Depth: Winding holes are usually provided on the ‘off’ side of a canal – i.e. the other side from the towing path. This is because as boats are usually steered from or near to the stern, the boat can be manually turned easily if required by steering towards the vee – and crew or steerer stepping off onto the path if necessary to pull the boat round (this also saves energy and time). To ensure any boat’s ease of manoeuvrability and safety of crew, the entire ‘vee’ area should be constructed and dredged to the full depth of the canal, because sometimes it will be found easier to put the stern into the vee – e.g. to allow the wind or current (where there’s a flow) to move the bow round to complete the turn.

Frequency of provision: Traditionally, winding holes would have been provided either side of any wharf, yard or terminus facility for the trading boats in use, unless such a facility was a large enough basin for unrestricted use. Today winding hole use is not perhaps exploited so much by the privately owned boats as by hired boats, where time restraints calls for a turn- round on a single route half-way to get the boat back to base without incurring late penalties; or even perhaps after mistakes in navigation. Also, passenger carrying boats and day-boats require a variety of lengths of cruise to suit limited available route-time, for example a ‘there and back’ cruise of two hours would require a suitable turning point after one hour from base. The few trading boats on our present canals, offering fuel or other provisions on restricted lengths, as well as maintenance boats, can also benefit from a selection of possible turning places – and these too are likely to be of a ‘full-size’ type of craft.

Marina entrances: In many cases, a marina entrance, wharf space, old arm of a canal (sometimes marked by a bridge for the towpath crossing), etc, can offer space for turning. In some cases however, especially where moored craft suggest that extreme care is needed, signs or chains have been erected to prevent or at least dissuade use for turning. Whilst this is regrettable, it also emphasises the need for adequate turning provision elsewhere.

Signage: whilst remote winding holes are often left unsigned, where any congestion is likely it is important that ‘no mooring’ is allowed opposite such a facility, so suitable signs should generally be in use.

Conclusions

The maintenance of winding holes both in number and in condition is important for users. Any loss of a former winding hole is therefore to be regretted, and hopefully a subject for restoration. The possibility of introducing new sites to turn the boats described above would widen the choices for commercial applications – e.g. hire and trip types, to encourage expansion of these trades, as well as providing more choice for private owners and any carrying and maintenance craft operating.

Opportunities such as marina entrances and tributary or junction design and retention, and provision of bank protection methods, should be encouraged to provide and maintain the necessary frequency and quality of winding holes.

Narrow Canal Provision
The extensive ‘narrow’ canal system dates from the late 18th century, on which the largest boats are about 72 feet by 7 feet beam (say 22m x 2.2m). (Although some longer boats were used in restricted lengths of the Wolverhampton level of the BCN, they could not pass through locks, and none survive in use). Therefore, the minimum perpendicular dimension should be 22m – or preferably a metre or so longer than this to allow some clearance, and therefore reduction in water turbulence. The radii, both at the point of the vee and the corners could quite usefully be equal to or greater than the beam or 2.2m min.

Broad Canal Provision
The basic requirement is usually the same, but the radius at the vee should be twice the size of that above, in order that wider boats can turn without experiencing a ‘tight-spot’ on their bows.

It is worth mentioning that on broad canals such as the G.U. main line and S.U. broad section, the nominal width of channel is greater than on narrow canals – but the maximum boat length is similar. Some canals (e.g. the Huddersfield Broad Canal) have a shorter ‘L’ dimension. In these cases the amount of land required for the ‘vee’ will be less than that required on the equivalent ‘narrow’ canal – BUT where larger locks are encountered, larger boats will be found, and each waterway section should be considered individually.

Turning Spaces on Rivers
As mentioned earlier, rivers vary a great deal – and the shape and terms used for turning spaces will be individual; however, the minimum requirements of shape are very similar to that described above. Most probably, it will be on the ‘off’ side to any river-side path, will have no foot-access to the bank, and will provide for the maximum size of boat expected on that navigation – and will require similar depths to the main channel.

Provision of Extra Space opposite the Winding Hole
In cases where a limited land area is available for a winding hole on the ‘off-side’, a curved indent in the ‘towpath-side’ is sometimes made, which complements the perpendicular indent of the ‘vee’. The radius of the tow-path curve should be taken from the radius in the vee, which should of course total Lt, as before, to allow for the turning boat.

Truncated ‘vee’ v ‘radius’
It can be seen that using the angular shape of a ‘truncated vee’ uses more land area than if the vee is radiussed, as the perpendicular dimension would remain the same. (see diagram in download below)

New Winding Hole provision
In addition to ensuring restoration and maintenance of existing turning places, the need to consider conservation of water resources suggests ensuring that boats can turn either side of lock flights, and at either end of ‘summit pounds’ – in order to reduce unnecessary lock usage. Going through a lock (or several), just to turn, is clearly a waste of water – but this is the case in several places (e.g. Oxford Canal). This can sometimes be met through new marina entrances, if written into access agreements, but otherwise new winding holes could be beneficial to both the navigation authority and commercial and private boating interests.

This suggestion could be combined with other initiatives for water-saving such as greater depth on summit pounds, restoration of side-ponds (after the good Droitwich Canal example), restoration of ‘duplicated’ locks, e.g Trent & Mersey Canal in Cheshire, and of course, marina and arm entrances mentioned earlier (which also add to ‘water area’ in a level, and therefore storage).

Impact of Winding Holes on Water quality and environment
It has to be said that when a boat of ‘full’ size for a winding hole is turned, there is often considerable disturbance of silt as the propeller passes the ‘tight-spot’ by the towpath. This is usually because of insufficient, or previously disturbed dredging, but it can also be because of an encroachment into the winding hole ‘point’ by falling soil or rubbish, or just accumulation of silt preventing the bow touching the full extent of the intended space. This can sometimes be exacerbated if a stream enters at the point, as in a few cases (e.g. on the Caldon Canal, Llangollen, and others). The inclusion of an element of ‘clearance’ in the length Lt will help to ensure space for the propeller and rudder to work correctly, and to obviate too much turbulence and erosion on the tow-path bank. The longer-term advantage is that less turbulence will ensure clearer water, and a healthier water environment, for fish etc., as well as less frequent dredging required.

The bank protection, whether steel piling, concrete or masonry, usually provides some stability to the form of the winding space, and around the arc of the radius, must be strong enough for the bows to rest against it, while the engine is used to power the turning operation.
A suitable height of such protection is also necessary for the typical craft of the canal – or frequent use could cause more wear and therefore silt, and damage to boats, than intended.

David W. Struckett, on behalf of IWA Navigation Committee
October 2014