Jump to content

K&A Trip planned


Featured Posts

On 11/08/2017 at 17:17, dmr said:

Several of the K&A locks, like Crofton, have no bywash, thats why they must be left empty. Any excess water flows over a sort of weir within the top ground paddle chamber.

This can only flow out if the bottom paddles are up so its really a case of leaving the bottom paddles up rather than the lock empty.

Why? On other canals without separate bywashes the top level of the bottom gates is set below coping level so that any excess water simply weirs over the bottom gates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, David Mack said:

Why? On other canals without separate bywashes the top level of the bottom gates is set below coping level so that any excess water simply weirs over the bottom gates.

^^^^^^This^^^^^^^

Plus, the original bottom gates on the K&A were set lower than the top ones, so that the lock could still be operated easily, as opposed to the arrangement on my local Forth and Clyde where the water flows over both sets of gates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, David Mack said:

Why? On other canals without separate bywashes the top level of the bottom gates is set below coping level so that any excess water simply weirs over the bottom gates.

I really don't know, I am just a boater with an keen interest in the canals, and a good observer of things with an engineers curious mind. I am not a K&A historian. Maybe it all got messed up in the restoration? but I cant believe all that money was recently spent on installing bywashes on the Eastern side of the summit if just lowering the top of the bottom gates would have fixed things. I do know from my own experience that some locks really do flood the immediate surroundings if the bottom paddles are not left open. The Rochdale 9 in Manchester have no bywashes and just lets the water flow over the gates (top and bottom) and they can  be nasty locks to work, maybe the K&A engineer knew better. I do recall that at least one of the Crofton locks gates had a line of holes, about 1" diameter, drilled through the gate just below the top of the gate, and pretty sure it was a top gate, but I think these are no longer there (gates replaced?) but maybe this was just a half baked attempt to solve problems.

.................Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the comments on the IWA as well as issues with the W&B restoration which are points I hadn't thought about before but makes sense.   

 

I must admit a particular bug bear of mine is people who don't moor their boat up well, particularly when it is their home.    There does seem to be those who live on boats because they like boating and then there are those who live on boats as it's cheap accomadtion! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Steilsteven said:

If they subscribed to this forum they would be shocked by the amount of continuous moaners.

Keith 

Not sure my post was a moan was it? More of an opinion tossed into the mix as to where perhaps some of the more extreme anti restoration thoughts/anti genuine ccers may eminate from.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Iain_S said:

^^^^^^This^^^^^^^

Plus, the original bottom gates on the K&A were set lower than the top ones, so that the lock could still be operated easily, as opposed to the arrangement on my local Forth and Clyde where the water flows over both sets of gates.

Indeed they were, but the trick isn't so much the level of the top gates as the ground paddles having a bywash built in, so the first thing that surplus water does is fill the lock. If it then can't escape at the other end the lock then floods, hence the top beam of the bottom gates should be lower.

One problem of adjusting the bottom gates is that it is the top beam that sets the level (I don't mean the balance beam, I mean the top beam of the gate itself) and lowering that isn't really practical. What then happens is that replacement gates get ordered to the same spec as the ones they are replacing.

All that said, historically the locks at Devizes were left empty with the bottom gates open which meant that much of the time surplus water ran to waste. This was never a busy canal though, and even then it suffered water shortages

58 minutes ago, Dharl said:

Thanks for the comments on the IWA as well as issues with the W&B restoration which are points I hadn't thought about before but makes sense.   

 

I must admit a particular bug bear of mine is people who don't moor their boat up well, particularly when it is their home.    There does seem to be those who live on boats because they like boating and then there are those who live on boats as it's cheap accomadtion! 

I think that is an issue, and personally I think a lot of boaters expect far too much when they moor up. Miles of permanent moorings with big "slow down" notices - if that's is your permanent mooring the boat should be properly secured to a level that probably isn't practical on a temporary mooring. Even at a temporary mooring though passing traffic is a fact, and the boat should be tied up properly. It isn't so much that people who live aboard should be more careful, but one would expect them to be more aware than someone on a week's hire. 

My own view, which I don't espouse very often, is that the tickover past moored boats should be dropped* and the responsibility for the moored boat being secure and stable should rest firmly with the moorer. Before anyone shouts at me though, I do always slow down past moorings, but I also moor properly because some others do not, if my boat comes loose then in practice it's my problem. (Someone will now doubtless tell me Lutine is adrift as I type!)

ETA *Note, I'm also of the view that some people's cruising speed is too fast for the canal anyway and it is these that REALLY cause a problem for a well moored boat

For all this debate though, the Kennet and Avon is not a canal that can easily be hurried - it wasn't a huge commercial artery in it's day, time was never of the essence and the West Country never offered the traffic that Birmingham - London did, it was slow then and it's slow now

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, mark99 said:

Not sure my post was a moan was it? More of an opinion tossed into the mix as to where perhaps some of the more extreme anti restoration thoughts/anti genuine ccers may eminate from.

 

No I suppose not, just mere speculation really. The situation at Bath has been like that for at least ten years to my knowledge and although there are many ''live aboards '' the canal is really a victim of it's own success in as much as it is a crowded waterway full stop.

Keith 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, magpie patrick said:

Indeed they were, but the trick isn't so much the level of the top gates as the ground paddles having a bywash built in, so the first thing that surplus water does is fill the lock. If it then can't escape at the other end the lock then floods, hence the top beam of the bottom gates should be lower.

One problem of adjusting the bottom gates is that it is the top beam that sets the level (I don't mean the balance beam, I mean the top beam of the gate itself) and lowering that isn't really practical. What then happens is that replacement gates get ordered to the same spec as the ones they are replacing.

All that said, historically the locks at Devizes were left empty with the bottom gates open which meant that much of the time surplus water ran to waste. This was never a busy canal though, and even then it suffered water shortages

I think that is an issue, and personally I think a lot of boaters expect far too much when they moor up. Miles of permanent moorings with big "slow down" notices - if that's is your permanent mooring the boat should be properly secured to a level that probably isn't practical on a temporary mooring. Even at a temporary mooring though passing traffic is a fact, and the boat should be tied up properly. It isn't so much that people who live aboard should be more careful, but one would expect them to be more aware than someone on a week's hire. 

My own view, which I don't espouse very often, is that the tickover past moored boats should be dropped and the responsibility for the moored boat being secure and stable should rest firmly with the moorer. Before anyone shouts at me though, I do always slow down past moorings, but I also moor properly because some others do not, if my boat comes loose then in practice it's my problem. (Someone will now doubtless tell me Lutine is adrift as I type!)

For all this debate though, the Kennet and Avon is not a canal that can easily be hurried - it wasn't a huge commercial artery in it's day, time was never of the essence and the West Country never offered the traffic that Birmingham - London did, it was slow then and it's slow now

The Canal is too shallow at the edges for safe mooring because no matter how slow a boat passes it draws the water away from under the moored boat. Last year when we were moored near Bedwyn I set out springs on four mooring pins on what I thought was a reasonably deep mooring against steel pilings. After being there for a week I noticed that the pins had moved, when I pulled them out I discovered that they were severly bent.

Keith 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have K&A pins, big long thick jobbies made by a blacksmith boater on the K&A. They don't bend. They are required because so many K&A boats, especially the hire boats, go much to fast. Trouble is the bank is just not that strong in many places so the pins move and progressively weaken the bank which eventually collapses, hence all the major works at Pewsey last winter.

I find it really irritating when a certain type of boat owner slows down past the visitor mooring (boats on rings) then speeds up again past the "14 day overflow area" where the boats are on pins.

.................Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Dharl said:

 

    There does seem to be those who live on boats because they like boating and then there are those who live on boats as it's cheap accomadtion! 

And there lies the problem. We have lived aboard for years as we genuinely prefer the life, we did own houses till ten years ago to holiday in but got rid of the last one in 2007 with zero regrets. There are very few very easy to abide by rules to be a liveaboard but too many today are moving on with no intention of adhering to them because it doesn't suit THEIR chosen lifestyle when they should be adhering to the rules not bending or indeed dismissing them.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Steilsteven said:

No I suppose not, just mere speculation really. The situation at Bath has been like that for at least ten years to my knowledge and although there are many ''live aboards '' the canal is really a victim of it's own success in as much as it is a crowded waterway full stop.

Keith 

I live within a mile of the K&A and have cruised it's entire length many times. It is not an easy canal to work, and I suspect that one of the main reasons that so many people want to live on the it is beacause of the easy access to good railway connections to London, Bristol, Bath etc.m rather than any of it's other "attractions".

Edited by David Schweizer
  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, David Schweizer said:

I live within a mile of the K&A and have cruised it's entire length many times. It is not an easy canal to work, and I suspect that one of the main reasons that so many people want to live on the it is beacause of the easy access to good railway connections to London, Bristol, Bath etc.m rather than any of it's other "attractions".

I suspect not, but it would be interesting to know how many liveaboards make regular use of the railway. 

I see three main reasons....

1 The K&A is a very attractive canal, a very nice place to live, and has a number of interesting towns along its length.

2 Its a South-Western canal, and so one of the few canals within easy reach of the South West.

3 It has an established community, or interesting, alternative and talented people (plus a few a**eholes of course). Many people wanting to live on boats want to escape the rat race and seek a more alternative lifestyle, and so living amongst other like minded people is a very big part of that.

I like all canals, the Caldon, Macclesfield, River Weaver and Trent and Mersey (to pick just a few) are all lovely, but I always find the K&A special and the people who live there and the laid back way of life are a significant part of that.

I suspect for many K&A folk the idea of taking the train to London would be close to a nightmare, though the Bradford on Avon link to Bath and Bristol is more useful. 

...............Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, dmr said:

I suspect not, but it would be interesting to know how many liveaboards make regular use of the railway. 

I see three main reasons....

1 The K&A is a very attractive canal, a very nice place to live, and has a number of interesting towns along its length.

2 Its a South-Western canal, and so one of the few canals within easy reach of the South West.

3 It has an established community, or interesting, alternative and talented people (plus a few a**eholes of course). Many people wanting to live on boats want to escape the rat race and seek a more alternative lifestyle, and so living amongst other like minded people is a very big part of that.

I like all canals, the Caldon, Macclesfield, River Weaver and Trent and Mersey (to pick just a few) are all lovely, but I always find the K&A special and the people who live there and the laid back way of life are a significant part of that.

I suspect for many K&A folk the idea of taking the train to London would be close to a nightmare, though the Bradford on Avon link to Bath and Bristol is more useful. 

...............Dave

There are a lot of "interesting, alternative and talented people" living in houses in Bradford on Avon, but if you talk to them, you may well secure a very differnt impression of the boat dwelling people you choose to describe as having those "qualities"

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, dmr said:

I have K&A pins, big long thick jobbies made by a blacksmith boater on the K&A. They don't bend. They are required because so many K&A boats, especially the hire boats, go much to fast. Trouble is the bank is just not that strong in many places so the pins move and progressively weaken the bank which eventually collapses, hence all the major works at Pewsey last winter.

I find it really irritating when a certain type of boat owner slows down past the visitor mooring (boats on rings) then speeds up again past the "14 day overflow area" where the boats are on pins.

.................Dave

It's interesting that you have an absolute presumption that static boats take precedence over moving boats. Years ago when the canals were full of fully laden working narrowboats and barges, I can't imagine they slowed down if there was a moored boat. But we have somehow gone from there to presuming that it is the moving boat's responsibility to avoid disturbing the static boat, rather than the static boat's responsibility to moor such that moving boats don't affect it. Weird!

if the KandA's banks are soft (which they are) and pins pull out, perhaps the answer is that it isn't suitable for mooring and folk shouldn't moor there?

Or at the very least, it should be up to both parties to act reasonably. But nearly all the boats moored "in the rough" we have passed, have very slack lines. Many of them at 90degrees to the boat - It seems to be how it's done on the KandA. Once the lines are slack, a moored boat can pick up speed from the suction of a passing boat, and then there is a large force when the line pulls tight, which pulls the pin through the ground until with a bit of repetition, it comes out. Then there are the unsuitable round-sided boats that are pretty difficult to moor securely to a bank even with the best of intentions. Apparently we are supposed to crawl past them especially slowly, because they have chosen to moor an unsuitable boat on a canal.

We did crawl the entire way from Hungerford to Bath at tickover. On the way back, I think we will go a little faster, not unreasonably so, not such that properly moored boats will be unaffected. But I'm sure we will leave a trail of boats in the middle of the cut, behind us.

Oh and on our limited experience of the KandA, we haven't seen hire boats travelling at anything above tickover past moored boats. No doubt there is the odd rogue, but I think hire boats on the KandA are resented more because they want to move, rather than because they tend to move unreasonably fast.

Edited by nicknorman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, nicknorman said:

It's interesting that you have an absolute presumption that static boats take precedence over moving boats. Years ago when the canals were full of fully laden working narrowboats and barges, I can't imagine they slowed down if there was a moored boat. But we have somehow gone from there to presuming that it is the moving boat's responsibility to avoid disturbing the static boat, rather than the static boat's responsibility to moor such that moving boats don't affect it. Weird!

if the KandA's banks are soft (which they are) and pins pull out, perhaps the answer is that it isn't suitable for mooring and folk shouldn't moor there?

Or at the very least, it should be up to both parties to act reasonably. But nearly all the boats moored "in the rough" we have passed, have very slack lines. Many of them at 90degrees to the boat - It seems to be how it's done on the KandA. Once the lines are slack, a moored boat can pick up speed from the suction of a passing boat, and then there is a large force when the line pulls tight, which pulls the pin through the ground until with a bit of repetition, it comes out. Then there are the unsuitable round-sided boats that are pretty difficult to moor securely to a bank even with the best of intentions. Apparently we are supposed to crawl past them especially slowly, because they have chosen to moor an unsuitable boat on a canal.

We did crawl the entire way from Hungerford to Bath at tickover. On the way back, I think we will go a little faster, not unreasonably so, not such that properly moored boats will be unaffected. But I'm sure we will leave a trail of boats in the middle of the cut, behind us.

Oh and on our limited experience of the KandA, we haven't seen hire boats travelling at anything above tickover past moored boats. No doubt there is the odd rogue, but I think hire boats on the KandA are resented more because they want to move, rather than because they tend to move unreasonably fast.

How on earth have you come to this conclusion????? 

Times have changed, there are more liveaboard boats (and of course this includes you for some of the time) and almost no urgent carrying of cargo, so moored boats maybe have a little more significance that 100 years ago.

When mooring on a shallow sided canal like the K&A, with the bottom edge of the boat just touching the bottom, then slightly loose ropes at about 90 degrees is a sensible technique and what I usually do on the K&A, tight ropes just don't work in many places. We could discuss this but that should be done in a new thread. However a lot of K&A boats do moor very badly and many have stupidly undersized pins. 

I am really surprised that you crawled from Hungerford to Bath, I think you might be exaggerating a teensy bit. Try to get into the K&A mindset and you will enjoy it more.:D I usually find the long pound largely empty, and Devizes bottom to Bradford not that busy, BUT, 90% of my K&A boating is done in the winter. This is also maybe why I see hire boats as mostly going much too fast, because in Winter its almost all Stag and Hen hires.

The K&A is popular, although it hasn't really done it for you, it really works for a lot of people and thats why its busy. There are limited visitor moorings, its mostly shallow sided, so mooring in sub-optimal places is a necessary evil. The local boaters are actually pretty good at mooring in these bad places in an effort to leave the visitor moorings empty for visitors, so I don't like your suggestion that "folk shouldn't moor there". Also there are quite a lot of local boaters who are pressing for dredging at the banks and extensive installation of armco. This would spoil a lovely rural canal so don't give them any ammo!!!! 

And, your 'udson is about as deep as us, so even with no moored boats you probably wouldn't go that much faster.

I still find the extensive offside moorings on the Shroppie much more tedious than anything on the K&A

and...go on.... even you must admit that most of the Avon down to Bristol is absolutely fantastic.

and as a final  bit of mischief, the increased enforcement and "20 mile rule" is probably making things worse on the K&A.....the "western enders" are now spending more time on the long pound and eastern end (and enjoying it) which is leaving more space at the Western end for new liveaboards, including huge widebeams, to move into.

............Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, dmr said:

How on earth have you come to this conclusion????? 

Times have changed, there are more liveaboard boats (and of course this includes you for some of the time) and almost no urgent carrying of cargo, so moored boats maybe have a little more significance that 100 years ago.

When mooring on a shallow sided canal like the K&A, with the bottom edge of the boat just touching the bottom, then slightly loose ropes at about 90 degrees is a sensible technique and what I usually do on the K&A, tight ropes just don't work in many places. We could discuss this but that should be done in a new thread. However a lot of K&A boats do moor very badly and many have stupidly undersized pins. 

I am really surprised that you crawled from Hungerford to Bath, I think you might be exaggerating a teensy bit. Try to get into the K&A mindset and you will enjoy it more.:D I usually find the long pound largely empty, and Devizes bottom to Bradford not that busy, BUT, 90% of my K&A boating is done in the winter. This is also maybe why I see hire boats as mostly going much too fast, because in Winter its almost all Stag and Hen hires.

The K&A is popular, although it hasn't really done it for you, it really works for a lot of people and thats why its busy. There are limited visitor moorings, its mostly shallow sided, so mooring in sub-optimal places is a necessary evil. The local boaters are actually pretty good at mooring in these bad places in an effort to leave the visitor moorings empty for visitors, so I don't like your suggestion that "folk shouldn't moor there". Also there are quite a lot of local boaters who are pressing for dredging at the banks and extensive installation of armco. This would spoil a lovely rural canal so don't give them any ammo!!!! 

And, your 'udson is about as deep as us, so even with no moored boats you probably wouldn't go that much faster.

I still find the extensive offside moorings on the Shroppie much more tedious than anything on the K&A

and...go on.... even you must admit that most of the Avon down to Bristol is absolutely fantastic.

and as a final  bit of mischief, the increased enforcement and "20 mile rule" is probably making things worse on the K&A.....the "western enders" are now spending more time on the long pound and eastern end (and enjoying it) which is leaving more space at the Western end for new liveaboards, including huge widebeams, to move into.

............Dave

How I came to that conclusion seems to be reinforced by your answer! You say it's popular with cruising boaters but that isn't born out by the views of the people we've spoken to. A limited sample, of course. But the very fact that we see far fewer moving non-hire boats than we would expect to see pretty much anywhere in mid summer, tells a story.

Yes we enjoyed the Avon, and Bristol was great. On the way down we found the long pound very busy with moored boats, as I recall we virtually never got out of tickover but perhaps I am misremembering, it was after all last week! I intend to make a count this time, and we have just set off from Devizes top lock. Devizes bottom to Bath was actually not too bad except at Bathampton, long stretches around the aqueducts quite free of moored boats. So for us, it is the long pound that I'm not looking forward to. But I'll report back.

The worst part of the whole experience is the palpable resentment and hostility displayed by many of the moored boaters. If someone is moored, I don't expect them to pop out of their boats every time a boat goes past to wave hello. But if they are out on their boat and staring at us, it is plain rude to just carry in staring blankly after we have said "Hi", smiled and waved. We have had this behaviour over and over again down here, something you virtually never see elsewhere on the canals. It really stands out.

But of course there are some nice people too, we came up the first bit of the locks today with a young couple who lived aboard and CCed solely on KandA, they had a pretty tatty boat but I certainly wouldn't hold that against them. They were pleasant, chatty, and interested in comparing our lifestyles. Great, but unfortunately for every one of them there seem to be several obnoxious, rude and chip-shouldered ones.

Edited by nicknorman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, nicknorman said:

Oh and as to the 20 miles a year rule. That is a laugh! We are going to do 20 miles tomorrow!

I do agree with you here. Its not easy to pick numbers but 200 a year would be more sensible, however that change would have to include some sort of roving mooring permit option and at very low cost for those with grandfather rights.

and....., if you really are going past all those boats at tickover (1mph) and doing at least 4 locks, then your looking at a 21 hour day :D

.............Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, dmr said:

I do agree with you here. Its not easy to pick numbers but 200 a year would be more sensible, however that change would have to include some sort of roving mooring permit option and at very low cost for those with grandfather rights.

and....., if you really are going past all those boats at tickover (1mph) and doing at least 4 locks, then your looking at a 21 hour day :D

.............Dave

Yes, let me rephrase that - we would be doing 20 miles tomorrow if it didn't all have to be done at tickover! Anyway, just passed Horton bridge. There is a long stretch of 48 hr visitor moorings. Totally empty at 17:39 mid-summer. But right off the end of the VMs, a long line of moored boats. Showing that the on-line-static-resident boaters outnumber the travelling boaters by probably 100 to 1. Maybe that's OK but I don't think it is what the people who spent chunks of their lives restoring the canal, had in mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And also, one of the irritations is that outside the really congested bits where everyone is nose to tail, boats tend to moor with about 2 boat lengths between each one so it is impractical to get out of tickover in the short gaps between. It's only a big deal because it goes on for most of the 20 miles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, matty40s said:

I don't think the people who restored the canals would ever think that someone would stick false rivets onto narrowboats at some time in the future either.

Things move on, change, stop moaning and enjoy yourself. :D

 

I think they probably did. It was reopened in 1990, long after decorative "rivets" were thought of.

 

Anyway, talking of decorative rivets, can someone tell me if RW Davis Northwich Trader boats are actually riveted together? As far as I can tell, they aren't, but they do have far more of a "rivet"-fest than Hudson boats. And yet nobody picks on them for ridicule. Why is that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyway, on a more positive note, we stopped for diesel yesterday at Hilperton, not at the boatyard, but at a coal yard just a few yards further east. Diesel 65p and pumpout £14 which I think is a bargain round these parts! And a very pleasant and helpful chap running it too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nick, I think you need to pour a very large G & T , (whisky would have been better but you probably don't have any on board :-) ) , relax and think that you will be off the K & A in a few days.  I must admit that it is the least favourite of my canals  so we just don't go there any more.  each to his own. You can now say you have cruised the K & A end to end and add another north to your bedpost - or whatever.

Haggis

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.