Reorte

18 minutes ago, PhilJ W said:

Seems odd that the (concrete) section nearest the collision point remained intact when the opposite section collapsed.

It'll all depend on just exactly how the forces were distributed and transmitted through the structure.

6 minutes ago, Dungrange said:

 

I think that's a wider issue with regards misunderstanding about taxation.  There are also people who will tell you that National Insurance pays for state pensions and the NHS - again, it doesn't: the money raised just goes into the general taxation pot for the government of the day to use as it sees fit.  Vehicle Excise Duty is a tax that is paid if you want to own a car and use it on the public road network, but it doesn't just pay for road maintenance and could be regarded as a 'sin tax' in the same manner as duty on cigarettes, alcohol etc.

And of course you can get cars where although there is a rate it's zero (mine is, and frankly I find that a bit absurd, although of course there's still all the tax paid on the petrol).

edit: replying to two posts ago (another reply appeared whilst I was typing)

And that's all well and good. I'm more than happy to pay taxes to contribute towards things I believe make the country a better place to live in even if they can't stand on their own two feet otherwise (which isn't solely just ones I personally benefit from). Obviously there have to be some limits there - the whole point about the economic considerations being limiting factors and a means to an end - but as a general concept, great. At the extreme it probably would make more economic sense just to let some people starve but who wants to live in a world where that would be seen as right and proper? And just because that's an extreme doesn't mean the same principle can't apply to less extreme scenarios.

Now I'm not trying to argue that the particular proposal in this thread should therefore go ahead, just that the "it doesn't make economic sense" isn't an argument against it in its own right (although "it makes little economic sense to a very excessive degree" would).

8 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

Try explaining that to the taxpayer, especially those skipping meals to subsidize someone elses vacation travel.

A bit one extreme or the other there don't you think? I.e. exactly what I was getting at. Do we only pay for schools because ultimately there's an economic return? Libraries? Parks?

It should've also been very clear that I wasn't saying "economic considerations don't matter at all," since I pretty much spelled that out.

14 hours ago, adb968008 said:

More chance the scottish govt will run out of money to subsidize these lines and reduce services, maybe cut FW altogether, at least in the off season.

 

Beeching said no lines north of Glasgow made economic sense, 60 years later nothing changed.

 

it only exists because the public dont scrutinise their taxes, and civil servants get away with it.

There are more kinds of sense than economic sense. Indeed, just looking at the economics isn't sense at all IMO; economic factors and considerations are enabling and limiting factors, they're something you need to have a good grasp of when determining whether or not something's even viable, but they're a means to an end and shouldn't ever be the end itself.

Sometimes we get a better world when economic considerations play second fiddle.

Just now, Jol Wilkinson said:

"Road rage" is nothing new and seems to have existed since cars became relatively commonplace. For some (many?) a car is an extension of their home and any invasion of their "space" causes annoyance.

I wouldn't be in the least bit surprised if it was common with horses and carts.

What? I'd not heard that, about sequels and DLC. That's very disappointing (and very odd considering what a success it's been).

1 hour ago, Siberian Snooper said:

I have to have my old meter replaced and the only option is a smart meter, I'm not happy with that, but I may get the last laugh, as the last time they wanted to change it, the chap took one look at it and said that he couldn't change it as the Western Power fittings were out dated and he'd not been trained on them. He said that he would report back to his supervisor and I should await a call from Western Power, quick as a flash, nothing happened. I'm now waiting to see what happens.

Pretty sure they can't force you to take a smart meter even if yours needs replacing. They'll have to replace it with a non-"smart" one (or one with the supposedly "smart" functions disabled, although by all accounts they're good enough at doing that themselves) if you ask.

Sounds like the ship got a mayday out and traffic was stopped as a result, so a quick response there probably saved lives.

12 minutes ago, Oldddudders said:

They do indeed look flimsy - but are evidently up to the job if unmolested. And that's the problem - the irresistible force of a large ship drifting, as apparently here, would require enormous, probably almost impossible, levels of protection. 

I've wondered about that. The kinetic energy in even a slow-moving container ship will be immense, is it actually possible to protect against something like this? I suppose you could go to really big extremes by building every pier on an artificial island but that could well be beyond practical.

1 hour ago, Michael Hodgson said:

I agree, but of course it does suggest an approach for marketing managers - produce advertising spam purporting to be from your competitors so they'll be so p*ssed off they'll buy from you instead!.

I'm guessing that there are fairly strict laws like that, which is why we rarely see anything go beyond "This is 2% better than other leading brands." If they tiptoe around like that it suggests attacking competitors lands you in trouble.

Well the download decided to restart half way through. So that's another day and a half (unless it does eventually come to realise half the stuff's already there - the files definitely are).

PC port of Horizon Forbidden West out now, and it sounds like a solid port of the console version for once. I'll find out eventually (day and a half to download it, and that's if I don't interrupt the download so I can use the connection for something else). I've managed to completely avoid spoilers so far...

1 hour ago, 30801 said:

 

The BBC has commercial activities around the world and isn't funded solely by UK licence fees...

Hence specific international services like the World Service. What we're talking about here though is very much a domestic news story (not even a national one).

1 hour ago, kevinlms said:

What a predictable and nonsense reply!

 

As I stated earlier, the world goes further than the British mainland - like it or not.

Yes, the right reply usually should be predictable. Calling it "nonsense" I'm afraid just looks like a lack of any sensible reply to it, sneering at answers you don't like.

Do you expect reports in countries that use metric units to give conversions of them all to imperial? Remember it's not just the UK that uses them, the USA is a pretty significant country that uses mph.

44 minutes ago, kevinlms said:

Given your comments, It's time the UK realised that a site like the BBC (the international one or not) is commonly read outside of the British mainland. Do people really think that 33kmh (lets ignore the fact as others have pointed out, that it's closer to 32kmh) is worse sounding than 20mph? Britain must be sadder than I thought if so!

Making pointless conversions is sadder IMO. Like I said it's read outside but the BBC's job is to provide for the UK, the ones who pay for it, not an international audience.

Anyway when I look at sites and stories and so on from another country I find it preferable if they stick to whatever's used locally and leave me to figure out any differences for myself. Makes the world a bit more of an interesting place if people don't all do things the same way, and I may learn something.

5 minutes ago, nightstar.train said:

I expect that they are rightfully fearful of Warner Bros army of lawyers and know exactly where the line is and how far they can tread it in regards to Harry Potter.

Harry Potter is no doubt a very useful tool for bringing in business, they don't need to risk treading on any legal toes to make use of that perception of it (although you could certainly argue that their headbutting with the ORR shows that they're happy enough to do that even when they're on a hiding to nothing). Probably helps that the train's been running since before Harry Potter made it more popular.

1 hour ago, Oldddudders said:

It is an ongoing source of bafflement to me that anyone would pay serious wonga to ride anywhere in a chraracterless Mk1 at National Network speeds in 2024. 25 mph on an impecunious preserved line is one thing, this is another. Obviously WCRC know their business, or perhaps don't. 

Considerably less characterless than what's followed. Travelling over 25 mph in them doesn't bother me in the slightest, although that assumes they're in decent condition and not rotting apart by now. In any case what's the line speed on the Mallaig extension? We're not exactly talking ECML.

Obviously there's a limit on how much I'd be prepared to pay but other than that there's nothing offputting.

1 minute ago, kevinlms said:

Why not, articles like that get read worldwide and not everyone knows what mph is.

They'll be full of things people elsewhere won't have heard of. The BBC's output, other than the World Service, is for domestic consumption. It's good that others can see it but that's not who it should be written for.

The bit that bothers me there is someone at the BBC has felt that they need to write 20 mph (33 km/h).

3 minutes ago, Oldddudders said:

I suspect there are ways around that. His participation in other formulae implies money is still available. 

 

Years ago at Le Mans, Deb got close to a Russian team who were not short of cash, and if they needed parts or an upgrade, they simply turned to Igor The Banker, who could procure funds for such. Much smaller numbers, I know, but..... 

In order to race you need to go to the country the race is in. Immigration's under no obligation to let him in to the country.

7 hours ago, Wickham Green too said:

Nothing left on the current aerial views. ☹️

The arch over the surviving lines seems to have been replaced with concrete too :(

32 minutes ago, cctransuk said:

 

Here we go again - I thought that we'd both agreed to leave this alone!

 

...

 

Nothing to be frightened of!

In which case all I'll point out is that I'm not frightened of it, I simply loathe it.

20 hours ago, adb968008 said:

 

so is this about shutting wcrc down, or making them cdl compliant ?

 

certainly the posts here read as many would like or are trying to shut them down, and as an outsider it certainly feels to me like theres plenty of vendettas and ill will.

But if thats the case, surely cdl isnt the right vehicle to do it, as if they become compliant…then that avenue is closed.

or is it a case of keep fighting until you get the killer blow ?

 

I’m not in this industry so I only know so much, but what I read here is fascinating, ive got to be honest ive not been on a wcrc tour in years either. I’d no idea it was that bad.

If it feels like some want to shut WCRC down it's only because  WC keep treading on toes and dragging their heels and generally giving the impression of not being a responsible operator. I said it earlier it's the job of an operator to follow the rules (they can argue against them, just as long as they follow them), and WCRC don't appear to be all that keen to do so. And whilst I'd more than happily travel on a train without locked doors (indeed, I'd prefer to) I'd have serious doubts about travelling on one belonging to a company that seems unwilling to meet the requirements - if they can't be bothered on one I'm not concerned about what are the chances that they're not bothering on one that I very much would be?

So it's no wonder some people appear to have it in for them.

If you've got nothing to hide - then it's absolutely no-one else's business to know about it. Nothing to hide, nothing to prove.