TOTALLY OFF TOPIC (train wreck)
Marin Faure
in the group who can give me a good answer. In reading the London Times
the last couple of days (one of the more valuable aspects of the
internet, as I live in Seattle), I have seen many references to the fact
that the Thames Train apparently ran Signal 109, which was red at the
time. In the US, rail lines are divided into blocks, each one up to
several miles long. Each block is guarded by signals, with (usually)
three lights in each signal. Green means the block you are about to
enter AND the block after it are clear. Yellow means the block you are
about to enter is clear but the block after it is occupied. Red means
the block you are about to enter is occupied. Trains passing a yellow
block signal are required to slow to a specific speed so as to be able
to stop if the next block signal is displaying red.
ATC (automatic train control) and radio (and now satellite)
communications have made the block signals somewhat redundant, but they
are still in use on all major US railroads.
In addition, CTC (Centralized Traffic Control) systems indicate on
master displays which blocks are occupied and which are not, as well as
provide control over all the switches (points) within its area of
coverage. CTC and its various computerized upgrades do not cover every
mile of the US rail system, but it is used wherever there is heavy
traffic, and particularly in congested rail areas such as exists at
Paddington. If a train somehow manages to elude all the safety systems
and enters an occupied block it is immediately evident on the CTC
display. The train crews can be radioed of the danger and, track
configuration permitting, switches can be thrown in an attempt to divert
a collision.
My questions: Is the UK rail system set up the same way as the US in
regard to blocks and signals (green, yellow, red)? And is there no CTC
or equivelent system in the Paddington area which would have shown
traffic controllers that the Thames Train was running past signals set
against it and entering an occupied block?
In light of the current flak about off-topic posts, I am prepared to
receive some for this one. But I know from past threads that there are
people in this group who are very knowledgeable on this subject. I will
be happy to take any answers via e-mail unless there are others who wish
to discuss the subject, although I daresay discussion should probably be
kept to a minimum. Thank you.
C. Marin Faure
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Jezza
posted this:
>:NO CANAL CONTENT. I'm asking this here because I know there are people
>:in the group who can give me a good answer.
Try <news:uk.railway>
Lots of postings there. Check out the last five days stuff first and
you'll probably find your answer there.
--
Jezza - <http://www.hotwells.freeserve.co.uk/>
Look out for the announcements for elections to the UK Usenet Committee
Appearing soon in uk.net.news.announce
Paul E. Bennett
fau...@halcyon.com "Marin Faure" writes:
> NO CANAL CONTENT. I'm asking this here because I know there are people
> in the group who can give me a good answer. In reading the London Times
> the last couple of days (one of the more valuable aspects of the
> internet, as I live in Seattle), I have seen many references to the fact
> that the Thames Train apparently ran Signal 109, which was red at the
> time. In the US, rail lines are divided into blocks, each one up to
> several miles long. Each block is guarded by signals, with (usually)
> three lights in each signal.
The UK system is similarly set out.
> Green means the block you are about to enter AND the block after it are
> clear.
Green also means that the route is set for you (at least three blocks
worth).
> Yellow means the block you are about to enter is clear but the block after
> it is occupied.
Yellow also indicates that the route may be only partially set and that
you would need to exercise caution. We also have four aspect signals that
feature two amber lights. In a four aspect scheme the sinle yellow is
shown first, double yellow second then you will get the red. Increasing
order of importance to stop. The four aspect signals are mainly used on
higher speed routes.
> Red means the block you are about to enter is occupied.
Red can also mean that your route is not yet set.
> Trains passing a yellow
> block signal are required to slow to a specific speed so as to be able
> to stop if the next block signal is displaying red.
In the UK we have several schemes in use. The Thames train had AWS but
no ATP or ATC. AWS sounds an alarm when you pass an amber or red signal.
The driver has three seconds to respond before the brakes are applied
automatically. If the driver responds by pressing a button within three
seconds the alarm is cancelled and the brakes are not applied. I am sure
you can see the obvious fault in the driver interface here.
> ATC (automatic train control) and radio (and now satellite)
> communications have made the block signals somewhat redundant, but they
> are still in use on all major US railroads.
It is nice to have the blocks to fall back on. However, if the ATP or ATC
fail while you have several trains on the section you are already into
problematic situations. I have raised this concern several times before.
> In addition, CTC (Centralized Traffic Control) systems indicate on
> master displays which blocks are occupied and which are not, as well as
> provide control over all the switches (points) within its area of
> coverage.
CTC does not count how many trains are occupying a single block (unless the
scheme you have in USA does this).
> My questions: Is the UK rail system set up the same way as the US in
> regard to blocks and signals (green, yellow, red)? And is there no CTC
> or equivelent system in the Paddington area which would have shown
> traffic controllers that the Thames Train was running past signals set
> against it and entering an occupied block?
The Slough board operators did notice the situation but by the time they
set the red aspect for the Great Western HST125 it was already too late.
The Great Western HST125 managed to slow just slightly before impact.
> In light of the current flak about off-topic posts, I am prepared to
> receive some for this one. But I know from past threads that there are
> people in this group who are very knowledgeable on this subject. I will
> be happy to take any answers via e-mail unless there are others who wish
> to discuss the subject, although I daresay discussion should probably be
> kept to a minimum. Thank you.
The Paddington (Ladbrook Grove) incident with the conditions of Tuesday
morning meant that it was difficult for the Thames Train Driver to see
the signal (according to latest reports). Signall 109 had been the
subject of a number of SPAD incidents (8 in 6 years) and there was an
outstanding notice of improvement on the section of track.
It is due to visibility problems, caused by infrastructure problems, track
curvature and poor positioning, that I prefer to see more emphasis on the
provision of in-cab signalling. Bringing the signal indication into the cab
(next two sections) will improve the drivers ability to determine how he is
going to be able to proceed.
The other facet of the incident is the fire, which initially seemed to be
a ruptured fuel tank that caught alight. Diesel fuel oil takes quite a bit
of energy to ignite but once lit it is vey hot indeed. At one time there was
talk about electrification of the whole UK rail network (25kV overhead)
which would actually been better than diesel in several respects.
Firstly, as an aid to preventing collisions, the overhead power could be
turned off automatically when conflicting movements were detected that
had no signallers authority (you need a mechanism to allow them under
controlled circumstances).
Secondly, with modern power breaker technology in place, the incidence
of fire would be greatly reduced. With no liquid fuel leaking around
a crash site and the energy switched off, two elements of potential
fires are not present.
I have not posted this to u.r.w or any other newsgroup. You may find that
if you want to discuss the Paddington incident in particular or UK railways
in general then uk.railway will be a better forum (I am there occassionally
myself).
--
Paul E. Bennett ................... <p...@amleth.demon.co.uk>
Forth based HIDECS Consultancy .... <www.amleth.demon.co.uk>
Tel: +44 (0)7971-620145
Going Forth Safely
Peter Forbes
delivering some repaired mobile chargers, and they were all understandably
a bit subdued in the workshops, although as there are no implications for
them directly they were not under any pressure about their own work.
The current designs for DMU's seem to favour clustering diesel tanks and
batteries in underslung frames beneath the bodies, and they are usually
isolated from each other by some distance. Train heating is by diesel
heaters on the newer carriages, so this may be a factor in the fire. The
generating equipment on the DMU's does not have sufficient spare capacity
to provide for electrical heating.
It is also worth remembering the Taunton accident when a carriage was set
alight by an electrical heater being covered by a towel or something, so
even electric heating isn't foolproof.
Peter
Peter & Rita Forbes
Lister Cold-Starting Diesel Engines
Email: die...@easynet.co.uk
Engine related web pages at:-
http://www.oldengine.org/members/diesel/
"Paul E. Bennett" <p...@amleth.demon.co.uk> wrote
Andy Mabbett
<fau...@halcyon.com> writes
>NO CANAL CONTENT.
Quite.
> I'm asking this here because I know there are people
>in the group who can give me a good answer.
I dare say you will get a far better answer by reading the many posts on
this subject made in the last few days, on uk.railway. If you don't, try
asking there. HTH
--
Andy Mabbett
"If they censure you, they tell you to cut it out.
If they censor you, they just cut it out."
Paul E. Bennett
p...@amleth.demon.co.uk "Paul E. Bennett" writes:
> I have not posted this to u.r.w or any other newsgroup. You may find that
> if you want to discuss the Paddington incident in particular or UK railways
> in general then uk.railway will be a better forum (I am there occassionally
> myself).
OOPS!!!!! |-<) -- I obviously hit the wrong key as I thought I had sent it
via email. Sorry folks.
David Long
<an...@pigsonthewing.demon.co.uk> writes
>In article <7tm164$e7v$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Marin Faure
><fau...@halcyon.com> writes
>>NO CANAL CONTENT.
>
>Quite.
>
>> I'm asking this here because I know there are people
>>in the group who can give me a good answer.
>
>I dare say you will get a far better answer by reading the many posts on
>this subject made in the last few days, on uk.railway. If you don't, try
>asking there. HTH
Well done Andy - a pleasant, measured response. Unless HTH hides
something nasty....
--
David Long
Sankey Canal Restoration Society
http://www.scars.demon.co.uk/scars/
Updated August 1999.
Andy Mabbett
<Da...@scars.demon.co.uk> writes
>
>Well done Andy - a pleasant, measured response.
Unlike your patronising response.
Molly
>something nasty....
No, it stands for Hope This Helps. Many usenet people use it
sarcastically (followed by HAND, for Have A Nice Day), but I don't
*think* AM is doing so here.
--
Molly (change nospam to orbs to email me)
Visit http://www.thehungersite.com for a totally free and simple way
to donate food to the hungry. (Go on, try it!)
David Long
<an...@pigsonthewing.demon.co.uk> writes
>In article <8bQYiDAtu3$3I...@scars.demon.co.uk>, David Long
><Da...@scars.demon.co.uk> writes
>>
>>Well done Andy - a pleasant, measured response.
>
Look, if you're going to get on your high horse when we object to your
unpleasant responses to off-topic postings, and then moan like this if
you are praised for restraint, we might fall out one day.
Mike George
>In article <xLdUjJALw7$3E...@pigsonthewing.demon.co.uk>, Andy
Mabbett
><an...@pigsonthewing.demon.co.uk> writes
>>In article <8bQYiDAtu3$3I...@scars.demon.co.uk>, David Long
>><Da...@scars.demon.co.uk> writes
>>>
>>>Well done Andy - a pleasant, measured response.
>>
>>Unlike your patronising response.
>
>Look, if you're going to get on your high horse when we object
to your
>unpleasant responses to off-topic postings, and then moan like
this if
>you are praised for restraint, we might fall out one day.
I thought it was patronising too.
--
Mike George in Bristol, UK
Nick Wedd
<p...@amleth.demon.co.uk> writes
>> I have not posted this to u.r.w or any other newsgroup. You may find that
>> if you want to discuss the Paddington incident in particular or UK railways
>> in general then uk.railway will be a better forum (I am there occassionally
>> myself).
>
>OOPS!!!!! |-<) -- I obviously hit the wrong key as I thought I had sent it
>via email. Sorry folks.
I am glad you did. Your posting was far better informed than anything
the national press is likely to print.
Nick
--
Nick Wedd ni...@maproom.co.uk
Andy Mabbett
<Da...@scars.demon.co.uk> writes
>>>Well done Andy - a pleasant, measured response.
>>
>>Unlike your patronising response.
>
>Look, if you're going to get on your high horse when we object to your
>unpleasant responses to off-topic postings, and then moan like this if
>you are praised for restraint, we might fall out one day.
Tough.
Robin Nicholson
<an...@pigsonthewing.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>In article <cHVpAAAY...@scars.demon.co.uk>, David Long
><Da...@scars.demon.co.uk> writes
>>>>Well done Andy - a pleasant, measured response.
>>>
>>>Unlike your patronising response.
>>
>>Look, if you're going to get on your high horse when we object to your
>>unpleasant responses to off-topic postings, and then moan like this if
>>you are praised for restraint, we might fall out one day.
>
>Tough.
Here we go again?
---
Robin Nicholson
'Few are qualified to shine in company; but it is in
most men's power to be agreeable'
Nick Wedd
cartergeorge.co.uk> writes
>>>>Well done Andy - a pleasant, measured response.
>>>
>>>Unlike your patronising response.
>I thought it was patronising too.
I'm not sure if this is a real argument, or if they're just having fun.
I'm going to join in anyway.
I thought it _sounded_ patronising but was not intended to.
Paul E. Bennett
Ni...@maproom.demon.co.uk "Nick Wedd" writes:
> In article <939464...@amleth.demon.co.uk>, Paul E. Bennett
> <p...@amleth.demon.co.uk> writes
>
> >> I have not posted this to u.r.w or any other newsgroup. You may find that
> >> if you want to discuss the Paddington incident in particular or UK railways
> >> in general then uk.railway will be a better forum (I am there occassionally
> >> myself).
> >
> >OOPS!!!!! |-<) -- I obviously hit the wrong key as I thought I had sent it
> >via email. Sorry folks.
>
> I am glad you did. Your posting was far better informed than anything
> the national press is likely to print.
For my sins, I have also been involved in railway signalling at times. I
was not involved on any of the Great Western lines so it is not one of my
projects (for those interested, mine were Three Bridges, Cowlairs (Glasgow),
District Line Train Monitoring and JLE (track and vehicle). One of my
current concerns is a new Tram system for which I have devised the entire
control and signalling scheme.
Most of the information I have gleaned about the recent Paddington Tragedy
was gleaned from the newsgroup people on uk.railways that I know and trust,
some from selected media sources and contacts within the industry.
Having laid my credentials on the line for that (off-topic) bit I must say
that I would like a bit more work within the marine industry, especially in
connection with electric boats (and nicely back on bioating themes..pheww!!!).
David Long
<Ni...@maproom.co.uk> writes
a way of putting his point across without annoying the poster or anyone
else. I thought he needed encouragement to use the same tactic next time
he thought it necessary to act as our unelected (and superfluous) net
policeman.
DR S NEILL
AFAIK British trains have no radios - so the only way of communicating with
them (other than signals) is if they stop, get out and use the lineside
telephone. Obviously this requires them to be aware they're standing into
danger.
Yes, seems crazy to me, too.
>C. Marin Faure
Sean
Michael J Wooding
<ed...@csv.warwick.ac.uk> writes
>AFAIK British trains have no radios - so the only way of communicating with
>them (other than signals) is if they stop, get out and use the lineside
>telephone. Obviously this requires them to be aware they're standing into
>danger.
I am fairly certain that communication with train drivers via radio is
widely in use now.
Mike
--
Michael J Wooding - nb DRACO http://www.thewoodings.freeserve.co.uk/
NABO Webmaster http://www.nabo.org.uk
CIBC Webmaster http://www.cutweb.org.uk
The Cutpics site: http://www.vhfcomm.co.uk/cutpics.htm
Bill
<Da...@scars.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> >I thought it _sounded_ patronising but was not intended to.
> I'd never be so cruel. I thought the lad needed encouraging - he'd found
> a way of putting his point across without annoying the poster or anyone
> else. I thought he needed encouragement to use the same tactic next time
> he thought it necessary to act as our unelected (and superfluous) net
> policeman.
I'm pretty relaxed about off-topic postings. Not only are they
(often) most interesting, but they often help to bind the group
together, and give it an identity (though folks who don't
understand inter-personal relationships will not understand
that). One must also notice that there is only one person who
continually whinges about them, and that he is occasionally
supported by 2 or 3 others. Hence, it seems reasonable to
conclude that the majority of participants condone the pattern of
postings to urw.
So that when the self appointed, un-elected and un-wanted net
policeman makes a wholly off-topic post (MID:
WAntBzBd...@pigsonthewing.demon.co.uk refers), I refrain
from making a fuss, but live in hopeful expectation that he will
now stand down from his time consuming and onerous task. Sadly,
I suspect that I will be disappointed.
Toodle pip!!
Bill
--
Please remove your.knickers before replying by e-mail
Peter Forbes
Highlands as far as my memory goes.
Peter
Peter & Rita Forbes
Lister Cold-Starting Diesel Engines
Email: die...@easynet.co.uk
Engine related web pages at:-
http://www.oldengine.org/members/diesel/
Michael J Wooding <Mic...@thewoodings.freeserve.co.uk> wrote
Dave Mayall
Bennett") wrote:
>Yellow also indicates that the route may be only partially set and that
>you would need to exercise caution. We also have four aspect signals that
>feature two amber lights. In a four aspect scheme the sinle yellow is
>shown first, double yellow second then you will get the red. Increasing
>order of importance to stop. The four aspect signals are mainly used on
>higher speed routes.
You have your yellows back to front!
Double yellow is *LESS* restrictive than yellow, and would be
encountered first.
They also don't indicate "importance to stop" A signal is either stop,
or it isn't, yellows indicate that there is a red signal ahead, and
instruct the driver to begin braking, in order to stop in time.
--
Dave Mayall
Mike Stevens
>
> I thought he needed encouragement to use the same tactic next time
> he thought it necessary to act as our unelected (and superfluous) net
> policeman.
More like a traffic warden IMO.
--
Mike Stevens, nb Felis Catus II
The optimist says the glass is half-full.
The pessimist says the glass is half-empty.
The engineer says the glass is bigger than needed by a factor of two.
Any off-list replies, please, to michael...@which.net
Web site http://homepages.which.net/~michael.stevens
Andy Mabbett
.your.knickers.demon.co.uk> writes
>So that when the self appointed, un-elected and un-wanted net
>policeman makes a wholly off-topic post (MID:
>WAntBzBd...@pigsonthewing.demon.co.uk refers)
You seem to be confused; that post was one of mine, not the person to
whom you refer.
Still, what a pity you don't have the wit to differentiate between
selfish people who deliberately start off- topic threads because they're
too clueless - or lazy - to use the correct forum; and normal and
inevitable thread drift (about which you will see that I have not
complained)
Andy Mabbett
<Da...@scars.demon.co.uk> writes
>I thought the lad needed encouraging
Patronising git.
Mike Stevens
>
> Still, what a pity you don't have the wit to differentiate between
> selfish people who deliberately start off- topic threads because they're
> too clueless - or lazy - to use the correct forum
Let us say, for the sake of hypothesis, that I wanted to ask a question
about steam engines (not specifically related to such engines in boats),
and let's consider what I'd have to do to ask it in the correct forum.
First I'd have to locate the correct forum. The name may or may not be
self-explanatory. There may be several different alternative fora.
Well, I suppose I can cross-post to all of them. Then I've got to
subscribe to that forum/those fora. At least I'll be able to tell my
machine not to download any earler posts. Then I've got to keep
watching that forum / those fora to follow the relevant thread, which
I'll have to weed out from all the other threads I'm not interested in.
Contrsatr this with simply thinking "There are a few steam enthusiasts
on urw & the mailing list, so I'll post it in those places.", knowing
full well that topics can drift on-topic as well as drifting off-topic,
and the off-topic ones here do quite frequently generate on-topic
material.
Yes, I know that's outside the charter of the ng, and in one sense I
*ought* to do it the hard way. But, as somebody else said, I believe
the charter should be regarded as guidance rather than holy writ and
there's plenty of scope for flexibility. I believe that a community like
urw can function perfectly well with such a flexible attitude. Neither
here nor on the "canals@" mailing list is ther level of off-topic
posting (10% or less, I reckon) at a level that I would expect to annoy
anyone except (a) the over-sensitive (b) the over-busy and (c) the
over-pedantic.
Andy M has made it clear on many occasions that he takes a different
view, but I think my view is almost certainly shared by nearly all the
other regular posters to urw. I know I can't speak for the lurkers, but
then neither can Andy.
David Long
<david....@ukonline.co.uk> writes
>>you would need to exercise caution. We also have four aspect signals that
>>feature two amber lights. In a four aspect scheme the sinle yellow is
>>shown first, double yellow second then you will get the red. Increasing
>>order of importance to stop. The four aspect signals are mainly used on
>>higher speed routes.
>
>
>Double yellow is *LESS* restrictive than yellow, and would be
>encountered first.
>
bridge section is for which traffic. One yellow diamond = two-way
traffic, two = one-way.
David Long
<an...@pigsonthewing.demon.co.uk> writes
>In article <GUwmhHAT...@scars.demon.co.uk>, David Long
><Da...@scars.demon.co.uk> writes
>>I thought the lad needed encouraging
>
>Patronising git.
I'm sorry you have to resort to such insults. You've obviously been
having difficulty getting used to life in the real, adult world of give-
and-take, and I really do think effort should be recognised.
Michael J Wooding
<mike...@which.net> writes
>Andy M has made it clear on many occasions that he takes a different
>view, but I think my view is almost certainly shared by nearly all the
>other regular posters to urw. I know I can't speak for the lurkers, but
>then neither can Andy.
As you may have guessed Mike, I agree with you 100%, but that has got me
into a lot of trouble - not agreeing with you per se, but with your
sentiments :->
Bill's posting made a lot of sense too - but then I have said similar
myself before.
Oh well - back to my seclusion - on this topic anyway.
Tomangler
<Ni...@maproom.co.uk> writes:
>I am glad you did. Your posting was far better informed than anything
>the national press is likely to print.
Blimey - I missed this post - any chance of a copy?
thanks,
tom
Peter Forbes
information with others. The setting up of various subject headings for
those groups was for obvious reasons: you couldn't sort out your subjects
from the thousands of other posts on other subjects.
Sharing information with others of a like mind is what generally happens on
this and other groups, and most newsgroups generally tolerate a fair bit of
off-topic posting if the subject is of general interest to those who
subscribe.
Intolerance is not part of newsgroup operations, and while anyone who is
seriously away from home on a subject will be steered kindly towards the
right area of discussion, the vast majority of posts to urw which can be
defined as off-topic by strict interpretation of the rules are usually
discussed with enthusiasm and interest.
Very few posters to urw can be described as selfish, lacking in wit or
lazy, and as I have mentioned before, the best way to get rid of anything
in the way of offensive posts or posters is to completely ignore them.
Giving vent to feelings of anger and frustration on the newsgroup is what
fuels such people and is what they want you to do, thus giving them some
feeling of credibility
and satisfaction. It is a sad situation for everyone, but in the end these
people are best ignored, leaving more space for the better things on the
newsgroup.
Any new subscriber would have had a hard time in recent weeks getting
his/her head around the general form of discussion which has been going on,
and not because of the original off-topic subjects, but the discussions,
recriminations and insults which followed on. A dignified silence is far
better than a burst of invective.
Peter
Peter & Rita Forbes
Lister Cold-Starting Diesel Engines
Email: die...@easynet.co.uk
Engine related web pages at:-
http://www.oldengine.org/members/diesel/
Andy Mabbett <an...@pigsonthewing.demon.co.uk> wrote
> Still, what a pity you don't have the wit to differentiate between
> selfish people who deliberately start off- topic threads because they're
Nick Wedd
<toma...@aol.com> writes
I have emailed Paul Bennett's posting to Tom.
DR S NEILL
>here nor on the "canals@" mailing list is ther level of off-topic
>posting (10% or less, I reckon) at a level that I would expect to annoy
>anyone except (a) the over-sensitive (b) the over-busy and (c) the
>over-pedantic.
>view, but I think my view is almost certainly shared by nearly all the
>other regular posters to urw. I know I can't speak for the lurkers, but
Correct.
>--
>Mike Stevens, nb Felis Catus II
Sean
Andrew Harrison
tro...@pickles24.freeserve.co.uk (Robin Nicholson) wrote:
> Here we go again?
Quite.
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
Guy Morgan
>>
>> Still, what a pity you don't have the wit to differentiate between
>> selfish people who deliberately start off- topic threads because they're
>> too clueless - or lazy - to use the correct forum
>
>about steam engines (not specifically related to such engines in boats),
>and let's consider what I'd have to do to ask it in the correct forum.
>
>First I'd have to locate the correct forum. The name may or may not be
>self-explanatory. There may be several different alternative fora.
>Well, I suppose I can cross-post to all of them. Then I've got to
>subscribe to that forum/those fora. At least I'll be able to tell my
>machine not to download any earler posts. Then I've got to keep
>watching that forum / those fora to follow the relevant thread, which
>I'll have to weed out from all the other threads I'm not interested in.
>
>Contrsatr this with simply thinking "There are a few steam enthusiasts
>on urw & the mailing list, so I'll post it in those places.", knowing
>full well that topics can drift on-topic as well as drifting off-topic,
>and the off-topic ones here do quite frequently generate on-topic
>material.
>
>Yes, I know that's outside the charter of the ng, and in one sense I
>*ought* to do it the hard way. But, as somebody else said, I believe
>the charter should be regarded as guidance rather than holy writ and
>there's plenty of scope for flexibility. I believe that a community like
>here nor on the "canals@" mailing list is ther level of off-topic
>posting (10% or less, I reckon) at a level that I would expect to annoy
>anyone except (a) the over-sensitive (b) the over-busy and (c) the
>over-pedantic.
>
>Andy M has made it clear on many occasions that he takes a different
>view, but I think my view is almost certainly shared by nearly all the
>other regular posters to urw. I know I can't speak for the lurkers, but
>then neither can Andy.
>
and can't we leave the whole thing there!
BTW please don't flame me for not snipping Mike's post :-) I do
usually snip carefully but I think it's worth repeating in case anyone
missed it in the first place.
Cheers
Guy
--
Guy Morgan
Andy Mabbett
>> selfish people who deliberately start off- topic threads because they're
>> too clueless - or lazy - to use the correct forum
>
>Let us say, for the sake of hypothesis, that I wanted to ask a question
>about steam engines (not specifically related to such engines in boats),
>and let's consider what I'd have to do to ask it in the correct forum.
>
>First I'd have to locate the correct forum.
Life's really hard, isn't it.
Andy Mabbett
<Da...@scars.demon.co.uk> writes
>>>I thought the lad needed encouraging
>>
>>Patronising git.
>
>I'm sorry you have to resort to such insults.
I just wonder why you did.
> You've obviously been
>having difficulty getting used to life in the real, adult world of give-
>and-take,
You obviously have difficulty understanding what you read.
Brian L Dominic
stopped the engine, undid the weedhatch AGAIN and muttered:
>It has been in use for some years, being introduced in the Scottish
>Highlands as far as my memory goes.
>
...... after having first been tried on the Ravenglass & Eskdale
Railway, who devised it in the first place!
Brian
NB "Rumpus"
Web Sites:
"Rumpus": http://www.proweb.co.uk/~dominicfam/rumpus.htm
Golden Valley Light Railway: http://www.proweb.co.uk/~dominicfam/gvlr
Canals: http://www.proweb.co.uk/~dominicfam/canal.htm
Roger Davies
<ed...@csv.warwick.ac.uk> writes
>>urw can function perfectly well with such a flexible attitude. Neither
>>here nor on the "canals@" mailing list is ther level of off-topic
>>posting (10% or less, I reckon) at a level that I would expect to annoy
>>anyone except (a) the over-sensitive (b) the over-busy and (c) the
>>over-pedantic.
>
>>other regular posters to urw. I know I can't speak for the lurkers, but
>
>
>>--
>>Mike Stevens, nb Felis Catus II
>
>Sean
- -
Roger Davies
To reply replace nospam with randk2
Zefram Cochrane
>Let us say, for the sake of hypothesis, that I wanted to ask a question
>about steam engines (not specifically related to such engines in boats),
>and let's consider what I'd have to do to ask it in the correct forum.
>
>First I'd have to locate the correct forum.
Andy Mabbett (an...@pigsonthewing.demon.co.uk) wrote:
: Life's really hard, isn't it.
It's even harder. Just locating the correct forum isn't enough. It's
customary to lurk in a NG for %period (estimates vary from 2weeks
to 6 months). People who just post one off questions without researching
on dejanews or scanning related groups tend to be abused for asking
something that has already been done to death.
The above isn't worth it for asking a simple one-off question. In my
opinion, that isn't what Usenet is about. There are other media
about that are more suited to this sort of thing.
Yes, Life is hard, and Usenet only solves/alleviates some of the
problems.
Richard [in CM8]
Tony Clarke
David Long wrote in message <8bQYiDAtu3$3I...@scars.demon.co.uk>...
>Well done Andy - a pleasant, measured response. Unless HTH hides
>something nasty....
Here Trolls, Hoping?
Tony Clarke
.
Tony Clarke
Andy Mabbett wrote in message ...
>>Still, what a pity you don't have the wit to differentiate between
>selfish people who deliberately start off- topic threads
Marked as OFF TOPIC in the header, and opening with the words NO CANAL
CONTENT. So, quite some posts into another knicker-wetting session live from
Birmingham, what *really* attracted you to complain that something is
unjustly inflicted on consenting adults who understand what their cursor
keys are for?
"Habit is the ballast that chains the dog to his vomit"
- Samuel Beckett
Tony Clarke
Tony Clarke
Andy Mabbett wrote in message
>In article <cHVpAAAY...@scars.demon.co.uk>, David Long
><Da...@scars.demon.co.uk> writes
>>>>Well done Andy - a pleasant, measured response.
>>>
>>
>>Look, if you're going to get on your high horse when we object to your
>>unpleasant responses to off-topic postings, and then moan like this if
>>you are praised for restraint, we might fall out one day.
>
>Tough.
I'm really impressed by the diplomacy and management skills on display
here. Promotion imminent, Andy?
"Habit is the ballast that chains the dog to its vomit"
Tony Clarke
Michael J Wooding wrote in message ...
>In article <edraa.493...@csv.warwick.ac.uk>, DR S NEILL
><ed...@csv.warwick.ac.uk> writes
>>AFAIK British trains have no radios - so the only way of communicating
with
>>them (other than signals) is if they stop, get out and use the lineside
>>telephone. Obviously this requires them to be aware they're standing into
>>danger.
>
>widely in use now.
It's certainly standard with EWS (freight) locos, but that may be more
to do with their special working circumstances - long periods held in loops,
permissive working over freight-only lines with minimal signalling
requirements, and the necessity of some direct contact with site security
when working trains in and out of private sidings.
Tony Clarke
Andy Mabbett
<ro...@nospam.demon.co.uk> writes
>In article <edraa.495...@csv.warwick.ac.uk>, DR S NEILL
><ed...@csv.warwick.ac.uk> writes
>>Correct.
>ditto
Brilliant - a 21 line post, containing new content of precisely one
word, quoting a 15 line post, also contributing just one word.
You will both find a useful primer on how to post to Usenet properly at:
http://www.mahayana.demon.co.uk/computer/format.htm
Andy Mabbett
<TonyC...@careers.cam.ac.uk> writes
>consenting adults who understand what their cursor
>keys are for
As opposed to the truly clueless who send blank e-mail messages to MIDs,
thinking they're e-mail addresses?
Like <WAntBzBd...@pigsonthewing.demon.co.uk>, for instance?
Andy Mabbett
<TonyC...@careers.cam.ac.uk> writes
>>Tough.
>
> I'm really impressed by the diplomacy
I don't wish to waste diplomacy on idiots...
>and management skills on display here.
... and I don't manage this newsgroup.
> Promotion imminent, Andy?
Possibly,
Andy Mabbett
<g...@onelight.demon.co.uk> writes
>I couldn't have put it better myself!
You could you could have been considerate enough not to needlessly quote
an entire post.
[...]
>BTW please don't flame me for not snipping Mike's post :-) I do
So you knew you were in the wrong, but you couldn't care less?
Guy Morgan
<an...@pigsonthewing.demon.co.uk> writes
>In article <akjFR7A+...@onelight.demon.co.uk>, Guy Morgan
><g...@onelight.demon.co.uk> writes
>>I couldn't have put it better myself!
>
>You could you could have been considerate enough not to needlessly quote
>an entire post.
>
See my comment at the bottom of that post - repeated below.
>[...]
>
>>BTW please don't flame me for not snipping Mike's post :-) I do
>
>So you knew you were in the wrong, but you couldn't care less?
I'm not going to get drawn too far into this - I've more useful things
to do with my life! However in view of the selective snipping above I
will simply quote my *entire* last paragraph in case anyone missed it
'BTW please don't flame me for not snipping Mike's post :-) I do
DR S NEILL
>--
>Andy Mabbett
What were you saying about one-word posts?
Sean
Ian McCarthy
> Double yellow is *LESS* restrictive than yellow, and would be
> encountered first.
>
> or it isn't, yellows indicate that there is a red signal ahead, and
> instruct the driver to begin braking, in order to stop in time.
When going down the T&M the other month I saw a flashing double yellow
on the main line which runs alongside. I have since discovered that was
not an error but yet another aspect for HST's meaning the next signal
may be double yellow so start breaking NOW! if doing 125, I don't know
if they use this 5 aspect system on the GW mainline, which doesn't run
close like the WCML does to a canal, so I haven't seen one!
--
Cheers Ian Mac
Peter Headland
> about steam engines (not specifically related to such engines in boats),
> and let's consider what I'd have to do to ask it in the correct forum.
>
> self-explanatory. There may be several different alternative fora.
I always start with Deja (www.deja.com) and do a search on a bunch of likely
keywords. It's amazing how often I get my question answered right there
without actually having to ask it (if you see what I mean). Bill would
certainly have had his question answered if he had done this. As would the
person who asked about obscure records or whatever. As will people who want
detailed information on digital cameras.
> Well, I suppose I can cross-post to all of them. Then I've got to
> subscribe to that forum/those fora. At least I'll be able to tell my
> machine not to download any earler posts. Then I've got to keep
> watching that forum / those fora to follow the relevant thread, which
> I'll have to weed out from all the other threads I'm not interested in.
Any remotely decent newsreader will allow you to display just your thread.
It might take a few minutes to learn how, but I'd suggest its worth the
effort. For example, in Outlook Express, you just select View -> Current
View -> Show Replies To My Messages. Or, you can mark a thread by clicking
next to it in the column with the little pair of spectacles icon, then use
View -> Current View -> Customize Current View to make an option which
displays only threads which yoiu have marked (see the on-line help for full
details of this).
You can also set your newsreader to only download headers, not the whole
text of every message.
> Contrsatr this with simply thinking "There are a few steam enthusiasts
> on urw & the mailing list, so I'll post it in those places."
Isn't your argument basically "I am so important that my time is worth more
than that of a couple of hundred other people, plus abuse of the public
resources used to carry my postings, so I'll be lazy and post anywhere I
please"? The worst part is that Marin would have got more and better
information if he had done things properly, plus he would not have started
another of these wretched debates.
FWIW, if Marin had posted asking us as a bunch of people in the UK whom he
knows moderately well what the real public reaction here to the crash was,
what we felt about it on a personal level, etc. I wouldn't have minded,
because I accept the "friends in the pub argument" to a fair extent. But for
straightforward factual information requests you will get a better response
and avoid annoying people if you do things properly.
--
Peter Headland, Matrix Link, UK
Pe...@matrixlink.com
http://www.matrixlink.com/
Andy Mabbett
<g...@onelight.demon.co.uk> writes
>However in view of the selective snipping
What rot.
>above I
>will simply quote my *entire* last paragraph in case anyone missed it
>
>'BTW please don't flame me for not snipping Mike's post :-) I do
>usually snip carefully but I think it's worth repeating in case anyone
>missed it in the first place.'
So you knew you were in the wrong, but you couldn't care less?
--
Andy Mabbett
<ed...@csv.warwick.ac.uk> writes
Presumably, you can't count.
Tony Clarke
Andy Mabbett wrote in message
>In article <7u28oe$2cf$1...@pegasus.csx.cam.ac.uk>, Tony Clarke
><TonyC...@careers.cam.ac.uk> writes
>>consenting adults who understand what their cursor
>>keys are for
>
>As opposed to the truly clueless who send blank e-mail messages to MIDs,
>thinking they're e-mail addresses?
Not answering the point again. Something so familiar...
Tony Clarke
Tony Clarke
Andy Mabbett wrote in message ...
>>and management skills on display here.
>
>... and I don't manage this newsgroup.
I understand you manage something or (God help them) somebody for
Birmingham City Council. It must be an unrewarding or lowgrade job - or
maybe you realise you're not up to it - for you to find such regular
onanistic solace in seeking out argument. Wasn't your eyesight good enough
for the SAS then? or do you just spend so much time online because your
mummy won't let you bring girls home?
Tony Clarke
Tony Clarke
Andy Mabbett
<TonyC...@careers.cam.ac.uk> writes
>>As opposed to the truly clueless who send blank e-mail messages to MIDs,
>>thinking they're e-mail addresses?
>
>
> Not answering the point again. Something so familiar...
Why, do you do make that mistake very often?
Brian Holt
Andy Mabbett wrote in message ...
>In article <3808FD3A...@which.net>, Mike Stevens
><mike...@which.net> writes
>>Not quite. We're charged for *all* local calls.
>
>Speak for yourself.
>
>On Birmingham Cable, we get free calls during off- peak periods, to
>other, domestic, B'ham cable customers.
>--
>Andy Mabbett
> "If they censure you, they tell you to cut it out.
> If they censor you, they just cut it out."
Now your really off topic. This is nothing to do with train wreck's
--
Brian from sunny Suffolk by the river Hundred who also posts to the Mailing
list at www.ukwaterways.net
Dave Mayall
wrote:
>Dave Mayall wrote:
>> Double yellow is *LESS* restrictive than yellow, and would be
>> encountered first.
>>
>> They also don't indicate "importance to stop" A signal is either stop,
>> or it isn't, yellows indicate that there is a red signal ahead, and
>> instruct the driver to begin braking, in order to stop in time.
>When going down the T&M the other month I saw a flashing double yellow
>on the main line which runs alongside. I have since discovered that was
>not an error but yet another aspect for HST's meaning the next signal
>may be double yellow so start breaking NOW!
It actually means rather more than that.
Flashing yellow (double or single) are used to indicate junctions
ahead.
--
Dave Mayall
C. Marin Faure
Bi...@billybubbles.your.knickers.demon.co.uk wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Oct 1999 14:54:25 -0700, fau...@halcyon.com (C. Marin
> Faure) wrote:
>
> > Over here if your ISP is a local phone call, there is no telephone charge
> > (yet) for an internet connection. Dialing up your ISP is no different
> > than dialing your neighbor down the street.
>
> This is the BIG difference. In UK, local telephone calls are NOT
> free. They have to paid for!!!
No wonder, then, that BT is able to afford those incredibly expensive,
albeit usually very clever and entertaining, television commercials.
Perhaps if they did one featuring a chap on a restored working narrowboat
going on about the advantages of having a mobile or satcom on his boat,
the cost of phone service might be made just slightly less annoying. At
least it would be a relevant commercial...
C. Marin Faure
author, Flying A Floatplane
Andy Mabbett
<Brian...@tesco.net> writes
[quoted copy of my sig]
Don't quote sigs, unless you intend to comment on them. It's rude and
inconsiderate.
MartinP
Bill <bi...@billybubbles.your.knickers.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:380d8e0f...@news.demon.co.uk...
> (Incidentally, why that should be news.worldonline.nl and not
> consunet.nl I'm not sure. I assume that consunet.nl is such a
> poor ISP that it does not have it's own news server, but buys in
> a news service from news.worldonline.nl, or that MartinP buys it
> in (for reasons best known to himself).
Consunet was a cheap good quality ISP set up by the Dutch consumer
association, unlike the rip off one set up by Which? The Dutch consumer
association went bankrupt and consunet was transferred to Worldonline. To
save everybody having to change their e-mail addresses they set up a
sub-thingy. So you got that completely wrong. Have you thought of joining
the Metropolitan police?
>
> Anyway, the MID (Message ID) uniquely identifies MartinP's
> message. If you have a good news reader, if you click on the MID
> that is in the previous paragraph but one to this one, you will
> be either be taken to MartinP's original message, or you will be
> presented with a message saying that the message is not in your
> message list, but that if you go on-line, the message can be
> retrieved (or words to that effect)
I think the message can only be retrieved as long as the server keeps it or
via deja boring.
>
> Gulp!! I didn't know I knew all that!!
amazing what you have stiuffed between your ears :-)
Have you thought of calling your boat MID?
Mike Stevens
>
> Consunet was a cheap good quality ISP set up by the Dutch consumer
> association, unlike the rip off one set up by Which?
I've not had any problems with Which?Online, whuich I've been using for
about 18 months. What makes you say they're a rip-off? They've
recently cut their charges, and I find their members-only pages very
worthwhile, including some useful help fora.
--
Mike Stevens, nb Felis Catus II
The optimist says the glass is half-full.
The pessimist says the glass is half-empty.
The engineer says the glass is bigger than needed by a factor of two.
Any off-list replies, please, to michael...@which.net
Web site http://homepages.which.net/~michael.stevens
Bill
<m.pat...@consunet.nl> wrote:
> .... Have you thought of joining
> the Metropolitan police?
No. I don't think I'm sufficiently racist or sexist.
> Have you thought of calling your boat MID?
No Way.
Toodle pip!!
Bill
--
Please remove your.knickers before replying by e-mail
Robin Nicholson
>Don't quote sigs, unless you intend to comment on them. It's rude and
>inconsiderate.
>Andy Mabbett
Andy- one member of this newsgroup recently E mailed me and said that
you first visited the ng about 18 months ago and "created havoc". So
what did you do exactly?
---
Robin Nicholson
DR S NEILL
>you first visited the ng about 18 months ago and "created havoc". So
>what did you do exactly?
Exactly the same as now!
>---
>Robin Nicholson
Sean
Tony Clarke
Andy Mabbett wrote in message
>In article <7u28oe$2cf$1...@pegasus.csx.cam.ac.uk>, Tony Clarke
><TonyC...@careers.cam.ac.uk> writes
>>consenting adults who understand what their cursor
>>keys are for
>
>thinking they're e-mail addresses?
Outlook Express thought it was a valid address when I clicked on it, so
I thought: what the hell, send it anyway just to bait him quietly off-list.
Which clearly it has, so that was a useful thing to learn.
Back to content, anyone, or is that too easy?
Tony Clarke
John Bennett
wrote:
>On Sat, 16 Oct 1999 14:54:25 -0700, fau...@halcyon.com (C. Marin
>Faure) wrote:
>
>> Over here if your ISP is a local phone call, there is no telephone charge
>> (yet) for an internet connection. Dialing up your ISP is no different
>> than dialing your neighbor down the street.
>
>This is the BIG difference. In UK, local telephone calls are NOT
>free. They have to paid for!!!
>
surely cease to be any free ISPs as it's only the share of the phone
call revenue that makes free ISPs viable?
Presumably there are no free ISPs in the US?
Cheers John
--
John Bennett nb "Jake B"
Cheddar Bradford-on Avon
Somerset UK Kennet & Avon
Andy Mabbett
<tro...@pickles24.freeserve.co.uk> writes
>Andy- one member of this newsgroup recently E mailed me and said that
>you first visited the ng about 18 months ago and "created havoc".
Just goes to show you shouldn't believe everything you read in e-mail.
Robin Nicholson
>Just goes to show you shouldn't believe everything you read in e-mail.
Actually, I was not around then so that's why I am curious!
---
Robin Nicholson
Mike Stevens
>
> In article <380cf13e...@news.freeserve.net>, Robin Nicholson
> <tro...@pickles24.freeserve.co.uk> writes
> >Andy- one member of this newsgroup recently E mailed me and said that
> >you first visited the ng about 18 months ago and "created havoc".
>
No, but some of it might be true!
Peter Headland
> inlcuding Mr. Headland, seem bothered enough by off-topic postings that I
> almost get the impresson they pay for their newsgroup service by the
> number of individual messages they download.
The negligible cost doesn't bother me. But I think people on this thread who
base their arguments on the fact that *at present* off-topic postings are at
a relatively low level are being naive or disingenuous. The point being that
off-topic postings *if left unchallenged* may very well increase to a level
where they cause substantial disruption of on-topic discussion. See the
mailing list for a rampant example of this, IMO (though if it suits the
people who are members of it, good luck to 'em because it is a private
list).
By posting occasional polite (I hope) reminders about the fact that people
should not post such things and in any case will do better using "the proper
channels" such as Deja, people like me hope to keep this in some sort of
balance. We are not intending to insult or belittle anyone. I find it an
interesting aspect of human psychology that some folk seem unable to deal
with even the most indirect challenges to their actions without becoming
belligerent and denying any fault on their part.
Private e-mails only inform the posters of the "offending" articles. By
posting publically (sp?), those who might unwittingly have "overstepped the
mark" are better informed also. I would have thought it was best just to let
such "net cop" postings go by without starting interminable threads.
BTW, in the interests of fairness, I deplore Andy M's recent aggressive
language here and wish to dissociate myself from it.