TV Program

[dor]

I don't think this has been mentioned on here (and if has my apologies for repeating).

Tonight on Ch 5, a new series "Building Britain's Canals"   with Dan Jones looking at the history of the canals, concentrating on their construction.  Starting with the Grand Union.

[Machpoint005]

That's a PROGRAMME, isn't it?

[Dr Bob]

Well done for spotting and posting this. I will record it to watch later. Ta.

[Horace42]

The recorder is on.

[Guest]

Just spotted Tawny Owl @RLWP

 

 

[system 4-50]

Its good to know that the Cosgrove aqueduct is strong enough not only to carry the weight of the water but the weight of the boat(s) as well.

[Alan de Enfield]

A quite good look at the developments of the canal - the usual errors* but for 'joe-public' a good introduction

 

* Example - "the aqueduct had to be built strong enough to take the weight of the iron trough, the water & the boat"

(maybe the writer of the script was on holiday when the physics class discussed at Archimedes and his "Eureka Moment")

 

Edit - you type a couple of minutes quicker than I do (I had to look up the spelling for Archi Medes)

Edited June 15, 2018 by Alan de Enfield

[PeterF]

The Stockton and Darlington Railway was not built to connect the coal fields of Stockton and Darlington, but to connect the coal fields of Darlington to the River Tees at Stockton for onward shipment.

 

I also think one of the black and white photos of dereliction was a retouched photo of Elland Wharf after the 2015 Boxing Day floods, I would like to see it again to confirm though.

[john6767]

2 hours ago, system 4-50 said:

Its good to know that the Cosgrove aqueduct is strong enough not only to carry the weight of the water but the weight of the boat(s) as well.

Someone’s parent must have taken them out of school that day.  I does begged belief that adults can’t figure stuff like this out.  BTW, not seen the program so could be talking cr....p.

[Victor Vectis]

Good heavens.

Tawny Owl as a TV star!

 

What ever next?

[OldGoat]

It's easy to comment on inaccuracies and schoolboy bloomers, but I thought it was a good programme - a lot of content and good pics:

More importantly - good production; much of the stuff on C5 is low budget, resulting in lack of detail and waffle to fill the time

[BWM]

Anyone know if this will be repeated?

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, BWM said:

Anyone know if this will be repeated?

Highly likely I would have thought. C 5 often repeat stuff quite quickly though it's not sceduled to be yet it appears.

 

It's on Catch up though.

 

https://www.my5.tv/building-britains-canals/season-1

[Mike Todd]

15 hours ago, system 4-50 said:

Its good to know that the Cosgrove aqueduct is strong enough not only to carry the weight of the water but the weight of the boat(s) as well.

An Archimedean joke?

[john6767]

22 minutes ago, Mike Todd said:

An Archimedean joke?

yes!

[Ace 01]

Why oh why do they have to pick stock footage of foreign (American?) railways to show the progression to railways from canals, is there insufficient suitable footage of British locomotives and railways?

 

Enjoyed the programme though.

 

Cheers

 

David

Edited June 16, 2018 by Ace 01

[OldGoat]

33 minutes ago, Ace 01 said:

Why oh why do they have to pick stock footage of foreign (American?) railways to show the progression to railways from canals, is there insufficient suitable footage of British locomotives and railways?

 

Enjoyed the programme though.

 

Cheers

 

David

/cynic ON/

Lack of time to do research

Lack of budget

/cynic OFF/

[ditchcrawler]

17 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

A quite good look at the developments of the canal - the usual errors* but for 'joe-public' a good introduction

 

* Example - "the aqueduct had to be built strong enough to take the weight of the iron trough, the water & the boat"

(maybe the writer of the script was on holiday when the physics class discussed at Archimedes and his "Eureka Moment")

 

Edit - you type a couple of minutes quicker than I do (I had to look up the spelling for Archi Medes)

I remember what BW said the same thing about Anderton Lift when they decided to restore it, it would carry the weight of water but not the boats

[Mike Todd]

Two small practical things:

 

1. Leaving a windlass on a candlestick paddle is even more risky that with other types - don't ask how I know!

 

2. Cruising with fenders down (esp on a steel boat) is not a brilliant idea. There are enough fenders on the bottom (or in someone's prop space) without adding any more.

 

Just enjoying being picky - otherwise it was a good programme.

[WotEver]

1 hour ago, Ace 01 said:

Why oh why do they have to pick stock footage of foreign (American?) railways to show the progression to railways from canals, is there insufficient suitable footage of British locomotives and railways?

Almost certainly the cost of licensing the stock footage. UK-centric stuff generally costs loads more than US. 

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, WotEver said:

Almost certainly the cost of licensing the stock footage. UK-centric stuff generally costs loads more than US. 

It did look very silly though, I was racking my brains to think was there ever a railway that looked anything like that here assuming I had missed something. Of course I wasn't.

 

Given it was a historical program it was out of place. As was the obviously changed from colour to B&W photo of a sunken modernish narrowboat inserted into the section about the run down of the system. It looked like it had been taken last week. Given it was a good promo for CRT you would think they would have supplied them with some 'proper' images.

[WotEver]

4 minutes ago, MJG said:

Given it was a good promo for CRT you would think they would have supplied them with some 'proper' images.

You’d be amazed at how hard it is to get clearance for some images. Chasing down the copyright owner can take weeks and then you start negotiating a price. For a short insert in a budget TV programme it’s often far simpler, faster, and cheaper to cheat it, even if that does upset the purists who will obviously be in the minority of the viewing audience. ‘The Boat That Guy Built’ was a good example of a terrible programme from a purist’s point of view that enjoyed good viewing figures from the general public.