Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <6i9ctlFp118sU1@
mid.individual.net>, at 07:18:30 on Thu, 4
> Sep 2008, John Williamson
btinternet.com> remarked:
> >>>> Oh, & while the WTD applies, time spent on the vessel while sleeping
>>>> & eating doesn't count, so a crew of 4 can be moving 24 hours a
>>>> day, 6 days a week.
>>>>
>>>> It *could* work, according to this envelope I've just covered in
>>>> calculations.
>>> A crew of one isn't practical for a lot of the locks through which I
>>> assume you'd be trying to get two boats one after the other. If there
>>> was only one boat there wouldn't be enough room for 4 people to live...
>>
>> If the infrastructure is updated,
>
> If you are going in for major upgrades to the infrastructure, then lots
> of things get easier. The conservationists might not be happy though.
>
True. Fifty thousand gallons of water for the average narrow lock. It
all comes from the summit level & travels with the boat, so that's
100,000 gallons per trip from London to Birmingham. Double that for a
wide canal. Halve it if boats alternate through locks.
Then again, that flow could be used as part of a national water grid as
has been proposed for many years now.
>> then single manned working through a lock is easy. When I was living
>> on a boat, I could go through a modern lock very nearly as quickly on
>> my own as a crew of 2,
>
> Just one boat then?
>
Yup. The way it worked with 2 boats on narrow canals was usually with
the lockwheeler jumping on the butty to work it through the lock, then
the boats were lashed side by side for the bit between the locks, unless
it was a staircase or too narrow. On a wide canal, they just lashed 2
narrow boats side by side & worked them as one boat.
>> if it was set my way to start with.
>
> if
>
Hence the lock wheeler. :-)
>> The convention was to use a motor & a butty, to help the movement of
>> 50 tons of goods using a single 10 or 20 horsepower engine. The normal
>> working crew was a steerer for each boat & someone on a bike to set
>> the locks.
>
> I think the canals were in existence long before bikes were invented.
>
They were, but in the days before bikes, there were keepers at each
lock, whose job it was to ensure quick & efficient passage of boats, as
well as collecting the tolls. Lockwheelers only really came in as the
canals started to decline & lost most of the lock keepers.
>> Between locks, the boats were lashed side by side, so only one steerer
>> was needed. On wide canals, such as the Grand Union & the Leeds &
>> Liverpool, they used wide boats. So, you need one steerer between
>> locks & one lockwheeler who helps at locks, & the lockwheeler could be
>> replaced by a lockkeeper, so you only need one person per boat, plus
>> one person per lock.
>
> Wide canals are easier, because there's more room for the accommodation
> *and* cargo on one boat.
>
They need a *lot* more water, though.
>> But.....
>> It was normal for a family of 4 or more to live on board, with two
>> sleeping in the stern cabin & 2 in the bow cabin. When they had more
>> children, they could buy a butty, have 2 extra cabins & the older kids
>> would start working. There are even laws still in force about the
>> minimum size of the cabins.
>
> And you think that you'd be able to find families to operate boats,
> today? Where would they put the 42" TV? [Joke].
>
Poland? Hungary? Romania?
Of course, for local stuff, as in the Birmingham Canal Navigation area,
the boaters could do what they used to do, & live in a house, cycling to
work each day. It'd work quite well round there, too, as there are 3
long levels connected by not very many locks. Possibly quicker than by
road, too, from what I remember of Birmingham's road network.
>> One major problem with canals is that traffic is limited to one boat
>> per lock, which takes about 10 minutes, so the absolute maximum
>> capacity of a canal for goods at the moment in the UK is the
>> equivalent of one articulated lorryload every 10 minutes in each
>> direction.
>
> This is ably demonstrated when one goes through locks next to a
> motorway. As you say, progress is a stately one lock every approx ten
> minutes, meanwhile HGVs are thundering past every 2 seconds. In the
> winder the cruising hours are limited by daylight, and weather.
>
Freezing weather yes, but I never stopped just 'cos it was dark. Maybe
the 15 inch diameter ship's headlight was overkill, though....
I had to stop when they emptied the canal to fix it, or there was a lock
that was locked to prevent use at night.
A few years ago, I worked out that I could deliver 40 tons of cargo from
London to Birmingham for about 2/3rds of the cost of the same trip by
lorry, but it'd take me 3 weeks to do the trip. Twyfords did a similar
calculation for moving stuff between 2 factories in the Potteries, &
came up with about a 50%% saving. That only stopped when they closed one
of the factories.
--
Tciao for Now!
John.
