The Kłodnica Canal that isn't there
The same vessel, two lock chambers, one scale. The orange hatching shows where the hull rectangle stops fitting inside the chamber rectangle. The chambers and vessels are didactic diagrams, not surveys of actual structures. How to read it · Limits of the model · Sources
Chamber A (model) 38.0 × 4.0 m · depth 1.2 m · conventional dimensions
DOES NOT FIT
Exceeded: length, width, clearance under the keel.
- Length: too long by 17.0 m
- Width: too wide by 4.2 m
- Under the keel: no room, draught greater by 0.6 m
Chamber B (model) 71.5 × 12.0 m · depth 2.5 m · conventional dimensions
FITS
Margins above the model thresholds (1.0 / 0.3 / 0.2 m).
- Length: margin 16.5 m
- Width: margin 3.8 m
- Under the keel: margin 0.7 m
Model diagram: the dimensions of the chambers and vessels are conventional and are not a survey of any structure. The scale of the plan and section is shared by both chambers and all vessels (1 m = 10 drawing units). On a narrow screen the drawing is reduced equally, and the dimensions are given as numbers.
How to read the fitting
One rectangle goes inside another or it does not. That is all this model checks.
- too long: the hull sticks out past the gates
- too wide: the hull overlaps the wall
- no room under the keel
- margin in length or under the keel
The plan view (on a wide screen the upper part of the drawing, on a phone the left) shows length and width. The longitudinal section (the lower or right part) shows the water depth and the draught: only the underwater part of the hull is drawn. The hull sits with its stern at the gates, so the length margin is always visible at the bow end.
The result “fits” means only that the hull dimensions are smaller than the chamber dimensions. The “tight fit” label appears when the margin is below the model’s conventional thresholds: 1.0 m lengthways, 0.3 m across and 0.2 m under the keel. These are demonstration thresholds, not navigation standards.
The model does not take account of current, filling of the chamber, manoeuvring, the shape of the bed or the rounding of the wall. Chambers A (38.0 × 4.0 × 1.2 m) and B (71.5 × 12.0 × 2.5 m) and vessels A, B and C are conventional values from the previous version of this page.
What follows. A larger vessel needs a larger chamber, and a chamber with small dimensions excludes whole classes of vessels. That is all the drawing shows.
What does not follow. That it was the dimensions that caused the closure of the port in Gliwice. The source descriptions carried over from the previous version do not give chamber dimensions; they speak of a new waterway and the overloading of the old one to be verified. A similar course of the two canals does not prove that the old channel was widened.
Fewer trips is not yet greater throughput
According to a description carried over from the previous version, the Museum of the Koźle Region links the building of the Gliwice Canal with the overloading of the old waterway in the 1920s [3] to be verified. Trips are counted only for the model vessels A (100 t) and B (500 t); the set C from the fitting has no load capacity here and no effect on the calculation. Below is simple division: the mass of the consignment divided by the capacity of the model vessel.
Vessel A · 100 t
50
trips (each: one lockage in one direction)
All trips full.
Vessel B · 500 t
10
trips (each: one lockage in one direction)
All trips full.
Vessel B: 40 trips fewer (−80%) than vessel A, for the same mass of 5,000 t.
Add your own assumption about the time of one lockage
We have no data on the cycle time of the historical locks. The fields are empty: no value means no knowledge, not zero. Enter your own assumption to see how it changes the result.
Trips A in total: no assumption
Trips B in total: no assumption
Enter both times to compare.
What this calculation does not say. Throughput is cargo per unit of time. It depends on the lock cycle time, the number of chambers and steps, traffic in both directions, empty trips, queues and the organisation of the ports. We do not have these data, so the number of trips does not prove the throughput of the whole waterway. The times in the fields above are only the reader’s assumptions; the total refers to a single chamber, without queues and without empty trips.
Where the water went
The old waterway ended in the centre of Gliwice. The new one, built in 1934–1939, ended in Łabędy, outside the centre [1]. According to a description carried over from the previous version, the old port in the centre was closed and the city’s transport layout changed [1] to be verified.
Kłodnica Canal
turn of the 18th and 19th centuries dates to be verified
Gliwice Canal
built 1934–1939, 40.6 km, 6 locks, fall of 43.6 m [3] figures to be verified
This is a diagram of sequence, not a map: distances and positions are not to scale, and directions do not correspond to the terrain. The dashed line marks a waterway that no longer exists. The brief provided for an extract of a plan and a present-day view; we have neither the material nor the rights for them, so we do not draw a “trace of the canal in the city”.
Limits, status of claims and what was removed
Status of claims
The content below comes from the previous version of the page and from descriptions of sources. In building this version the sources were not opened and were not checked in an archive.
- Gliwice Canal: 1934–1939, 40.6 km, 6 locks, 43.6 m fall [3] to be verified
- New terminus in Łabędy, closure of the port in the centre [1] to be verified
- Kłodnica Canal: beginnings at the turn of the 18th and 19th centuries, transport of coal from the Królowa Luiza (Zabrze) and Król (Królewska Huta) mines [2] to be verified
- Overloading of the old waterway in the 1920s [3] to be verified
- Kłodnica siphon under the Gliwice Canal [3] location to be verified
- Dimensions of chambers A and B and vessels A, B, C didactic model
- Causal link “dimensions, therefore closure of the port” hypothesis, not a finding
What changed compared with the previous version
- Chamber C with its own dimensions removed. There are two model chambers; custom parameters apply to the vessel and are tucked into an expandable section.
- Load-capacity slider removed: it did not affect the geometry. The capacities of 100 t and 500 t go directly into the trip calculation (for vessels A and B only).
- The 850 t capacity of set C is no longer shown: it had no effect on any result. Set C is used only for the fitting.
- Route switch replaced by a fixed side-by-side comparison of the two routes.
- Four tabs about places on the ground replaced by a short text. Street names and information about the infilling of the port, bridges and access to the site were not carried over, because we have no confirmation of them.
- Field notebook dropped: this version saves nothing in the browser. Entries made earlier in the previous version (key
atlas-v2-13) remain untouched. - The photograph of the Dzierżno lock is not embedded, because the page is not meant to depend on resources from the internet; the link to the file is in the sources.
- The “tight fit” thresholds were made consistent: 1.0 m lengthways (in the previous version the code and the description gave different values).
Sources
References carried over from the previous version. They are clickable links; the page does not load them. We do not declare them verified.
- [1] Muzeum w Gliwicach: wstęp do „Dziejów Kanału Kłodnickiego i Gliwickiego” [Gliwice Museum: introduction to “The History of the Kłodnica and Gliwice Canals”]. According to the description in the previous version: the new structure, the terminus in Łabędy, the old port and the development of the city.
- [2] Muzeum w Gliwicach: monografia Przemysława Nadolskiego [Gliwice Museum: monograph by Przemysław Nadolski]. According to the description: the beginnings of the canal and the carriage of coal from the Luiza and Król mines.
- [3] Muzeum Ziemi Kozielskiej: Kanał Gliwicki [Museum of the Koźle Region: the Gliwice Canal]. According to the description: parameters (40.6 km, 6 locks, 43.6 m fall), overloading of the old waterway in the 1920s, the Kłodnica siphon.
- Photograph of the Dzierżno lock (Adrian Tync), used in the previous version, not embedded here: file on Wikimedia Commons, licence as given on the file page: CC BY-SA 4.0.
The drawings on this page are our own diagram generated in the page code. It is not a map, an archival plan or a measurement. System fonts, no external resources.