so learning. ... I DO know of a middle that uses supports when going on dock so thought it was norm. and a requirement. oviously I was wrong.

 

sorry for posting my inaccurate information. I shall keep my trap shut in future.

 

 

Please don't. We all have to learn throughout our whole lives. On occasions we are told information which we have no reason other than to believe it is correct. Unfortunately this is then passed on in good faith and to some extent becomes the norm. It is only when correction happens that we find out what is "right".

 

I do not mind being corrected if I present inaccurate information, this is how we learn. What I do object to is if this correction is imparted in a belittling manner as if I am some sort of fool. I am many things but fool is not one of them.

Edited February 18, 2016 by Ray T

[stagedamager]

^^^^^couldn't agree more^^^^^

[paddles up]

Having been belittled by Jason in person myself last year I reserve the right to not treat him with kid gloves on a forum.

[roland elsdon]

So the knees on a middle boat were cast as one piece right across the bottom, and connecting the sides unlike big boats where there was a gap between knees resulting in debris rot and cracking of the baseplate. No keelson am I right?

[paddles up]

No, the knees were made separately as per big and little boats. Of the examples I've seen I'm not convinced they were originally welded together either but you never know...?

There was no keelson, instead short (6"?) lengths of angle were riveted longitudinally at various points along the centre line in pairs, around two inches apart. These supported a wooden beam upon which the shuts would sit.

Edited to add... although the knees clearly did meet in the middle.

[IanM]

There was no keelson, instead short (6"?) lengths of angle were riveted longitudinally at various points along the centre line in pairs, around two inches apart. These supported a wooden beam upon which the shuts would sit.

Edited to add... although the knees clearly did meet in the middle.

 

As shown in this post in another thread http://www.canalworld.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=34935&p=622980

[swift1894]

I like the extra strake that Yarwoods put around the stern.

I thought that Northwich boats might have done the same just to carry on the tradition, but they don't.

[alan_fincher]

I believe I am correct in saying the only significant original drawings that survive for the "Middle Northwich" type are those that feature a cross section through the hull, (there are other ones showing things like stern gear, from memory, but none of the overall boats, I think).

 

Extracts from these have been posted in older threads, here and here.

 

Assuming what was actually built matches these drawings, they give a pretty good representation of the construction, the very considerable difference in the steel thicknesses used, and exactly what overlaps what, and how joined.

They also imply that the "V" is about 3.5" lower in the centre of the boat than at the edge of the rounded chines.

Although I have made no attempt to measure "Sickle", I am considerably doubtful it is that much now. Whether it has been "flattened" or whether the "V" was never as pronounced I can't say.

If none of those knees are continuous, and all are in fact butted together at the centre, (I must admit I thought some were continuous), it would make it more likely perhaps that adding a new bottom has changed an original shape?

I can see it would even be possible with no bottom on to shorten those knees slightly at the centre, and draw the sides together, in order to reduce the likelihood of at least the open part of the boat having "girth" problems in some of the reduced width locks that will not now allow some "historics" to pass through them.

I have to admit I have not had to think to deeply about all this up until now, despite owning an example of the genre!

I like the extra strake that Yarwoods put around the stern.
I thought that Northwich boats might have done the same just to carry on the tradition, but they don't.

 

You could always buy an R W Davies "Northwich Trader".

 

In that detail at least, they do seem to follow an idea from Yarwoods!

[swift1894]

 

You could always buy an R W Davies "Northwich Trader".

 

In that detail at least, they do seem to follow an idea from Yarwoods!

Could I? You gonna give me the money? Edited February 18, 2016 by swift1894

[Guest]

Having been belittled by Jason in person myself last year I reserve the right to not treat him with kid gloves on a forum.

Perhaps then take it elsewhere because I would guess the majority of the forum are not interested in your squabble...

[ditchcrawler]

The chains are for pulling the sides tight against the cross beams thus holding them in place and retaining correct width.

But in this case they are vertical, through eyes that are welded to the bottom plate and attached to I beams above. not normal cruising chains.

[Jay4424]

Perhaps then take it elsewhere because I would guess the majority of the forum are not interested in your squabble...

I did speak wrong of him last year :-( he has every right to take it out on me

 

For my actions last year mr D ...paddles up I apologise

 

 

For everyone else, sorry this became a public. Do not reply to this post please

[Derek R.]

But in this case they are vertical, through eyes that are welded to the bottom plate and attached to I beams above. not normal cruising chains.

 

Yes, they are vertical, pulling the new bottom plate up against the RSJ's so as to follow the V of the bottom. The bottom plate will have been flat when slid under the boat, and the uprights welded to the bottom plate so as to get a purchase for the chains. The chains are pulling the bottom plate up. Once the new bottom plate is fitted, i.e. cut to size and welded in, those chains, RSJ's and uprights would be removed.

 

With regard to the knees being one piece or two welded together, I believe they are welded together as can be seen HERE.

That is TYCHO's bottom plate (original). However, whether that welding was done by Yarwood's on building, or by Bulls Bridge in 1942 or any later date, is unknown. It could well have been done at Bulls Bridge.

 

TYCHO's "snowplough" - Okay . . . .

 

Edited February 18, 2016 by Derek R.

[jenevers]

I can see a strip of metal rivetted to the top surface of the chines along the inside edge. It looks to me as if that is the remains of the original bottom plate, the rest being cut out. But the new bottom plate looks to be located below the chine angle (which would make it easier to fit, but historically incorrect). Have I got that right?

Fulbourne has rounded chine plates (but smaller than Sickle's) which are rivetted onto the outside of the side plates and below the bottom plate. As the bottom is getting thin in places we are wondering how best to replace it when the time comes.

I wonder why the baseplate was riveted inside the Chines. This seems to creat a water trap all the way along the overlap. Fulbourne's design seems better from that point of view, if I understand correctly.

[Tam & Di]

EDIT: I think all buttys are probably full length except Thea - Leonids did have a motorised elum, but I'm unsure of current status.

 

 

Is that information fairly current Alan? Rather ironic if so; we bought Leonids when it was in use as a houseboat in the basin at Bishops Stortford in the 70s and it had a hydraulic drive bult into the elum then. We stripped it all out and put the boat back into trade, and used it on the barrels job among other things as butty to Towcester. Sam Lawton told us that some boatmen hated the middle boats as they tended to roll, but we know others were in favour of them. Certainly Leonids was one of our favourite craft. It certainly swam very well - much better than the sundry Woolwich butties we had.

 

Tam

 

edit to add photo (I can't seem to get it bigger for some reason)

 

Edited February 26, 2016 by Tam & Di