Castle Aching

[Edwardian]

The great British public want us to Move On from risqué pictures of Susannah York in stockings ....

 

Here we see one of the inhabitants of West Norfolk.  She has been trying to work out what she can and cannot do during lock-down, whether she can ride her bicycle 20 miles to the optician, who should then be able to tell her whether she can see well enough to ride 20 miles back to her cottage, and whether 260 miles really is too far to journey just to cough in the face of her parents. After hours of study, she finds herself stumped.   

 

 

She would do well to remember that she is Not Important Enough to avoid a fine if exercising individual judgment.

 

 

[jwealleans]

Quote

The great British public want us to Move On from risqué pictures of Susannah York in stockings ....

 

I think you've badly misjudged the popular mood there.

[St Enodoc]

20 minutes ago, Edwardian said:

The great British public want us to Move On from risqué pictures of Susannah York in stockings ....

You cannot be serious!

[Edwardian]

1 minute ago, St Enodoc said:

You cannot be serious!

 

If Bozza can keep a straight face, so can I!

[Regularity]

14 hours ago, Northroader said:

Ahhh... Susannah York......

 

1 hour ago, sem34090 said:

She was a bit less wooden last time I watched The Battle of Britain...

Not sure the same can be said of her appreciative audience...

[Hroth]

5 hours ago, nick_bastable said:

 

Nick B

Nahhhh....  I'd just lean forward and twang her suzzies.....

 

3 hours ago, Edwardian said:

The great British public want us to Move On from risqué pictures of Susannah York in stockings ....

 

Don't think so!

(And that goes for other things we are being admonished to move on from too!)

 

 

 

[nick_bastable]

19 minutes ago, Hroth said:

Nahhhh....  I'd just lean forward and twang her suzzies.....

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hands off the laughing zone

 

Nick B

[Compound2632]

16 hours ago, jcredfer said:

 

 

Govt trials are poised to start, called "need for education", on similar principles, in schools in England.  The principle is based on keeping the pupils in small groups back at school, separated into smaller groups called bubbles, in the hope that they will spread the virus in a less rapid way than letting them run about freely.  This will spread the virus from the pupils of infected families to other families and teachers, more slowly.  The principle is based on the lower rate of youngster's deaths, whilst ensuring the transfer of the virus from one infected family to several other families.  Eventually it is hoped that this will achieve the Herd Immunity which might let the govt off the UK death figures.

 

To make this easier, the returning classes are recommended to be divided into two half size groups [with bubbles, within] and separated into different rooms.  Existing staffing are to be appropriately deployed to care for the increased number of groups, well of course they will.  The same staff, whilst taking part in the virus spread, are also going to be required to provide both education materiel and feedback for the online education of those pupils still at home.

 

The recent events involving political advisors might make some people somewhat doubtful of how realistic the plan might be and the possible outcomes.

 

It also raises the question, of when do the remainder of the classes return, given that will mean full size classes back in their original classrooms?

 

I am reminded of the old saying "Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive."

 

Julian

 

 

Apologies for a serious reply to a satirical but accurate description of the situation. I happen to be a governor of a primary school - as a governing body we have, with the senior staff, been wrestling with this and I believe what we are doing is typical. As governors, we have had to be convinced that risk has been fully assessed and that the arrangements put in place are as safe as can be. The arrangements are very much as described for years 1 and 6 with classes of 15 pupils, being taken be the year 1/2 and year 5/6 teachers, each with a teaching assistant. These year groups will only be in school Mon-Thur, with Fridays for staff to prepare and support year 2 and year 5 online learning - which will be less than it has been; likewise those year 1 and 6 pupils whose parents decide against sending them in will receive no more than pointers to appropriate online resources. As Julian says, staff cannot be expected to move from doing one full-time job to three. For EYFS (reception in old money), it is deemed that they would not be able to cope with a whole day of socially-distanced desk-bound (not literally) learning, so half will be in in the morning and half in the afternoon, again Mon-Thur. (Indications are that fewer EYFS children will be coming in than for years 1 and especially 6.) The three-day weekend provides time for a deep clean on Friday and 72 hours for the virus to expire on any contaminated surfaces. There will be no taking books or equipment to and from school and parents are asked to send their children in in clean clothes every day and ensure clothes are washed promptly on return from school - no uniform required. Meanwhile, year 3/4 staff will be continuing to provide childcare for key-worker children not in EYFS, year 1, or year 6 Mon-Fri - those classrooms are in a separate block. It'll be a pretty grim experience compared to what pupils are used to but in many cases better than being stuck at home, both mentally and educationally.

 

Parents have been warned that if there is  a government request for other year groups to come back in, the provision for years 1 and 6 will have to be reduced - basically, it's only safe and practicable to have half the pupils in at any one time. There will also be less supported online learning.

 

These are not the year groups one would have chosen to bring back in first from a purely educational standpoint, in my view. I have seen it said that the government's choice of year groups has been driven by the desire to get more parents back into work - I think it's obvious enough that in practice, the provision that can actually be made falls far short of enabling that. It might provide some relief for those working at home but that's all. 

 

Apologies again, if you've read this far, thank you for your patience. As a reward, here's a picture of an Edwardian princess:

 

 

Princess Victoria Patricia Helena Elizabeth, b. 1886 at Buckingham Place, daughter of Prince Arthur of Connaught, third son of the old Queen. In 1919 she married well beneath her - to a mere third son of an earl, Sir Alexander Ramsey - at which point she relinquished her titles of royalty, becoming Lady Patricia Ramsey.

Edited May 28, 2020 by Compound2632

[CKPR]

19 hours ago, Edwardian said:

 

Indeed, if you go to www.honestlythereisaplan/K9contacttracer.gov.uk,  you can download a PHE-Approved K9 Contract Tracer to build.   

 

Do your bit!

 

This is the pre-grouping forum so even just sticking some gears on this would be acceptable. Oh, and a few highly visible thermionic valves would much appreciated and within our preferred technological parameters.

[Hroth]

37 minutes ago, CKPR said:

Oh, and a few highly visible thermionic valves would much appreciated and within our preferred technological parameters.

 

To be honest, only "balloon" diodes and triodes would be acceptable in that situation.

 

Of course they would have to be in a highly polished mahogany case with brass and ebonite switchgear . Large flat mica condensers, resistors longer than two inches and free-air variable condensers should also be clearly visible.  The positioning of the High Tension and Low Tension (heater) batteries would take some thought too...

 

As a matter of interest, condensing even this amount of computational power might be a tad difficult

The K-9 unit might have to be slightly larger than originally envisaged...

 

 

Edited May 28, 2020 by Hroth
Clarification

[Donw]

Compare that original stuff with todays Surface Mount Technology which can seem insane. The very small 0603 size devices are about 1.6mmx 0.8mm and the pitch on the leads of a big chip( i.e centre to centre can be a little as 0.5mm)  Imagine something less than an inch square with 144 leads 36 per side which could out perform the computer above with just a fraction of its power. 

I have some to do on a kit for a DCC Cab I have bought. Fortunately they are the bigger 3mmx1.5mm size so at least I might see them.

Go for that option and K9 could probably match Marvin's brain the size of a planet.

 

Don

[nick_bastable]

1 hour ago, Donw said:

Compare that original stuff with todays Surface Mount Technology which can seem insane. The very small 0603 size devices are about 1.6mmx 0.8mm and the pitch on the leads of a big chip( i.e centre to centre can be a little as 0.5mm)  Imagine something less than an inch square with 144 leads 36 per side which could out perform the computer above with just a fraction of its power. 

I have some to do on a kit for a DCC Cab I have bought. Fortunately they are the bigger 3mmx1.5mm size so at least I might see them.

Go for that option and K9 could probably match Marvin's brain the size of a planet.

 

Don

sounds like the MERG one nice kit works really well  although ultra sonic the board threw me

 

Nick B

[jcredfer]

4 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Apologies for a serious reply to a satirical but accurate description of the situation. I happen to be a governor of a primary school - as a governing body we have, with the senior staff, been wrestling with this and I believe what we are doing is typical. As governors, we have had to be convinced that risk has been fully assessed and that the arrangements put in place are as safe as can be. The arrangements are very much as described for years 1 and 6 with classes of 15 pupils, being taken be the year 1/2 and year 5/6 teachers, each with a teaching assistant. These year groups will only be in school Mon-Thur, with Fridays for staff to prepare and support year 2 and year 5 online learning - which will be less than it has been; likewise those year 1 and 6 pupils whose parents decide against sending them in will receive no more than pointers to appropriate online resources. As Julian says, staff cannot be expected to move from doing one full-time job to three. For EYFS (reception in old money), it is deemed that they would not be able to cope with a whole day of socially-distanced desk-bound (not literally) learning, so half will be in in the morning and half in the afternoon, again Mon-Thur. (Indications are that fewer EYFS children will be coming in than for years 1 and especially 6.) The three-day weekend provides time for a deep clean on Friday and 72 hours for the virus to expire on any contaminated surfaces. There will be no taking books or equipment to and from school and parents are asked to send their children in in clean clothes every day and ensure clothes are washed promptly on return from school - no uniform required. Meanwhile, year 3/4 staff will be continuing to provide childcare for key-worker children not in EYFS, year 1, or year 6 Mon-Fri - those classrooms are in a separate block. It'll be a pretty grim experience compared to what pupils are used to but in many cases better than being stuck at home, both mentally and educationally.

 

Parents have been warned that if there is  a government request for other year groups to come back in, the provision for years 1 and 6 will have to be reduced - basically, it's only safe and practicable to have half the pupils in at any one time. There will also be less supported online learning.

 

These are not the year groups one would have chosen to bring back in first from a purely educational standpoint, in my view. I have seen it said that the government's choice of year groups has been driven by the desire to get more parents back into work - I think it's obvious enough that in practice, the provision that can actually be made falls far short of enabling that. It might provide some relief for those working at home but that's all. 

 

Apologies again, if you've read this far, thank you for your patience. As a reward, here's a picture of an Edwardian princess:

 

 

Princess Victoria Patricia Helena Elizabeth, b. 1886 at Buckingham Place, daughter of Prince Arthur of Connaught, third son of the old Queen. In 1919 she married well beneath her - to a mere third son of an earl, Sir Alexander Ramsey - at which point she relinquished her titles of royalty, becoming Lady Patricia Ramsey.

 

Co-incidentally, I am also a Governor of a Primary School and we went through very similar set of calculations to the School that Compound relates.  There were two other factors which also added to the problems for the Head Teachers of Schools, I'm sure also at Compound's School.

 

1.  At the same time as the Gov't decision about the return of some children to schools, they were saying that we could meet with one only person, from outside the family and only then at a distance of more than 2 metres.  Pupils and their adult staff were stated to be allowed to meet in groups and would be expected to expose themselves to less than 2 metres and for extended periods of the day!!   {Note, there was no medical, or other information about how the virus would behave differently in Schools.  I have yet to see any, since.}  Without being in the slightest bit cynical {tempting 'though that is} and without any information from the Gov't on how that difference might be reconciled, their motives look to be questionable.  They are what led to my supposition that children's lesser reaction to the virus may be being used as a lower rate viral  distribution, to move towards Herd immunity.  True or not, their assumption that school children and their teachers  could should be more exposed, than the rest of the population, seems an extraordinary piece of mental skulduggery.

 

2.  Many Schools were also dealing with a previous set of instructions about being open for the children of Essential Workers, regardless of their year group.  That had resulted in our school with 65 such pupils and many other schools with similar numbers.  There will be few of you who cannot instantly see that 7 classrooms, 65 pupils, classrooms, each with less than 15 pupils, bubbles of 8 max, one member of staff allocated to each bubble, work to be provided for those still at home, marking of all the homework, time for planning for all of these.....   doesn't exactly leave much room for the introduction of 3 more full classes of 30 pupils.

 

Relating to the jokes thread?  The Gov't think we won't see through what they wish on our children and teachers.    .....               

 

Julian

 

[monkeysarefun]

21 hours ago, Annie said:

We have an election coming up soon and upon our bunch of dimwit Tories in opposition discovering via a poll that their current leader was seriously disliked by a large proportion of the NZ population promptly elected another one who was pretty much a complete unknown.  I suppose they thought if nobody knows who he is nobody could dislike him.  But then in an television interview at home he proudly shows off his trophy shelf and among his trophies is a red Trump campaign baseball cap.  Way to go Tories, - shooting yourself in the foot just like you always do.

 

Our most Tory PM was that prize   idiot Tony Abbott - he who resurrected Australias long dead knighthood honour and then gave one to HRH Prince Phil. 

 

Think bog standard Rightwingnutjob  but with a love of wearing speedos on telly..

 

I got so sick of seeing his face in the news so I was overjoyed when someone made a firefox extension that replaced any photo of him on a webpage with a random picture of kittens. I keep forgetting I still have it installed and so whenever there is a rare story about him -  doing invited trips to the UK to preach how good Brexit is going to be and how the world is better off with climate change  are just some - I get a surprise to see the kittens.

 

Just so very glad his party dumped him after discovering his inner loon - can't imagine what state we'd be in right now  if he was still PM.

 

Edited May 28, 2020 by monkeysarefun

[brianusa]

5 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Apologies for a serious reply to a satirical but accurate description of the situation. I happen to be a governor of a primary school - as a governing body we have, with the senior staff, been wrestling with this and I believe what we are doing is typical. As governors, we have had to be convinced that risk has been fully assessed and that the arrangements put in place are as safe as can be. The arrangements are very much as described for years 1 and 6 with classes of 15 pupils, being taken be the year 1/2 and year 5/6 teachers, each with a teaching assistant. These year groups will only be in school Mon-Thur, with Fridays for staff to prepare and support year 2 and year 5 online learning - which will be less than it has been; likewise those year 1 and 6 pupils whose parents decide against sending them in will receive no more than pointers to appropriate online resources. As Julian says, staff cannot be expected to move from doing one full-time job to three. For EYFS (reception in old money), it is deemed that they would not be able to cope with a whole day of socially-distanced desk-bound (not literally) learning, so half will be in in the morning and half in the afternoon, again Mon-Thur. (Indications are that fewer EYFS children will be coming in than for years 1 and especially 6.) The three-day weekend provides time for a deep clean on Friday and 72 hours for the virus to expire on any contaminated surfaces. There will be no taking books or equipment to and from school and parents are asked to send their children in in clean clothes every day and ensure clothes are washed promptly on return from school - no uniform required. Meanwhile, year 3/4 staff will be continuing to provide childcare for key-worker children not in EYFS, year 1, or year 6 Mon-Fri - those classrooms are in a separate block. It'll be a pretty grim experience compared to what pupils are used to but in many cases better than being stuck at home, both mentally and educationally.

 

Parents have been warned that if there is  a government request for other year groups to come back in, the provision for years 1 and 6 will have to be reduced - basically, it's only safe and practicable to have half the pupils in at any one time. There will also be less supported online learning.

 

These are not the year groups one would have chosen to bring back in first from a purely educational standpoint, in my view. I have seen it said that the government's choice of year groups has been driven by the desire to get more parents back into work - I think it's obvious enough that in practice, the provision that can actually be made falls far short of enabling that. It might provide some relief for those working at home but that's all. 

 

Apologies again, if you've read this far, thank you for your patience. As a reward, here's a picture of an Edwardian princess:

 

 

Princess Victoria Patricia Helena Elizabeth, b. 1886 at Buckingham Place, daughter of Prince Arthur of Connaught, third son of the old Queen. In 1919 she married well beneath her - to a mere third son of an earl, Sir Alexander Ramsey - at which point she relinquished her titles of royalty, becoming Lady Patricia Ramsey.

 

Some of the daughters of Royalty were quite beautiful especially the Czars quartet, the Czarina being Victoria's daughter along with the rest of the brood.  A lot though depended on the abilities of the photographer!

       Brian.

[Hroth]

12 minutes ago, brianusa said:

A lot though depended on the abilities of the photographer!

 

Not just the photographer, but his backroom staff of retouchers.  The smooth tones in the portrait of Princess Victoria Patricia Helena Elizabeth were achieved by blocking out blemishes, lines and wrinkles using a soft pencil on the negative to achieve the desired result.  Not that the Princess might need such heavy handed treatment, but the even skin tone exhibited was much desired.  The image shows the results of such manipulation, a pre-computer photoshopping if you like!

 

For the work of a photographer who was noted for landscapes and cityscapes, but relied on keeping his portraiture subjects happy, a typical example might be E. Chambré Hardman  who worked in Liverpool and who's home and studio are now in the care of the National Trust.  He kept several members of staff to retouch portraits in a small back room of the house.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E._Chambr%C3%A9_Hardman

https://www.nationaltrust.org.uk/hardmans-house

 

 

 

[Donw]

3 hours ago, nick_bastable said:

sounds like the MERG one nice kit works really well  although ultra sonic the board threw me

 

Nick B

 

It is indeed the MERG DCC CAB

[St Enodoc]

11 hours ago, nick_bastable said:

Hands off the laughing zone

 

Nick B

Wasn't it Ken Dodd (or somebody) who called the flesh-coloured area we can see there the Golden Mile, because when you got there you were laughing?

[St Enodoc]

There seems to be a lot of vitriol and even hate around at the moment. I get enough of that in the real world and it's not much fun seeing it in the Achingverse too. Can we tone things down a little please?

[Adam88]

4 hours ago, brianusa said:

 

... the Czarina being Victoria's daughter ...

 

 

granddaughter

[Annie]

3 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

 

Post deleted

Edited May 29, 2020 by Annie
Wasting my time

[Malcolm 0-6-0]

6 hours ago, monkeysarefun said:

 

Our most Tory PM was that prize   idiot Tony Abbott - he who resurrected Australias long dead knighthood honour and then gave one to HRH Prince Phil. 

 

Think bog standard Rightwingnutjob  but with a love of wearing speedos on telly..

 

I got so sick of seeing his face in the news so I was overjoyed when someone made a firefox extension that replaced any photo of him on a webpage with a random picture of kittens. I keep forgetting I still have it installed and so whenever there is a rare story about him -  doing invited trips to the UK to preach how good Brexit is going to be and how the world is better off with climate change  are just some - I get a surprise to see the kittens.

 

Just so very glad his party dumped him after discovering his inner loon - can't imagine what state we'd be in right now  if he was still PM.

 

 

 

When Abbott first entered parliament he was memorably described by the Labor Party Prime Minister of the day, Paul Keating, as a young fogey.   

[Compound2632]

I googled "Happy Edwardians" - this was the first thing to come up. I like the extended caption, too.

[monkeysarefun]

Young Edwardians  at Bondi Beach  not being socially distant, a mistake which closed the beach a mere 120 years later. 

 

Swimwear had obviously not been invented yet, other than by a couple of youngsters near the centre of the picture  wearing speedos - obviously time travellers or a young Tony Abbott.

 

Edited May 29, 2020 by monkeysarefun

[Edwardian]

35 minutes ago, monkeysarefun said:

Young Edwardians  at Bondi Beach  not being socially distant, a mistake which closed the beach a mere 120 years later. 

 

Swimwear had obviously not been invented yet, other than by a couple of youngsters near the centre of the picture  wearing speedos - obviously time travellers or a young Tony Abbott.

 

 

What a great photograph for getting us into the holiday mood.

 

For the Edwardian seaside, inter alia, it's worth checking out the pictures of Cecil Hewitt, which include seaside holidays in Norfolk.  Warning, it involves a link to the Mail Online.  Now wash your hands.

 

 

Here is a Another Collection.  Warning, this set does include bathing costumes and, shockingly, ladies' toes!

I'm rather taken with the lady with the parasol in the picture below, date and place unknown ...

 

 

 

Most remarkable, though I think fairly well-know, are Otto Pfenninger's colour pictures of Brighton in 1906:

 

 

 

Finally, nudity!