nb Beech

[Derek R.]

I somehow do not think the whole engine unit turned with the steering. That looks very firmly bolted to a frame welded to the deck. More like the vertical drive shaft and housing would be turned by the wheel. Hot air? Possibly out the back towards the steerer - along with plenty of noise.

 

The engine canted at an angle would facilitate the drive, through joints, to the left hand side of the drive unit and thence to the propellor via the vertical shaft. The wheel steering looks like it is connected by morse chain to a sprocket on a shaft that connects to the right hand side of the drive which through gearing would rotate the vertical drive unit to give directional control.

 

There is also a connecting cable(?) to the vertical drive that would allow the entire vertical section with prop to be raised by pivoting in the horizontal plane, thereby allowing blade clearance of debris.

Edited January 21, 2016 by Derek R.

[Athy]

It occurs to me that the position of the engine reduced the size of the back cabin, which looks very short on the photos, to the point that it would be too small to live in. So where did the crews live? Just in the butty's cabin?

[J R ALSOP]

Anne and Beryl were Mr Jones daughters.

[Steve Priest]

I've come to this post a little late, and perhaps it has moved on from the original comments, but as I have been mentioned a few times, I thought I might join it.

 

I am interested by your comments concerning our little Woolwich copy. Few yards make as much effort to get shapes accurate as we do at Brinklow Boats, and the little Woolwich copy, which was named Astraea, was measured from my own boat, Aquila. Allowing for tweaking the width, depth and length to those more typical of a new built boat, the shape is accurate. If sheer is what you want perhaps our tunnel tug Hasty is more to your taste ( google tunneltug Hasty) In this case we used original photos as a concept, and developed the shape from there.

 

I don't recognise the josher copy attributed to me, it could be one of Simon's

 

The Admiral copy (which was named Pellew) was built using copies of Yarwoods drawings (probably from you, Laurence?) . Whilst the internal framing was different, the external hull shape is correct, including the counter bottom and swim. In fact, we have now adopted this swim shape in most of the boats that we build.

 

Anyway, Beech. I went to see Beech when she was for sale at Les Allens, I think in the winter of 1976, following an advert in the Exchange and Mart. In those days most boats were advertised in the Exchange and Mart, or in Motor boat and Yachting. The boat looked marvellous, straight, and immaculately painted, with a largely rebuilt JP2 and an asking price of £3500. I made an offer, and was second in line, but didn't get it. Ian Kemp owned it for a while, after he sold it, it did a couple of seasons as a camping boat in the WFBCo fleet, by then it was clear that there was a lot of filler under the paintwork. A few years later on Ken Ward ended up with it, and moored it at the WFBCo. I used to keep an eye on it for him and pump it out when it needed it. By that time although it still looked quite good it was clear that there was a lot of work to be done, and Ken, amazingly undaunted, took it to Charity dock ( if I remember correctly) and got on with what became a complete rebuild. He was always clear that he didn't intend to retain the exact shape, he wanted to make re fore and stern ends finer, and also give the hull sheer along its length. I mean it as no disrespect to the work that Ken did, but the shape is not really typical of a wooden Josher any more, including the amount of sheer that the hull now has.

 

I hope that Beech ends up with an owner that can do the work that is necessary and can give the boat a good future, not only for the sake of the boat, but also in memory of Ken, and I wish you all the best with whatever you decide to do.

 

I have heard it said several times that whilst Beech was a maintenance boat at Hillmorton, the Bolinder was taken out and went to the museum at Stoke Bruerne, and is the one that now sits in the corner of the tea shop.

 

 

Steve

[mark99]

 

I don't recognise the josher copy attributed to me, it could be one of Simon's

 

 

Steve

 

 

Yes you are correct it was definitely Simon, my mistake - too hasty with the keyboard.

 

Talking about Hasty, here is a link:

 

http://www.brinklowboatservices.com/new-builds/steam-tunnel-tug-hasty/

 

Trawling around the website above does make you wonder why would you want to go elsewhere?

 

NB I have no connection whatsoever to BBS/never met or even seen them - I recognise superior work when I see it.

Edited January 22, 2016 by mark99

[Guest]

Good morning Steve

 

Thank you so much for dropping in and expanding on Beech's past, really interesting to hear how she ended up with a re-shape.

 

Her shearline and fining may no longer be prototypical for a wooden Josher, but they are certainly most elegant and are a compliment to Ken's abilities. I look at many many boats, I admire the classics for the Heritage that they represent and the fascinating history that lies behind each name, but rarely has one taken and held my interest where as Beech and her lines both caught and held my eye.

 

I don't have enough photos of her as yet to see if there's a mathematical reason behind the attraction, ie that her shearline may follow a segment of the clothoid curve (which is often used when transiting from a straight line to a curve http://virtualmathmuseum.org/Curves/clothoid/clothoid.pdf).

 

I've seen the lines on Hasty, and I'm sure they are authentic, but to my eye (and for my tastes only) the apex of the shear is too far forward, so the shearline is u shaped and banana like as a result. I've attached the photo that has given me this impression:

 

Astraea is undoubtedly a beautiful boat and a compliment to your skills and persistence, the bow is simply beautiful and completely captures the essence of the Woolwich design. I don't doubt her authenticity at all, only again, one photo put me off pursuing a small Woolwich remake for myself - and this I am sure is a reflection of the original design and not a comment about your own interpretation (for which I would be hopelessly under-qualified and rather arrogant to make!)

 

Edited January 22, 2016 by dpaws

[Laurence Hogg]

I imagine the wheel steering may not have been popular with older boatman. Even with the wheel, the need to swing the entire engine and transmission when steering must have made the steering heavy and tiring to use, and making the boats less responsive. Was this a factor in their lack of success?

 

 

The engine doesn't move just the drive unit, steering wasn't heavy at all and you could sit down, the boats were a success but convincing boatmen to accept change was a major problem and they came too late.

 

See details of the prop unit here: http://www.harbormastermarine.com/index.htm

Edited January 22, 2016 by Laurence Hogg

[pete harrison]

I have heard it said several times that whilst Beech was a maintenance boat at Hillmorton, the Bolinder was taken out and went to the museum at Stoke Bruerne, and is the one that now sits in the corner of the tea shop.

 

Steve

This is true, and I have the evidence to prove it.

 

Bolinder BM 15hp serial number 18020 was very possibly fitted in the Fellows, Morton and Clayton Ltd. motor GREYHOUND from new, but was certainly in this boat by 17 August 1959 when it is recorded as being at Hillmorton. On 28 October 1960 GREYHOUND is recorded as being at Hillmorton and "Lister engine now".

 

BEECH is also recorded at Hillmorton during this period and 18020 is recorded as its engine, clearly receiving it directly out of GREYHOUND sometime around autumn 1960. BEECH was tendered for sale (closing date ?? June 1962) and is now recorded as still being at Hillmorton Depot but "without engine", and this is supported by an 'enthusiast' observation dated 07 April 1962 when it was lying below Hillmorton bottom lock.

 

I have numerous 'enthusiast' observations (including my own - but I am not an 'enthusiast') of 18020 subsequently being exhibited at the Canal Museum, Stoke Bruerne, although I have not seen it since March 2000

Edited January 22, 2016 by pete harrison

[Jrtm]

I would quite happly have beech but would want to find a put the original bolinder back in if its the one in the tea shop there would be no hope of that ever happening. I still trying to convince my wife that beech is the right boat but the only answer i get is dont you want a bolinder. Need umea to come up! I love the lines on beech though.

[Guest]

She is so pretty, it's true - I mentioned earlier in the post about the work that she requires immediately and I've no idea what that work would cost, and after that what budget should be set aside monthly in a "trust fund" for her upkeep... would there be enough left every month to keep a Bolinder?

 

If you really so attached to the Bolinder then nothing else comes close (we were privileged to ride on Mary's Bolinder powered Swan), otherwise I'd jump at a 2 cyl Samofa... and you could always swap it out later...

 

I had a quick google for Umea - it seems she's still much loved by Mr Bryan... if they divorced I guess it would be very expensive... It could be worth an email regarding a shared ownership scheme, and that would naturally then put you first in line to buy him out should he retire from the cut...

Edited January 27, 2016 by dpaws

[Guest]

Build guru Steve Priest mentioned something of much interest earlier regarding the Admiral Class hull

 

".... in fact, we have now adopted this swim shape in most of the boats that we build."

 

For a chap with his experience, having handled probably all of the different historical boats, that's quite a vote of confidence, and the first time I've heard someone of his standing commit to a preference.

 

I've ordered the drawings from Laurence (no doubt the Italian post will deliver them sometime around Easter), but meanwhile does anyone have any decent photos of the Admiral class rear swim, in particular I'm curious about the shape under the counter stern...

[Jay4424]

 

...(we were privileged to ride on Mary's Bolinder powered Swan),...

 

I had a quick google for Umea - it seems she's still much loved by Mr Bryan... if they divorced I guess it would be very expensive... It could be worth an email regarding a shared ownership scheme, and that would naturally then put you first in line to buy him out should he retire from the cut...

 

Swan does not have a bolinder. its a Garden VT4 I think.

 

Umea and Monnow are/were forsale last I heard.

[bargemast]

Swan does not have a bolinder. its a Garden VT4 I think.

 

Umea and Monnow are/were forsale last I heard.

Yes, Swan has a Gardner VT 4 and you can see a nice video on YouTube of Mary starting the engine.

 

I'm on my phone and can't do links, but it's easy enough to find and well worth watching.

 

Peter.

[Guest]

Yes, Swan has a Gardner VT 4 and you can see a nice video on YouTube of Mary starting the engine.

 

I'm on my phone and can't do links, but it's easy enough to find and well worth watching.

 

Peter.

 

Apologies guys, you're right, of course, it was the blow-lamp starting that got me all confused... wonderful noise though, and all the planking danced to the same rhythm - you really get the sense that the boat is alive!

 

Re "Umea and Monnow are/were for sale last I heard" - I googled and found an entry in 2014 suggesting that Umea would be kept and Monnow sold with the chap having lost his mooring warden mooring rights - of course that could have changed recently....

 

Do people do historic boat sharing or is that considered a cardinal sin worse than sharing the wife?

Edited January 27, 2016 by dpaws

[Jay4424]

I know of a few groups who share historic boats.... there were more, but they didn't last as the groups were entirely boat focused, its important to be friends first and foremost and have other interests together other than just the boat.

there are of cause groups who look after boats for museums etc

 

edited for speeling!

Edited January 27, 2016 by Jay4424

[pete harrison]

I would quite happly have beech but would want to find a put the original bolinder back in if its the one in the tea shop there would be no hope of that ever happening.

I did not say that 18020 was originally in BEECH but that it was fitted in about 1960 and removed in 1962. 18020 was most likely fitted in GREYHOUND when new, and this is the engine now exhibited at Stoke Bruerne.

 

Museum collections get sold off all of the time so as 18020 still exists there is always the possibility. The Bolinder BM 15hp in FOXGLOVE was previously exhibited in the Plus Pleasures Canal Museum at Shardlow

[Laurence Hogg]

I did not say that 18020 was originally in BEECH but that it was fitted in about 1960 and removed in 1962. 18020 was most likely fitted in GREYHOUND when new, and this is the engine now exhibited at Stoke Bruerne.

 

Museum collections get sold off all of the time so as 18020 still exists there is always the possibility. The Bolinder BM 15hp in FOXGLOVE was previously exhibited in the Plus Pleasures Canal Museum at Shardlow

The Bolinder at Shardlow was sourced through Tony Miles of Keays. The Petter also on show came through Tony but from Charity dock.

[IanM]

Just looking at Laurence's website at the plans on offer as I feel an Admiral (pity it's not a Pimblott built one) might be quite nice to build a model of and I'm wondering what is the difference between a General Arrangement drawing and a Steel Scantling plan?

Edited January 28, 2016 by IanM

[Guest]

Just looking at Laurence's website at the plans on offer as I feel an Admiral (pity it's not a Pimblott built one) might be quite nice to build a model of and I'm wondering what is the difference between a General Arrangement drawing and a Steel Scantling plan?

 

About £12...

 

(I'm sure you're aware of this one, but just in case it has escaped your googling: http://www.brinklowboatservices.com/new-builds/admiral-class-remake-pellew/ )

Edited January 28, 2016 by dpaws

[Laurence Hogg]

About £12...

 

(I'm sure you're aware of this one, but just in case it has escaped your googling: http://www.brinklowboatservices.com/new-builds/admiral-class-remake-pellew/ )

The scantling plan gives you the exact sizes of the sheet used in each section of the build, very useful if you are building a replica. The Yarwoods drawing is very detailed.

 

The Pimblott's used the BTC drawing which is currently "missing" in the collection at E Port, it was not very detailed and was simply an advancement of the string of drawings relating to the unbuilt "County" class in my eyes. The Yarwoods drawing seems to adopt all the information produced by the research team at Bulls Bridge to produce a boat capable of carrying a maximum tonnage on a badly maintained waterway with bulging lock sides.

[Athy]

the unbuilt "County" class

Laurence, I know nothing of these. I am sure that there is some information on the internet, but a search might bring up lots of sites about G.W.R. 4-6-0 locomotives. Was this perhaps a class of boats which was planned but not built because of the post-war decline in canal carrying? Has anyone used the drawings to build a replica of one?

[Guest]

Has anyone used the drawings to build a replica of one?

 

That's an interesting concept, can you build a replica of something that was never built?

[Giant]

Well, I've just read through this thread and learnt a great deal. Thank you all.

 

Can't help thinking though that if you like this:

 

 

and this:

 

 

then deep down you really want a Humber keel!

 

 

[Athy]

 

That's an interesting concept, can you build a replica of something that was never built?

If you can think of a better word, then please tell me - but I think you know what I mean. I seem to remember a similar project years ago with regard to a design of steam locomotive which had been planned but never built, but I don't know if the people behind the idea ever got round to turning their scheme into reality. It may have been a Fairlie, but I'm not certain (though I'm fairlie sure).

[Guest]

Well, I've just read through this thread and learnt a great deal. Thank you all.

 

Can't help thinking though that if you like this.... then deep down you really want a Humber keel!

 

 

 

You're right Giant, and that's the point - a buff "spoon" bow is perfect for wide and deep channels, such as the Humber, you'll find the same on many of the European barges - but what's best on these waterways won't be optimised for our narrow UK waters.. have a look at the Polish research document earlier in the post, and see how the resistance of this bow shape increases rapidly as the water depth (UKC) decreases, particularly at water depths less that 2.5m if I recall...

 

You may also have noted comments made previously about the new design of canal boat, much researched, that took an extra two days to arrive at their destination compared with older designs - this is due to the increased resistance from their buff bow curves.

 

As I understand it the water displaced by the spoon shape rides ahead of the bow in a wave whose energy cannot dissipate in all directions on a narrow waterway due to wave interactions from the banks close by, so it gets trapped ahead of the boat and the boat has to push it along for the voyage. A finer, more pointed bow, such as the classic "Josher" style forms a very different bow wave, in effect cutting through the water because it slowly pushes the water to the side rather trying to move it head on all at once.

 

Both are designed for purpose - maximum cargo capacity for a given length will result is a buff bow, optimised to in the water at loaded / maximum draft (not trimmed aft with her bow high and proud). The fly boats with perishable goods required speed, so minimal resistance was the first priority and fine bows were utilised. When deciding which way to go you need only to consider your intended purpose.

 

For our build we've found that many of the moorings listed online have a maximum boat length of 62'. We already have our engine, a 36hp Bukh. The interior layout has certain requirements and restrictions too, but to some extent they can be juggled in best sympathy with the hull. So for us, we want the minimum water resistance that a 62' LOA hull shape can offer whilst having sufficient space for our needs inside.

 

Beech may, unfortunately, prove to be too fine - initial estimates suggest an extra 3'6" length is needed to fit everything we need inside (compared to a Northwich Town class, for example). At the moment the internal space requires a 61' LOA - a Beech style bow would push the LOA to 64'6"; we'd be very restricted with rural moorings and neither of us enjoy marinas...

 

Everything's a compromise, so you must define "needs" and wants" - when the crunch comes we need the internal space more than we want the gorgeous curves of her bow... that's the Royal "we" obviously, bless her...

Edited January 29, 2016 by dpaws