ejstubbs

Is that what the sets I saw at Haymarket with the ex-FGW coaches are being used for, or is there still driver training going on too? Will the slam-door stock be re-liveried before going in to service? Or will they not bother since it'll be going for refurb sooner or later anyway, and its place taken by fully refurbed and reliveried stock?

Passing Haymarket yesterday on the tram, there seemed to be two HST sets in the yard. Each had a power car in "seven cities" livery, but both were attached to purple/swooshy lined (ex FGW?) coaching stock. I couldn't see the other end of either train, so I don't know if either one had the second power car attached. Didn't get the numbers of the two power cars I saw, unfortunately. Would I be right to assume that these are being used for more driver training, and awaiting refurbed coaches? I assume that the HST services running now are using a fully refurbed and Scotrail-liveried set (or is there more than one set in service now?)

In other words, we think "they built things to last" because most of the stuff that they didn't build so well hasn't survived for us to see. A fine example of Survivorship Bias.

Sometimes remodelling is not adequate to meet modern needs (especially for something like food retail cf storage and maintenance of railway coaches). Or the cost of remodelling is so much higher than the cost of rebuilding that it's simply not justifiable for a business which aims to remain solvent. And sometimes the existing fabric is so far gone as to make preservation nigh-on impossible - you'd end up rebuilding most of it from scratch (see also 60103). Apparently, one of the latest designs put forward for the Aldi store does aim to reflect some of the brickwork and arch details from the old facade: A number of commentators on a.n.other rail-related forum have suggested that demolition of the fire-damaged building could easily be more expensive than if it had not been set alight. That's because of the likelihood of asbestos debris, and the risk of heat-related weakening of previously sound brick/masonry and metal structural elements. DevonLive has reported that the local fire & rescue service has confirmed that the fire was started deliberately. Unsurprisingly, no suggestion has yet been put forward as to those responsible. The article does say that youths had been seen in the buildings on Saturday afternoon. On the DevonLive live feed it was noted that a small rubbish fire had been set inside the building on Sunday, which the fire & rescue had extinguished. Looks like it could just be the local neds taking advantage of a building that was about to be demolished to have a bit of fire-raising fun. (Admittedly it's not completely outwith the realms of possibility that they were put up to it, but I do always try to keep Hanlon's Razor in mind in such situations.)

I bought one of these from Rapid's eBay shop. They work very well. Personally I'm not too keen on that crimp in post #6: those serrations look to me like they could be a bit weak and prone to failure under a fairly low bending load. The CK Tools one gives a uniform squeeze/crush crimp that slips neatly in to the terminal block; not had any failures to date.

In my experience the Dapol NEM pocket setup is not very reliable. The tiny screw that is used to attach the pocket and its centring spring to the soft plastic underframe seems particularly prone to stripping the (miniscule) thread inside the mounting boss. I received a brand new Dapol wagon the other day on which oe ofn the NEM pockets had a significant droop, to the point that the 'tail' of the TLC was catching in the sleepers. As expected, it was not possible to tighten the mounting screw because it had stripped its thread. As it happens, I don't use TLCs, preferring Kadees. On many of the Dapol wagons I've got, I've quickly given up trying to use a NEM Kadee in the flaky Dapol NEM pocket and resorted to surgery, removing the Dapol NEM equipment and installed whisker Kadees in gear boxes. I recognise that Kadees aren't everyone's cup of tea, though. In that case I would suggest looking at using screw-on TLCs in place of the rather poor Dapol NEM implementation. The Bachmann ones (36-025 or 36-026) might fit - and IMO the Bachmann TLCs are better quality then the Dapol ones anyway (as others have pointed out, the Dapol TLCs have a tendency to fall apart.)

This is the wagon the OP is referring to: https://www.track-shack.com/acatalog/Bachmann-37-932-3-Plank-Wagon-LMS-Bauxite681.jpg It says "LMS" on the side so I would assume it's supposed to represent something still in the ownership of the LMS, rather than something that BR has had its hands on. I suspect that the presence of the vacuum cylinder and star is just sloppiness/"artistic licence" on Bachmann's part. There are no vacuum pipes, after all. I don't know how long this wagon has been in Bachmann's catalogue - I suspect it could days back to Mainline days or even earlier, when perhaps less attention was paid to such details. (A bit like the Bachmann LMS vent van which I've read is also "a bit tired").

Was there ever more than one?

My recollection is that most (quite possibly all) of the ferry terminals around the west coast of Scotland and the islands have big multi-lingual reminder signs as you depart towards the normal road network. Which also goes to show how many non-UK visitors they do get round those parts. Mind you, the concept of "keeping left" on some of the narrow roads in that part of the world is rather more theoretical than practical!

Blue flags have been used to indicate that a faster driver is close behind (stationary) or is trying to overtake (waved) since the year dot, long before modern aerodynamics became such a hindrance to overtaking in the premier racing series. They're used in motorcyle racing which has no aero worth speaking of, and AFAIAA they use them in karting as well, which is about as un-aerodynamic as any four-wheel racing series I can think of.

To be fair, the W H Smith kiosk is a model - albeit in 1:1 scale (OK, a "replica": https://www.nymr.co.uk/pickering-station-trail).

Given that they apparently travelled some distance going the wrong way I think it's at least equally likely that they thought they were in the correct lane for driving on a three-lane road in the UK. You would expect to have traffic going the other way passing you on the right in that situation. If three-lane roads are more common where they hailed from then it wouldn't necessarily seem odd to them, especially if they failed to notice the traffic going the same way as them on the other side of the crash barrier. Even if they did notice that, it's conceivable to rationalise that away. (IIRC there is, or was, a section of the Paris peripherique consisting of multiple lanes all going in the same direction, with a barriered reservation part way along that splits it into two carriageways both going the same way. I remember it because I was travelling in convoy with a pal who changed lanes at the last minute, leaving me on the "wrong" side of the reservation. I initially thought we were going to end up at opposite ends of the country, but a mile or so later it all joined up again.) TBH I'm not sure how one could go about reaching the hard shoulder safely across two lanes of oncoming traffic, if one did ever did find oneself driving the wrong way along lane 3. Stopping as far over on to the central reservation as possible might be preferable (although it would potentially make exiting the vehicle very unsafe if it ended up too close to the barrier to get the doors open on that side).

Agree. Your son's contract, including the next day delivery he paid for, is with the seller. The seller's contract is with Royal Mail. If Royal Mail didn't deliver the contracted service, it's up to the seller to to take it up with them. The seller should reimburse your son for the extra cost anyway, regardless of whether they get any recompense from Royal Mail. As the saying goes: you can outsource responsibility but not accountability.

I don't think that means much: the first series of just about everything seems to get tagged as "S1" these days, whether or not there are more to come. The Bodyguard episodes on iPlayer are showing as "Series 1: Episode n" but no second series has been commissioned (yet). I suppose it's justifiable in the sense that, even if there is only ever one series, the series that was made is the first (as well as the last).

Formula 1: George Russell joins Williams to become third British driver in 2019

Deploy the stinger at the far side of the crossing?

Or sell it as a going concern, or pay someone to run it for them? I rather suspect that money issues may be a factor behind the "family responsibilities". Maybe he's been doing a lot of unpaid work to keep it going but the family situation has changed and now means that he no longer has the time available to do that, and the museum doesn't bring in enough to pay someone else to do what he's been doing. Or maybe more simply the museum has been haemorrhaging money that the family can't afford any more. Whatever the underlying reasons, it's a shame that the museum is closing but I would have thought it likely that the cars will find new homes rather than be scrapped. They just won't necessarily be homes where they can be seen by the public. I'm afraid I tend to agree with Hroth as well: in a museum or private collection most of the cars would at least be preserved/conserved (or at least that should be the case). Don't get me wrong, I enjoy watching historic sports cars race* as much as the next closet petrolhead but I am also well aware that: (a) Running a race car is expensive whatever its age, and will only be more so if it is a valuable and/or technically complex example. So it's basically a wealthy man's game, albeit one that's fun to watch**; (b) Despite everyone's best intentions, sometimes one of these valuable records of past engineering accomplishments does end up getting bent or broken to a greater or lesser extent. As well as adding further to drain on the owner's wallet, this arguably can detract from both the monetary and the historical value of the vehicle if it cannot be repaired using original components or materials (shades here of the arguments about a certain well-known green steam locomotive's last overhaul/rebuild). Again, I do enjoy watching some of these beautiful antiques being raced, but I don't regard it as the only valid way to preserve the majority of them. I think that the technical issues that Hroth highlights have some similarities to those being experienced by some teams in the diesel preservation movement: you just can't get the parts. At least a steam engine can be fixed with a welding kit, spanners and a hammer...(he said, not entirely seriously, before any steam preservationists take offence). * I don't know whether the ITV coverage of this year's Goodwood Revival meeting is still available on catch-up, but there was some cracking racing in that - Troy Corser on the pre-war BMW was a highlight in the vintage motorcycle race. Nonetheless, a few cars did end up rather...er...the worse for wear. ** Actually, the pits between races, the paddock and even the spectators' car park are often at least as good value as the on-track action.

https://www.derbytelegraph.co.uk/burton/driver-cheats-death-a38-burton-1790794 It looks like the driver of the car two behind the driving school car might have started to indicate (difficult to be sure from the video), and the van driver was undertaking a tad enthusiastically, but the car driver does seem to have shown extremely poor rearward observation before executing their manoeuvre. The incident appears to have occurred here.

An additional useful check, particularly if accurate information is important enough in the circumstances, is to search for information about the same subject outside of Wikipedia. This mitigates the risk that the references given in Wikipedia have been selected precisely because they support what's written in the article. The most obvious source of such information is Google, but you do need to beware of Google finding web sites that basically just regurgitate what's in Wiki (although some of these - an increasing number, actually, it seems to me - are trivially easy to spot since they simply replicate the Wiki entry verbatim). Beyond electronic sources it's back to physical reference books and original documents, which is why we still have libraries and museums. The big difference being that Wiki can be changed. If someone writes a reference book and someone else disagrees with what's said within, the only recourse that second someone has is to write another reference book, or enter in to a debate with the original author in the pages of a journal specific to the subject. The first, in the extreme case, requires the "seeker after truth" to read every flippin' book that's ever been written on the subject! The second usually takes place in a forum so obscure that most people, even many of those with an interest in the subject, will never see it. With a Wiki article, all the changes throughout its life can easily be seen (there's a "View History" tab at the top of every article, right next to the "Edit" tab) so it's straightforward to review - with further reference to Wiki's own discussion forums - any debates about the accuracy or relevance of the content. It's all in one place. (Which doesn't, of course, mean that it's not still worthwhile looking elsewhere for corroboration or contradiction.)

Two current listings, each one with mismatched description and photographs: https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Bachmann-38-080-12-Ton-Southern-2-2-Planked-Vent-Van-LMS-Grey-Wagon-00-gauge/323480437507 https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Bachmann-37-803-12-Ton-Planked-Ventilated-Van-LMS-Grey-wagon-in-VGC-00-gauge/323480072013 In fact one listing has photos of the item described in the other listing, and vice versa. (It's not helped by the box label photo in each listing being correct, but the box contents being wrong. Basically, the guy doesn't really know exactly what he's selling.) I contacted the seller yesterday pointing out his mistake, and saying that if he can fix it so I know what I'd actually get if I won either auction then I would happily enter a realistic bid. No response so far. Why are so many sellers so useless at listing their stuff accurately, and helping buyers if anything is unclear or wrong? (See also my post #78 and rab's post #79). Bet they blame eBay when they no bids or low bids, too.

Blimey, I never knew that Eric Morecambe was a Bevin Boy. Says something for someone's character that they can emerge from something like that* and still retain such a whacky sense of humour. According to Wiki, Brian Rix volunteered for it. * I have been down a working coal mine once, back in the 1980s. Frankly, I wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy as a way to make a living. In the 1940s they would likely have been even less pleasant.

My understanding is that repeater signs are not required for NSL on unlit roads, or for 30 limits where the regular street lighting condition applies. Other 30 limits which have been imposed eg by a TRO do require repeater signs. Roads with street lighting can also have a higher limit allowed, in which case the limit must be signed including repeater signs*. [Happy to be corrected if I'm mistaken on some of those details.] For 20mph limits, it depends how the start of limit is signed. If it's signed as a 20mph zone: then repeater signs are not required by the regulations. If it's just a round 20 limit sign: then repeater signs are required. In all cases, the relevant authority can opt to put up repeaters even when they're not actually required by the regulations, to help avoid confusion. Helpfully, that's what Edinburgh council did when they rolled out the 20 limits here, even though all the 20 limits are signed as zones (some of the new 20mph zones had speed bumps in place already, but no new ones have been deployed). Unfortunately it doesn't stop some ignorant people from doing 20mph on clear, safe, streets with regular street lighting and no repeater signs. (On the other hand, nothing seems to stop some people from exceeding the correctly signposted speed limits, sometimes by quite a fair margin.) * There is an urban, lit 40mph limit road near where I live. It is fully signed. At the risk of drifting badly off topic, I don't think I've ever seen a vehicle parked on that road showing lights at night, even though Highway Code Rule 249 says it's a legal requirement. Nor have I ever seen any action taken against offenders. Mind you, the wording of RVLR Reg 24 is so convoluted that it's quite possible that such parking is actually permissible, so this could an example of the Highway Code writers erring on the side of caution. Rule 248 is another not very well known rule which is regularly flouted with impunity in residential streets, and in this case CUR Reg 101 seems fairly clear: "no person shall, except with the permission of a police officer in a uniform, cause or permit any motor vehicle to stand on a road at any time between half an hour after sunset and half an hour before sunrise unless the near side of the vehicle is as close as may be to the edge of the carriageway". In the case of my awkward neighbour, I assume that he would regard parking with half of each offside wheel on the kerb (which I can't help feeling can be doing his expensive low-profile tyres little good) as having the near side of his manhood-compensating BMW "as close as may be to the edge of the carriageway". Actually though, on reflection, I suspect that he just DGAF.

But all too often the dangerous behaviour itself was deliberate - it's the consequences which were not intended. As per the examples offered by Stationmaster Mike (and reference also some apologists for what happened at Great Heck). Despite what melmerby wrote, I don't believe that a rational person who is applying an acceptable degree of concentration to their driving can "accidentally" text while proceeding along a dark road. Hence, as Ohmisterporter noted, the police these days preferring the term 'collision' to 'accident'. Apart from anything else,'collision' is a simple statement of fact: one or more vehicles has/have collided with something/each other. Use of the word 'accident' to describe an incident at a time when the causes and contributory factors are wholly unknown implies an unjustifiable pre-supposition that there was no deliberate intent involved.

I did like the nod to one of Chris Chibnall's predecessors as a scifi/fantasy scriptwriter: the crane scene was surely meant as a reference to Nigel Kneale's Quatermass and the Pit? One of the shots of Jodie at the end of the jib immediately made me think of James Donald in the Hammer Films version, riding to his doom but saving London from a Martian invasion in the process.

Seems to have been said by lots of people about all kinds of competitive sports, including rugby (unsurprisingly, if you have any idea of what goes on in the scrum and during rucks, even these days), baseball and NASCAR as well as the NFL. Myself, I prefer to imagine that it was first coined by James T Kirk when he reprogrammed the Star Fleet Academy Kobayashi Maru simulation. One problem with that view is that he isn't due to be born until 2233. But I'm sure there's a simple explanation. (Link for those who know not to what I refer.)