Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
davidandheather

Tug style narrow boats

164 posts in this topic

Thanks. So, as Springer carried on building boats until about 1993, who ran the company after his demise?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks. So, as Springer carried on building boats until about 1993, who ran the company after his demise?

He had a manager/partner of sorts, called (I think) Len/Les Smith, who carried on after Sam's death.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Out of curiosity were there ever wide-beamed tugs? I love the looks of the narrow-boat tugs but when it comes time for us to get a boat, depending on where we are, it may suit us better to have a wide-beam.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Out of curiosity were there ever wide-beamed tugs? I love the looks of the narrow-boat tugs but when it comes time for us to get a boat, depending on where we are, it may suit us better to have a wide-beam.

 

Wide beam tugs did exist but not really in the narrowboat sense this is what we had in our neck of the woods-

 

 

Saying that we have plenty of "Fat Narrowboats" here now so a a "Fat tug" or even a "Fat washer josher" wouldn't really be out of place. :lol:

Edited by Gary Peacock
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wide beam tugs did exist but not really in the narrowboat sense this is what we had in our neck of the woods-

 

 

Saying that we have plenty of "Fat Narrowboats" here now so a a "Fat tug" or even a "Fat washer josher" wouldn't really be out of place. :lol:

 

There any of those left around :lol:

 

Or there's this beauty. http://commercial.apolloduck.co.uk/display.phtml?aid=92255

 

Think I could lock it?

Edited by Jason Wilson and Family
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi if you were thinking of having a Tug style narrowboat build who would you have build the shell???

David

I hate it when people say "without doubt the only......" etc. A number of builders can produce a good imitation of a tug ( and it`s an imitation you are actually looking for ). It will be an imitation of a tug of rare good looks - most of them were extremely ugly - so you`ll be after the Stentor, Buffalo, Birchills, Enterprise look. The Northwich Trader/Hawkins type modern boats are very fine indeed - but I`m not at all sure if they have any physical resemblance to any historic examples at all. They may be what you EXPECT to see - or maybe nowadays people are writing tug rather than "tug" too often.You can`t easily seperate the work of Dave Harris , Ian kemp , and Norton Canes. Roger Farringdon is very good indeed - my own experience of his work is limited but others whose opinion I respect in these matters tell me so. There are , no doubt, one or two more. It`s a question of what you think constitutes a "tug". If it`s hundreds of false rivets and "chunky" detail you want look one way , if your priorities lie elsewhere then so should your enquiries. How about looking at pictures of some real tugs first .

Phil

 

Out of curiosity were there ever wide-beamed tugs? I love the looks of the narrow-boat tugs but when it comes time for us to get a boat, depending on where we are, it may suit us better to have a wide-beam.

Yes - Buffalo , working on the thames and southern Grand Union ( I think ) was a "wide" narrow bota in appearnce and I`m sure there were several more.

Phil

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I hate it when people say "without doubt the only......" etc. A number of builders can produce a good imitation of a tug ( and it`s an imitation you are actually looking for ). It will be an imitation of a tug of rare good looks - most of them were extremely ugly - so you`ll be after the Stentor, Buffalo, Birchills, Enterprise look. The Northwich Trader/Hawkins type modern boats are very fine indeed - but I`m not at all sure if they have any physical resemblance to any historic examples at all. They may be what you EXPECT to see - or maybe nowadays people are writing tug rather than "tug" too often.You can`t easily seperate the work of Dave Harris , Ian kemp , and Norton Canes. Roger Farringdon is very good indeed - my own experience of his work is limited but others whose opinion I respect in these matters tell me so. There are , no doubt, one or two more. It`s a question of what you think constitutes a "tug". If it`s hundreds of false rivets and "chunky" detail you want look one way , if your priorities lie elsewhere then so should your enquiries. How about looking at pictures of some real tugs first .

Phil

 

 

Yes - Buffalo , working on the thames and southern Grand Union ( I think ) was a "wide" narrow bota in appearnce and I`m sure there were several more.

Phil

 

This is the best site I have come across for photos of the tug steamers Phil refers to

 

http://www.steamershistorical.co.uk/steamers_tugs_index.htm

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is the best site I have come across for photos of the tug steamers Phil refers to

 

http://www.steamershistorical.co.uk/steamers_tugs_index.htm

 

Hi Charles,

 

thanks for the link to the steamers website. I have just learned something that I had suspected but never found evidence of. The records on Luna show she was built at Crewe by the LNWR. Does anyone have a picture of Luna? I'm trying to understand how much Crewe got involved with the boats of the canals that the LNWR owned.

 

Richard

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

There's some fascinating information on there. I particularly liked the description of Birmingham, which apparently had two 3' diameter contra-rotating screws. Operating on a canal whose reported depth is an average 3'6"!!! (presumably it was deeper in them there days). Imagine the pull on that tiller.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There's some fascinating information on there. I particularly liked the description of Birmingham, which apparently had two 3' diameter contra-rotating screws. Operating on a canal whose reported depth is an average 3'6"!!! (presumably it was deeper in them there days). Imagine the pull on that tiller.

 

The pull on the tiller may not have been any greater than we experience on a deep draughted boat today because the shaft speed of the steam engine would have been proportionately lower. I doubt if those large props turned at more than 80 to 150 rpm.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There's some fascinating information on there. I particularly liked the description of Birmingham, which apparently had two 3' diameter contra-rotating screws. Operating on a canal whose reported depth is an average 3'6"!!! (presumably it was deeper in them there days). Imagine the pull on that tiller.

 

Maybe the screws were one at either end, some tunnel tugs were built like that, for instance with a central engine with a clutch on either end of the crankshaft to select the prop you needed.

 

Tim

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Charles,

 

thanks for the link to the steamers website. I have just learned something that I had suspected but never found evidence of. The records on Luna show she was built at Crewe by the LNWR. Does anyone have a picture of Luna? I'm trying to understand how much Crewe got involved with the boats of the canals that the LNWR owned.

 

Richard

 

The long account of the two engine drivers and the steerer that died in the tunell accident on a steamer overcome by smoke is worth a read on this site

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Maybe the screws were one at either end, some tunnel tugs were built like that, for instance with a central engine with a clutch on either end of the crankshaft to select the prop you needed.

 

I believe there were tugs with a prop at each end but none appear to have survived to enable us to see how they were designed so as not cause excessive drag when not propelling. The clutch idea is feasible in allowing them to rotate freely or perhaps they feathered or lifted out on a frame as in those early ships with combined steam and sail.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I believe there were tugs with a prop at each end but none appear to have survived to enable us to see how they were designed so as not cause excessive drag when not propelling. The clutch idea is feasible in allowing them to rotate freely or perhaps they feathered or lifted out on a frame as in those early ships with combined steam and sail.

 

There are drawings extant of at least one such tug, it has a Bolinder or similar engine in the middle with a clutch on either end, the vessel has a prop and a rudder at each end.

 

Tim

0

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
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.