Colin_McLeod

Genuine question. How does this create a serious risk of confusion?

No. He was not a priest.

I was going to describe one of my old English masters but then I remembered the RMweb censoring software.

How did they reconcile wearing a special tie with not advertising to management that they broke a safety rule (speed limit)?

Some already have!

So spacing the sleepers further apart is the same as the new Toblerone only it is being marketed as an improvement lol

Agree. I bought a model and brought it home.

Thanks Andy

. The word "you" may have personalised it if you take the word as being in the second person singular, but it did not infer anything. You may think it was an accident or you may think it was not. You made the inference not me. Also take my comments in the context of this thread. Several posters are quire sensibly discussing the use of the word accident (not inferring that you were not by the way) and it is clear that the only alternative to an accident is something that was done deliberately. I thought you had have difficultly with that point, so I made a comment in an effort to explain it but you took it as a personal inference. The phrase "No more debate needed" comes across to me as arrogant, by the way. Feel free to continue the debate if you wish but please do not try to bring it to a premature end after making a point. No need for Mods to lock the thread just because the word "accident" is being discussed IMHO

I did not infer anything.

Unless you think it was done on purpose then yes it was truly an accident. Accidents don't just happen: they are caused. If they were not caused deliberately then they are accidents. Your two responses were concatenated because you posted them so soon after each other. I assume your actions that caused this (fast consecutive posting) was accidental - In this case due to lack of training in that no one explained to you that this would happen.

It was not a crash. It was a derailment. I see nothing wrong with the thread title and see no need to amend it

Misuse is not a reason to abolish.

Why is it a "pity"? It makes sense to use a firm with relevant previous experience rather than starting from scratch using a firm that lacks such experience.

I knew it. The law does not apply to cyclists!!!!!!

The Blythfield curve linking Belfast Central station with Belfast Great Victoria Street involved the demolition of some brand new houses. Despite the best efforts of the DOE(NI) to try to use this to pour cold water on the project NIR approached the householders directly and discovered that they had been moved from their former community on the nearby Donegal Road. So NIR bought a plot on the Donegal Road and got new houses built there. The householders were delighted to get back to their former area, the new curve was built and everyone was happy. The moral of the story is that there are always solutions and perhaps some of the problems highlighted for HS2 are not so insurmountable as the objectors make out.

That estate takes up a lot of space It is probably more realistic to say HS2 cuts through it rather than requiring 100% demolition. As for the farmer lady who is prepared to fight HS2 "to the death" that is a laughable comment.

According to the Hattons description it does have an extension to the pin for below baseboard fitting and also cranks for operating signals. Nice to see some robust old technology back.

Most of the editing I now have to do is to correct unnoticed auto corrects. The rest were due to my own mistakes.

Reserve not met. Seller obviously wants at least £50.

Sounds like a supply problem 50A55B rather than a delivery problem.

No pics because the photographers did not want to get their camera wet in the rain.

That bullhead track must be Peco with the four bolt fishplates

Meil I agree with your thoughts but NOT the last sentence. The reason for the SPAD has to be determined as it could be a technical problem for example a failure of the brakes.

Try using CAPITALS but in a SUBTLE way.