Warren Branch

[chuffinghell]

1 hour ago, richbrummitt said:

Is your display case bought or built?

 

It's a bought one from Amazon, even though I'm capable I was too lazy at the time to make one 

[chuffinghell]

2 hours ago, KNP said:

Another thing to ponder is would they build a recessed area for just one boat, my thought is no as it would be 'fiddly' to get into and costly in construction.

 

What if the recessed area is partially 'off stage' so to speak, theoretically it could be infinitely longer?

 

[Rowsley17D]

Good idea, you could have 1/2 a narrow boat in there too!

[MrWolf]

59 minutes ago, chuffinghell said:

 

I admit that I'm very much out of my depth here, my original thought was the recessed area just serviced the pumphouse for coal delivery. I'm beginning to think I may have been a little too ambitious.

 

 

Thank you, it's drawn on CAD. I'm a design engineer so I do technical drawings every day.......not that it always helps

 

 

I don't quite know how to explain but I didn't really want it too 'built-up' other than the area behind the pump house

 

I need to step back and have a serious think about how to proceed otherwise I'll end up getting Silvia* the sledgehammer out of my tool box

 

*anyone else named their sledgehammer after their ex mother-in-law?

 

 

Keep it simple. Anything that meant that a canal was built to it in rural areas would have been very basic, we're talking 18th century industry.

 

The wall I was thinking of is only about four feet high and coarse stone. More like revetments.

 

I am an ex engineer who also trained as a technical illustrator ...... Not that it always helps either.

 

Not named any hammers after my ex mother in law. 

 

My other half has a WW1 bayonet that she calls Stabitha.

 

But that's my fault for taking the £### and asking if she had names for her stuff.

 

[chuffinghell]

Here's another thought (dangerous I know) I've changed the angle of the nearest bank which gradually widens towards the pump house area

 

 

I'm thinking maybe the pump house area should have a little makeshift stable for Mr.Horse to have a short rest while the boat is being unloaded????

[chuffinghell]

10 minutes ago, MrWolf said:

My other half has a WW1 bayonet that she calls Stabitha.

 

Brilliant!!!!

 

I've not named anything after the ex wife though, I don't own any tools that are evil or manipulative

[MrWolf]

Wow. Was your ex wife called Samantha? Our paths may have crossed! 

 

Did you forget selfish, coercive and greedy....

[chuffinghell]

Sorry guys, more messing about.

 

I didn't think the 'lump' looked right on the lower drawing so I've attempted to smooth it out, what do you think of MKXXV

 

 

Canals are just as bad as track design

 

[long island jack]

A more sweeping curve may help!

 

[Joseph_Pestell]

17 minutes ago, MrWolf said:

Wow. Was your ex wife called Samantha? Our paths may have crossed! 

 

Did you forget selfish, coercive and greedy....

 

I got my Decree Absolute paperwork through the post yesterday, so this is a bit raw for me..

 

While my ex-wife has some faults, I am glad that I don't feel anything like as sore about her as you do about yours. That would be to waste the very happy years that we had together.

[chuffinghell]

Last one for today

 

Its gone from a brook to a stream to a river to a canal.......I really don't want it to become an ocean

[chuffinghell]

2 hours ago, long island jack said:

A more sweeping curve may help!

 

 

Would they still have moored the boat there without a lay-by (apologies if I'm using the wrongs terms)

 

Is that what you meant too @KNP? no lay-by at all?

 

Apologies for being thick

 

Edited December 3, 2020 by chuffinghell

[MrWolf]

Trust me, nobody else wants it to become an ocean. Because then you would be looking at oil tankers and you're never going to get round that bend even with a 1930s tanker.

You'd be back at square one! 

[Ponthir28]

Possibly but I think there would still be a stone wharf mooring.

[chuffinghell]

30 minutes ago, MrWolf said:

You'd be back at square one! 

 

I think scrapping Warren and starting again might not be such a bad idea 

 

I've had one more go. I admit not having the 'lay-by' solves more problems than it creates

 

MKXXXV

 

 

 

Edited December 3, 2020 by chuffinghell

[chuffinghell]

10 minutes ago, Ponthir28 said:

Possibly but I think there would still be a stone wharf mooring.

 

I can find a ceramic one but I'm struggling to find a stone worf

 

 

 

Edited December 3, 2020 by chuffinghell

[KNP]

47 minutes ago, chuffinghell said:

 

Would they still have moored the boat there without a lay-by (apologies if I'm using the wrongs terms)

 

Is that what you meant too @KNP? no lay-by at all?

 

Apologies for being thick

 

 

Yes, no 'lay-by' so the boats could just sweep in and moor, also cheaper and easier to build.

Now I had to be careful how I had to be answered this as I was going to just tick agree, then thought can't do that as it might be misconstrued that I was agreeing with the last line!!!! 

[KNP]

15 minutes ago, chuffinghell said:

 

I think scrapping Warren and starting again might not be such a bad idea 

 

I've had one more go. I admit not having the 'lay-by' solves more problems than it creates

 

MKXXXV

 

 

 

 

To my way of thinking that's cracked it, now get on and build it before any of us has a chance to comment.....!!

[chuffinghell]

30 minutes ago, KNP said:

 

Yes, no 'lay-by' so the boats could just sweep in and moor, also cheaper and easier to build.

 

Thanks Kevin and apologies for miss-interpreting your previous post. I thought you meant they would build a longer one instead of a short one... I never considered you meant non at all 

 

Edited December 3, 2020 by chuffinghell

[MrWolf]

37 minutes ago, KNP said:

 

To my way of thinking that's cracked it, now get on and build it before any of us has a chance to comment.....!!

 

I have to agree, because regardless of how the canal ends or continues it's off scene and all you need do is suggest that the canal goes somewhere. Which is what you have done in your latest drawing. 

You don't need to model any of the bits on my sketch, the viewer already assumes that they are there.

 

 

Stick with it, it's working!

[Schooner]

It wouldn't be RMWeb if a person asking for advice opinions wasn't given two directly conflicting answers  responses, so...

 

Absolutely nothing wrong with it, looks like a lovely model.

 

Lots of things right about it, looks like a lovely bit of canal which you've modelled.

 

Sorry  

 

EDIT: A second thought, a middle way perhaps...

 

Edited December 3, 2020 by Schooner

[figworthy]

4 hours ago, chuffinghell said:

Last one for today

 

Its gone from a brook to a stream to a river to a canal.......I really don't want it to become an ocean

Looking good, but.

 

At the risk of dropping a large container of spanners into the works, I might have spotted another problem (assuming that you are trying to be accurate).  Going back to the bridge and looking at the above, the towpath is on the top side of the canal.  Having the wharf on that side means that any boat coming past would have to negotiate the tow line past any thing tied up on the wharf, and the crane that close to the bank could make it difficult to get past, so is best avoided.  Unless of course it is the end of the canal (a branch line terminus if you like).  The other problem would be security at the wharf, although (as previously discussed) the canal would be private property, having the towpath run through the wharf makes it more difficult to secure, almost all cargos have a value, would you have a railway goods yard that was wide open ?

 

Adrian

[chuffinghell]

7 minutes ago, figworthy said:

Looking good, but.

 

At the risk of dropping a large container of spanners into the works, I might have spotted another problem (assuming that you are trying to be accurate).  Going back to the bridge and looking at the above, the towpath is on the top side of the canal.  Having the wharf on that side means that any boat coming past would have to negotiate the tow line past any thing tied up on the wharf, and the crane that close to the bank could make it difficult to get past, so is best avoided.  Unless of course it is the end of the canal (a branch line terminus if you like).  The other problem would be security at the wharf, although (as previously discussed) the canal would be private property, having the towpath run through the wharf makes it more difficult to secure, almost all cargos have a value, would you have a railway goods yard that was wide open ?

 

Adrian

I’ve got no problem ditching the crane, the boat/barge would only stop there to deliver coal to the pump house.

 

As with everything I’ve done I’ll just have to make sacrifices/compromises

 

Its c1930’s so the boats could be moving under their own steam so to speak, I’m not that bothered about horse draw

[Schooner]

25 minutes ago, figworthy said:

Having the wharf on that side means that any boat coming past would have to negotiate the tow line...

 

No hoss, no worries:

 

...using the quant-poles that is, sails is definitely cheating!

 

https://www.alamy.com/crewman-using-a-quant-pole-to-manoeuvre-the-historic-norfolk-wherry-image69009369.html

Edited December 3, 2020 by Schooner
Modern close-up image from Alamy linked

[Indomitable026]

My advice is go with your gut and what YOU like.

 

If you try and get a consensus on here you’ll never build anything - thrust me.

 

Its your layout, do what you see fit...