Jump to content

Historic Boats for sale online


alan_fincher

Featured Posts

20 minutes ago, magnetman said:

Was it Bognor?

 

9 minutes ago, BWM said:

No, not bognor, definitely a longer name.

I feel sure it is Bournemouth being discussed.  Definitely had a Braine "skirted" counter to reduce draught.

Another one fitting that category that was offered for sale, but I believe is still with the person that advertised it is Bristol.

I don't know how true it was, but I was advised by a previous owner that Bristol's back cabin shape was altered from a normal profile to suit the reduced draught, and that if a new owner "de-skirted" the boat, the result might look odd.  I couldn't quite see it myself, but that was what I was told.

One of the Joshers that Brinklow removed a "skirt" from proved I think to have all the original uxter present but in a very degraded state.  This presumably meant that there had never been access to the top of the "new" Braine (?) uxter plate, (now removed).  I'm trying to think which Josher it was, but I'm failing to come up with the name.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, alan_fincher said:

I'm actually broadly in agreement with you Pete, and whilst I can admire the effort that has gone into some of the most "blinged" and polished boats, (Joshers more often than not?!?), I also am no great fan of seeing them more restored than they might normally ever have been in service.

However when it comes to having a hull sliced through at about waterline level, and then everything below that rebuilt more in the style of a modern leisure boat, I start to question whether you are looking at an evolving part of an historic boat's history, or a largely new boat that has managed to retain enough of the "above water" bits to still largely look the part.  That said I guess provided it has enough structural integrity the "largely new below water" boat is less likely to be an expensive money pit than one that still has 80 to 100 year old riveted seams much further down.

Even a boat that has had its knees cut out as a part of re-footing / re-bottoming is still developing a history. Whether it is to the liking of other enthusiasts or has enough structural integrity to be loaded again is another matter. I do not record these details as I see them as maintenance, but clearly I have an opinion on whether some of these repairs could have been carried out with more sympathy - and usually cost, especially where a boat has a fully fitted hold conversion. These boats were designed to be unconverted with most parts of the hull easily accessible for future repairs, making any converted boat a compromise when hull maintenance is concerned.

All of this is very easy for me to say as I do not own a fully fitted converted boat :captain:

Could the Malcolm Braine boat of 'reduced draught' be BAILDON with its deep counter of 'Royalty' proportions :captain:

Edited by pete harrison
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, pete harrison said:

All of this is very easy for me to say as I do not own a converted boat :captain:

Even an unconverted boat is not without it's issues.

Work we had done on Sickle last year could largely be done by cutting out and replacing, but where there were weaknesses to tho hull where the back cabin is, we agreed to the over-plating of certain areas, because using the same riveted techniques as had been used in the hold area could not be achieved without more destruction of the back cabin interior than we could face up to.

And anyway, its a good repair that will long outlast our likley ownership of the boat.

:offtopic:  I would love to see Tycho in your care Pete, not that it is any of my business of course - I might even offer a contribution to more suitable paint!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, alan_fincher said:

Even an unconverted boat is not without it's issues.

Work we had done on Sickle last year could largely be done by cutting out and replacing, but where there were weaknesses to tho hull where the back cabin is, we agreed to the over-plating of certain areas, because using the same riveted techniques as had been used in the hold area could not be achieved without more destruction of the back cabin interior than we could face up to.

And anyway, its a good repair that will long outlast our likley ownership of the boat.

:offtopic:  I would love to see Tycho in your care Pete, not that it is any of my business of course - I might even offer a contribution to more suitable paint!

Advantage of having a wooden boat, you build everything so it can be removed in sections without causing problems or having to damage everything,

Towys back cabin will come out in 6 sections once finished leaving just the bacic frame work inplace.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, pete harrison said:

Even a boat that has had its knees cut out as a part of re-footing / re-bottoming is still developing a history. Whether it is to the liking of other enthusiasts or has enough structural integrity to be loaded again is another matter. I do not record these details as I see them as maintenance, but clearly I have an opinion on whether some of these repairs could have been carried out with more sympathy - and usually cost, especially where a boat has a fully fitted hold conversion. These boats were designed to be unconverted with most parts of the hull easily accessible for future repairs, making any converted boat a compromise when hull maintenance is concerned.

All of this is very easy for me to say as I do not own a fully fitted converted boat :captain:

Could the Malcolm Braine boat of 'reduced draught' be BAILDON with its deep counter of 'Royalty' proportions :captain:

I've seen Baildon (is it a misspelling of Basildon?) around London recently. It is about 50ft long and has the "gap" like Flamingo. Does not look very good on top but the hull seems to be an original GUCCCo.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, magnetman said:

I've seen Baildon (is it a misspelling of Basildon?) around London recently. It is about 50ft long and has the "gap" like Flamingo. Does not look very good on top but the hull seems to be an original GUCCCo.

 

A town in Yorkshire....
 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baildon

Actually about 58 feet long, and a conversion from one of the buttys that BW sold off from the Wendover Arm.

A very deep counter on the conversion, personally not to my taste at all.

nb-Baildon-BW-64074-historic-narrowboat-

Edited by alan_fincher
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, alan_fincher said:

Even an unconverted boat is not without it's issues.

Work we had done on Sickle last year could largely be done by cutting out and replacing, but where there were weaknesses to tho hull where the back cabin is, we agreed to the over-plating of certain areas, because using the same riveted techniques as had been used in the hold area could not be achieved without more destruction of the back cabin interior than we could face up to.

And anyway, its a good repair that will long outlast our likley ownership of the boat.

:offtopic:  I would love to see Tycho in your care Pete, not that it is any of my business of course - I might even offer a contribution to more suitable paint!

I fully understand over-plating at the back end when the interior fittings of the cabin are in good condition, and I think this is a very common solution. To be honest I think cutting out and weld repair is more than satisfactory in other more accessible parts of the hull, after all this is how 'British Waterways' carried out much of their repair work :captain:

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, alan_fincher said:

 

I feel sure it is Bournemouth being discussed.  Definitely had a Braine "skirted" counter to reduce draught.

Another one fitting that category that was offered for sale, but I believe is still with the person that advertised it is Bristol.

I don't know how true it was, but I was advised by a previous owner that Bristol's back cabin shape was altered from a normal profile to suit the reduced draught, and that if a new owner "de-skirted" the boat, the result might look odd.  I couldn't quite see it myself, but that was what I was told.

One of the Joshers that Brinklow removed a "skirt" from proved I think to have all the original uxter present but in a very degraded state.  This presumably meant that there had never been access to the top of the "new" Braine (?) uxter plate, (now removed).  I'm trying to think which Josher it was, but I'm failing to come up with the name.

Laurel

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, alan_fincher said:

That's the one - thank you David.

Tho she ended up having a whole counter too as all shot. 

As to original over new yes there are some odd ideas but if the knees are taken out instead of cut etc then why not quite a few boats with a lot of new albeit riveted. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, pete harrison said:

To be honest I think cutting out and weld repair is more than satisfactory in other more accessible parts of the hull, after all this is how 'British Waterways' carried out much of their repair work :captain:

A very very expensive way of adding not particularly large amounts of new steel to an otherwise old boat though.  The actual material costs are almost insignificant compared to many weeks of dedicated labour.

But yes, I agree with you.

In the case of "Sickle" BW had themselves already over-plated part of the swims.  Our surveyor told us that it would have been an ideal repair, had they chosen to take it a bit further, and form the hoins at more sensible places.  Guess what we ended up having to do!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, alan_fincher said:

In the case of "Sickle" BW had themselves already over-plated part of the swims.  Our surveyor told us that it would have been an ideal repair, had they chosen to take it a bit further, and form the hoins at more sensible places.  Guess what we ended up having to do!

I think there are few 'historic' boats that have not been over-plated somewhere, and as a short term / cost effective fix I have no problem with this method of repair. Personally I prefer cut out and replace, but clearly this would depend on available finances and time - and re-riveting is commendable for those who wish to take that route, including Friends of Raymond who re-riveted the bottoms and footings of NUTFIELD just over 10 years ago :captain:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, alan_fincher said:

A very very expensive way of adding not particularly large amounts of new steel to an otherwise old boat though.  The actual material costs are almost insignificant compared to many weeks of dedicated labour.

But yes, I agree with you.

In the case of "Sickle" BW had themselves already over-plated part of the swims.  Our surveyor told us that it would have been an ideal repair, had they chosen to take it a bit further, and form the hoins at more sensible places.  Guess what we ended up having to do!

I thought the swims had been done as in fully replaced I’m sure I remember seeing photos of this along with counter 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, djgoode1980 said:

I thought the swims had been done as in fully replaced I’m sure I remember seeing photos of this along with counter 

No,

Sides replaced forward of the swims for some distance, but once back at the swim only above uxter level, not below.  And, as you suggest, completely new uxter and counter.

I have the Parrott's pictures which show a lot of the work in some detail, (and also the work not done!).

EDITED: To add one photo....

0022.JPG.dfc6e645634131f9adf532d89987ebe5.JPG

What was less obvious was that (other than the bottoms) not a lot was ever done forward of about the half way point.  Most of our fairly recent expenditure related to the front half of the boat, that was still largely unrestored.

Diagnosis from him who did the work - "The front is going to outlast the back now!"

1 hour ago, zenataomm said:

"Bugger Bognor" George V's boat?

I don't think that has a 2 cylinder engine, or it might go

"Bugger bugger, Bugger bugger, Bugger bugger............."

Edited by alan_fincher
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, pete harrison said:

I think there are few 'historic' boats that have not been over-plated somewhere, and as a short term / cost effective fix I have no problem with this method of repair. Personally I prefer cut out and replace, but clearly this would depend on available finances and time - and re-riveting is commendable for those who wish to take that route, including Friends of Raymond who re-riveted the bottoms and footings of NUTFIELD just over 10 years ago :captain:

We had all overplating removed from Hawkesbury including the baseplate, which had been installed over the original bottom. Surprisingly a lot of the original sides under the overplating were still sound. A serious amount of work was involved in de-riveting the original baseplate from knees, engine bed, etc. so can understand how some craft have had them cut away when done on a budget, personally I couldn't have that on my conscience. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, BWM said:

We had all overplating removed from Hawkesbury including the baseplate, which had been installed over the original bottom. Surprisingly a lot of the original sides under the overplating were still sound. A serious amount of work was involved in de-riveting the original baseplate from knees, engine bed, etc. so can understand how some craft have had them cut away when done on a budget, personally I couldn't have that on my conscience. 

Out of interest did you repair with rivets or welds ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, pete harrison said:

I fully understand over-plating at the back end when the interior fittings of the cabin are in good condition, and I think this is a very common solution. To be honest I think cutting out and weld repair is more than satisfactory in other more accessible parts of the hull, after all this is how 'British Waterways' carried out much of their repair work :captain:

When we had work done on Hampton, we really had no choice but to replace because the overplating would have been seen as ugly patches above the waterline. Also there were parts of the hull that had overplating over overplating. Cutting out the rotten iron and replacing in steel  is highly skilled work  and took nearly three months to accomplish.

Looking at the finished result you can't tell that the rear end is largely steel.

P1210458.JPG.7a73caadc09daef8a8b96028256e7aed.JPG

P1210725.JPG.fa8babb3d37811d614b4dd1487dcd6b0.JPG

 

Edited by koukouvagia
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, pete harrison said:

Out of interest did you repair with rivets or welds ?

All welded, including one fairly extensive knee repair that extends above the waterline. Uxter plates were also replaced at that time. With all the knees, etc, in place at least the option to replace the rivets is there for the future. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, alan_fincher said:

No,

Sides replaced forward of the swims for some distance, but once back at the swim only above uxter level, not below.  And, as you suggest, completely new uxter and counter.

I have the Parrott's pictures which show a lot of the work in some detail, (and also the work not done!).

EDITED: To add one photo....

0022.JPG.dfc6e645634131f9adf532d89987ebe5.JPG

What was less obvious was that (other than the bottoms) not a lot was ever done forward of about the half way point.  Most of our fairly recent expenditure related to the front half of the boat, that was still largely unrestored.

Diagnosis from him who did the work - "The front is going to outlast the back now!"

I don't think that has a 2 cylinder engine, or it might go

"Bugger bugger, Bugger bugger, Bugger bugger............."

Ah yes now I remember with all that done was easy to think the swims were done

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, pete harrison said:

Ah, is it you that has bought OTLEY ?

OTLEY looked a bargain to me at the price that was being asked, although of course is not historically correct (cabin / engine room / engine) :captain:

I didn't buy it but it did appear to be a good price.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BWM said:

We had all overplating removed from Hawkesbury including the baseplate, which had been installed over the original bottom. Surprisingly a lot of the original sides under the overplating were still sound.. 

I sometimes wonder how many old boats are condemned by insurance surveys (4mm plate thickness?) when the boat is basically sound. Couple that with a surveyor having an amicable relationship with a boatyard...

 

Edited by magnetman
Link to comment
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
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.