March of the Widebeams

[rustynewbery]

There is a place for wide beam boats but the north Oxford Canal is definitely not one.

Despite the published dimensions of 2.1m beam and 21.9 length, it would seem that CRT have not objected to these boats being moored at Dunchurch Pools [Onley "Monster Marina"] and Barby Moorings. On my return trip to Cropredy last week, I saw 4 wide beams in Dunchurch  and 2 in Barby.  The former's entrance from the canal has clearly been constructed to allow these boats to gain access and egress.

The local licensing officer even said there was nothing they could do. Really?  But let's look at the real issue, and disregarding the fact that only narrow beam boats can travel through Hillmorton Locks:  the canal profile is totally unsuitable for anything over 6ft 10" nominal beam!

Several pinch points exist which will render meeting a wide beam an accident waiting to happen include

a. the length between bridge 90 and 89, with 14 day mooring and overgrown offside vegetation,

b. between bridges 83 and 84, again overgrown vegetation on the offside, not to mention the slope of the towpath edge

c. the blind approach to bridge 80, only recently repaired. 

CRT have said they doubt if these boats will actually go out, but I do know that Dunchurch have constructed a wide beam slipway so we can expect movement along this 3 mile section.  I for one would not want to come up against a wide beam at the locations noted above.  An even worse scenario would be one going down to Hillmorton, finding they cannot go further the trying to reverse back to Tarry's bridge winding hole.

Maybe it is time to campaign for a narrows to be constructed at bridge 90 of 8ft beam.  I'm sure it would get the support of most narrow beam boaters.

 

 

[StephenA]

You can get up to Braunston from there can't you?

[alan_fincher]

2 hours ago, rustynewbery said:

the canal profile is totally unsuitable for anything over 6ft 10" nominal beam!

Fortunately not true, and both our ex working narrow boats, built to 7' 0.5" beam, (but one of them now definitely wider), are no less suited to the canal than the now accepted 6' 10" beam chosen for most modern leisure narrow boats.

Having got that out the way, I am otherwise in agreement with you, and find it most unsatisfactory that CRT are prepared to allow the use of the Northern Oxford by wider beamed craft.  It is a stupid idea, and should not be happening.  IMO CRT should not be prepared to let marinas built on this canal house these boats, unless there is a clear condition specified that they are never going to leave those marinas.

14 minutes ago, StephenA said:

You can get up to Braunston from there can't you?

Yes, but there are some fairly horrendous pictures doing the rounds of some incidents involving these boats cruising the Northern Oxford.  One of the better ones shows the resulting chaos when a loaded motor / butty pair on a long line encountered one at a point that was simply not wide enough.

The canal was certainly not built with anything other than narrow boats in mind, and they should not b on it.

[StephenA]

13 minutes ago, alan_fincher said:

 

Yes, but there are some fairly horrendous pictures doing the rounds of some incidents involving these boats cruising the Northern Oxford.  One of the better ones shows the resulting chaos when a loaded motor / butty pair on a long line encountered one at a point that was simply not wide enough.

The canal was certainly not built with anything other than narrow boats in mind, and they should not b on it.

But I assume that the marina owners and CRT will use exactly the point I've used .. 

I recall there being some widebeams when we were moored at Braunston many years ago and I did think then that it was a bit mad.

Edited October 1, 2017 by StephenA

[rustynewbery]

I stand corrected on the working boat girth!

It's a bad day if nothing can be done to stop them.

[zenataomm]

I'd like to see the number of photos doing the rounds, I often cruise that area and need to be aware of what I could meet out on the main line. Any links please?

I too recently saw the ones at Dunchurch Pools and Barby which surprised and puzzled me.

[mrsmelly]

1 hour ago, rustynewbery said:

I stand corrected on the working boat girth!

It's a bad day if nothing can be done to stop them.

Widebeams are fab but not onbaby canals thankyou. Hows that old smokey RN going?

[rustynewbery]

I totally agree, and my smelly 3 pot is going nice, thank you, but not smoky anymore.

[mrsmelly]

38 minutes ago, rustynewbery said:

I totally agree, and my smelly 3 pot is going nice, thank you, but not smoky anymore.

R U hiding at Cropredy this winter?

[Victor Vectis]

4 hours ago, rustynewbery said:

Maybe it is time to campaign for a narrows to be constructed at bridge 90 of 8ft beam.  I'm sure it would get the support of most narrow beam boaters.

Or how about CaRT emphasising the no widebeams north of Berko recommendation?

Oh look! Up there!! In the sky!!!

Oink, flap. Oink flap

[john6767]

Just put a couple of posts 9ft apart in the canal by the first bridge up the North Oxford, problem solved.

I can't see too much wrong with the odd wide beam on the GU in Braunston and points North, but the couple that I saw moving this year both looked like 70x14 monsters, which I think are inappropriate there.

[GUMPY]

Widebeams are good as they don't rock as much as narrowboats when you pass them having forgotton to slow down 

[matty40s]

There is a 70 ft by 13 foot boat moored in the lower Calcutt locks pound, the owners don't take it out often as they get the feeling that other boaters don't think they should be on the canals!! The first section from Napton junction towards Braunston is almost too narrow for 2 narrowboats to pass, never mind a boat of that size.

Even more worrying is the North Kilworth new marina having wide beam size dry and wet docks being built, and plans for widebeam berths when it opens.

CRT could and SHOULD do something.

They wont though, especially if they can get their widebeam increased licence fee through.

I did witness a fully loaded pair almost take the back off a newly launched widebeam where the owners didnt have a clue how to steer and the steering wheel controls had been fitted back to front. 

 

[Lily Rose]

I saw one moving on this section, on or about 22 August, but fortunately not while I was moving.

We moored for lunch at the (often) narrow section (made narrow by the line of moored boats on one side and overgrown vegetation on the other side) of the north Oxford between the first and second bridges heading north out of Braunston. We moored behind a fat boat facing north which was just about to set off. I'm glad we weren't moving south along that stretch at the time.

If CRT are happy to allow fat boats on unsuitable canals they could at least do a better job of keeping the overhanging vegetation under control to reduce the likelihood of problems.

[alan_fincher]

3 hours ago, zenataomm said:

I'd like to see the number of photos doing the rounds, I often cruise that area and need to be aware of what I could meet out on the main line. Any links please?

 

Having had a quick look, at the moment I'm only finding references in private FaceBook groups.  If I find a publicly available picture I'll post it, but at the moment I can't.

[Murflynn]

what we really need is a widebeam moored on each side of a canal with a 14ft scaffold plank across the remaining gap to act as a barrier to prevent other widebeams passing through, but also enabling the WB owners to charge a penny fee for pedestrians to cross the bridge.

.............. vary the width of boat and the length of plank to suit local conditions.

[Ray T]

This is  Matty's photo.

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...........

Edited October 1, 2017 by Ray T

[Mike Todd]

I thought that the GU was only really built for wide beam barges up to the Port of Berkhampstead and that the provision of wide locks thereafter was intended to speed up the passage of pairs of narrowboats. 

[alan_fincher]

5 minutes ago, Mike Todd said:

I thought that the GU was only really built for wide beam barges up to the Port of Berkhampstead and that the provision of wide locks thereafter was intended to speed up the passage of pairs of narrowboats. 

Pretty accurate, I would say.

Except I remain deeply suspicious that "Port of Berkhamptead" may be a modern turn of phrase coined by a well known local resident.  Do you actually have any good evidence that it is a legitimate term from actual history.

[StephenA]

6 minutes ago, alan_fincher said:

Pretty accurate, I would say.

Except I remain deeply suspicious that "Port of Berkhamptead" may be a modern turn of phrase coined by a well known local resident.  Do you actually have any good evidence that it is a legitimate term from actual history.

 

 IIRC Braunston Tunnel used to have some notice about wide beam craft having to phone and arrange passage.... and it wasn't a new notice when we were at Braunston round about 2000

[GUMPY]

7 minutes ago, alan_fincher said:

"Port of Berkhamptead"

[john6767]

23 minutes ago, StephenA said:

 

 IIRC Braunston Tunnel used to have some notice about wide beam craft having to phone and arrange passage.... and it wasn't a new notice when we were at Braunston round about 2000

Widebeams have to book Braunston tunnel, and also Bliswoth, as two boats can not pass.  That does imply that they are not allowed on that part of the GU.

[StephenA]

7 minutes ago, john6767 said:

Widebeams have to book Braunston tunnel, and also Bliswoth, as two boats can not pass.  That does imply that they are not allowed on that part of the GU.

No it implies that they are allowed but were rare enough that it wasn't worth imposing a schedule like they do on tunnels like Foulridge ....

[john6767]

17 minutes ago, StephenA said:

No it implies that they are allowed but were rare enough that it wasn't worth imposing a schedule like they do on tunnels like Foulridge ....

Is there any long tunnel that has a timed schedule, I can’t think of one.

[StephenA]

6 minutes ago, john6767 said:

Is there any long tunnel that has a timed schedule, I can’t think of one.

?????