Canal World

Join us absolutely Free in just two minutes to gain access to all our features. Once registered, you will be able to submit new content and get answers to your all your canal & boating questions all for absolutely Free!

PhilAtterley

Member
  • Content count

    90
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

10 Neutral

About PhilAtterley

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Yorkshire

Previous Fields

  • Occupation
    Transport Consultant

Recent Profile Visitors

146 profile views
  1. I wonder if they will be content with restricting any Appeal to anything adverse to them in the Judgment, or if they will try to "appeal" their own admissions with regard to using S.8 as a debt collection tool ? I'm sure they will already have their best most warped minds addressing the issue !
  2. We must hope that the Judge is blessed with vision enough to see through CRT's unstinting efforts to brainwash everyone into believing that the terms 'Licence' and 'Pleasure Boat Certificate' share precisely the same meaning for everyday, practical purposes and are freely interchangeable in their use ! Whatever meaning is attributed to the phrase 'main navigable channel' and whatever the extent of it's boundaries, one thing that is absolute certain is that keeping or using a boat on one of CRT's rivers does NOT require a "Licence". The inclusion of "cuts" in CRT's selection of things which they say do not comprise the main navigable channel is interesting, and indicative of either some very muddled thinking on their part, or alternatively, utter contempt with regards to the intelligence of those they seek to bamboozle with such nonsense. A moment spent considering the reason for digging 'cuts' on any of the CRT rivers should suffice. If you accept the CRT argument excluding 'cuts' from forming part of the main navigable channel on a river you are left with the inescapable conclusion that they must be arguing that, in reality, it is the weir streams that fulfill that function !
  3. If that's all you're doing, just use a straight (compression fitting) union and forget about flexible - you don't need any!
  4. You will obviously need to be very careful at Thorne, because you will have very little margin for error, but the lock is a fairly generous 'Sheffield size' length and a few feet wider than normal 'Sheffield size' width, . . . I can't remember the exact width, and I can't find my old notebook from about 12 years ago with the measurements I took before going that way round back to the Trent with the BW Dredger, but the Dredger was 67' [overall length with the buckets raised up clear of the water for travelling] x 14' 6'' wide and it penned laying straight down the middle of the lock, with the bottom tumbler and the buckets just an inch or two off the bottom gate walkways and the engineroom/cabin end just an inch or two off the top gates. I would suggest that you operate the lock at least once, draining it right down from full, without the boat in it before penning, so you'll know just how slowly you can drain down [using one sluice, all or just part raised] and how quickly all the sluices can be closed or raised should it become necessary to do so, . . you can also check the rate of leakage through the bottom gates, and how quickly the water level starts to fall with the top gates and the sluices at both ends shut. Whilst you've got the lock drained right down without the boat in it, have a poke around at the top cill with a boathook so you'll know the shape of it and how far into the chamber it comes, and the depth left over it with the lock drained all the way down. When you've got the boat into the lock, and the top gates shut, get some lines ashore at both ends [more than one if needs be] and get the boat positioned with no slack in the lines, and the lines made off with nothing more than a good few turns that can be taken off and slacked away with the rope under tension as the level drops. Early morning, before there's anybody much about, would probably be your best time for doing this, . . . the last thing you need is some well meaning involvement from others distracting you from what you're doing, or even joining in and doing something that you weren't expecting, and at just the wrong moment. Edited June 14, 2016 by Tony Dunkley Tony. A. K. Dunkley Canal & River Transport Services, Nottingham (Est. 1968)Commercial vessel operators and Marine engineers Edit to add : I have tried to get rid of the two quote boxes above, but they don't seem to want to go away.
  5. Those figures from BW / CRT are hopelessly wrong - Thorne Lock was built to take Sheffield size which is 61' 6'' x 15' 6'', and that figure of 77' long for Keadby is for the flood lock (the set of gates for when the river is higher than the Cut) - the other set of gates will pen a Trent size barge which is 82' 6''.
  6. I wouldn't worry about it - the tide tables don't know what they're being used for !
  7. The head joints - plain steel ring + steel shims - on the water cooled variants of the H & S air cooled ranges have a tendency to blow due to heat shrinkage and distortion adjacent to the exhaust ports. The hot gases then frazzle the rubber ring seals on the block to head water passages. Water loss then causes the engine run hotter and that induces oil leaks from round the valve gear area of the heads - sometimes down the two internal head studs/nuts under the rocker covers. If you're lucky this could be the cause - if you're out of luck it could be a cracked head, or heads ! I suggest you ring Tony Dunkley on 07553 294325 - he's got more than half a Century of 'living' with Listers under his belt, running, maintaining and overhauling them in boats and plant.
  8. That could be a major inconvenience for a good many folk if we have a dry Summer. I've known it struggle to make 3' over the old outer cill on poor tides after a long, hot, dry spell when there's no fresh in the river, and I believe that BW were stupid enough to make the outer cill on the new chamber the same height as the old one. Edit to add: I noticed a few posts back that someone said - quote - "As a general rule you can get over the cill at Torksey two hours before high water to a few hours after." - this is complete and utter nonsense; the flood runs up at Torksey for only 2 hours at the very most, and usually for quite a bit less, so 2 hours before (local) HW is in fact the last few minutes of ebb, with the tide/river level as low as it's going to get !
  9. Aiming for Torksey from Cromwell you can go at any time that suits you. If you have a set of the Trent charts with you and you keep to the deep water channel, there is more than ample depth all the way for a canal boat at any state of the tide. There are floating pontoon moorings in Torksey Cut on which you can wait if there isn't enough depth over the outer cill when you arrive. If you just happen to leave Cromwell at a time that will see you meeting the flood just short of Torksey then you will have the easiest possible passage. On the last of the ebb the nesses and the drying, shallow, shelving banks along the racks will help you to judge where the deepest water is, you will be stemming the tide so the turn into Torksey Cut will be as easy as it can be, and on everything except the smallest of neaps there will be enough water over the outer cill for you to get straight into the lock without having to wait at all. An added bonus to going downriver late on the ebb is that if you do happen to get it wrong and ground somewhere, then you won't have very long to wait before the next tide lifts you off and you're on your way again.
  10. Over the 70 plus miles from Hull to Cromwell the tide is progressively much delayed and diminished from the times and ranges that hold good at Hull, with a shortening period of flood and a correspondingly longer period of ebb as you go further upriver.
  11. True, but the effect and meaning is precisely as I stated.
  12. No, the test is whether or not the vessel "is bona fide used for navigation". A permanently static vessel is unarguably NOT used for navigation, and therefore falls within the statutory definition of a Houseboat in S.3(1) of the 1971 Act.
  13. This sounds as if you are anticipating an interesting new twist on the well established misuse of S.13 Notices ! Do you envisage the owners of permanently static boats, let for accommodation purposes only, and having been left with no option other than to accept the issue of one of these new type of Letting Licences, then being served with S.13 Notices because they don't hold a current Houseboat Certificate ?
  14. There is in fact, no loophole whatsoever in need of closing, but I am intrigued by your labeling of someone who happens to need a Houseboat Certificate for a boat they own as a 'defendant' !! I might disagree with Nigel Moore about the motives and reasoning behind introducing this latest example of CRT stupidity, but I do agree about the utter pointlessness of inventing and then having to administrate a new, superfluous class of 'licence' when the craft to be covered by this new 'licence', ie. static, on a permanent mooring and never used for navigation, have been adequately legislated for throughout the last 46 years by the Houseboat Certificate introduced in the 1971 Act and applicable on any inland waterway.
  15. That is one of the little Woolwich Zoo Bus conversions, so it definitely is NOT 'Water Rambler' - the hull is still 'as built' without having had the top bends and deck cut down to improve the forward view for the passengers sitting in the glass saloon which ran about halfway along the length of the boat. As for where the photo is - going from the concrete piled and capped inside (towpath side) and how close the railway is, I would say it's just on the Hatton side of the turn into the arm on to the North Stratford at Lapworth, which I think I have heard referred to as Kingswood Junction.