On 27 Jun 2010, at 18:26, Adrian Stott wrote: > On Sun, 27 Jun 2010 15:03:51 +0100, Bruce Napier > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> But a lock gate should give around 35 - 40 years service; sixteen >> years is nothing. AIUI from my recent cruising companion who'd been >> involved with the K&A for a long time, the gates as originally fitted >> were cheap and cheerful in order to get the job done within budget, >> and now BW are paying the price. > > Indeed. > > AIUI many gates on the French Freycinet canals are over 100 years old. > They are metal. Easier (and, I believe, cheaper) to build than wooden > ones, and more environmentally friendly. The lockkeepers (used to, > when there were lockkeepers) report you to VNF if your vessel even > touches a gate. (*Everyone* uses ropes in French locks.) The VNF > then brought out the guillotine. > > BW has said that it doesn't use metal gates because they get bent if > boats hit them, and the gates then leak badly.
There is quite a bit of galvanised steel in the construction of the upper gates on the Devizes flight. Presumably these are much less prone to violence since an out-of-control boat entering the lock would simply strike the cill. When we first started to use these locks, a bit over 10 years ago, I didn't enjoy crossing the top gates as there is a large bracket at the top of the heel post to step over and the metal surface beyond could be slippery when wet. They have since been modified by the addition of that black grippy stuff, which is a great improvement [although Mrs J retains her preference for a stroll around the lock using the handy tail bridges]. Presumably the decision to use allegedly cheaper timber for gates when the canal was restored was taken consciously - if it got the waterway fixed earlier then maybe it was worthwhile. It would be a valid call if it was thought that the later costs could be coped with. Doesn't seem very likely though. It's not as if there would be a significant revenue stream generated by earlier re-opening. Baz
