***** This thread is now closed, please CLICK HERE to go to Volume 18 *****
Volume 17- NO CARS :-)
PLEASE NOTE:-
To try and maintain some kind of logical order of discussion, if you start a new subject then reply to this post and remember to change the default subject header.
Volume 16 is here
Last edited by: VxFan on Fri 19 Jun 15 at 12:55
|
The International Space Station will be visible over UK with an unusual level of brightness in just over 10 mins.
Rises in West at 17:20*, reaching a maximum elevation of 42degrees in SSW before setting in SE.
*Northants timings - may be slightly different in other parts of UK.
www.heavens-above.com/
|
Ta
Got the kids next door. :"Look its's Santa's just setting off."
|
>> Couldn't see it.
Either you're in the bit of UK under cloud or you should have gone to Specsavers!!
|
.....get it even a bit right ?
Hundreds of thousands of pounds spent producing Downton Abbey for our Christmas delectation !
Now, I don't care if the spoons on the dinner table were made in 1927 but where on Earth, in 1924 would the local railway company.....LNER by then....have managed to rustle up a mid-1950s British Railways Standard Class 5 locomotive for the family's shooting trip ?
Surely the railways are the one industry where every aspect of history is well known by thousands of people. A phone call would have put the producers on the right track ( pun intended )
I won't even mention the Routemaster bus in Foyles War a couple of months ago !
Blast...I've gone and mentioned it !
|
>> rustle up a mid-1950s British Railways Standard Class 5 locomotive for the family's shooting trip
I would guess it was also hauling post 1951 Mk1's?
|
|
Some sort of Pullman coaches by the looks of it, certainly not Mk 1s. I suspect they just had to use whatever the preserved line they use for station scenes happened to have.
|
>> Some sort of Pullman coaches by the looks of it, certainly not Mk 1s. I
>> suspect they just had to use whatever the preserved line they use for station scenes
>> happened to have.
If Nicole has taped it I will check it out and find out what stock was used. I know they use the BlueBell railway a lot, might be their ex golden arrow pullman stock. Don't think they have had a black 5 down there for a while tho.
|
>> >> Some sort of Pullman coaches by the looks of it, certainly not Mk 1s.
>> I
>> >> suspect they just had to use whatever the preserved line they use for station
>> scenes
>> >> happened to have.
>>
>> If Nicole has taped it I will check it out and find out what stock
>> was used. I know they use the BlueBell railway a lot, might be their ex
>> golden arrow pullman stock. Don't think they have had a black 5 down there for
>> a while tho.
I meant of course a BR standard Class 5 MT, which i think Ted was referring to. The Bluebell Railway has one, but its boiler is 350miles away from the rest of it.
|
>>
>> I won't even mention the Routemaster bus in Foyles War a couple of months ago
>> !
Heh!
Wasn't really watching it (corner of the eye, thing!), but about 5 seconds after the scene cut away, I said to SWMBO, "I'm sure that was a Routemaster and not an RT".
;-)
|
Not many RTs are pre-war either. Quick dating test of photographs between pre and post war is has an RT got a roof number box. They were deleted on post war production.
Yes I know that is exactly what a severe bus anorak would say, but hey, my first word was bus, not mama or papa.
|
The coaches weren't Pullmans ( Pullmen ? ) They looked pre WW1 stock varnished wood and shorter than normal 60' stock. Had a box van on the back.
The bit with the train passing through the valley was the NYMR, I'm sure. The loco may have been 75029 The Green Knight it had some awful totem on the side of the tender.
|
Departure was filmed at Horsted Keynes with the Bluebell Metropolitan "Teak" Stock, It was then filmed at the NYMR, it was their "LNER TEAK" stock.
The line was right, the station was wrong, stock was right, and the loco was BR Standard Class 4MT 4-6-0 locomotive No. 75029 built at Swindon Works in 1954
|
I thought the first train was the Metropolitan set. I think it was in the Railway Magazine earlier in the year being dragged around by the Metropolitan tank engine. Along with the station, wrong for a series based in Yorkshire. But then, so is Highclere !
I'm not sure the LNER stock was right either. Remember, this is the Summer of 1924, 18 months after the grouping and any new LNER stock would have been on the ECML. A train as depicted would probably have been NER stock or possibly, if in the Border country, NBR coaches.
I'll mention it to dear Julian at Maurice Bowra's next bridge evening at Sezincote. I'm sure he won't give a stuff !
|
>> .....get it even a bit right ?
Same as some people who ignore the "PLEASE NOTE" request at the top of this thread. They can't seem to get it right either, and I then have to spend 5 to 10 mins unpicking the thread and moving the new subject to the correct place!
Last edited by: VxFan on Sun 28 Dec 14 at 02:27
|
Why can't they......
Stop moaning.,
|
Its my revue of the year I posted onto my youtube channel.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=3evQ4Ru_qfk
|
What joy Zero.
Bittern at the end, Mallard at the beginning. Wasn't Mallard the loco that established a steam speed record by being timed at 126mph?
|
2015 Revue of steam
Network Rail suspends West Coast Railway ( steam) trains.
The suspension notice means it cannot run chartered services until 15 May.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-32167724
|
>> 2015 Revue of steam
>>
>> Network Rail suspends West Coast Railway ( steam) trains.
>>
>> The suspension notice means it cannot run chartered services until 15 May.
>>
>> www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-32167724
It follows a SPAD (signal passed at Danger) early last month. WCR has been in NRs bad books for a while after an incident last year
The incident
www.gov.uk/government/news/dangerous-occurrence-at-wootton-bassett-junction-wiltshire
The NR statement
www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/news/statement-west-coast-railways-suspension-notice
|
As you may know they've been building a viaduct near Reading station for the last year or 2, and I've been watching the work progress on my commute between Reading and Bath.
Well this morning as the train left Reading I looked out of the window to see how it was getting on - it had disappeared! Then I noticed we seemed to be higher up than usual. Yep, the train was on the viaduct.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-berkshire-30666218
|
We were out walking the other day, in countryside a few kms north west of Limoges airport. Suddenly there was a huge roar and this (not the one in the picture) appeared at what seemed to be almost tree-top level. It was obviously doing a very slow circuit from the south onto the normal north approach to the airport. I thought last night's wine had come back to haunt me.
Apparently, underneath, it's an Airbus 300. I read that there are only 5 but development work on a newer version is under way and local TV news said they were using Limoges airport for some sort of short landing testing.
www.flickr.com/photos/64660965@N03/16361426679/
Last edited by: Mike Hannon on Mon 16 Feb 15 at 11:12
|
|
I believe that they are principally used to transfer the wings from Broughton near Chester, to Toulouse.
|
|
I see them occasionally coming into land at Broughton when I happen to be passing n the A55...big things !
|
It's formally known as the Beluga and is used to carry Airbus components from factories around Europe to the assembly lines at Toulouse and Finkenwerder (Hamburg). We have friends in the Wrexham area and like RP see them from time to time in and out of Hawarden. Told they're particularly impressive seen from Hope Mountain, an area of high ground overlooking Hawarden, but never managed to be there at right time.
It's predecessor the Aero Spacelines Guppy, based on a Boeing Stratocruiser, was even more impressive:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aero_Spacelines_Super_Guppy
There is a preserved example up the road at Bruntingthorpe with another at Toulouse. NASA still have on operational in the States.
|
|
Guy at work flew on one (as a passenger) a few times last year. Apparently quite difficult to land when empty due to the low weight.
|
|
The new A400M made a low approach into RAF Valley yesterday some photos on line. Plenty of Typhoon/Lynx and Apache action in Meironydd in the course of the day.
|
Feature on BBC site:
www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-31831603
As a satisfied 125 commuter (3 days a week) I hope the Hitachi is as good as they suggest; should find out in 2017.
In the next few months the early prototype will be tested on the rail network.
Perhaps our resident trainspotter could post some footage?
Last edited by: Focusless on Thu 12 Mar 15 at 12:15
|
>> Feature on BBC site:
>> www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-31831603
>>
>> As a satisfied 125 commuter (3 days a week) I hope the Hitachi is as
>> good as they suggest; should find out in 2017.
>>
>> In the next few months the early prototype will be tested on the rail network.
>>
>> Perhaps our resident trainspotter could post some footage?
Arrived at Southampton docks this morning, will be transported by road to the Old Dalby Test Track (Between Nottingham and Melton Mowbray) by road for testing. Don't have access to the running schedules on the DTT and access is limited, but I am due to do some dog training at Tollerton (near the north end of the track) so may try and get some shots. Either way I shall be trackside for the first mainline tests.
A word here about the train its replacing, the British Railways Class 43, known by all as the IC125. These have been pounding up and down the GWR and the ECML at a solid 125mph since 1973. (apart from the two sets written off - The Southall and the Upton Nervet crashes). All have now had the Paxman Valenta (known as screaming valentas) engines replaced by MTU, but essentially still the same train. Its is, in my mind, without a shadow of doubt, the finest trains ever built anywhere in the world at any time and they saved British Railways and acted as the springboard for revitalised rail transport.
|
|
I did an almost weekly commute between Edinburgh and London for a couple of years in the early days of the IC125s. Their introduction transformed the East coast route.
|
Went down to friends at southampton, and then filmed this
Britannias Maiden Voyage Departure
www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCAy0Yk3NNc
|
|
Very well done Nought, especially with the fireworx behind das boot. Hideous-looking thing from the rear though IMO and ... Made in Italy so they need to try and keep the thing dry.
|
>> Very well done Nought, especially with the fireworx behind das boot. Hideous-looking thing from the
>> rear though IMO and ... Made in Italy so they need to try and keep
>> the thing dry.
Yer, tis hideously ugly from some quarters. Pity that sharply raked bow with the union jack motif is stunning. It looks like a giant speedboat with a block of flats perched on the top.
|
|
Talk about ugly, a seagoing block of flats, not a ship at all. Yuck...
|
|
My god, that is one ugly beast.
|
|
It's the biggest 'ship' ever made. For what it's worth. 4,000 boring unimaginative well-heeled old codgers trying to focus on palm-fringed shores... makes you want to cry.
|
>>It's the biggest 'ship' ever made
Shall we qualify that AC?
"The biggest ship ever built for the UK market."
|
>> "The biggest ship ever built for the UK market."
Was I wrong? Some supertankers bigger? Damn!
It's still horrible though.
|
|
I have seen it described somewhere as a barge with a 1960s council block plonked on top of it ;) Not the most attractive ship to look at, though as you can't see it when you're on it does that matter?
|
From some angles it looks disturbingly like Northampton's old bus station.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-northamptonshire-31889521
|
>> Went down to friends at southampton, and then filmed this
>>
>> Britannias Maiden Voyage Departure
>>
>> www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCAy0Yk3NNc
>>
It's smoking a bit, already.
|
And so....
The Network Rail ban on West Coast Railways has been lifted, so steam trains are returning to the main line (ironically tho, this excursion is one of the few DB Schenker steam services)
Clan Line on the belmond british pullman
www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEkl9CY_BS4
and
www.youtube.com/watch?v=opwUpHl5djY
I quite like the last one, full of moody lighting, scene setting, and symbolism.
|
|
You're not 'into' angling then I take it.
|
So much good stuff here. A 1961 English Electric Deltic at speed, wearing the flying scotsman headboard, both Napier power plants in full flow, that lovely shimmering blue oil haze from its exhaust stacks, (I can't capture the smell - its Castrol R on Steroids) with that passing deep thruuuuuuuuuuuum
and
Fantastic red kit action with loud and crystal clear calling.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=AfMIKIZ_Ojk
What a great way to spend an early morning.
Last edited by: Zero on Sat 16 May 15 at 15:02
|
>> What a great way to spend an early morning.
Sounds brilliant.
|
|
And this is why I prefer diesels to steam. Even 68 has a bit of character, imo.
|
|
Last flying season for the Vulcan, only a few airshows left. Last one is at Dunsfold in Surrey 29/30 August. Even if you're not really into a/c it's worth seeing. Saw it last year on an impromptu 'airfield beat up' at (very) low level, very good. It looked impressive last year, lord knows what people thought in the 50s when it first flew.
|
|
will probably be at Dunsfold for that one.
|
|
I saw one take off on a test flight from RAF St Athens when they were in service, immediately into a steep turning climb at full power. Very impressive.
|
>> ... lord knows what people thought in the 50s when it first flew.
>>
One did a banking turn near our house in the 50s. I remember thinking "What a target! How could an AA gunner miss it?"
|
|
Well i suppose i did ask! I look at it and think it's still looks quite modern even now. Back then when it first flew not that long after the war, i always thought it must have been incredible looking. Making bombers just a few years before look very old fashioned.
|
>> >> ... lord knows what people thought in the 50s when it first flew.
>> >>
>> One did a banking turn near our house in the 50s. I remember thinking "What
>> a target! How could an AA gunner miss it?"
It was designed to get to Moscow at just under mach 1 at a height of about 55,000 feet. Like to see an AA gunner hit that.
When you think about it, despite being a magnificent looking* and sounding aircraft, it wasn't actually that good. Couldn't fly above Mach 1, crashed and wrecked with alarming regularity, unreliable in service, and when actually called upon to drop real bombs on real targets, mostly missed.
* The best looking of the "V" bombers was the Victor. What a spiteful, malevolent, aggressive, dangerous looking beast that is.
Last edited by: Zero on Sun 17 May 15 at 09:18
|
|
Was this the design that only the pilot/co-pilot could exit if abandoning? Seem to remember the crew were regarded as expendable...
|
>> Was this the design that only the pilot/co-pilot could exit if abandoning? Seem to remember
>> the crew were regarded as expendable...
IIRC only the pilots had ejector seats. The rest of the crew would have to bail out through a hatch in same fashion as on Lancaster etc.
At least one crew successfully evacuated under those conditions when XM610 crashed after an engine fire over County Durham.
www.neam.co.uk/wingate.html
|
|
I think one idea was to have a cockpit that jettisoned everyone to safety. However it was compromised by having to have two pilots. The layout of the cockpit then didn't allow for it. It was a very cramped layout.
|
>> Was this the design that only the pilot/co-pilot could exit if abandoning? Seem to remember
>> the crew were regarded as expendable...
Well if they are flying out to drop "the" bomb, they ain't flying back to anything left now are they.
|
Most aircraft of that era suffered from the same problems. Crash rates were high for that era dozens of military aircraft lost per year were nothing remarkable in that era. More a reflection of the era than the aircraft per se. Iron bombs were similar a problem you needed lots to make a dent in something, they got (just) enough to damage the runway.
Unreliability is an interesting one, ironically the least safe of the three v bombers was the Valiant but was also the most reliable. Maintainability being thought about from the very beginning.
|
>> * The best looking of the "V" bombers was the Victor. What a spiteful, malevolent,
>> aggressive, dangerous looking beast that is.
>> tinyurl.com/pfgq2l5
|
|
What were we spending on defence as a percentage of GDP in those days? In the 50s we still had National Service, of course. That must have cost a few bob.
|
|
Well its about 2% now and due to fall. Back then in the 50s as high as 10%.
|
Just in case anyone is interested, the DT this weekend is running some cackamaney competition, in which you can win "30 minutes flying in a Spitfire".
www.telegraph.co.uk/promotions/11597248/spitfire-competition.html
|
Driving back from Bath towards Reading along the M4 on Friday evening, somewhere between Chippenham and Swindon, lovely blue sky overhead suddenly filled with a Hercules going in roughly the same direction but naturally a fair bit quicker. His mate wasn't far behind.
Have seen them in the distance from the train in the past so I guess it's not that unusual if you're a regular on that route, but they impressed me.
Last edited by: Focusless on Sun 31 May 15 at 22:00
|
|
See them quite often over my part of Wales. I'm guessing it's something to do with the Brecon Beacons training area, or perhaps the ranges at Pendine and Castlemartin.
|
|
I used to commute that way to Bristol and there was often (like most days) a military plane circling somewhere in that general area - I don't know my planes, could have been a Herc. I guess the answer would be somewhere in t'internet.
|
I happened to be in London last night on Chelsea Bridge looking down stream
and then this happened
www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFtHwhHo6C4
what part of the PLEASE NOTE request at the start of this thread did you not understand? Now moved to the correct place. Remember though there is a risk of loosing your post when doing this, so don't blame me in the future if it vanishes into thin air
Last edited by: VxFan on Fri 5 Jun 15 at 10:47
|
|
Made me think about what my ole mum must have experienced in Bermondsey during the blitz !
|
|
Surprised they needed firework displays then, what with all those explosives going off :-)
|
.... though there is a risk of loosing your post .....
Duty Pedant here.
An all too common misuse.
Loosing refers to letting something loose, or releasing something.
The correct spelling in this case is losing.
You should check the definitions of to loose, and to lose.
Hope this helps
8o)
|
Are you gong to tell him b******* VX, or shall I? :)
Pat
|
>> what part of the PLEASE NOTE request at the start of this thread did you
>> not understand? Now moved to the correct place. Remember though there is a risk of
>> loosing your post when doing this, so don't blame me in the future if it
>> vanishes into thin air
And how is your new hi viz jacket and company note book mr Jobsworth?
|
The above post applies to you too!
Pat
|
>> And how is your new hi viz jacket and company note book mr Jobsworth?
Fine thanks. How's your rain poncho and train spotters note pad?
|
Bottom line is all I'm asking for is a bit of co-operation from forum members. I can understand a new forum member making the error, but not a veteran such as yourself.
TIA.
|
>> Bottom line is all I'm asking for is a bit of co-operation from forum members.
>> I can understand a new forum member making the error, but not a veteran such
>> as yourself.
I agreed with that sentence up to "such as yourself":)
|
>> Bottom line is all I'm asking for is a bit of co-operation from forum members.
>> I can understand a new forum member making the error, but not a veteran such
>> as yourself.
You could have said "experienced" "valued" or "prolific". "Witty", "Charming" or "erudite" would have sufficed.
But no you had to crack on in there with the ageism.
"Veteran" indeed
|
Wot about retired folk? Some of us are not yet veterans of ........
|
>> "Veteran" indeed
Veteran - according to Words Thesaurus: Experienced person, expert, old hand.
Count yourself lucky. I could have said old fart ;)
Last edited by: VxFan on Fri 5 Jun 15 at 16:52
|
|
Went on a Dreamliner to Rhodes in May. I was very impressed. Roomier, quieter, and better aircon than any other aircraft that I have flown in.
|
|
Elderly KLM 747 to LAX for me next week. Also flown an even older KLM MD11 in the recent past. One day I shall get to fly something newer, although most of the smaller stuff I fly is mostly new. Apart from Jet2s old 737 from Jersey yesterday. Got home just before the rain arrived!
Last edited by: legacylad on Fri 12 Jun 15 at 10:37
|
>> most of the smaller stuff I fly is mostly new. Apart from Jet2s old 737
>> from Jersey yesterday. Got home just before the rain arrived!
I got a friend at Be, so use their Embraers to Southampton.
|
Would love to know how that photo was taken.
If something was ahead of it in the climb, you would want to know that you had equivalent or better speed to get out of the way!
|
>> Would love to know how that photo was taken.
>>
>> If something was ahead of it in the climb, you would want to know that
>> you had equivalent or better speed to get out of the way!
It was shots of multiple rehearsals from a chase plane, helicopter at one point. it was never in the way or flightpath.
Good job they didn't use a small drone, it would have got sucked through the air intakes!
|
'Near-vertical' is a bit strong! An empty (no fuel) 787-9 weighs 138,000kg, while its engines are rated at 320kN each. So that's enough to oppose gravity on rather less than half the mass of the plane, never mind accelerate it upwards.
Z will understand that the head-on shot at takeoff is taken with a very long lens, so there's extreme foreshortening of the fuselage. When the tail drops away, that exaggerates the apparent angle, making the climb appear much steeper than it is.
There's a less giddy account here, with some insight from my favourite debunker of aviation nonsense, Patrick Smith.
edition.cnn.com/2015/06/11/travel/boeing-dreamliner-paris-air-show-rehearsal-video/
|
>> 'Near-vertical' is a bit strong! An empty (no fuel) 787-9 weighs 138,000kg, while its engines
>> are rated at 320kN each. So that's enough to oppose gravity on rather less than
>> half the mass of the plane, never mind accelerate it upwards.
I suspect it would still look pretty impressive from a crowd line parallel to the runway and is a demonstration of the machine's capability and handling.
While the power/empty weight statement is true a show like that doesn't need acceleration, indeed the pilot is probably trading speed for angle of climb.
I've seen a DHL 757 do some similar manoeuvres when displaying at Duxford a few years ago.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Fri 12 Jun 15 at 11:32
|
...a show like that doesn't need acceleration...
It's a challenge to get anywhere without it, Sir Isaac - vertically or horizontally. Even your Berlingo has some!
I've seen a DHL 757 do some similar manoeuvres...
I've seen DHL Sprinter vans do similar manoeuvres.
|
>> ...a show like that doesn't need acceleration...
>> It's a challenge to get anywhere without it, Sir Isaac - vertically or horizontally. Even
>> your Berlingo has some!
Obvs there is acceleration from brakes off to rotation. I'm suggesting that the a/c does not need to continue accelerating during the climb and that speed may be traded for angle to give more 'wow' for the watchers.
EDIT: I replaced the word climb with show (too avoid repeat use) and inadvertently changed meaninig .
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Fri 12 Jun 15 at 12:28
|
|
You're missing the point, Bromp. Even maintaining altitude requires acceleration, if only to oppose the downward acceleration due to gravity. Ask Wyle E. Coyote.
Last edited by: WillDeBeest on Fri 12 Jun 15 at 12:35
|
>> Even maintaining altitude requires acceleration,
No, it doesn't.
I think you may be confusing acceleration with power, force or thrust. An airplane can fly at a constant speed with no acceleration involved.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Fri 12 Jun 15 at 12:37
|
|
I wonder how much the wingtips deflect.
|
Yes, all right. But Newton tells us F=ma. m here is constant (if we forget the diminishing fuel load) so at the very least the upward and downward Fs must be equal and opposite to achieve level flight or a steady climb (a=0). But to have got off the ground at all, there must have been some net upward a.
My real point is that 'near vertical' is nonsense, because the engines can't deliver even half the force required for a vertical hover (a=0), never mind any upward acceleration (a>0).
Last edited by: WillDeBeest on Fri 12 Jun 15 at 12:49
|
Oh Mr. De Beest,
You're not getting off that lightly...
Bromp: "does not need to continue accelerating during the climb "
WDB: "You're missing the point, Bromp. Even maintaining altitude requires acceleration"
>>My real point is that 'near vertical' is nonsense
Of course it is, but so is "maintaining altitude requires acceleration"
Now, stop slapping your own forehead and admit it....
You got it wro-ng, nah, nah, nah-nah, nah.
After that I begin to wonder whether Vx Astras are in fact good cars after all.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Fri 12 Jun 15 at 12:52
|
|
Yes, I should have expressed it in terms of force first, rather than acceleration. And I'm happy to accept that an Astra would be a good car with which to demonstrate the acceleration due to gravity.
|
>>Ask Wyle E. Coyote.
Maintaining altitude requires airflow around the wings sufficient for lift to overcome gravity. That will be achieved at a stable speed/Mach No and with power at cruise setting.
Mr Coyote's problem was lack of either aerofoil or forward motion.
|
|
Of course, but back to the article. In a 'near-vertical' climb, the wings contribute nothing because the force they produce is mostly parallel to the ground. It would require the engines alone to lift the plane - as a Harrier's can - which the data on thrust and mass show isn't even close to possible.
|
|
It would be interesting to know what the climb angle actually is. And for that matter the airspeed and rate of climb during the manoeuvre.
|
|
I'd hazard a guess at around 30%. Where's that pilot-y bloke when we need him, he'll have a pretty good idea.
|
>> 'Near-vertical' is a bit strong! An empty (no fuel) 787-9 weighs 138,000kg, while its engines
>> are rated at 320kN each. So that's enough to oppose gravity on rather less than
>> half the mass of the plane, never mind accelerate it upwards.
Perhaps not applicable here, but don't forget that an aeroplane can exchange speed for height. A common aerobatic stunt.
|
>> Perhaps not applicable here, but don't forget that an aeroplane can exchange speed for height.
>> A common aerobatic stunt.
Which is more or less the point I was trying to make.
|
ISS Pass - Bromptonaut
