Titan

Not forgetting a long stay in York...

I'll have a P please Bob! https://youtu.be/_u3sbu6aokM

He was suffering from shock.

Wok awound the clock. Johnathan Ross's favourite

It is widespread. I was on another motoring forum where there was a guy who was in to getting good economy from his diesel. He claimed that he was getting around 10% better mpg by avoiding supermarket fuel. Many were skeptical. Those of us that actually put his theory to the test, including me, got the same results - about 10% improvement. I was doing long distance commuting at the time, so was able to test as accurately as possible, by virtue of doing identical journeys week in, week out. Three consecutive tankfuls of Sainsburys v 3 consecutive tankfuls of Shell, and I consistently got around 10% improvement tested back to back with all other variables reduced to insignificance. As the Shell was much less than 10% more, the Shell gave me lower costs overall. The reason why so many people are unaware of this is that very few actually go to the bother of accurately measuring just how much fuel they have used, particularly when they are skeptical in the first place, (as was I) and a 10% difference is not particularly noticeable unless you actually go looking for it. Therefore most people carry on in blissful ignorance thinking they are saving money using the cheaper fuel.

Unfortunately many broad gauge main lines were quadrupled after the change to standard gauge, and in so doing already used up the extra space.

Why do people keep confusing test/trial with full scale introduction? This is the second thread which this has happened recently. How come the concept is so difficult to grasp for some?

Pity the diesel engine had yet to be invented!

That works both ways. Sometimes an apparently blindingly obvious problem turns out not to be once tested. And it will only be a fair test if it is done under typical conditions. A lightly used motorway may yield misleading results.

I do wonder if people are missing the point. This is a test not a full scale introduction. The whole point of a test is to find out what the problems actually are, rather than to speculate. Under the circumstances I expect the test to be thorough, in which case it will reveal which issues are real problems and which are imaginary ones. I expect that the test may also reveal other problems that no-one has thought of yet too...

Indeed, especially bearing in mind how many on this forum are experienced professional railwaymen...

I would have thought that would be as a result of inadequate design rather than old age/wear.

I suspect the jet engines 'efficiency' at high altitude has got more to do with needing far less power to push the airplane through thin air rather than it being in it's ideal operating environment. Indeed the thinner the air the less there is for the jet engine to react with. Put a jet engine in space and it won't work at all...

And toilet waste...

I suppose you could always put a clamp on its propeller....

And how are you going to persuade them to give up their jobs and move themselves and their families over here, just to do the same thing?

Looks like a bottom feeder to me.

It appears that our IT department is using the power of the dark side... I know we may have thought of blowing up our computers, but I think it is a bit of an extreme solution!

I would imagine that the timbers would rot out before the rail becomes worn anyway.

I was disappointed to see what seemed to be a large attack of Fresh Graffiti on the walls on the approach to Birmingham New Street around Proof House Junction. I was particularly unimpressed with the miscreant repeatedly spraying the tag 'void' with an apparent total lack of artistic talent. About two seconds later the penny dropped...

However the units will use the pans on the outer cars only, giving a minimum spacing of approx 9 cars - due to the pans being on the inner ends of the outer cars.

But then how do you know that? After all the bidders are hardly going to message you that they are bidding lower than they would have done otherwise (or not bid at all) because of the postage cost. There is even an option for sorting by lowest price including p+p which was only added because it was important to a significant number of buyers. High postage costs = lower maximum bids, fewer bidders or both, with a resultant lower price. And since the final value fees include postage, the more postage you charge the more you lose to e-bay. Of course you may not consider that losing money is a problem, but most people don't have that luxury.

I do wonder why, if having no front brake is illegal, he was not charged with that as well?

Dear fellow forum members, It seems someone wrote an app for google chrome that, when installed, will rid you of those damn photobucket P500 upgrade rectangles and will allow you to see the embedded photos again in older posts. How to use ? 0. Use google chrome as your browser 1. Go here: https://chrome.google.com/webstor...cpnnlofnnghnmfegnfnflicjjgj?hl=en 2. Install the plugin. 3. Clear your browser image cache (click the three dots at the top right in your browser bar - then click advanced, go to the "privacy and security" bit, "clear browser data" should be the last item in the window, then select "cached images and files" and clear the cache) Just to be clear - this is something YOU have to do if YOU want to see the pictures - for everyone else who surfs to the topic and uses a different browser or doesn't have the app installed, it will still show the photobucket upgrade mess. The original posters of the topics can do nothing about it. I can only say that for me it works splendid !

Because the same drivers treat them with even greater contempt than the level crossing ones.