Jump to content
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
Sign in to follow this  
rustynewbery

March of the Wide Beams

Featured Posts

15 hours ago, Captain Pegg said:

That's undoubtedly true however as the published dimensions are 12' 6" minimum on this canal it should be maintained for such craft including being able to moor. It isn't the fault of any boater that it isn't.

I would far sooner boat on the sections north of Braunston with a channel clear of vegetation from bank to bank and a wide dredged channel and share it with wide beams than the current scenario of overhanging tress right across the canal and risk putting my cabin top hardware and crew through trees at the slightest movement out of the middle of the channel.

JP

I have no argument what ever against wide beam boats boating on a cut that has designed dimensions to suit them but the lack of upkeep is a factor that is causing problems & the fact some don't move much if at all the condition of the cut that make them concerned & if they move they have problems & don't enjoy so stay put it's a chicken /egg syndrome which will only get worse with the lack of maintenance & the increasing number of wider boats or for that matter boats in general the increase of newbie posts on this forum titled I'm looking to buy a liveaboard which is fine if they comply with the T's & C's but i wonder how many become disillusioned with the constant moving if they choose CCing & become stay putters or bridge hoppers so the cut has boats moored in awkward places  so the round of difficulty's may start again for boats wider than the narrow beam dimensions,  The purpose the cut is now used for is compleatly different to its designed use but without being adapted to today"s requirements such a shame

  • Greenie 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, X Alan W said:

I have no argument what ever against wide beam boats boating on a cut that has designed dimensions to suit them but the lack of upkeep is a factor that is causing problems & the fact some don't move much if at all the condition of the cut that make them concerned & if they move they have problems & don't enjoy so stay put it's a chicken /egg syndrome which will only get worse with the lack of maintenance & the increasing number of wider boats or for that matter boats in general the increase of newbie posts on this forum titled I'm looking to buy a liveaboard which is fine if they comply with the T's & C's but i wonder how many become disillusioned with the constant moving if they choose CCing & become stay putters or bridge hoppers so the cut has boats moored in awkward places  so the round of difficulty's may start again for boats wider than the narrow beam dimensions,  The purpose the cut is now used for is compleatly different to its designed use but without being adapted to today"s requirements such a shame

Agreed and that should be the challenge for CRT to resolve. It would be nice to think we could have a properly maintained width and depth of channel used by a range of boats and that would be to everyone's overall benefit. After all we are only really talking about a small proportion of the network in terms of wide beam capability where there is an issue with capability. Back to the original point and it could be argued that Braunston to Hillmorton is a trade off for the places designed for wide boats where they can't go anymore - Middlewich, Nantwich, Droitwich. (It seems BW must have had a saltist policy). As you say the demand for usage changes. We don't live in the past.

JP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, matty40s said:

Someone's either brave, foolish or part of the protest. ......

 

20171014_090209.jpg

Isn't that a ringed visitor mooring where the green

boat is?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes it is and you can see the post advertising the fact. This picture show just how this section is only suitable for narrowboats.

Even if CRT were to cut back the official mooring there is absolutely no wriggle room for anything else. Two can just about get by with care.  Put a wide beam in the picture and it's not a joke.

  • Greenie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/10/2017 at 17:43, Captain Pegg said:

 

Careful Gents. I hope you haven't made any comments about the historic use of the GU north of Berkhamsted being for pairs of narrowboats rather than wide boats as the subject of mooring will put you on a very sticky wicket.

I will hazard a guess my great granddad moored his pair of (narrow) horse boats in the form a 14' floating obstruction on occasions he had reason to pass that way in the 1890s and 1900s. His cousin was the innkeeper.

JP

I have no doubt that your G grandad didn't tie up much before 8/9 oclock at night & was  probably up & gone by 5 am the next morning so the fact of him narrowing the cut would have had minimal effect

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, zenataomm said:

I guess the common ingredients in this blossoming issue are .......

1 Some people can't/won't/don't have empathy or any concern regarding the inconveniences they may cause to others

2 Some buying or ordering Fat Boats aren't serious canal enthusiasts nor do they understand how this issue could be contentious to others.

3 Some of them only see locks and bridge 'oles as being their only obstruction to moving around.

4 Waterways (I don't care what name they go by currently) certainly don't want to get involved in any issues around this.  Especially as they want to make money, perhaps by licencing boats by square footage.  Having charged them accordingly they don't then want to face appeals for a reduction in licence fees from those who now have an officially restricted network.

Currently an appeal from one for being stuck somewhere like the N Oxford would elicit a Waterways response like "You took a boat that size there? Why?"

At the moment it's nothing more than a small group of people not being educated by anyone (Waterways/Brokerage/Builders/Marinas) about the potential tears and tantrums before bed time.  There's no objective point of view to research only individuals' personal points of view.

It'll get worse before Waterway's are forced to spend money on pointless consultations etc. which will only result in table thumping and individuals flouncing off the canals furious about the nanny state again.

Absolutely correct, but unfortunately no suggestions as to how each of the problems may be resolved.

Greenie for 'correctly identifying the questions'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 01/10/2017 at 17:25, Ray T said:

This is  Matty's photo.DSC_1970.JPG.32ad94248b135e848a846ca6942ffb0d.JPG.80ca43780ec8ad0fcde24ddf522a864d.JPG

I am not at liberty to post the photo but a well known Historic boater has posted a photo of a butty he was towing passing a wide boat, on the North Oxford that Alan was referring to, there was virtually no water between the two boats. I am not against wide boats per say, but to me taking them on narrow canals is just thoughtless. Waits for flack...........

Not trying to imply the above comment is meretricious or anything but; we met someone who seemed like a kind, knowledgable & down to earth person going by the name of Ray T 4 years ago. 

He came down to Braunston to see our Widebeam being craned off the truck into the water at Braunston, he took some really lovely photos of the day and even provided a bottle of Newcastle Brown for the christening.  Then a couple of months later offered to accompany us on our maiden cruise up to Wiggrams turn to teach us some of the basic do's & don'ts of cruising / mooring.  Didn't seem bothered at all, us being a widebeam and cruising / mooring on those waters at the time. 

Are you not the same man?  If so, I guess times & attitudes change quicker than I thought. :(

I can't fatham out that if it was such a thoughtless thing to do why you offered to accompany us 

** Please note this ^^^ does not take away from the gratitude that both hubby & I both have for you and Simon for taking us out that day, we thoroughly enjoyed ourselves and learned loads of vital info.

  • Greenie 2
  • Unimpressed 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I am the same, not changed.

I will repeat, "I am not against wide beams persay", but as I said in the quoted post the North Oxford Canal is a narrow canal and is unsuitable for wide boats either in the past or now.

Why you are taking my comments personally I don't know.

Edited by Ray T

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Ray T said:

Yes, I am the same, not changed.

I will repeat, "I am not against wide beams persay", but as I said in the quoted post the North Oxford Canal is a narrow canal and is unsuitable for wide boats either in the past or now.

Why you are taking this comment personally I don't know.

Is the bit of canal between Braunston & Wiggrams Turn not considered part of the north Oxford?  If not, then I stand corrected. 

I thought it was, and as so, found the comment of it being "thoughtless" somewhat confusing coming from someone who quite happily took a couple of complete novices for a small cruise on said section of canal.

^^ because of my personal experience Ray - I just don't see how you can do one thing and then call it a thoughtless act when others do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Bettie Boo said:

Not trying to imply the above comment is meretricious or anything but; we met someone who seemed like a kind, knowledgable & down to earth person going by the name of Ray T 4 years ago. 

He came down to Braunston to see our Widebeam being craned off the truck into the water at Braunston, he took some really lovely photos of the day and even provided a bottle of Newcastle Brown for the christening.  Then a couple of months later offered to accompany us on our maiden cruise up to Wiggrams turn to teach us some of the basic do's & don'ts of cruising / mooring.  Didn't seem bothered at all, us being a widebeam and cruising / mooring on those waters at the time. 

Are you not the same man?  If so, I guess times & attitudes change quicker than I thought. :(

I can't fatham out that if it was such a thoughtless thing to do why you offered to accompany us 

** Please note this ^^^ does not take away from the gratitude that both hubby & I both have for you and Simon for taking us out that day, we thoroughly enjoyed ourselves and learned loads of vital info.

Betty, Braunston and Wigrams Turn are both on the Grand Union (Wigwams Turn is on the section shared by the GU and the Southern Oxford Canal), so both are on a wide canal.

Ray is commenting on widebeam boats travelling from Braunston to Hillmorton, on the North Oxford canal, which is a narrowonderful canal.

He was not criticising you.

 

Cross posted other Betty's  post directly above.

Edited by cuthound
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Bettie Boo said:

Is the bit of canal between Braunston & Wiggrams Turn not considered part of the north Oxford?  If not, then I stand corrected. 

I thought it was, and as so, found the comment of it being "thoughtless" somewhat confusing coming from someone who quite happily took a couple of complete novices for a small cruise on said section of canal.

^^ because of my personal experience Ray - I just don't see how you can do one thing and then call it a thoughtless act when others do it.

Historically you can consider Braunston to Napton as the Oxford,  (potted possibly slight inaccurate history lesson follows!) but when the Grand Union was formed it was incorporated somewhat into the Grand Union to give them a route between London and Birmingham.  I believe that the Oxford still got tolls on that section though, so it is often counted and being part of both the Oxford and the GU, CRT for example do count it as the Oxford for the purposed of stoppages etc, and you will see "Oxford Canal Walk" signs on this section too. 

I would say that it certainly widebeam though, as much as any part of the GU from Braunston to Camp Hill in Birmingham is.  So I don't think anyone is going to take exception to widebeam on that section.

  • Greenie 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, cuthound said:

Betty, Braunston and Wigrams Turn are both on the Grand Union (Wigwams Turn is on the section shared by the GU and the Southern Oxford Canal), so both are on a wide canal.

Ray is commenting on widebeam boats travelling from Braunston to Hillmorton, on the North Oxford canal, which is a narrowonderful canal.

He was not criticising you.

Thanks for that cuthound.

As I wrote earlier I thought the bit between Braunston & Wigrams Turn were considered part of the Oxford as well and couldn't figure out why he was saying that cruising that section was thoughtless for a widebeam operator to cruise, when he had assisted/accompanied us on our maiden vouyage on said section.

Just to clarify I didn't actually think he was criticizing me personally, just widebeam operators in general who choose to cruise that section.

Sorry for the confusion Ray - I stand corrected and you still have your upstanding, kind and helpful attributes IMO :)

 

  • Unimpressed 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Bettie Boo said:

Thanks for that cuthound.

As I wrote earlier I thought the bit between Braunston & Wigrams Turn were considered part of the Oxford as well and couldn't figure out why he was saying that cruising that section was thoughtless for a widebeam operator to cruise, when he had assisted/accompanied us on our maiden vouyage on said section.

Just to clarify I didn't actually think he was criticizing me personally, just widebeam operators in general who choose to cruise that section.

Sorry for the confusion Ray - I stand corrected and you still have your upstanding, kind and helpful attributes IMO :)

 

Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, john6767 said:

Historically you can consider Braunston to Napton as the Oxford,  (potted possibly slight inaccurate history lesson follows!) but when the Grand Union was formed it was incorporated somewhat into the Grand Union to give them a route between London and Birmingham.  I believe that the Oxford still got tolls on that section though, so it is often counted and being part of both the Oxford and the GU, CRT for example do count it as the Oxford for the purposed of stoppages etc, and you will see "Oxford Canal Walk" signs on this section too. 

I would say that it certainly widebeam though, as much as any part of the GU from Braunston to Camp Hill in Birmingham is.  So I don't think anyone is going to take exception to widebeam on that section.

Hmmm when did you last cruise that section. There are several sections where the width of the visible water between the towpath and the trees is not even enough for two narrow boats to pass without the Braunston bound boat stopping and edging into the trees, it is not actually possible to have both boats moving at once. If you were unfortunate enough to meet a wide beam on one of these sections you would be practicing your reversing skills for a few hubdred yards, as they have no reverse as we all know. To be fair to the widebeam if you get behind a boat towing a butty on that section progress is about watching the snails go past on the towpath, due to the chaos of meeting traffic. It is also one of the most used  stretches of canal in the Midlands

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, X Alan W said:

I have no doubt that your G grandad didn't tie up much before 8/9 oclock at night & was  probably up & gone by 5 am the next morning so the fact of him narrowing the cut would have had minimal effect

I am sure that's the case but I wonder how many folk who would be inclined to turn their noses up at 10' - 12' of widebeam would be in raptures at the site of 14' of motor and butty moored in the same place.

JP

  • Greenie 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Detling said:

To be fair to the widebeam if you get behind a boat towing a butty on that section progress is about watching the snails go past on the towpath, due to the chaos of meeting traffic.

What's the issue with a motor towing a butty on that stretch?

If they are at "snail's pace" they are doing something wrong.

Provided people coming the other way don't try passing through a bridge between the motor and the butty, (it happens!), a motor/butty pair shouldn't be significantly slower than a motor running alone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Detling said:

Hmmm when did you last cruise that section. There are several sections where the width of the visible water between the towpath and the trees is not even enough for two narrow boats to pass without the Braunston bound boat stopping and edging into the trees, it is not actually possible to have both boats moving at once. If you were unfortunate enough to meet a wide beam on one of these sections you would be practicing your reversing skills for a few hubdred yards, as they have no reverse as we all know. To be fair to the widebeam if you get behind a boat towing a butty on that section progress is about watching the snails go past on the towpath, due to the chaos of meeting traffic. It is also one of the most used  stretches of canal in the Midlands

You'll find it a lot better next time you're down that way. This years cutting on the Oxford seems to have started at bridge 34 near Brinklow, and by last Saturday they had got to about halfway between 107 and 108. Much better than it was, though there are a couple of places where I did wonder why they hadn't done a little more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Captain Pegg said:

I am sure that's the case but I wonder how many folk who would be inclined to turn their noses up at 10' - 12' of widebeam would be in raptures at the site of 14' of motor and butty moored in the same place

Not having "Had a Go on the cut in some years"   I cant judge the attitude of some present days boaters but get the impression that less animosity would be shown to the owner of a moored up side by side pair if they moved on  than a wide beam moored up in an awkward spot & sat there for the full 14 days as that seems the chosen method of travel for many from photo's there seems a leaning to moor in places with not much thought for others both in narrow & wide boats with the latter the width is a bigger/wider problem Good & bad in all sizes of boats but the decline of the maintenance of a waterway which affects a wide more than a narrow beam boat which in turn affects all users  sad to say but the actual canal is the most problem

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, alan_fincher said:

What's the issue with a motor towing a butty on that stretch?

If they are at "snail's pace" they are doing something wrong.

Provided people coming the other way don't try passing through a bridge between the motor and the butty, (it happens!), a motor/butty pair shouldn't be significantly slower than a motor running alone.

If the steerer of the pair is competent & the pair unloaded & the butty on X straps progress in most places will be at a very similar speed to most other boats a lot of lesuire boats by hull design "Dig in" due to short swims more so if it's the rear swim so the more throttle the more bank wash/slower speed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely as you leave Braunston to Wigrams the pinch point where the permanent boats have their gardens could be a problem as i came through after giving way to a narrow boat heading to Braunston I thought thats a silly place for a fibreglass to breast up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Detling said:

Hmmm when did you last cruise that section. There are several sections where the width of the visible water between the towpath and the trees is not even enough for two narrow boats to pass without the Braunston bound boat stopping and edging into the trees, it is not actually possible to have both boats moving at once. If you were unfortunate enough to meet a wide beam on one of these sections you would be practicing your reversing skills for a few hubdred yards, as they have no reverse as we all know. To be fair to the widebeam if you get behind a boat towing a butty on that section progress is about watching the snails go past on the towpath, due to the chaos of meeting traffic. It is also one of the most used  stretches of canal in the Midlands

LOL, About 3 weeks ago, we moor at Calcutt, so I know every inch of that section very well.  You are right that there is a lot offside and in some cases near side vegetation encroaching, although recently CRT have been cutting it back in some places, like on Puddlebanks opposite the vistor moorings, and in the narrow section near Napton Junction.  There are lots of places that you would not choose to pass 2 narrowboats never mind a wide beam.

But all that side is your assertion that as it could be considered part of the Oxford that widebeams should not be allowed on that section? Whilst the North Oxford is according to CRT officially a narrow canal, the Braunston to Napton section is not, so I think you would be on dodgy ground there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do like this advert.......

 

BOAT FOR SALE:

Name:  DOWN THE HATCH 70ft 2in x 13ft 6in (reported) wide beam cruiser narrowboat for sale 

 

Selling to buy a narrowboat.

Cruising, G U Canal - £158,000

http://ebtk.co.uk/resources/stats/click.php?c=629&e=427&o=1030&url=http%3A%2F%2Ftinyurl.com%2F3251abnb

  • Greenie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.