Jump to content
  • Announcements

    Welcome! New around here? Take a look at the New Members' Guide for some pointers.

    You can Sign up or log in with your Facebook account and you can soon be chatting away with friends old and new..

    Check out our Handy Information section if you're after something quickly!

  • If you would like to support the forum, please consider visiting the forum shop, where you can purchase such items as NBN Burgees, Window Stickers, or even a custom Limited Edition Wooden Throttle Control Knob

    Forum Shop

Jono

Lost A Boat!!! Or My Mind??? Oh Never Mind.

Recommended Posts

On 09/08/2018 at 21:13, jimbob88 said:

Great to see an old photo of one of the original lowliners faircraft ran. I absolutely love this design of boat so if you have anymore photos of it I’d love to see them if you don’t mind. 

I will try and find our old photo albums to see what is in there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 13/08/2018 at 14:43, Jono said:

I will try and find our old photo albums to see what is in there.

Thanks very much, appreciate it whatever you find. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/08/2018 at 09:28, jimbob88 said:

I don’t like them, think the angular stuff looks better. 

I think the main benefit is that the angular stuff is more spacious...

Take an Alpha 35 C/C from 1995 and then compare it with an Alpha 35 c/c from 2015. There's a LOT more space inside the 1995 model....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That’s another wonderful reason for the more angular designs. Like a tardis those original alpha 35 cc. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 09/08/2018 at 21:13, jimbob88 said:

Great to see an old photo of one of the original lowliners faircraft ran. I absolutely love this design of boat so if you have anymore photos of it I’d love to see them if you don’t mind. 

Found some Lowliner photo's in our old albums. Also realised the inside helm was on the "wrong" side from one photo below (2.3).

Fair Lowliner 2 1.jpg

Fair Lowliner 2 3.jpg

Fair Lowliner 2 4.jpg

Fair Lowliner 2 5.jpg

Fair Lowliner 2.jpg

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 15/08/2018 at 09:40, oldgregg said:

I think the main benefit is that the angular stuff is more spacious...

Take an Alpha 35 C/C from 1995 and then compare it with an Alpha 35 c/c from 2015. There's a LOT more space inside the 1995 model....

Any photos to help explain what you mean? It always seems to me that something ‘rounded’ would be more spacious than something ‘angular’. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cheers lovely to see some more old lowliner photos, was only 4 months old while you were holidaying on this boat. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I seem to remember hiring one of these from Herbert Woods many years ago having been fooled by the name ( v stupid I know !) into thinking that it would go under Potter Heigham Bridge.

It didn't !!:default_dunce:

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, charlesa said:

I seem to remember hiring one of these from Herbert Woods many years ago having been fooled by the name ( v stupid I know !) into thinking that it would go under Potter Heigham Bridge.

It didn't !!:default_dunce:

They do fit just needs to be unbelievably low water and with the bridge sinking it’s getting less and less likely to happen. 

769CF4AA-D6AE-4FB1-8E29-7D7AED2F027A.png

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, vanessan said:

Any photos to help explain what you mean? It always seems to me that something ‘rounded’ would be more spacious than something ‘angular’. 

Does this really crude drawing explain how space is lost on a curved design as opposite to the old angular design. 

24338DAA-953C-41AA-A134-95EEF4F471EC.jpeg

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, vanessan said:

Any photos to help explain what you mean? It always seems to me that something ‘rounded’ would be more spacious than something ‘angular’. 

Compare this https://www.richardsonsboatingholidays.co.uk/boats/viscount/ 

with https://www.richardsonsboatingholidays.co.uk/boats/swan-renown/

But basically as Jimbob88 has shown above. The old angular design was totally reworked to improve the aesthetics, but the angles were what gave such impressive interior space.

Also take a look at https://www.richardsonsboatingholidays.co.uk/boats/highland-gem/ - Unlikely to win any beauty contests, but massive inside for a 38ft boat.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its great to see some boats moored at Marina Keys. Lets hope the plans to bring these back into use do actually happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks oldgregg and jimbo88 for the explanations, I now see exactly what you mean. I hired the old design quite a few times but don’t have much idea of the newer boats as we have our own boat now. Interesting sketch jimbo but it got the idea across :default_biggrin: .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Always keen to replace opinion by fact.  The Lowliners were designed to 'fit' Potter Bridge perfectly - probably the first to be so designed.  The arch was the first line to be drawn on the designer's drawing board - and fit they most certainly still do.  When these boats were passing Potter every day of the week, 6' 9" air draft was all they needed - except for one variant, which had the wheel on the 'wrong' side.  We listed her as needing 6' 11" to give us a larger margin of safety.  We took all Lowliners through from the upper helm position and the boat's profile exactly matched the bridge's.  

Similarly in an attempt to dispel the myth - the bridge is not "sinking".  It hasn't sunk in the past fifty years anyway.  Based on personal empirical knowledge, the water levels have risen by at least four inches in the last thirty years.  Now, as some local 'experts' repeatedly suggest, if we were to dredge beneath the bridge, we'd get back to the good old days when seven feet plus headroom clearances were the Summer norm!  :default_icon_rolleyes:

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Expilot, are you forgetting your very own craft? Weren't Ripplecraft Broadland class designed "to pass under all Broads bridges, at any state of tide, with canopy closed", as I seem to recall in Blakes brochure?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, expilot said:

Always keen to replace opinion by fact.  The Lowliners were designed to 'fit' Potter Bridge perfectly - probably the first to be so designed.  The arch was the first line to be drawn on the designer's drawing board - and fit they most certainly still do. 

They sure were. Out of interest, do you know who designed them for Faircraft?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, expilot said:

 

Similarly in an attempt to dispel the myth - the bridge is not "sinking".  It hasn't sunk in the past fifty years anyway.  Based on personal empirical knowledge, the water levels have risen by at least four inches in the last thirty years.  Now, as some local 'experts' repeatedly suggest, if we were to dredge beneath the bridge, we'd get back to the good old days when seven feet plus headroom clearances were the Summer norm!  :default_icon_rolleyes:

Nothing I enjoy more than being told I’m wrong 😁

 

To be honest I’d heard so many times off people it was sinking I just took it as gospel. Is that true about dredging or is that tongue in cheek. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, jimbob88 said:

To be honest I’d heard so many times off people it was sinking I just took it as gospel. Is that true about dredging or is that tongue in cheek. 

No, it's true. If you lower the river bed, it's obvious to any idiot that the water must go down as well. There will be a definite dip in the river under the bridge. Oh, did I mention I'm an idiot?

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, jimbob88 said:

To be honest I’d heard so many times off people it was sinking I just took it as gospel. 

A bit like the National Park story.............:default_norty:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that photo Jimbob88, I stand corrected although if you look at the current Herbert Woods website for Glittering Light, for instance, it says this:

 

Glittering Light Specification & Floor Plan

Length: 38ft (11.58m) Width: 12ft (3.66m)

Cabins: 4 Bathrooms: 2

Bridge Clearance - 6 ft 8 ins. Will not pass under Beccles Old or Potter Heigham bridges. Will pass under Ludham, Wayford and Wroxham bridges subject to weather and tide conditions with the windscreen lowered. (Bridge pilot service must be used when passing under Wroxham bridge)

 

Hence I think one could be forgiven for an earlier post ¬!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, expilot said:

 

Similarly in an attempt to dispel the myth - the bridge is not "sinking".  It hasn't sunk in the past fifty years anyway.  Based on personal empirical knowledge, the water levels have risen by at least four inches in the last thirty years.  Now, as some local 'experts' repeatedly suggest, if we were to dredge beneath the bridge, we'd get back to the good old days when seven feet plus headroom clearances were the Summer norm!  :default_icon_rolleyes:

Nothing I enjoy more than being told I’m wrong 😁

 

To be honest I’d heard so many times off people it was sinking I just took it as gospel. Is that true about dredging or is that tongue in cheek. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, charlesa said:

Thanks for that photo Jimbob88, I stand corrected although if you look at the current Herbert Woods website for Glittering Light, for instance, it says this:

 

Glittering Light Specification & Floor Plan

Length: 38ft (11.58m) Width: 12ft (3.66m)

Cabins: 4 Bathrooms: 2

Bridge Clearance - 6 ft 8 ins. Will not pass under Beccles Old or Potter Heigham bridges. Will pass under Ludham, Wayford and Wroxham bridges subject to weather and tide conditions with the windscreen lowered. (Bridge pilot service must be used when passing under Wroxham bridge)

 

Hence I think one could be forgiven for an earlier post ¬!

 

No definitely I can see why you thought that. There’s a good number of boats that used to state they could fit under potter or wroxham years ago that now no longer fit. Must be the yards getting worried about boats getting stuck on the other side. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, charlesa said:

 

Glittering Light Specification & Floor Plan

Length: 38ft (11.58m) Width: 12ft (3.66m)

Cabins: 4 Bathrooms: 2

Bridge Clearance - 6 ft 8 ins. Will not pass under Beccles Old or Potter Heigham bridges. Will pass under Ludham, Wayford and Wroxham bridges subject to weather and tide conditions with the windscreen lowered. (Bridge pilot service must be used when passing under Wroxham bridge)

 

Hence I think one could be forgiven for an earlier post ¬!

 

Yeah, that's just the boatyard stating what they allow.

I think there was an incident in the summer of '98 where a lot of boats got stuck the wrong side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, expilot said:

  When these boats were passing Potter every day of the week, 6' 9" air draft was all they needed - except for one variant, which had the wheel on the 'wrong' side.  We listed her as needing 6' 11" to give us a larger margin of safety. 

Can you recall what boat this was can’t think of any lowliner with upper steering on opposite side. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • NBN Mobile App

    Our new mobile app is available now on Android and iOS!

    Get it on Google Play

×

Important Information

For details of our Guidelines, please take a look at the Terms of Use here.