Tug Decks

[jonk]

OK - I found this http://www.justcanals.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=472&start=0

a similar question asked in justcanals forums. The OP says that a similar topic is on this forum, I'll see if I can find it.

Seems that originally Tugs were built to push or pull dumb boats, but I still don't see why the flat area at the front - I'll keep looking.

[RLWP]

 

A BCN tug from 1941

 

That's how they were around Brum

 

Richard

 

Image from the useful BCNS website

Edited February 18, 2011 by RLWP

[jonk]

A BCN tug from 1941

 

 

 

That is interesting, nice picture. Also interested to see the wheelchair on board - presumably the boat was not in service at that time. From the bow I guess that it has been used to push dumb boats?

Edited February 18, 2011 by jonk

[RLWP]

A BCN tug from 1941

 

 

 

That is interesting, nice picture. Also interested to see the wheelchair on board - presumably the boat was not in service at that time. From the bow I guess that it has been used to push dumb boats?

 

No. She was originally built as an ice-breaker which is why she's fined down at the bow. Otherwise she's just carrying a typical inelegant but highly practical fender.

 

The tugs would have pulled strings of day boats.

 

Richard

[jonk]

No. She was originally built as an ice-breaker which is why she's fined down at the bow. Otherwise she's just carrying a typical inelegant but highly practical fender.

 

The tugs would have pulled strings of day boats.

 

Richard

 

OK - thanks. Didn't realise they had specialist icebreakers on the canals, but it makes sense since it was then a commercial waterway. Lots of nice rivets to count on that boat

WHY THE FLAT FRONT if it tows from the back? I keep asking that question but no-one seems to have an answer - not even Google, the source of 'all' knowledge

Will try again tomorrow.

[alan_fincher]

OK,

 

You are asking a serious enough question, so I'll have a go......

 

I assume we are talking solely about narrow boat tugs, no other type, so a maximum ruling dimension of around 72 feet by 7 feet.

 

Obviously the standard narrow boat sized lock, whether single or double, is the main limitation on moving narrow boats around with any speed, so for general freight carrying, the use of a tug which itself didn't carry would not make a lot of sense where there were a lot of these locks. You would either have to work the boat through a narrow lock independently of anything it was towing, or it would take up half a broad lock, again very inefficient use of a lock cycle.

 

Hence on most such canals the standard 70 foot narrow boat was king, and accommodation and engine space kept as small as possible. (Steamers were not very good in this respect as the engine space was so large, a major reason diesel boats soon took over, as soon as suitable engines existed).

 

So a narrow boat tug was actually a fairly specialist beast. It might be built, or adapted from a working boat, to meet a specialist need, such as ice-breaking or towing "dumb" maintenance boats like "mud hoppers". Or it might be used to tow maybe multiple day boats on the longer lock free stretches of the BCN. But you will find that even there, some of the last operators of day boats, like "Caggy" Stevens, who had a contract to shift waste by day boats, only used a tug in the lock free stretches, but retained horses to work through the heavily locked sections. This meant one less operation of each lock, and he reckoned horse working won hands down in those cases.

 

So a typical tug needed to be able to pull one or more bigger boats, but was generally only used on short haul traffic, so did not need a lot of accommodation for it to be "lived on". If a narrow boat is to perform well in this role, particularly if it's a cut down working boat, there is a minimum length that works well without the boat being "all swim", and hence not particularly stable, because it lacks the usual "straight bit" in the middle. The length of tugs can be all over the place, but must seem to settle at not much under 40 to 45 feet.

 

That means you end up with a boat far longer than the cabin it needs just to house rudimentary "day" facilities for it's crew and the engine itself. This results in a long length similar to the hold of a working boat. Given the use to which they are put, being able to walk all over this area is much easier from the crew than if it were a 4 foot deep void.

 

So they are generally planked over.

 

Some of what are now considered real "tugs" were also used as ice-breakers. These originally had raised pole running roughly where the top plank of a working boat would be, and were also decked over. This allowed a team of men to be aboard to further aid the ice-breaking effort.

 

Few real narrow boat tugs, if 50 to 70 feet long, would have had the long cabins associated with many modern build "tug-style' boats. Some did, but most were more likely to have a short cabin, and a longer planked area. Obviously modern builds are trying to capture the look, but to give more accommodation.

 

All these (mostly!) 1970's images have been aired before, and some are I regret poor quality.

 

However hopefully they give a better idea as to what real working tugs might look like. Not very "Steve Hudson" are they ?

 

It just so happens all these started life as 7' 6" long GUCCCo working motor boats in the 1930s, but many more existed that came from other sources....

 

Middle Northwich Sickle - Former ice-breaker, but with ice-breaking additions removed.....

 

 

 

 

Big Northwich "Renton" - Still with ice-breaker nose, and support for original "rocking bar".....

 

 

Big Woolwich "Aynho" - A more modern BW conversion - hold not boarded in this case.....

 

 

Small Woolwich "Vesta", used as a tug by Stewarts & Lloyds on the BCN, but sheeted over in it's current restored form

 

 

Small Woolwich "Algol" here in working guise as Stewarts & Lloyds "Tug No 2".

 

Note almost "cruiser stern" at this part of it's commercial use....

 

 

Edited February 18, 2011 by alan_fincher

[RLWP]

That's an excellent answer Alan. The modern tug is a parody of those boats, I suspect to produce something different for the owner.

 

Richard

 

More "cruiser sterns" from the BCNS website:

 

Edited February 18, 2011 by RLWP

[alan_fincher]

The former Stewarts & Lloyds site at Coombeswood, Halesowen is completely unrecognisable from those 1970s pictures....

 

But many of the boats regularly go back there.....

 

[bargemast]

Excellent series of pictures, they really make clear what a Narrowboat-tug looks like, much better then pages of writing.

 

Peter.

[canaldrifter]

In context:

 

http://www.canalworld.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=36258

 

Tone

[alan_fincher]

If I were going for a modern boat, then I think something like "Leo's" Albion Mills is a pretty good choice.......

 

Reasonable accommodation space, without the cabin completely taking over>

 

This does it for me far more than some of the much more elaborately engineered ones....

 

 

 

EDITED TO ADD:

 

But the idea is you stand inside the hatches Mike!.....

Edited February 18, 2011 by alan_fincher

[PaddingtonBear]

Another plus is that they seem to hold their price very much better than others. I suppose that this is because they are generally made by the best builders? Gazelle.........................wow!!!!!

[NB Alnwick]

>snip<

 

It just so happens all these started life as 7' 6" long GUCCCo working motor boats in the 1930s, but many more existed that came from other sources....

 

>snip<

 

An excellent explanation but I think you may be have missed a zero here

[Ange]

When we were boat hunting we really fancied a tug. We had a tour of Alnwick and were really impressed with the sleeping area under the tug deck - a proper bedroom with enough room to sit up in bed! Unfortunately we found them really thin on the ground - I reckon we climbed on at least 100 boats in the six months we were looking and only two of them were tugs - even though we sought them out. Both had a solid bulkhead between the stern and the living quarters that meant you had to walk along the gunnels to pass a cup of tea to the steerer from the kitchen!

 

Maybe our timing was unlucky.

[blackrose]

A tug deck gives one the advantages of a cruiser stern (nice outside area for relaxing etc) but without the continual water leaks and sheer ugliness.

 

<flak jacket ready>

 

That is apart from the sheer ugliness of the tug deck of course.

 

Beauty is in the eye.... I think tug decks look silly on modern boats but each to their own.

Edited February 19, 2011 by blackrose

[Hairy-Neil]

That is apart from the sheer ugliness of the tug deck of course.

 

Beauty is in the eye.... I think tug decks look silly on modern boats but each to their own.

 

I think all modern boats look silly, period.... Nothing dafter looking than a 70ft tug..... (then, perhaps a wide beam narrowboat is... )

 

However, a well designed (along working boat lines, nothing twee) tug is a way of having a good looking modern cabined boat that's 50ft, tops.

[Ange]

Hmm just wondering - is it possible to get lascivious over a tug?

 

Fellow boaters have told me tis so

[Smelly]

Hmm just wondering - is it possible to get lascivious over a tug?

 

Fellow boaters have told me tis so

 

It depends whether you're single handed...

[jonk]

Many thanks Allan! I knew someone on this forum had the answer - just wouldn't tell!

I must say that those original working tugs do look good, but I still don't care for the modern versions - don't really dislike them but they seem pretentious somehow (just a personal opinion - no doubt owners love them).

So - the reason for the long front deck is mainly to make up the length of the boat to 70', but it was also used for carrying some cargo on occasion and was useful in the case of ice-breakers where boaters could use ice-breaking poles over the sides. Sometimes the 'cargo hold' was planked over and sometimes steel covered. I also read somewhere that extra fuel tanks were sometimes fitted in there? In conclusion, the long front deck really has nothing to do with the actual tug duties apart from giving the boat length.

Have I got that right?

 

Many thanks again - one less frustrating unknown put to rest

[andywatson]

On the subject of tug decks on modern boats I have some sympathy with the views expressed by Cherstsey.

 

WRT to the early tugs, I don't know if anyone else has noticed but some of those (eg the steamers in pathe clips plus Primus and Roama in the BCNS article) had relatively short front decks.

These were pupose designed and built rather than cut down ex cargo boats.

See also Buffalo (not the Bushells one) on the front cover of "Steam on Canals".

 

I suppose (experts please correct me if wrong) that wheras the classic BCN tug with it's long deck was useful for handling day boats in congested areas, the long distance tugs would have a short front deck as they towed for longer with less tight manouvering and the hull space could be best used for the required accomodation.

Edited February 19, 2011 by andywatson

[alan_fincher]

An excellent explanation but I think you may be have missed a zero here

It's a "one" actually...

 

Should be....

 

It just so happens all these started life as 71' 6" long GUCCCo working motor boats in the 1930s, but many more existed that came from other sources....

I think I did manage to get in and correct the bit where I referred to 70 foot wide narrow boats before anybody quoted it, but clearly failed to proof read this bit properly.

Edited February 19, 2011 by alan_fincher

[alan_fincher]

So - the reason for the long front deck is mainly to make up the length of the boat to 70', but it was also used for carrying some cargo on occasion and was useful in the case of ice-breakers where boaters could use ice-breaking poles over the sides. Sometimes the 'cargo hold' was planked over and sometimes steel covered. I also read somewhere that extra fuel tanks were sometimes fitted in there? In conclusion, the long front deck really has nothing to do with the actual tug duties apart from giving the boat length.

Have I got that right?

Almost!

 

I's say 40 to 50 foot was a more common overall length for many tugs, althougb they existed in all lengths up to full working boat length.

 

I didn't post any, but if you can find photos of operations on somewhere like the BCN, then "tug" duties often involved much manouvering of lines of day boats, on to and off of moorings, as well as lining them up to tow. Pictures of somewhere like Stewarts & Lloyds tubeworks will often show men standing on that tug deck, either shafting other boats around, or pulling them towards the tug with ropes.

 

So sometimes it was used as a safe working platform - not just a hold cover. You couldn't have easily got along the full length of a tug, if it had an open hold.

 

Although not actually showing what I'm trying to say, if you scroll to the end of this HNBOC Article it shows a 1960s hire boat trying to negotiate the Coombeswood area, and gives an idea of the general mayhem that existed at sites where lots of movement of day boats took place. Again S&L "Tug No 2" features.

 

That is apart from the sheer ugliness of the tug deck of course.

 

Beauty is in the eye.... I think tug decks look silly on modern boats but each to their own.

Indeed,

 

And we are all different.

 

I think a well proportioned tug deck will always look a lot better than the huge slab back end of a Liverpool Boat's wide beam, but, as you say, it depends on personal perspective.

[RLWP]

I hadn't really considered it before, but I wonder if tugs were kept at 40'-50' so you could wind them in the width of the canal

 

Richard

[Catrin]

... was useful in the case of ice-breakers where boaters could use ice-breaking poles over the sides. ...

 

Boaters did use poles to break the ice (see some of the Idle Women books), however, the ice breakers carried teams of men who would rock the boat from side to side, cutting a path through the ice for the following working boats. The pole in the centre was for the men to hang onto as they rocked it. I know I've seen some old photos of an ice breaker being followed by working boats before the canal iced up again - but I can't find anything on a quick search.

 

This LINK shows some photos of Tycho on the Sickle web-site.

 

Cheers

Cath

[alan_fincher]

I hadn't really considered it before, but I wonder if tugs were kept at 40'-50' so you could wind them in the width of the canal

 

Richard

I'd say generally "yes", though it obviously depends on where they were used what the winding prospects were.

 

My take is that they needed to be as long as was necessary to not be "all swim". If you go much below 40 foot, and have good swims, you'll have very little "straight bit in the middle", so the tug would be prone to roll.

 

If you go much over 50 feet, unless you are planning to put a payload on the tug itself, you have more boat to operate and maintain than you actually need.

 

40 to 50 foot seems ideal to me, and just (in my jaundiced view!), happens to produce a handsome purposeful looking boat.