Jump to content

March of the Wide Beams


rustynewbery

Featured Posts

On 22/11/2017 at 21:52, Dr Bob said:

...but the problem is that the CRt will do neither. We are therefore left with the situation we now have. At least they have done some cutting back at the Napton end but large sections between Napton and Braunston have not been cut back, and Braunston seems to be a magnet for launching them. I think Zenataomm's post above is the best way forward and gives the responsibility to the fat boat owners. That will never happen either!

...and they will do neither because people bicker among themselves here rather than getting on CRT's case about the lack of keeping the canal clear of vegetation.

Keith

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 23/11/2017 at 13:40, zenataomm said:

dmr ........

Everything you say is right.

It is more difficult to argue fat boats on fat canals whether they are handled badly or moored badly.  I guess what is pertinent here is that taking them onto a narrow canal is even more foolish and is easier to criticise.

You are also accurate in commenting that even The Grand Onion was proven to be unsuitable in the 30s for such traffic. Who could forget the incident when The Grand Union Canal Co. wide boat "Progress" certainly didn't when she met The Bushell Bros. built wide boat "Lard Arse" on the Tring summit (check on Google Earth, they're still there, nose to nose)

If it didn't work then when the cut was regularly maintained and dredged, I don't see it as being sensible today. Shaving the beam to 12ft or even 10' 6" to me seems silly especially as you can't traverse tunnels without a load of Hoo - Haa.

 

Say something enough times and people accept it as fact.

Keith

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/22/2017 at 21:52, Dr Bob said:

...but the problem is that the CRt will do neither. We are therefore left with the situation we now have. At least they have done some cutting back at the Napton end but large sections between Napton and Braunston have not been cut back, and Braunston seems to be a magnet for launching them. I think Zenataomm's post above is the best way forward and gives the responsibility to the fat boat owners. That will never happen either!

 

3 minutes ago, Steilsteven said:

...and they will do neither because people bicker among themselves here rather than getting on CRT's case about the lack of keeping the canal clear of vegetation.

Keith


Actually some of us are often on CRT's case, in addition to anything we may or may not contribute here.

Vegetation and its effect on navigation is regularly raised at the South East Boaters Sub-Group.  It is likely to be specifically on the agenda in the next couple of weeks, and I will revisit this thread before then to extract some key comments from it.

If anybody wants to PM me specific concerns or examples, then please do so, (but I point out this is for South East area - I can't reasonably raise anything not related to that area).

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, alan_fincher said:

 


Actually some of us are often on CRT's case, in addition to anything we may or may not contribute here.

Vegetation and its effect on navigation is regularly raised at the South East Boaters Sub-Group.  It is likely to be specifically on the agenda in the next couple of weeks, and I will revisit this thread before then to extract some key comments from it.

If anybody wants to PM me specific concerns or examples, then please do so, (but I point out this is for South East area - I can't reasonably raise anything not related to that area).

I know you are Alan, as am I but I don't think boater's groups achieve very much, at least not in my experience.

Direct complaints are much more effective but it needs everyone to make the effort.

I was in conversation with Mark Stevens, Waterway Manager for the K&A previous to Mark Evans, and he told me that he had a list of 5000 problems with the waterway. Priority goes to the problem most complained about.

Keith

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, alan_fincher said:

 


Actually some of us are often on CRT's case, in addition to anything we may or may not contribute here.

Vegetation and its effect on navigation is regularly raised at the South East Boaters Sub-Group.  It is likely to be specifically on the agenda in the next couple of weeks, and I will revisit this thread before then to extract some key comments from it.

If anybody wants to PM me specific concerns or examples, then please do so, (but I point out this is for South East area - I can't reasonably raise anything not related to that area).

Well they have been out clearing the off side vegetation between Napton and Braunston. The long (300yards)stretch to the west of bridge 107 - where it was difficult to get two narrowboats past without one stopping in the bushes - has now been cleared with lots of 'trees' (I would call them saplings) removed. You could now get two broadbeams past each other - assuming it hasnt silted up.

Lovely cruise down to Braunston today.

  • Happy 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Steilsteven said:

I know you are Alan, as am I but I don't think boater's groups achieve very much, at least not in my experience.

Direct complaints are much more effective but it needs everyone to make the effort.

I was in conversation with Mark Stevens, Waterway Manager for the K&A previous to Mark Evans, and he told me that he had a list of 5000 problems with the waterway. Priority goes to the problem most complained about.

Keith

'Problems' are variously known as defects, defect reports, defect notifications or ZX notifications (after the two digit code use to record them on C&RT's SAP system). Not sure how many years ago you were given that figure but the number of defects on the system is increasing significantly and averages over 7,000 per waterway region.

Across all C&RT waterways, the latest published figure is 72,026 (1 April 2017). This is up on 12 months previously when it was 62,379.

What C&RT have done in the past is to nominate a small proportion of these defects for clearance each year. These 'high priority' defects are determined by safety and customer service considerations. Unfortunately, performance in clearing these 'high priority' defects is poor. Of 5,807 high priority customer service / safety related infrastructure defects scheduled for clearance in 2015/16, C&RT only managed to clear 2,910 (i.e. 50%). Last year (2016/17), C&RT actually reduced the number of high priority defects scheduled for clearance by more than 2000. Of 3,744 high 
priority defects it cleared 2,809 (75%). Whilst 75% clearance rate looks good against 50%, the fact is it cleared 100 less faults so its performance is actually worse.

The reason given for this poor performance is that funding/resources are diverted into dealing with 'arising defects' (i.e. faults that arise during the year and take precedence because they are more important to fix).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Dr Bob said:

Well they have been out clearing the off side vegetation between Napton and Braunston. The long (300yards)stretch to the west of bridge 107 - where it was difficult to get two narrowboats past without one stopping in the bushes - has now been cleared with lots of 'trees' (I would call them saplings) removed. You could now get two broadbeams past each other - assuming it hasnt silted up.

Lovely cruise down to Braunston today.

Fantastic that that they have cleared that section, well done to CRT on that one.  I shall look forward to that in a couple of weeks time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Steilsteven said:

Well that one will only fit on an ''appropriate waterway''. 

Keith

Although the locks are wide enough I would hate to meet one on the river nene, some parts are difficult enough to sqeeze a narrow boat through. From Titchmarsh to Thrapston some parts are like going through the Everglades.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, artleknock said:

Although the locks are wide enough I would hate to meet one on the river nene, some parts are difficult enough to sqeeze a narrow boat through. From Titchmarsh to Thrapston some parts are like going through the Everglades.

Are you sure? Keels are usually fifteen feet beam AFAIK.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

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
  • 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.