woodenhead

I don't disagree and all the teams do this I would imagine, when you are talking such micro variations in car performance you use every angle you can to gain an advantage. In the commentary it was very much about the stewards having a go, when it was more likely someone had questioned the legality of the move with them to spur intervention. But putting two points on his licence when he had clearly been heard asking if he was ok to perform what he did shows he himself was taking steps to ensure he was not foul of any regs.

Seb was looking rather anonymous this week, Sainz was showing he is ready to replace him over at Ferarri and Albon again had a hard race from the back whilst Gasly & Kvyat benefitted from good strategy. The races are certainly not boring these days.

This is exactly the problem we have right now and why people don't follow the guidance: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8779373/Parliaments-bars-NOT-subject-10pm-curfew.html One rule for us and no rules for them.

With regards to the Hamilton penalties - which team had the most to gain from using the rulebook and raising a complaint with the FIA and which team whilst seeing the punishment as perhaps harsh didn't condemn it. I'm glad that in the end the FIA took back the licence points as that did seem a step too far and I was beginning to think myself this is the FIA indirectly taking him to task about his increasingly political stances.

It appeared in my unread items, I do try and not read stuff but sometimes you just see enough and then you zoom in and read the whole sentence. It didn't affect my enjoyment of the race from the comfort of my recording of the highlights show. Also I did end my post with a laugh emoji - I know I have only myself to blame if I see the result before I see the race.

There is a massive supply line if you look at the simple act of commuting: The trains require drivers / guards require timetablers require maintenance require track requires steel for track requires maintenance / upkeep requires signallers signalling signalling upkeep require leasing companines to provide the stock leasing company employees The stations require staff require upkeep require ancilliary service cafes & shops require staff requre supplies requires supply chains require inspections require connections with local services public transport buses taxis The list could go on and on and this is just to and from work, then there is the whole build up of shops, services and infrastructure around the workplaces. If less people need offices then the whole supply chain that keeps those offices running becomes affected and ultimately it means less jobs. Covid has decimated the holiday market - some 30,000 air crew without jobs and it's not like it's one airline where many will ultimately find employment with other airlines who buy up the capacity created by the loss of one. They are all suffering and will continue to suffer well into 2021 and probably beyond. I've read EasyJet was in the uneviable position of owning it's jets, to keep afloat is is now selling it's aircraft and leasing them back - this is a major shift for the airline, what happens when it has no more aircraft to sell?

Arghh spoilers, I don't get to see the race until the highlights and even then it may be the recorded highlights

But really by this time these weren't express trains in Mr Wright's world of expresses, these were fast locals between Sheffield and Manchester. Even the Boat train was only 7 or 8 coaches - making the line between Sheffield and Barnsley Junction quite modellable with a Heljan 76 and a few Mk1s and then some freight in the period after the Great Central mainline closed and before the electric passenger services ceased.

If the station is surrounded by retaining walls, how do the chaps in the goods yard get the goods in and out of the goods yard other than by rail. Could you extend the loading dock to cover both tracks and then make a hint of a warehouse in the side retaining wall with the tracks extending inside maybe a wagon's length. No coal facilities but it would then address how the goods got from the rail level to the upper level where the road would be.

I usually by in bulk, 48 rolls being the norm. It's when you see six or more 24 packs in a trolley that you begin to wonder. I went out yesterday, my choice of Iceland (I know!!) had nothing in stock but next door home bargains seemed to have lots of 24 packs. As we've gone off the ones in Home Bargains I decided I'd wait till later in the week to pick some up as I still have stocks remaining at home.

Now now, it's not like he did this at Red Bull with Ricciardo or Webber

I doubt Bachmann would waste a slot for a good blue riband model to re-run an old 47, black 5 or 94xx model. Hornby has plenty of collectors to soak up it's specials and none of their anniversary models are actually using old mouldings, they are all new but retro style where appropriate, the anniversay Duchess even though metal is a fine locomotive.

That's quite a sad outcome - I had a rake of the Chinese versions and I remember the announcement of the new ones and thought I wonder if they really will be that great an improvement - a bit like the older Farish 31 the bodyshape and the look of the carriages was spot on, the gap between the coaches being the issue. Even at one stage I was thinking of keeping my older Mk1s against the newer blue riband versions as side on they looked as good - it was the gap that led me to sell them and just retain the newer ones which are closer coupled.

Contentious view time: Ministers don't throw money at a government owned organisation because 'people' cannot invest in it. Put it in private hands and that same money can create dividends for shareholders and thus wealth. The fact that those shareholders might also be friends and acquaintences of ministers of course would have no bearing on this. Example, a certain housing scheme on the banks of the Thames given ministerial approval just days before a law was to be enacted making the planned scheme impossible. The major investor in the scheme seen many times having dinner with said minister and there being records of conversations stating that perhaps they shouldn't be seen together for a bit. I don't doubt this sort of thing happens within both main parties, I am of the belief that power ultimately corrupts, but whilst some may honestly believe in certain ethos for others it is simply a means to an end to get rich.

Dont forget HS2 predates the vanity of our current leader, hence talk now of a bridge to Northern Ireland, for some reason he likes nautical themes - Boris Island, the green bridge over the Thames and now a viaduct ovder the Irish channel.

Some nice tunnels near the end

Which exactly proves the point that the railways are run by the DFT, always have been, doesn't matter what the name on the side of the carriage says the trains will run. A franchise is just a licence to run the trains on behalf of the government, they have certain freedoms within the scope of the contract but ultimately they are doing the Government's bidding and they don't then the Government will put someone else in charge but it will be the same staff running the actual trains with a different badge on their uniform. No failure of a franchise has ever seen the trains stop - however, if a company like Grand Central got into difficulties the trains would simply be shunted into the siding of the Rosco's choice and left until someone else leased them or they were scrapped. At the moment the ex franchisees are running the services they are told to by the DFT - 50%,60%,70%,100% of their services with the Government subsidising any shortfalls due to lack of passenger income. Grey areas may be stock refurbishment - Avanti have Voyagers going through refits, do they stop or continue, I would hope the latter but if the DFT decide that isn't a priority then it may come to a halt - of course the refurbishment is keeping staff employed so maybe it's a wise investment and it continues. I don't know what the current status of that programme is so I am just guessing here.

I believe Boris just wanted to be the leader, I don't think he is in charge. I think one person's rampant rule breaking in order to 'test' his eyesight put paid to any idea that Boris was fully in control.

Strategically privatisation gave the Government distance when large monopolistic industries came face to face with changing industrial realities. The UK had a wealth of aging, resource heavy, union dominated industries falling behind emerging economies and were a millstone around HMGs neck. The Government had the choice to invest heavily, address union issues and rebuilld these industries anew or allow private companies to try and do so and if they failed it was not the Government's fault. Looking back now, privatisation raised a lot of capital for the Government, allowed the UK public to be involved in decision making (through buying of shares, which they then quickly sold) and then not worry what came next. In some respects it was a bit of a con - not many members held on to their shares, the businesses were sold cheap then large investment houses purchased them at a higher price from Joe Public who felt they had made a profit to spend on themselves, the large investment institutions got their hands on things that could later be broken up and sold off. You could argue perhaps that the government economists could see what the future held, recognising there would be a temporary lift before the realities that these monolithic industries would need to radically change, sell or simply be absorbed into larger international conglomerates but it would now be something that the Government was not responsible for and could deflect away from. A more unpalatable thought would be that those in charge knew if they invested wisely in the rising economies abroad and waited they would gain massively later on when the UK industries failed or became absorbed into these new international organisations. Back to Railways - they were never suitable for selling off and the Government knew it because left wholly to the private sector Serpell would have been enacted quickly and such pruning would probably have killed off the rest apart from maybe commuting into London. So the Goverment had to concoct a form of privatisation that would give them UK public the impression it was private, but it never really was. Railtrack very quickly demonstrated what happens when you let go of infrastructure - they cut costs and eventually something went bang and in the worst way. Network Rail rose from the ashes, it was now back in the hands of Government and remained so. The franchising arrangement was a big con, making the public think that it was the private companies making lots of decisions but in reality they did as they were asked in the proposal and the one that would take the least or pay the most to Government won - even if the plan they offered was unfeasible and quickly evaporated when faced with realities. To me it seems the big winners in all this have been the ROSCOs - they got the stock, have continued in the main to be the people who control it (apart from the few HSTs owned by First). Every franchise let seems to involve new stock being procured - sometimes before the previous stock even had a chance to turn a wheel in revenue earning service. I don't yet understand why the most radical arm of the Tories now being in charge are talking language like the opposition, but that is another debate and not for this forum I imagine.

The new app uses bluetooth to detect other phones not a mobile signal - that is only required to occasionally check in and establish if anyone you have previously come into contact with has now declared they have the virus. Sadly the original NHS version was actually better at utilising the Bluetooth connection to establish who you have been next to and for how long, the Google/Apple version less so and will result in more errors until they decide to update their base software to use whatever algorithms the NHS had. The app is also anonymous, it doesnt want to know your name or contact details and you don't log in to it, it just uses algorithms to generate codes that constantly change to record your locations and close contacts for x days before the data is deleted. You don't even by the looks of it have to share if you test positive; which seems rather selfish, you want to know if you're infected but wont do the decent thing and tell others. My big concern with the app is actually to do with the users of the app - the system would appear (and rightly so otherwise there would be serious invasions of privacy concerns) to use self reporting of covid as the basis for alerting. i.e. you indicate to the app you are self isolating, this uploads an anonymous notification to a central database which is read by other phones and alerts anyone who has been near to the person alerting within set guidelines. Sounds perfectly plausible and sound, but what if some idiot decides to visit 20 locations today, mill around in a mask and then go home and alert the system that they are self isolating even though they know there is nothing wrong with them - would that then mean lots of people in those 20 locations suddenly find themselves in self isolation (under threat of a fine now). Or friends who want a couple of weeks of Government hand outs (for the low paid) using the system to spoof a self isolation and then claim the benefit. Reading some notes it does appear that the system would link tests to the app if you book the test via the phone, but that would also suggest that you can self report if you've not used the app for the test booking. I understand the system will be useful and when visiting places scanning QR codes is better than giving everyone your name, address and contact number, but I'd rather the government get in place a proper testing regime, get their messaging right, play by the rules themselves and ensure robust contact tracing via traditional methods and not just let an app be the only hope.

Always seemed like a genial chap, very much not your typical Ferrari head of. At least F1 will be run by someone who has been involved in the organisation at a level that understands the stakeholders.

You're correct, though it depends where you live - here in Manchester it is enhanced restrictions and in parts of Wales you cannot travel without good reason.

So Boris mentions closing of establishments at 10pm and a request to work from home - the selfish brigade look at that and cause a return to panic buying - with loo rolls again being bought in bulk. Don't people learn, they didn't all get the sh*ts last time round, its the same virus so they won't get the sh*ts this time. Shops did not shut first time around, no-one has placed any restriction on going to the shops or in fact of going anywhere (except parts of Wales) - you just shouldn't be out and about without good reason after 10pm at night. It's hardly a massive restriction that will affect anyone going to the shops.

Crewe station used bays for a mix of passenger trains and parcels, at the south end. Before the remodelling there were two dedicated parcels bay platforms but afterwards these ended up in the platforms that had been used for Cardiff services with the dedicated platforms removed - I assume at that point the remaining bays became dual use.

Hence it snuck around at low level hoping not to be spotted. I was watching a formation of Hercules in the Mach Loop on YouTube when it dawned they are similar in length to a Lancaster - in fact they are 9 metres longer. You forget just how small these 'big' bombers were in their day.