BARRY HOLLAND <[email protected]> wrote: >Walking down to "The Fox'' @ Hanwell on Sunday last to enjoy a pint of >"Special FX" we noted that some of the pounds were low
AIUI, it's because some of the gates leak. Sometimes that's not because the gates are damaged, but because rubbish gets moved up to the (usually upper gate) sill as a result of the passage of boats, thus preventing the gate from closing tightly against the sill. Dredging would probably help prevent this. However, I think it has been a long time since this flight was dredged. >Side ponds are in evidence but are never used in my 25 years on the waterways Almost all have been nobbled by BW. IIRC one or two near the bottom of the flight were "restored" a couple of years ago, but are not available for general use. BTW, Hanwell is unusual in that it has *three* sideponds at (each? some?) of the locks. >I can remember a back-pumping system [?] being installed @ Hanwell about ten >years ago to prevent the towpath being regularly flooded & I #thought# to >prevent the imbalance of water I saw on Sunday---obviously not! Yeah - I made the mistake of taking some friends down the flight in my barge at the time, to show them the peace and quiet of the canal. There were diesel-powered pumps running very noisily at every lock. Then we got out on to the Thames, to find that there was a grand re-opening at Richmond lock going on. <sigh> I suppose the back pumps could be used to adjust the in-flight water levels. But wouldn't it be just as easy to run water down from the top? Actually, come to think of it, were they installing back pumps or bywashes? Adrian Adrian Stott 07956-299966
