Kickstart

Nato GDP spending target seems a bit strange. The UK is one of the higher, but then the UK also has areas like the Falklands to protect. Germany is pretty much surrounded by NATO countries so spending is purely on NATO defence. The USA has high defence spending by GDP, but half its coastline is not in the NATO area and unlikely to be a target for an aggresor to NATO, plus has forces in Korea and Japan , and various overseas bases. Add in how much went on Iraq and Afghanistan operations, which were well outside the NATO area and limited in the participants. That said, not sure what a better way would be of targeting a level of spending. All the best Katy

Unless we stock up on weapons soon, likely a pitchfork will be the equipment for conscripts. Seems likely we still have 200k SA80s (half of which will be the early non updated version), and sold / scrapped all the SLRs, and doesn't seem we have the manufacturers to build up again in a short timeframe. All the best Katy

I do wonder if the recruitment / retention issues the armed forces have are a combination of factors which amount to not being treated well. Rounds of redundancies with more and more time deployed in hot and sandy environments where people are trying to kill them. This can become self perpetuating, if less people means more time deployed, so more recruitment issues, etc. Might also not help that there is now a far higher perception of the chances of being severely wounded, when those who have been wounded are more likely to survive and then be seen in society at large (this is not denigrating those who have been severely wounded, rather just the effect on the public and its knowledge of the chances of life changing injuries). We also have perceptions of kit not being fit for purpose. SA80 for example - even if those in combat use will be the upgraded version which seem liked and reliable there is still the perception that it is unreliable (from memory, only about half the L85A1 were upgraded to L85A2 standard). Further, how appealing is it to join a military to fight a war that doesn't appear to be an appropriate place to stick our noses, and which has no real defined plan for completion? Possibly the comments on preparing for a citizen army have more to do with just increasing military spending to strengthen the professional armed forces to avoid talking about conscription. I doubt the UK could arm a conscript army, nor could source the weapons to do so in any short space of time. All the best Katy

Think you are probably right. I only saw one on the road back in the 80s. And that was an unmarked police car in Northern Ireland that we saw quite regularly. Full jam sandwich livery would probably have been less obvious! All the best Katy

Didn't realise Duracell made munitions Sorry, couldn't resist All the best Katy

Red one above the Sherpa is a Talbot Solara isn't it? Noticed a pile of yellow painted cars with TRRL down the side. Presume crash test cars from the TRRL All the best Katy

That was quite some speed. If the other ship wasn't there it would have instead impacted the dock wall. Also not sure if just me, but shortly before the impact it seems to change directly, more directly towards HMS Bangor. Almost like there was confusion in the direction to turn when moving astern All the best Katy

Point I was trying to make was that putting a 14+ age rating on them will reduce sales to a younger age range. Nephew I am thinking of I would have had zero concerns about them having a Bachman loco with fine detail when still well under 14 (nearer half that age). But a protective parent would often prevent that happening for any such children. All the best Katy

Bachman have done it since quite a while before then. But it cuts off a large part of your potential market, and undermines the companies future. 15 odd years ago a nephew wanted a train set. He was 7 at the time. One of the most important points to him was that it was not Thomas The Tank Engine as he was way beyond that age. If there is nothing interesting available for 7~8 of their most formative years then that is a major problem All the best Katy

99% of the time that is just google analytics. Which is where web sites plug in small Google bits of code, and get some useful info, and in exchange Google gets a load of valuable data and the ability to make a lot of money with targeted adverts all over the place. Something I find a bit unpleasant. It gets really nasty when this tracking can link up with a previous web site to get your email address, and spam email you. Yes this can happen 😲 - fortunately so far it seems to be rare. As to bespoke software vs off the shelf - that bespoke software is the way to differentiate yourself. Without it you just fade into the background noise - with as much uniqueness as a random Ebay shop. All the best Katy

It is 6 of one, half a dozen of the other. An off the shelf solution is easy, until you want some bespoke functionality which ramps the cost up and makes maintenance a lot harder. But it is that bespoke functionality that people like with some web sites (such as the trunk function). The development costs were probably most paid for a decade or more ago, just leaving the maintence. Always the chances that there are big holes in the web site due to lack of maintenance, but the same will apply to off the shelf solutions All the best Katy

Most Bachman models are marked as for 14 years +. To an extent this might just be covering themselves from liability, but for a "protective" parent this probably stops them letting their child have one of these models All the best Katy

So sorry to hear this All the best Katy

Suspect this is very much the case. Added to which is how the unreliability reflects in costs. If both a blown bulb and a blown gearbox each count as a failure then 2 equally failure prone cars by the report would have dramatically different costs (or possibly more realistically, a blown headlight bulb taking 2 minutes to fix, or a blown instrument cluster bulb which required the dashboard out) I know that previously there have been surveys published of faults, both by number of faults and the costs of repairs and the results have been dramatically different All the best Katy

Fortunately not had a drive with a gearbox like that. The Focus we have is not great now, but probably an adjustment issue and as getting to the linkage is a major job we are just living with it (it was fine until the original linkage failed). We have had Alfasuds / 33s and 75s. All were slated for their gear changes and none of them did I really have issues with. The 33 I liked quite a bit as it worked well for quick gear changes. All were better than (say) the E46 BMW we had. Old Mk2 Escorts had lovely gear changes. Not sure how many modern cars approach that level. All the best Katy

Other than weight (a simple fact - and to be honest most modern cars are massively heavy) and reliability (not something that would show on any normal driving experience) I haven't criticised the DSG gearbox. I like the idea of a quick changing manual controlled by buttons All the best Katy

A colleague had a DSG Audi, and was paranoid of it failing (from memory the fluid changes were regarded as critical). The gearbox survived but the control unit for it died, and this was very expensive and keyed to the car to stop him fitting a 2nd hand one. That said, VW group seem to get away with reliability like this and expensive repairs which most other brands would be absolutely panned for. I like the idea of a DSG box although to be honest not driven one. I have done a fair few miles in a Selespeed Alfa 156, and while it would no doubt change gear more quickly that I can, it felt far slower as I was sitting there waiting for it to do something rather than me actually participating. Only once did it make a nasty mess of changing and that was when I had left it in auto mode on a long motorway journey, and after coming off to a roundabout I spotted a gap in the traffic and put my foot down. It tried to accelerate, decided it needed a lower gear, changed down and tried to accelerate before deciding it needed a lower gear, etc. By the time it actually got down to a gear it was happy to accelerate in I was in the middle of the roundabout with the gap having almost disappeared! All the best Katy

Yes with a DSG. There you just have the extra weight. All the best Katy

Very much so. My car I bought when it was about 7 years old, but with 21k. Now done over a 120k. Even if worthless now the depreciation would be at most the £7k I paid for it. Buying a new car I would have lost that and more in a couple of years. Newer version of the MX5 would maybe save me 20% (being generous) on fuel. Over the 100k that would maybe be a saving of £4k. Which is probably less than the depreciation of just driving it off the forecourt. For fuel economy, often not. For a manual the gear change points, etc, for the fuel consumption tests, etc, are specified. On an auto they are up to the car. Hence for an auto it is easy to tweak the gear changes to minimise fuel consumption on the tests. In the real world the auto is unlikely to be better, and often worse as it has a significant amount of extra weight to carry around. All the best Katy

For this car, more revs made no positive contribution. A lazy gearbox would have been better, and 4 speeds was no real benefit. But on a revvy engine, yes please for gears. My MX5 is a Sport version, specifically so I had a 6 speed gearbox to play with. We have bikes with 7 speed gearboxes (and on one, where the power started at 9500rpm and ended at 11000rpm it was pretty essential and a lot of fun when in the mood). Changing gear and using the clutch, with umph increasing with revs is what I enjoy. It feels like I am being rewarded for paying attention to the engine and gears. Unlike a large engine with all the umph at low revs where I feel like I am being punished for doing anything with the gearbox. All the best Katy

Afraid when we were in Aus we hired a 6 cylinder Falcon one long weekend. It really wasn't a pleasant car. Largely a mismatch between the engine and the gearbox. It was a very lazy straight 6 engine which didn't do anything useful if revved but responded to just the throttle. The gearbox was a hyperactive 4 speed, and if you looked at the accelerator it kicked down a gear, and if you pressed it more than a tiny amount it kicked down 2 gears (not very smooth!), and now was doing 5000+ rpm for no benefit. Handing was not exactly pleasant either. The gearbox would have been fine if joined to a nice revvy engine. But the 4L really needed a very lazy gearbox and didn't benefit from 4 speed. Of the 4 cars we hired it was the least pleasant to drive. The Daewoo Cielo (Nexia in the UK) was not bad to drive, and the auto Corolla was also OK (not sure that the Corolla was any better than the Cielo). The Holden Barina was OK, but keeping to the speed limit was not a problem (exceeding it would have been!) All the best Katy

Power wise, you are stuck with the larger heavier engines from BMW (even the 4 cylinders), which are not particularly powerful. Yes they build cars with more power but then you are into far more complexity. That said, my experience of BMWs is limited and not really positive! The Mk3 is not bad for that. Shells do have some rot spots but the subframes seem not bad. However not sure the Lowcosts use any part of the subframes All the best Katy

Black almost never looks clean. Silver almost never looks dirty! All the best Katy

Not many cheap rwd doner cars anymore (and not sure anyone would want to use a BMW) Not sure how much was used, but I have seen locally a rather nice condition Vauxhall Chevette with an MX5 engine All the best Katy

Been a lot of inflation since then I have been following a youtube video of someone building a Lowcost over the last few years (using an MX5 as a basis, rather than the Sierra that was originally envisaged). Interesting to watch All the best Katy