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
cuthound

March of the Widebeams

Featured Posts

3 minutes ago, Little Else said:

I think the reason the hotel boat can’t get past the bridge is not because of the bridge but because there is a rather large boat moored just in front of the bridge. It really is quite an obstruction. 

There is a very simple solution.

Share this post


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

I think the reason the hotel boat can’t get past the bridge is not because of the bridge but because there is a rather large boat moored just in front of the bridge. It really is quite an obstruction. 

Fact or fiction?  That would be very odd because when we went through on Saturday there was somebody on board ABSUMUS (the raw water outlet was in full flow).  The skipper of Tranquil Rose had guests that were destined for Warwick.  I can't imagine the TR skipper would go to all the trouble and inconvenience of turning round and changing his itinerary for the sake of not asking the other boat to reverse back a bit.

  • Greenie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where would it reverse to?

 

A narrow boat moored where that abortion is moored would be in the way.

Remember there are boats moored all along the offside there.

 

We came through Monday and no one was at home.

 

Could ABSUMUS an anagram of "Does my bum look big in this"?

 

Discuss.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, GRLMK38 said:

There does seem to be a lack of acknowledgement that the wide locks were built to allow a Motor and Butty pair travel through more efficiently than a narrow lock allows.

The locks, perhaps but that bridge 'ole is a known tight spot.

 

A couple of years ago I was heading south but was held up by a pair of breasted up tugs stuck there.

Can't remember exactly when but I sent a text to Radio 2 and the hold up was mentioned in a traffic report on Ken Bruce's show!

 

IIRC the boats were extricated by someone from Warwickshire Fly Boat and a Tirfor.

Share this post


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

Yes. Sorry I tend to use the working boaters terms as the Captain I visit doesn't recognise modern names.

Whilst I can just about see that as Arm End in Northants, I'm not convinced it isn't actually Marsworth Junction, looking out of the Aylesbury Arm towards the main line. 

Share this post


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

Whilst I can just about see that as Arm End in Northants, I'm not convinced it isn't actually Marsworth Junction, looking out of the Aylesbury Arm towards the main line. 

And if I was a betting man I’d happily stick a few bob on you being correct.

 

JP

Edited by Captain Pegg

Share this post


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

Whilst I can just about see that as Arm End in Northants, I'm not convinced it isn't actually Marsworth Junction, looking out of the Aylesbury Arm towards the main line. 

My first reaction on seeing the picture, before reading the text, was Marsworth.

 

This is Gayton Junction, seen from the Arm. Looks completely different:

4573825_b67d94ca_1024x1024.jpg

https://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/4573825

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Captain Pegg said:

And if I was a betting man I’d happily stick a few bob on you being correct.

 

JP

 

And you'd lose your stake.

 

It's from the Red Lion bridge. The Aylesbury Arm is another bridge and several bends away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, john6767 said:

And the rest!

Anything more is wasted energy as the paddle is clear of the sluice after 18 turns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ray T's photo:

Progress.JPG

 

Marsworth Junction from the Aylesbury Arm (Google Streetview)

Capture.PNG.23d701cec771d819b62de0f6bda8f5fe.PNG

 

I woudl say these are the same location.

  • Greenie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 01/07/2019 at 11:32, Ray T said:

That would be Tranquil Rose, passed through Braunston on Friday I believe,

Tranquil Rose.jpg

 

Mr Pegg gets his stake back and wins the bet. I thought it was about this picture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, GRLMK38 said:

There does seem to be a lack of acknowledgement that the wide locks were built to allow a Motor and Butty pair travel through more efficiently than a narrow lock allows.

 

From Wikipedia ".....although the Grand Union company had a number of broad boats built to take advantage of the improvements, they never really caught on and the canal continued to be operated largely by pairs of narrow boats, whose journeys were facilitated by the newly widened locks in which they could breast up."

 

I would be interested in knowing more about these broad boats e.g. Who built them? Were they named? Have any survived?

This is the usual internet / Wikipedia nonsense written by people who learn off either the internet or from a book. The Grand Union Canal Company had only one purpose built long distance carrying wide boat and that was PROGRESS, built by Bushell Brothers on the Wendover Arm in 1934. PROGRESS attended the opening of Hatton Locks on 30 October 1934, and although this boat was gauged at 75'0'' x 12'1½ it was soon deemed to be unsuccessful and was relegated to maintenance duties. As already stated PROGRESS is currently undergoing a rebuild.

 

The independent carrier Fellows, Morton and Clayton Ltd. built their carrying wide motor boat PIONEER at Uxbridge in late 1934 with a gauge of 71'8'' x 13'7¼'', but this boat was built for the papermill traffic on the lower Grand Union Canal and I have seen no evidence that it travelled through the new locks north of Napton - and it was sold off to another southern Grand Union Canal business in February 1936. By 1961 PIONEER had been sunk in the Yeading Tip arm and was later buried over.

 

I have always maintained that the modernised canal between Napton and Camp Hill is a narrow beam waterway with the benefit of wide locks, with my opinion being based on the narrow bridges or bridges with low arches that prevent easy passage - and I learned the hard way when operating a motor / butty pair, but I did listen to advise when it was available :captain:

  • Greenie 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, pete harrison said:

This is the usual internet / Wikipedia nonsense written by people who learn off either the internet or from a book. The Grand Union Canal Company had only one purpose built long distance carrying wide boat and that was PROGRESS, built by Bushell Brothers on the Wendover Arm in 1934. PROGRESS attended the opening of Hatton Locks on 30 October 1934, and although this boat was gauged at 75'0'' x 12'1½ it was soon deemed to be unsuccessful and was relegated to maintenance duties. As already stated PROGRESS is currently undergoing a rebuild.

 

The independent carrier Fellows, Morton and Clayton Ltd. built their carrying wide motor boat PIONEER at Uxbridge in late 1934 with a gauge of 71'8'' x 13'7¼'', but this boat was built for the papermill traffic on the lower Grand Union Canal and I have seen no evidence that it travelled through the new locks north of Napton - and it was sold off to another southern Grand Union Canal business in February 1936. By 1961 PIONEER had been sunk in the Yeading Tip arm and was later buried over.

 

I have always maintained that the modernised canal between Napton and Camp Hill is a narrow beam waterway with the benefit of wide locks, with my opinion being based on the narrow bridges or bridges with low arches that prevent easy passage - and I learned the hard way when operating a motor / butty pair, but I did listen to advise when it was available :captain:

Thanks Pete.  Interesting and somewhat definitive of the situation that appears to be repeating itself today, albeit for different reasons.

Share this post


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

So on narrow canal fat boat can’t get through because of fat boat. Hello CRT. Put the kettle on and sniff the aroma.

It is not a narrow canal though.  It has a stated width of 12’6”.  Whilst I am no fan of widebeams in this area, you can not blame someone with one that fits the dimensions.  The bit that I am missing here is that Tranquil Rose I am sure has been to Warwick before, and therefore I assume it is within the stated dimensions.  If it can no longer get through this bridge then something has changed.  Similarly with the other boat, if it really is over 13’ then it has no place there, but if it too is within dimension then again why can’t not get through the bridge?  You would have thought that if the boat was oversize CRT would not have started messing with the bridge and the boat would have gone straight back to the builders.  If the boat is still there then they must still be expecting CRT to do something.  This to me does not add up.

  • Greenie 1

Share this post


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

This is the usual internet / Wikipedia nonsense written by people who learn off either the internet or from a book. The Grand Union Canal Company had only one purpose built long distance carrying wide boat and that was PROGRESS, built by Bushell Brothers on the Wendover Arm in 1934. PROGRESS attended the opening of Hatton Locks on 30 October 1934, and although this boat was gauged at 75'0'' x 12'1½ it was soon deemed to be unsuccessful and was relegated to maintenance duties. As already stated PROGRESS is currently undergoing a rebuild.

 

The independent carrier Fellows, Morton and Clayton Ltd. built their carrying wide motor boat PIONEER at Uxbridge in late 1934 with a gauge of 71'8'' x 13'7¼'', but this boat was built for the papermill traffic on the lower Grand Union Canal and I have seen no evidence that it travelled through the new locks north of Napton - and it was sold off to another southern Grand Union Canal business in February 1936. By 1961 PIONEER had been sunk in the Yeading Tip arm and was later buried over.

 

I have always maintained that the modernised canal between Napton and Camp Hill is a narrow beam waterway with the benefit of wide locks, with my opinion being based on the narrow bridges or bridges with low arches that prevent easy passage - and I learned the hard way when operating a motor / butty pair, but I did listen to advise when it was available :captain:

A photo of Progress at the opening from the RCHS collection.

RCHS 204, 108 opening Hatton Locks  with Progress.jpg

  • Greenie 1

Share this post


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

This is the usual internet / Wikipedia nonsense written by people who learn off either the internet or from a book. The Grand Union Canal Company had only one purpose built long distance carrying wide boat and that was PROGRESS, built by Bushell Brothers on the Wendover Arm in 1934. PROGRESS attended the opening of Hatton Locks on 30 October 1934, and although this boat was gauged at 75'0'' x 12'1½ it was soon deemed to be unsuccessful and was relegated to maintenance duties. As already stated PROGRESS is currently undergoing a rebuild.

 

The independent carrier Fellows, Morton and Clayton Ltd. built their carrying wide motor boat PIONEER at Uxbridge in late 1934 with a gauge of 71'8'' x 13'7¼'', but this boat was built for the papermill traffic on the lower Grand Union Canal and I have seen no evidence that it travelled through the new locks north of Napton - and it was sold off to another southern Grand Union Canal business in February 1936. By 1961 PIONEER had been sunk in the Yeading Tip arm and was later buried over.

 

I have always maintained that the modernised canal between Napton and Camp Hill is a narrow beam waterway with the benefit of wide locks, with my opinion being based on the narrow bridges or bridges with low arches that prevent easy passage - and I learned the hard way when operating a motor / butty pair, but I did listen to advise when it was available :captain:

ISTR having somewhere  a newspaper cutting from the 1930s with a FMC wideboat in Leamington - but until I can locate it......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hotel boat Tranquil Rose has been visiting Saltisford for a number of years (about ten?) without problem.

The idea of subsidence at the bridge sounds more probable than lack of dredging.

Rog

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The CRT crew who were removing the coping stones told me that they were doing so because the bridge had "moved" and the gap had narrowed. 

  • Greenie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, billS said:

The CRT crew who were removing the coping stones told me that they were doing so because the bridge had "moved" and the gap had narrowed. 

Given that a lot of narrow locks have moved preventing craft from moving but nothing has really been done I wonder why so much effort is being put into this? Surely there are better priorities. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, roland elsdon said:

Antelope was I think 8 ft wide but I believe may have been dwelling registered. Of course she pre dated the improvements.

ANTELOPE was a wide beam (8' ish) wooden tug that worked the southern Grand Union Canal / Paddington Arm / Regents Canal, latterly operated by Sabey's. It would not have traded to the midlands, and as you say it was one of a few tugs registered as a dwelling.

 

There were loads of wide beam boats working on the southern Grand Union Canal / Paddington Arm / Regents Canal, including several wide beam steamers and motors, but none of these operated through to the improved section post its opening in the early to mid 1930's :captain:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, archie57 said:

ISTR having somewhere  a newspaper cutting from the 1930s with a FMC wideboat in Leamington - but until I can locate it...…

I am pretty sure (without going through the F.M.C. Ltd. 'Boat Register') that PIONEER was their only wide boat operating in the 1930's :captain:

Share this post


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

Given that a lot of narrow locks have moved preventing craft from moving but nothing has really been done I wonder why so much effort is being put into this? Surely there are better priorities. 

Locks, bridges, tunnels are all going to have moved since they were built.  The system is rather old.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, dogless said:

Hotel boat Tranquil Rose has been visiting Saltisford for a number of years (about ten?) without problem.

The idea of subsidence at the bridge sounds more probable than lack of dredging.

Rog

That's what the skipper told me.

  • 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

  • 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.