David Mack

Two boats going up passing a hotel boat pair coming down in one of the shortest pounds at Hatton.

The examples quoted cover the costs incurred by a navigation authority or similar in the removal (and possible scrapping) of your boat if it is causing an obstruction or environmental damage. That it not necessarily the same as the costs you would incur hiring a contractor to refloat your boat and clean and repair it to bring it back into use.

Since both batteries should have their negative connections grounded to the hull, they will necessarily share a common ground, whatever their chemistry.

Tame Valley Canal over the M5. Dudley Port Aqueduct on the New Main Line rebuilt for larger road beneath. One on the GU in Milton Keynes ( whose name escapes me) The 1980ish Stanley Ferry Aqueduct.

The interior cabin and hull sides have recently been tarted up, but the ceiling clearly has problems. The well deck and engine bay look very scruffy by comparison. And signs of damp on the cabin side here behind the TV bracket. "Freshly blacked in 2021" actually means "in need of reblacking". But it is a very cheap boat, albeit almost 50 years old. If the hull is in good condition it may be worth going for. If its in need of overplating, then maybe not.

I'm sure burying small quantities of one human's waste is pretty harmless to the environment. But my experience of boating in the 60s is that my father would dig a hole to bury several days worth of the whole family's waste, along with a quantity of the formaldehyde-based toilet blue fluid. Not sure that was so harmless!

Yup. Its required to stop a child sleeping on the side bed from being corrupted by what Mum and Dad might be doing on the cross bed!

Under the 1968 Transport Act they are required to maintain the Commercial and Cruising waterways in the condition they were before the passing of the Act. They have no obligations at all in respect of remainder waterways, but neither did BW before them.

I suspect its a SABB diesel engine - nice little proper marine engines. Whereas SAAB is a defunct manufacturer of cars.

Does your bow thruster reliably produce enough lateral thrust to overcome the force of a strong crosswind on the boat?

I am involved with two ex working boats, built in 1936 and 1937, both built of steel (rather than iron), and both of which retained their original 5/16" bottoms until 3 and 4 years ago respectively. Both had had various repairs and patching to the bottom over the years, and the bottoms were thin enough in places to warrant eventual rebottoming, but I think 85 years or so aint bad!

https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/notices/0197f924-cb3a-7bbf-9870-c6b17b262359

Whether it's done "a jot of load carrying work" is irrelevant. We are just talking about corrosion here. And in this case it appears that the bottom has never been painted at all, let alone "half decently protected". Similarly the inside face of the baseplate probably had a rudimentary coating when the boat was new, but nothing since. Yes that is less than ideal. But there are loads of similar boats out there that are now 3 or 4 decades old which still have more than enough bottom plate to keep them afloat (and insurable) for a good few years yet.