Setting lock in advance rant

[biggles47]

Nothing wrong with setting locks in advance BUT...please look ahead.

 

Some 'skippers' seem to send a team ahead with instructions without telling them the whole story.

 

Anyway, rant over. You know who you are.

[pearley]

One lock ahead is far enough and even then one should look ahead.

[Sanddancer]

A lady closed the lock gate as I was approaching I asked why and she replied her husband told her to close the gates every time. He of course denies this and then they had a Discussion as I left.

[MtB]

Anyway, rant over. You know who you are.

 

Yes thanks. I'm "Mike the Boilerman". Well I am according to my business cards anyway!

[spadefoot]

 

Yes thanks. I'm "Mike the Boilerman". Well I am according to my business cards anyway!

Well if you're not, you've nicked his van.

[alan_fincher]

One lock ahead is far enough and even then one should look ahead.

 

Well it is a suggestion, but there are cases where you don't need to follow it, and it will save time, if you really want to be getting ahead for the minimum possible lock wheeling effort.

 

Example:

 

Boat with crew of three, arrives at bottom lock of (say) a 6 lock flight like Braunston and that lock is against them.

 

(Having checked nothing coming down in next lock!), 2 of the crew start turning and working through that lock.

 

Meanwhile 3rd crew member is cycling to next lock up, and (again checking ahead!) starts that one emptying in anticipation.

 

They could now wait, but if they cycle up to the top of the flight, and encounter nothing coming down, and nobody waiting at, or even approaching the top lock, they can safely cycle back down, and set the 4th and 3rd locks emptying as they pass them.

 

By that stage the boat will be near to lock 3 anyway, and there isn't a shred of danger of it not being clear of the 4th lock as well long before anything comes down.

 

Hence with just one trip to the top, you can set half the flight up, without any fear of upsetting anyone.

 

(Obviously only works at non-busy "out of season" times, and if you have spare crew available to be taking a bike ride. On a typical busy summer day, you will not cycle to the top, because you will quickly establish that someone is coming down!)

 

My highly energetic son has pre-set large amounts of very much bigger flights such as Tardebigge in similar manner - if he cycles up 10 locks, and nobody is coming down any of those, he knows as he returns he is OK to set 5 ahead of where he last saw our boat

, (leaving the last 5 he cycled past untouched, in case a boat coming the other way gets there first).

 

We have never got caught out yet!

 

However if there is only 2 of us, we'll generally not try clever tricks like this!

[ditchcrawler]

A lady closed the lock gate as I was approaching I asked why and she replied her husband told her to close the gates every time. He of course denies this and then they had a Discussion as I left.

Jame thing happened to us but the chap backed her up saying the Hire Company told them always to lower paddles and close gates when they leave and that is what he intends to do.

[Gardner]

I travelled down through Buckby locks recently & two volunteers turned a lock around immediately in front of me. I was unable to question their reasoning as they conveniently disappeared somewhere at the bottom. In the cafe perhaps.

[matty40s]

I travelled down through Buckby locks recently & two volunteers turned a lock around immediately in front of me. I was unable to question their reasoning as they conveniently disappeared somewhere at the bottom. In the cafe perhaps.

you need to be a tad quicker, they did the same to me the day before,and then went down to work the bottom lock, so i turned it again and came down, much to their disgust.

[MtB]

I've had the opposite.

 

Going downhill I've arrived at a lock to find it empty with both bottom gates wide open, and a Hudson fast approaching.

 

 

Said Hudson proceeds to moor on the lock landing and feck about instead of coming in, so eventually I walk down and ask them tersely if they are planning to come up, or what?

 

They also rather tersely yet disarmingly say I was there first so its my lock, and they were waiting for me to turn it and come through first!

 

Turned out it was their first trip on a hire boat. Yes, a Hudson was a hire boat!

Bless...

[spadefoot]

They were fibbing, they were just waiting for their footman to catch up.

[Paul C]

 

Well it is a suggestion, but there are cases where you don't need to follow it, and it will save time, if you really want to be getting ahead for the minimum possible lock wheeling effort.

 

Example:

 

Boat with crew of three, arrives at bottom lock of (say) a 6 lock flight like Braunston and that lock is against them.

 

(Having checked nothing coming down in next lock!), 2 of the crew start turning and working through that lock.

 

Meanwhile 3rd crew member is cycling to next lock up, and (again checking ahead!) starts that one emptying in anticipation.

 

They could now wait, but if they cycle up to the top of the flight, and encounter nothing coming down, and nobody waiting at, or even approaching the top lock, they can safely cycle back down, and set the 4th and 3rd locks emptying as they pass them.

 

By that stage the boat will be near to lock 3 anyway, and there isn't a shred of danger of it not being clear of the 4th lock as well long before anything comes down.

 

Hence with just one trip to the top, you can set half the flight up, without any fear of upsetting anyone.

 

(Obviously only works at non-busy "out of season" times, and if you have spare crew available to be taking a bike ride. On a typical busy summer day, you will not cycle to the top, because you will quickly establish that someone is coming down!)

 

My highly energetic son has pre-set large amounts of very much bigger flights such as Tardebigge in similar manner - if he cycles up 10 locks, and nobody is coming down any of those, he knows as he returns he is OK to set 5 ahead of where he last saw our boat

, (leaving the last 5 he cycled past untouched, in case a boat coming the other way gets there first).

 

We have never got caught out yet!

 

However if there is only 2 of us, we'll generally not try clever tricks like this!

 

I always thought the most efficient method with 3 people is for one to set the next lock ahead; the driver of the boat to work lock; and the third crew member to "close up" the gates after. Of course, the driver isn't doing all the work, but is definitely doing some of the work. The person ahead only needs to go ahead just in time to have the next lock ready so half the time they're with the boat. And the person behind will catch up after closing the previous lock, so can do a bit more too. The driver never has to stop the boat between locks because the next is always ready with the gate open, and the previous is getting left for the 3rd crew.

 

To have a crew member go and set more than 1 lock ahead adds no benefit, you may as well have the 3rd member do something else to speed things up. And if there's a 4th member, there is still no value in going ahead too far etc

[MtB]

They were fibbing, they were just waiting for their footman to catch up.

 

 

I thought this too, but as it happened I gave them a friendly and non-judgemental chat about the ways of of the cut and they lapped it up. Then they entered the lock much reassured and we parted best of friends.

 

 

I shoved the footman in the cut.

[biggles47]

 

Well it is a suggestion, but there are cases where you don't need to follow it, and it will save time, if you really want to be getting ahead for the minimum possible lock wheeling effort.

 

Example:

 

Boat with crew of three, arrives at bottom lock of (say) a 6 lock flight like Braunston and that lock is against them.

 

(Having checked nothing coming down in next lock!), 2 of the crew start turning and working through that lock.

 

Meanwhile 3rd crew member is cycling to next lock up, and (again checking ahead!) starts that one emptying in anticipation.

 

They could now wait, but if they cycle up to the top of the flight, and encounter nothing coming down, and nobody waiting at, or even approaching the top lock, they can safely cycle back down, and set the 4th and 3rd locks emptying as they pass them.

 

By that stage the boat will be near to lock 3 anyway, and there isn't a shred of danger of it not being clear of the 4th lock as well long before anything comes down.

 

Hence with just one trip to the top, you can set half the flight up, without any fear of upsetting anyone.

 

(Obviously only works at non-busy "out of season" times, and if you have spare crew available to be taking a bike ride. On a typical busy summer day, you will not cycle to the top, because you will quickly establish that someone is coming down!)

 

My highly energetic son has pre-set large amounts of very much bigger flights such as Tardebigge in similar manner - if he cycles up 10 locks, and nobody is coming down any of those, he knows as he returns he is OK to set 5 ahead of where he last saw our boat

, (leaving the last 5 he cycled past untouched, in case a boat coming the other way gets there first).

 

We have never got caught out yet!

 

However if there is only 2 of us, we'll generally not try clever tricks like this!

So on the basis your crew see nothing approaching the top lock whilst you are still working your way through the start of the bottom locks, you have taken the water away from any boat which turns up at the top lock and delayed them.

 

That seems a bit selfish to me. Why not just stick to setting one ahead at a time? Is that really going to delay you? Not to mention the potential waste of water.

[adam1uk]

So on the basis your crew see nothing approaching the top lock whilst you are still working your way through the start of the bottom locks, you have taken the water away from any boat which turns up at the top lock and delayed them.

 

That seems a bit selfish to me. Why not just stick to setting one ahead at a time? Is that really going to delay you? Not to mention the potential waste of water.

 

If you actually read what Alan said, the crew isn't setting the top lock -- they're going to the top to see if anything is coming, then go back down and set a couple above where their boat was, safe in the knowledge that a boat coming the other way won't get there in time.

[pearley]

If you actually read what Alan said, the crew isn't setting the top lock -- they're going to the top to see if anything is coming, then go back down and set a couple above where their boat was, safe in the knowledge that a boat coming the other way won't get there in time.

Only if the canal is straight for a mile above the locks, or they can see round corners.

[alan_fincher]

So on the basis your crew see nothing approaching the top lock whilst you are still working your way through the start of the bottom locks, you have taken the water away from any boat which turns up at the top lock and delayed them.

 

That seems a bit selfish to me. Why not just stick to setting one ahead at a time? Is that really going to delay you? Not to mention the potential waste of water.

 

No - you absolutely have not read my post!

Only if the canal is straight for a mile above the locks, or they can see round corners.

 

And nor have you.

 

In the example I gave the lock wheeler has not in any way touched the top couple of locks, which will be exactly as they were as if that lock wheeler had not been all the way up to the top to check the situation there.

 

But perhaps I haven't explained clearly enough?

 

If you actually read what Alan said, the crew isn't setting the top lock -- they're going to the top to see if anything is coming, then go back down and set a couple above where their boat was, safe in the knowledge that a boat coming the other way won't get there in time.

 

Thank you - glad someone understood!

[NickF]

 

Well it is a suggestion, but there are cases where you don't need to follow it, and it will save time, if you really want to be getting ahead for the minimum possible lock wheeling effort.

 

Example:

 

Boat with crew of three, arrives at bottom lock of (say) a 6 lock flight like Braunston and that lock is against them.

 

(Having checked nothing coming down in next lock!), 2 of the crew start turning and working through that lock.

 

Meanwhile 3rd crew member is cycling to next lock up, and (again checking ahead!) starts that one emptying in anticipation.

 

They could now wait, but if they cycle up to the top of the flight, and encounter nothing coming down, and nobody waiting at, or even approaching the top lock, they can safely cycle back down, and set the 4th and 3rd locks emptying as they pass them.

 

By that stage the boat will be near to lock 3 anyway, and there isn't a shred of danger of it not being clear of the 4th lock as well long before anything comes down.

 

Hence with just one trip to the top, you can set half the flight up, without any fear of upsetting anyone.

 

(Obviously only works at non-busy "out of season" times, and if you have spare crew available to be taking a bike ride. On a typical busy summer day, you will not cycle to the top, because you will quickly establish that someone is coming down!)

 

My highly energetic son has pre-set large amounts of very much bigger flights such as Tardebigge in similar manner - if he cycles up 10 locks, and nobody is coming down any of those, he knows as he returns he is OK to set 5 ahead of where he last saw our boat

, (leaving the last 5 he cycled past untouched, in case a boat coming the other way gets there first).

 

We have never got caught out yet!

 

However if there is only 2 of us, we'll generally not try clever tricks like this!

 

Surely if working up hill this would waste a lot of water as each lockful would spill over the overflow of the lock below rather than helping to fill the lock it. Going down would be no problem.

[FadeToScarlet]

The absolute ideal to aim for is that the boat is never stationary- it always is moving either horizontally or vertically, without ever stopping. As soon as it's in the lock, the gates are closed and paddles drawn; as soon as it's level, the boat is out and moving to the next.

 

If the locks are slower to empty than fill for example (e.g. centres and grounds on the top, only two smaller paddles on the bottom) then the boat can get ahead towards the emptying lock ahead and have to stop which loses the ideal.

 

If you can set more than one ahead, you will always have that efficiency. We generally can't as we're only two handed, but even then have had delays that another person setting two locks ahead could have prevented.

[NickF]

A system we have used well with three active people is that the two lock wheelers only work every other lock. i.e. they set a lock , open it, work the boat through and close up afterwards before walking on two locks and starting to set that. Obviously half way through the process the other lock wheeler will walk straight past on his way from the last lock to the next.

[Murflynn]

perhaps the solution is to operate a one way system which reverses on alternate days.

 

that way all the locks can be set for going up with no risk that someone is going to want to come down.

 

I'll suggest it to CRT.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

........................... coat

 

 

 

 

 

 

[biggles47]

 

No - you absolutely have not read my post!

 

 

And nor have you.

 

In the example I gave the lock wheeler has not in any way touched the top couple of locks, which will be exactly as they were as if that lock wheeler had not been all the way up to the top to check the situation there.

 

But perhaps I haven't explained clearly enough?

 

 

Thank you - glad someone understood!

Having read it again a second time this morning, it seems I did mis-understand. Sorry.

 

However, I still don't see the point of setting more than one lock ahead. If you have a slight probem with a lock, boat or person and get delayed you could still potentially delay any boat coming down.

 

Not that there is supposed to be any rush!

[alan_fincher]

A system we have used well with three active people is that the two lock wheelers only work every other lock. i.e. they set a lock , open it, work the boat through and close up afterwards before walking on two locks and starting to set that. Obviously half way through the process the other lock wheeler will walk straight past on his way from the last lock to the next.

 

Looking at your profile, you must be one of the few canoes that sends two lock wheelers ahead of the boat. Respect is due!

[___]

Having read it again a second time this morning, it seems I did mis-understand. Sorry.

However, I still don't see the point of setting more than one lock ahead. If you have a slight probem with a lock, boat or person and get delayed you could still potentially delay any boat coming down.

Not that there is supposed to be any rush!

 

If you have a crew of four - including the steerer - you can't really get any significant advantage over a well organised crew of three. So if everybody wants to be fully involved in working the locks sending a fourth person ahead keeps everybody occupied. We shouldn't overlook that many people want to work locks for fun. It's not just about being efficient or in a hurry.

 

JP

[biggles47]

If you have a crew of four - including the steerer - you can't really get any significant advantage over a well organised crew of three. So if everybody wants to be fully involved in working the locks sending a fourth person ahead keeps everybody occupied. We shouldn't overlook that many people want to work locks for fun. It's not just about being efficient or in a hurry.

JP

If you go and set the next say 3 or locks in a flight then you will still have to twidddle your thumbs for the same overall amount of time as doing just one ahead at a time. It's also not a bad idea to keep your crew close to the boat at all times just in case there is an issue, like a hanging boat, where you need to open/close paddles in an emergency.

 

Anyway I only had this rant because someone did hold us up yesterday by setting one too many ahead. We weren't in a rush so it didn't matter really and probably not worth the rant.