--- In [email protected], Adrian Stott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > IIRC, the K&A did not have bywashes. Instead, if the upper pound were > too full, water would flow over the top of the top gates (until the > lock were full) and then over the bottom gates. > > However, during restoration, this design feature was misunderstood, > and quite a few of the new bottom gates were built too tall. The > result was that several pounds became liable to flooding. > > To deal with this, instead of altering the new gates (which was > claimed to be much too difficult, although it never appeared so to me) > BW first started insisting that all locks be left empty with the > bottom gates open (that's a *great* way to save water on a notoriously > water-short canal, eh?), then started building bywashes all along the > canal. > > Too bad. > > Adrian > > Excellent would be my reaction. The water over the gate system of passing suplus water is dangerous and involves extra time in lock operating. I would have made the same decision as BW.
Regards Pete
