On 2016\01\03 22:02, wrote:
In article ,
() wrote:

With the larger lorries in use today I think 3 could probably do the
job of a pair of narrowboats. The lorries would each need a driver
and could do London to Birmingham as an example in about half a day,
so about 1.5 working days worth of labour. London to Birmingham by
canal normally takes about six days and the pair of boats would be
worked by a crew of two, so about twelve working days worth of labour.

'Fly' boats working through the night could do the trip in about 52
hours, but then you'd need extra crew to work the extra hours. Given
that there are about 100 locks to work through between London and
Birmingham this timing was pretty good.

You can walk from London to Birmingham along the towpath, as I have
done many years ago when I had better legs, in about the same time as
it takes by normal boats.

About the only way to get the costs down would be much larger craft,
which would need much bigger canals.

You're obsessed with narrow boats again. This thread was about barges and
lighters on the Thames.


If only Usenet threads allowed the creator to specify a subject line.

Anyway, I've just looked for New Bermondsey and Surrey Canal on the TfL
website and drawn a blank. It is also noticeably absent on
https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/london-over...d?intcmp=32665
, so I'm thinking it's not happening at all. I'm not surprised, it was
only proposed in the first place to shut up the locals about the new
railway being cut through their neighbourhood, so now that TfL has got
its railway built the compensatory measure is forgotten.

On Mon, 04 Jan 2016 13:09:48 +0000
wrote:
existed as complimentary wet Branches to the railway system many
operated by people forced to live in what would now be classed as
poverty conditions.a good number ended up in Railway ownership anyway.

I'm not sure what the conditions would be classed as today, since apparently
"poverty" now means you can only afford a 32 inch TV instead of a 40 inch one
and have to make do with the bare minimum Chav^H^H^H^HSky TV package.

--
Spud

Colin Rosenstiel wrote

And you are obsessed with Cambridge,

Eh? We have no freight traffic to speak of on the Cam.


Was there ever ?

And was the Cam ever tidal, say in Newton's time, at Cambridge ?


--
Mike D

In article , (Michael R N
Dolbear) wrote:

Colin Rosenstiel wrote

And you are obsessed with Cambridge,

Eh? We have no freight traffic to speak of on the Cam.


Was there ever ?

And was the Cam ever tidal, say in Newton's time, at Cambridge ?

Tidal no, but coal to the generating station came in by river until it
closed in 1966. It was still the distribution point for supplies in central
Cambridge until after I arrived and was surprised to find 210v (nominally,
actually 205v) electricity again, it having gone from Putney in the 1950s.
My landlord when I graduated and rented my first bedsitter in 1972 still had
most of his free issue of replacement light bulbs.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In message , at 21:22:31 on Mon, 4 Jan
2016, Michael R N Dolbear remarked:
And you are obsessed with Cambridge,

Eh? We have no freight traffic to speak of on the Cam.

Was there ever ?

Yes, all the way up to the Mill.

http://www.queens.cam.ac.uk/files/st...sex_building_-
_baldrey_1804_at_25.jpg?itok=TXqI490V

And was the Cam ever tidal, say in Newton's time, at Cambridge ?

It's an awfully long way from the sea, so no.
--
Roland Perry

On Tue, 5 Jan 2016 07:36:42 +0000
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 21:22:31 on Mon, 4 Jan
2016, Michael R N Dolbear remarked:
And you are obsessed with Cambridge,

Eh? We have no freight traffic to speak of on the Cam.

Was there ever ?

Yes, all the way up to the Mill.

http://www.queens.cam.ac.uk/files/st...sex_building_-
_baldrey_1804_at_25.jpg?itok=TXqI490V

And was the Cam ever tidal, say in Newton's time, at Cambridge ?

It's an awfully long way from the sea, so no.

That doesn't mean a lot. The Thames would be tidal all the way into Berkshire
if it wasn't for the lock at Teddington. What matters is whether a given
part of the river is above high tide level.

--
Spud

On 2016\01\05 07:36, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 21:22:31 on Mon, 4 Jan
2016, Michael R N Dolbear remarked:
And you are obsessed with Cambridge,

Eh? We have no freight traffic to speak of on the Cam.

Was there ever ?

Yes, all the way up to the Mill.

http://www.queens.cam.ac.uk/files/st...sex_building_-
_baldrey_1804_at_25.jpg?itok=TXqI490V

And was the Cam ever tidal, say in Newton's time, at Cambridge ?

It's an awfully long way from the sea

Horizontally, maybe!

In message , at 09:26:14 on Tue, 5 Jan
2016, d remarked:

And was the Cam ever tidal, say in Newton's time, at Cambridge ?

It's an awfully long way from the sea, so no.

That doesn't mean a lot. The Thames would be tidal all the way into Berkshire
if it wasn't for the lock at Teddington. What matters is whether a given
part of the river is above high tide level.

No, it also depends on things like the width of the river and whether
there's enough time for the tidal waters to get that far upstream before
the tide turns.

As for the vertical height, according to Environment Agency data the
river in Cambridge is typically 5.1m above sea level.

Denver Sluice was built in 1591 to bar tidal waters any further
upstream. Newton was born in 1623.
--
Roland Perry

On Wed, 6 Jan 2016 08:29:54 +0000
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 09:26:14 on Tue, 5 Jan
2016, d remarked:

And was the Cam ever tidal, say in Newton's time, at Cambridge ?

It's an awfully long way from the sea, so no.

That doesn't mean a lot. The Thames would be tidal all the way into Berkshire
if it wasn't for the lock at Teddington. What matters is whether a given
part of the river is above high tide level.

No, it also depends on things like the width of the river and whether
there's enough time for the tidal waters to get that far upstream before
the tide turns.

Salt water rarely travels far upstream. What happens is that the water in the
river starts to back up and that can happen pretty quickly depending on the
flow rate.

--
Spud

In message , at 09:27:15 on Wed, 6 Jan
2016, d remarked:
And was the Cam ever tidal, say in Newton's time, at Cambridge ?

It's an awfully long way from the sea, so no.

That doesn't mean a lot. The Thames would be tidal all the way into Berkshire
if it wasn't for the lock at Teddington. What matters is whether a given
part of the river is above high tide level.

No, it also depends on things like the width of the river and whether
there's enough time for the tidal waters to get that far upstream before
the tide turns.

Salt water rarely travels far upstream. What happens is that the water in the
river starts to back up and that can happen pretty quickly depending on the
flow rate.

Well, ignoring the four locks in the way (yes, three of those are
post-Newton) you won't get a backup all 40 miles to Cambridge on a river
flowing as slowly as the Cam (it rarely exceeds 6 cubic metres a
second).
--
Roland Perry