"Tiangong-1 Space Station Will Crash Into Earth by April"

[Lynn McGuire]

"Tiangong-1 Space Station Will Crash Into Earth by April"

https://www.pcmag.com/news/356794/tiangong-1-space-station-will-crash-into-earth-by-april

Heads up !

Lynn

[Kevrob]

Time to break out the old "Skylab Protective Helmet?"

Kevin R

[Dimensional Traveler]

Don't forget one for your Dingo.


--
Inquiring minds want to know while minds with a self-preservation
instinct are running screaming.

[Quadibloc]

On Monday, October 16, 2017 at 6:05:12 PM UTC-6, Dimensional Traveler wrote:
> On 10/16/2017 4:43 PM, Kevrob wrote:
> > On Monday, October 16, 2017 at 3:38:11 PM UTC-4, Lynn McGuire wrote:
> >> "Tiangong-1 Space Station Will Crash Into Earth by April"

> >> https://www.pcmag.com/news/356794/tiangong-1-space-station-will-crash-into-earth-by-april

> >> Heads up !

> > Time to break out the old "Skylab Protective Helmet?"

> Don't forget one for your Dingo.

I checked; the station has an orbital inclination of 42.8 degrees.

So indeed all of Australia is once again in the crosshairs, but so is most of
the United States. For once, despite winter coming on, I'm glad I live in
Edmonton, Alberta.

John Savard

[alie...@gmail.com]

On Monday, October 16, 2017 at 8:56:47 PM UTC-7, Quadibloc wrote:

(snip)

> ...I'm glad I live in Edmonton, Alberta.

Why do Canucks so often include the name of the province when they mention a city in Canada? Is there an Edmonton in any of the other provinces?

I ask because there's a spate of question on Quora about why Americans say which state they're from instead of the country when asked where they're from. Englishmen particularly are confused as to why Americans ask them back "Why do you say 'England' rather than 'Great Britain' when I ask you?".

It's not like there aren't many cities in different U. S. states with the same name, but then I don't feel a need to mention the city name unless that's specifically requested.


Mark L. Fergerson

[Greg Goss]

New York New York gets both, but that distinguishes them from upstate.

I live in Calgary, province assumed. I used to live in and near
Vancouver, ditto. I grew up in Kelowna, in the BC interior. I spent
most of the eighties in Trail, BC. I was born in Trawna, and spent a
year and a half there in the twokays.

So, Calgary and Vancouver, I assume you know of. Kelowna gets a
description of where in the province, but Trail doesn't unless you ask
("where the Columbia crosses into the States"). Toronto not only gets
no province, but gets a mandatory mangling if presented in a text
form.

So I am spectacularly inconsistent. Until preparing this post, I had
never noticed that Kelowna gets more description than Trail does.
--
We are geeks. Resistance is voltage over current.

[William Hyde]

On Tuesday, October 17, 2017 at 11:35:59 PM UTC-4, nu...@bid.nes wrote:
> On Monday, October 16, 2017 at 8:56:47 PM UTC-7, Quadibloc wrote:
>
> (snip)
>
> > ...I'm glad I live in Edmonton, Alberta.
>
> Why do Canucks so often include the name of the province when they mention a city in Canada?

In part because they think Canadians from other provinces might not know where Edmonton is. I'd like to mock them for this, but I fear they might be correct.

I live in Toronto. I don't specify the province because:

(1) There are not many Torontos around.

(2) If I say Ontario some people think I'm in California.

William Hyde

[Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy]

William Hyde <wthyd...@gmail.com> wrote in
news:64290816-7e3f-44d0...@googlegroups.com:

> On Tuesday, October 17, 2017 at 11:35:59 PM UTC-4, nu...@bid.nes
> wrote:
>> On Monday, October 16, 2017 at 8:56:47 PM UTC-7, Quadibloc
>> wrote:
>>
>> (snip)
>>
>> > ...I'm glad I live in Edmonton, Alberta.
>>
>> Why do Canucks so often include the name of the province when
>> they mention a city in Canada?
>
> In part because they think Canadians from other provinces might
> not know where Edmonton is. I'd like to mock them for this, but
> I fear they might be correct.

That's no reason to refrain from mocking. In fact, it actually
increases the incentive to.

>
> I live in Toronto. I don't specify the province because:
>
> (1) There are not many Torontos around.
>
> (2) If I say Ontario some people think I'm in California.
>

That's because if you say Ontario, you probably *are* in California.

--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

[Kevrob]

On Wednesday, October 18, 2017 at 5:09:59 PM UTC-4, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy wrote:
> William Hyde <wthyd...@gmail.com> wrote in
> news:64290816-7e3f-44d0...@googlegroups.com:
>
> > On Tuesday, October 17, 2017 at 11:35:59 PM UTC-4, nu...@bid.nes
> > wrote:
> >> On Monday, October 16, 2017 at 8:56:47 PM UTC-7, Quadibloc
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> (snip)
> >>
> >> > ...I'm glad I live in Edmonton, Alberta.
> >>
> >> Why do Canucks so often include the name of the province when
> >> they mention a city in Canada?
> >
> > In part because they think Canadians from other provinces might
> > not know where Edmonton is. I'd like to mock them for this, but
> > I fear they might be correct.
>
> That's no reason to refrain from mocking. In fact, it actually
> increases the incentive to.
> >
> > I live in Toronto. I don't specify the province because:
> >
> > (1) There are not many Torontos around.
> >
> > (2) If I say Ontario some people think I'm in California.
> >
> That's because if you say Ontario, you probably *are* in California.
>
>

There are quite a few more Washingtons than Ottawas, but many of both:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottawa_(disambiguation)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington

I'm from [state] or [city, state] may be a remnant of the pre-1860
attitude that an American's 'country" was his state or some smaller
slice thereof. Would you not get the same sort of regionalism
from an Italian? Or a German? {Sicilians are different, Bavarians
are different.} Some US states - Texas, California, Hawaii - were
at least temporarily foreign countries.

Kevin R

[Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy]

Kevrob <kev...@my-deja.com> wrote in
news:d37a8d79-4652-4578...@googlegroups.com:

Or, in the case of California, alternate dimensions.

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <XnsA8129018550...@69.16.179.42>,

Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>William Hyde <wthyd...@gmail.com> wrote in
>news:64290816-7e3f-44d0...@googlegroups.com:
>
>> On Tuesday, October 17, 2017 at 11:35:59 PM UTC-4, nu...@bid.nes
>> wrote:
>>> On Monday, October 16, 2017 at 8:56:47 PM UTC-7, Quadibloc
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> (snip)
>>>
>>> > ...I'm glad I live in Edmonton, Alberta.
>>>
>>> Why do Canucks so often include the name of the province when
>>> they mention a city in Canada?
>>
>> In part because they think Canadians from other provinces might
>> not know where Edmonton is. I'd like to mock them for this, but
>> I fear they might be correct.
>
>That's no reason to refrain from mocking. In fact, it actually
>increases the incentive to.
>>
>> I live in Toronto. I don't specify the province because:
>>
>> (1) There are not many Torontos around.
>>
>> (2) If I say Ontario some people think I'm in California.
>>
>That's because if you say Ontario, you probably *are* in California.

But if you say Toronto, Ontario, California, you are in one of
those alternate dimensions you were going on about.

--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <d37a8d79-4652-4578...@googlegroups.com>,

Caifornia was an independent nation for a couple of days ... just
to dispel any preconception that it still belonged to Mexico ...
before petitioning to join the United States.

[Kevrob]

On Wednesday, October 18, 2017 at 9:00:05 PM UTC-4, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:

>
> California was an independent nation for a couple of days ... just

> to dispel any preconception that it still belonged to Mexico ...
> before petitioning to join the United States.

Vermont had to wait a bit.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vermont_Republic

Kevin R

[Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy]

djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote in
news:oy1oI...@kithrup.com:

And then, of course, there's Berzerkly, which the rest of
California considers so crazy it's an alternate dimension. Perhaps
one of Discworld's Dugneon Dimensions.

[Gene Wirchenko]

On Tue, 17 Oct 2017 20:35:56 -0700 (PDT), "nu...@bid.nes"
<alie...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Monday, October 16, 2017 at 8:56:47 PM UTC-7, Quadibloc wrote:
>
>(snip)
>
>> ...I'm glad I live in Edmonton, Alberta.
>
> Why do Canucks so often include the name of the province when they
mention a city in Canada? Is there an Edmonton in any of the other
provinces?

The context might be where people from other countries can read
it, people who are not so familiar with Canadian cities. This could
be people from the U.S.A; some are quite insular.

Vancouver, BC and Vancouver, WA are in the southwest of their
respective province/state. Fairly close.

> I ask because there's a spate of question on Quora about why Americans
say which state they're from instead of the country when asked where
they're from. Englishmen particularly are confused as to why Americans
ask them back "Why do you say 'England' rather than 'Great Britain'
when I ask you?".
>
> It's not like there aren't many cities in different U. S. states
with the same name, but then I don't feel a need to mention the city
name unless that's specifically requested.

I think more of the city where I live than the province so I
mention the city name. Then, I make my post more easily understood by
including the province name.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

[James Nicoll]

In article <l1miucd8g7qjnhb50...@4ax.com>,

Also, the people who named Canadian towns and cities were not over-
burdened with originality. Not just reusing old world city names without
tacking a New on the front. At least once the post office had to intervene
to keep four nearby but still different towns from using the same name.

Heck, in olden times we were so short on names two of the fathers of
Confederation shared the same first, middle and last names.
--
My reviews can be found at http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/
My Livejournal at http://www.livejournal.com/users/james_nicoll
My patreon is at https://www.patreon.com/jamesdnicoll

[Kevrob]

The Canadian Football League had both Saskatchewan Roughriders
and Ottawa Rough Riders. Ottawa's team went on hiatus and
a new side entered the league as the Renegades, then folded.
The Redblacks wear the old Rough Riders' "colours," but don't
use the old nickname.

The space between Rough and Riders must make all the difference.

Why the league didn't also have some Rough-Riders, I'll never know. :)

Kevin R

[William Hyde]

When Baltimore briefly joined the CFL some years ago I was hoping they'd become the Baltimore Rough-Riders.

But they preferred to stick with the Colts. No sense of style.

William Hyde

[Kevrob]

They were trying to annoy the Irsays, who moved the Colts to Indy.

Then the NFL's trademark lawyers made them change it, and they
became, officially, the Stallions. The fans still called them Colts.

1995 Grey Cup champions!

Kevin R

[William Hyde]

On Friday, October 20, 2017 at 3:27:12 PM UTC-4, Kevrob wrote:
> On Friday, October 20, 2017 at 3:14:29 PM UTC-4, William Hyde wrote:
> > On Friday, October 20, 2017 at 6:31:19 AM UTC-4, Kevrob wrote:
>
> > > The space between Rough and Riders must make all the difference.
> > >
> > > Why the league didn't also have some Rough-Riders, I'll never know. :)
> >
> > When Baltimore briefly joined the CFL some years ago I was hoping they'd become the Baltimore Rough-Riders.
> >
> > But they preferred to stick with the Colts. No sense of style.
>
> They were trying to annoy the Irsays, who moved the Colts to Indy.

I was aware of that. But they should have been thinking of me.

I liked Baltimore, the few times I was there. After Texas, the Baltimore summer seemed refreshingly cool.

William Hyde

[Greg Goss]

The year I watched them in the Grey Cup, they had no real name, except
for the one that the fans used.

[Default User]

On Friday, October 20, 2017 at 2:14:29 PM UTC-5, William Hyde wrote:

> When Baltimore briefly joined the CFL some years ago I was hoping they'd become the Baltimore Rough-Riders.
>
> But they preferred to stick with the Colts. No sense of style.

I don't think they were called the Colts. Some sort of trademark problem in the US as I recall.


Brian

[Default User]

I should have read on, as I see that this was covered. Ah well.


Brian

[Gene Wirchenko]

On Fri, 20 Oct 2017 02:10:00 +0000 (UTC), jdni...@panix.com (James
Nicoll) wrote:

[snip]

>Also, the people who named Canadian towns and cities were not over-
>burdened with originality. Not just reusing old world city names without
>tacking a New on the front. At least once the post office had to intervene
>to keep four nearby but still different towns from using the same name.

Like the U.S.A. is any different?

I understand that _The Simpsons_ is set in Springfield, because
there are so many of them.

"New _____" is a common name. New York even gets used for a city
and a state.

Just a bit of homeland nostalgia, perhaps?

>Heck, in olden times we were so short on names two of the fathers of
>Confederation shared the same first, middle and last names.

The U.S.A. was close with John Adams and John Quincy Adams.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

[Chrysi Cat]

Y'know that's actually a father and a son, the latter of whom was far
too young to have anything to do with founding the USA, right?

--
Chrysi Cat
1/2 anthrocat, nearly 1/2 anthrofox, all magical
Transgoddess, quick to anger
Call me Chrysi or call me Kat, I'll respond to either!

[Kevrob]

On Sunday, October 22, 2017 at 7:32:57 AM UTC-4, Chrysi Cat wrote:
> On 10/21/2017 8:54 PM, Gene Wirchenko wrote:
> > On Fri, 20 Oct 2017 02:10:00 +0000 (UTC), jdni...@panix.com (James
> > Nicoll) wrote:
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> >> Also, the people who named Canadian towns and cities were not over-
> >> burdened with originality. Not just reusing old world city names without
> >> tacking a New on the front. At least once the post office had to intervene
> >> to keep four nearby but still different towns from using the same name.
> >
> > Like the U.S.A. is any different?
> >
> > I understand that _The Simpsons_ is set in Springfield, because
> > there are so many of them.
> >
> > "New _____" is a common name. New York even gets used for a city
> > and a state.
> >
> > Just a bit of homeland nostalgia, perhaps?
> >
> >> Heck, in olden times we were so short on names two of the fathers of
> >> Confederation shared the same first, middle and last names.
> >
> > The U.S.A. was close with John Adams and John Quincy Adams.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> >
> > Gene Wirchenko
> >
>
> Y'know that's actually a father and a son, the latter of whom was far
> too young to have anything to do with founding the USA, right?
>

JQA was mostly a witness, not a participant, but he was
actually helping out US diplomatic missions as a teenager.


[quote]

Much of Adams' youth was spent accompanying his father overseas.
He accompanied his father on diplomatic missions to France from 1778 until
1779 and to the Netherlands from 1780 until 1782. Adams acquired an
education at institutions such as Leiden University. He matriculated in
Leiden on January 10, 1781. For nearly three years, beginning at the age
of 14, he accompanied Francis Dana as a secretary on a mission to Saint
Petersburg, Russia, to obtain recognition of the new United States.

[/quote] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Quincy_Adams

Quincy was all of 10 years old when he accompanied his father
aboard USS Boston en route to Europe, where the future 2nd President
would become a commissioner to France. Boston took a British prize
en route, so was present at a naval battle at that young age.

Compare that to Andrew Jackson, who was 14, when he was captured by
the British, while acting as a courier for Continental forces.

Teenagers fighting in the cause of Independence is an actual
historical fact. See:

"Young People At war" - Thomas Fleming

https://allthingsliberty.com/2013/04/young-people-at-war/

The Navy had midshipmen and powder boys. Army units had drummer
boys. Maybe 5% of those in arms were younger than 16, the age
when militia service started.

Kevin R

[J. Clarke]

On Sun, 22 Oct 2017 08:55:03 -0700 (PDT), Kevrob <kev...@my-deja.com>
wrote:

There's at least one case on record in which someone went to sea as a
midshipman at age 6.

<https://www.encyclopediavirginia.org/Barron_Samuel_1809-1888>

And then there's Alexander the Great, who while his father was away,
acted as regent of Macedonia at age 16, putting down an invasion in
the process.

I don't know that we do young people any real service by treating them
like incompetents.

[Ted Nolan <tednolan>]

In article <2iipucprij8naeerv...@4ax.com>,

There's an amusing meme that's been making the rounds on conservative
sites, here's one instantiation:

https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/278414/
--
------
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..

[William Hyde]

Also formative would be the case of the officer who lost a leg to a misfiring cannon (not during the battle), or the explosion of a store of powder, which killed one crewman, injured many more, and damaged the ship. Considerable losses without enemy action.

Mind you the fact that the prize, a mere merchantman, put up a fight against a frigate might be something to mull over too.

William Hyde

[J. Clarke]

On 22 Oct 2017 17:13:56 GMT, t...@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan

It's only amusing until you consider the consequences, and I don't
think the New York Times is particularly conservative.

My generation used to say "America, change it or lose it". Well, we
changed it, but we may have thrown away the baby with the bath water.

[J. Clarke]

Remember that the objective was not just to destroy the merchantman
but to take it as a prize--the crew got a share of the value when it
was sold (and _only_ when it was sold) so there was considerable
incentive to capture it. And that meant going hand-to-hand with the
crew.

That was also a time when crews were much larger--they needed to have
a certain amount of manpower to work a square-rigged ship and they
were all strong and agile (you don't survive long up in the rigging if
you aren't strong and agile). A warship would have a larger crew than
a merchant ship but it stil meant going after the merchant crew with
swords and pikes and single-shot firearms.

[Gene Wirchenko]

On Sun, 22 Oct 2017 13:09:50 -0400, J. Clarke
<jclarke...@gmail.com> wrote:

[snip]

>I don't know that we do young people any real service by treating them
>like incompetents.

Agreed. Some will fail, but some will do very well indeed.

And it is not as if the same does not happen with adults.
Adulthood is no guarantee of success.

Sincerely,

Gene wirchenko

[Kevrob]

There would have been a Marine detachment aboard, skilled
in repelling boarders, firing muskets from the rigging, etc.

Yup. Boston had some:

https://archive.org/details/listofmarinesonb00bost

Kevin R

[hamis...@gmail.com]

Yeah, that's clearly desirable...
>
> <https://www.encyclopediavirginia.org/Barron_Samuel_1809-1888>

and I'm sure he contributed a lot when he was first made a midshipsman at 2...

>
> And then there's Alexander the Great, who while his father was away,
> acted as regent of Macedonia at age 16, putting down an invasion in
> the process.

yeah, but had a lot of advisors

>
> I don't know that we do young people any real service by treating them
> like incompetents.

Feel free to be operated on by a 16 year old...

[J. Clarke]

Probably about as much as the average 18 year old midshipman does in
our modern navy.

>> And then there's Alexander the Great, who while his father was away,
>> acted as regent of Macedonia at age 16, putting down an invasion in
>> the process.
>
>yeah, but had a lot of advisors

So did Nimitz. What of it?

>> I don't know that we do young people any real service by treating them
>> like incompetents.
>
>Feel free to be operated on by a 16 year old...

If he's been studying medicine since he was 2 he's likely pretty good
at it.

Which would you rather, a 16 year old with 14 years experience or a 25
year old with five years experience?

[J. Clarke]

On Sun, 22 Oct 2017 16:49:36 -0700 (PDT), Kevrob <kev...@my-deja.com>

Nothing magic about Marines, contrary to popular belief. Stick a
sword in one of 'em and he bleeds the same color as everybody else.

[William Hyde]

On Sunday, October 22, 2017 at 6:37:53 PM UTC-4, J. Clarke wrote:

I appear to be wrong here, see below.

>
> Remember that the objective was not just to destroy the merchantman
> but to take it as a prize

I think this calls for a "Duh".

--the crew got a share of the value when it
> was sold (and _only_ when it was sold) so there was considerable
> incentive to capture it. And that meant going hand-to-hand with the
> crew.

Not usually. In fact very rarely. Most merchantmen wouldn't resist a frigate. Most merchant seamen were not keen on dying for a few pence per day.

The end result was inevitably many dead, and being captured all the same. They might make a run for it if fog or night loomed. Or if there were two merchantmen.

An exception would be some East Indiamen which had enough guns to resist a frigate, but never enough crew to man them, about 150 on the very largest (for contrast an English third rate, about the same size, should have a crew of 550). At a guess they'd hold off a small frigate like the Boston, but they were no match for French 40 gun frigates.

There may be some confusion of ships here. Excerpts from JA's diaries show (as far as I can tell, anyway) that the Boston met two English vessels on the way. One was a small privateer, which mistook the Boston, which was very small for a frigate, for some weaker vessel. Some firing took place, and the smaller ship struck when the size of the Boston's broadside became apparent.

The Martha, as expected, struck without incident.

> That was also a time when crews were much larger--they needed to have
> a certain amount of manpower to work a square-rigged ship and they
> were all strong and agile (you don't survive long up in the rigging if
> you aren't strong and agile).

You don't survive long if you go up, heavily outnumbered, against professional fighters with bigger guns.

> A warship would have a larger crew

Much, much larger. Especially after your decks were cleared with grapeshot.

than
> a merchant ship but it stil meant going after the merchant crew with
> swords and pikes and single-shot firearms.

No, it generally did not.

William Hyde

[David DeLaney]

On 2017-10-18, Greg Goss <go...@gossg.org> wrote:
> New York New York gets both, but that distinguishes them from upstate.

ObSF: That bit from Cities in Flight, of course.

> I live in Calgary, province assumed. I used to live in and near
> Vancouver, ditto. I grew up in Kelowna, in the BC interior. I spent
> most of the eighties in Trail, BC. I was born in Trawna, and spent a
> year and a half there in the twokays.
>
> So, Calgary and Vancouver, I assume you know of.

Sure. But in z variant of the Usenet principle "please be assured that you are
much more interested in you than we are", almost all USAns? Have no clue what
_provinces_ those are in, unless they live near that particular border or have
some other association with the city. They're far more likely to know they're
in Canadia.

> Toronto not only gets
> no province, but gets a mandatory mangling if presented in a text form.

That's only memetic echoing from Tonto and Totoro, of course. Toronto ON may
be the main exception to the "wait, it's in a province?" USAn atitude, come to
think of it.

Dave, who says "Cleveland OH" when asked where he's from, despite having lived
in Knoxville TN for longer than anywhere else by some margin now
--
\/David DeLaney posting thru EarthLink - "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK>
my gatekeeper archives are no longer accessible :( / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.

[David DeLaney]

On 2017-10-18, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taus...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Kevrob <kev...@my-deja.com> wrote in
>> Some US states - Texas,
>> California, Hawaii - were at least temporarily foreign countries.
>
> Or, in the case of California, alternate dimensions.

You'll have to reconjugate that "were" there, I think.

Dave, punctuation is vital here

[Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy]

David DeLaney <davidd...@earthlink.net> wrote in
news:kd2dnUfZO7n-EXDE...@earthlink.com:

> On 2017-10-18, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
> <taus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Kevrob <kev...@my-deja.com> wrote in
>>> Some US states - Texas,
>>> California, Hawaii - were at least temporarily foreign
>>> countries.
>>
>> Or, in the case of California, alternate dimensions.
>
> You'll have to reconjugate that "were" there, I think.

I won't argue the point. Especially these days.

>
> Dave, punctuation is vital here



--

Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

[Peter Trei]

Yup - This is one of those situations where quantity has a quality all its own,
on top of one being crewed by mnay people expecting to fight, and many
specialists in fighting, and the other with the minimum crew they can get
away with, and no real desire to fight.

Surrender is the logical choice.

> An exception would be some East Indiamen which had enough guns to resist a frigate, but never enough crew to man them, about 150 on the very largest (for contrast an English third rate, about the same size, should have a crew of 550). At a guess they'd hold off a small frigate like the Boston, but they were no match for French 40 gun frigates.
>
> There may be some confusion of ships here. Excerpts from JA's diaries show
> (as far as I can tell, anyway) that the Boston met two English vessels on the
> way. One was a small privateer, which mistook the Boston, which was very small
> for a frigate, for some weaker vessel. Some firing took place, and the smaller
> ship struck when the size of the Boston's broadside became apparent.
>
> The Martha, as expected, struck without incident.
>
>
> > That was also a time when crews were much larger--they needed to have
> > a certain amount of manpower to work a square-rigged ship and they
> > were all strong and agile (you don't survive long up in the rigging if
> > you aren't strong and agile).
>
> You don't survive long if you go up, heavily outnumbered, against professional fighters with bigger guns.
>
> > A warship would have a larger crew
>
> Much, much larger. Especially after your decks were cleared with grapeshot.
>
> than
> > a merchant ship but it stil meant going after the merchant crew with
> > swords and pikes and single-shot firearms.
>
> No, it generally did not.

Poking around, I found some poorly sourced numbers:

http://forums.sjgames.com/showthread.php?t=67016&page=2
(Age of Sail forum)
- start quote -
At any rate, going by numbers for the British Napoleonic-era system (and all
crew or gun numbers are approximate, +/- 20%)

Rate
1st (3 decks, 120 guns): 850
2nd (3 decks, 90 guns): 725
3rd (2 decks, 74 guns): 600
4th (2 decks, 50 guns): 370
5th (1/2 decks, 32-44 guns): 250
6th (1 deck, 28 guns): 200
Sloop of war: 16-20 guns, 100 men
Gunboat/cutter: 6-12 guns, 10-20 men

As has been mentioned, most of these are "excess" crew so you can fight the ship
and sail it at the same time, board and repel boards, detach crews for prizes,
and take casualties. Merchant crews or prize crews are _much_ smaller, perhaps a
dozen men. Merchants don't want to pay any more salary than they have to.

The "East Indiamen" operated by the British company were an intermediate case,
heavily armed for a merchantman, and had about half as many crew as a Royal Navy
man-of-war of similar size.

- end quote -

Consider this:
Full rigged
HMS Victory 1758, 3500 tons, crew 850

Six masted schooner
Wyoming 1909, 3700 tons, crew 13
(yes, this is much later, but I wanted to show how the technology progressed)

Just for fun
CSCL-Globe 2013, 187,000 tons, crew 31
(its a container ship)

pt

[Kevrob]

I think of Marines on board a fighting warship in the Age of Sail as
leaven in the bread dough. The bulk of the boarding party, or those
repelling a boarding attempt, would be Able Bodied Seamen. They
would go into the melee with a blunt instrument or edged weapon,
and might or might not have a firearm. Having a boarding ax and a
matchlock pistol would have been a good combination.

OvSF: Doc Smith's "space-ax" used in the Lensmen series.

In fiction, you often run into unusual weapons more than you
would in real life: the 7-shot volley gun Sgt Patrick Harper
carries in the Richard Sharpe novels was a naval weapon.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nock_gun

It also shows up in the film, THE ALAMO, wielded by Jim Bowie.

Kevin R

[Kevrob]

On Monday, October 23, 2017 at 2:28:11 AM UTC-4, David DeLaney wrote:
> On 2017-10-18, Greg Goss <go...@gossg.org> wrote:
> > New York New York gets both, but that distinguishes them from upstate.
>
> ObSF: That bit from Cities in Flight, of course.
>
> > I live in Calgary, province assumed. I used to live in and near
> > Vancouver, ditto. I grew up in Kelowna, in the BC interior. I spent
> > most of the eighties in Trail, BC. I was born in Trawna, and spent a
> > year and a half there in the twokays.
> >
> > So, Calgary and Vancouver, I assume you know of.
>
> Sure. But in z variant of the Usenet principle "please be assured that you are
> much more interested in you than we are", almost all USAns? Have no clue what
> _provinces_ those are in, unless they live near that particular border or have
> some other association with the city. They're far more likely to know they're
> in Canadia.

It helps to be a hockey fan.

Heck, I know where Red Deer and Kamloops are, from following hockey.*
Same reason I know Kenora used to be Rat Portage. They won the
Stanley Cup!

>
> > Toronto not only gets
> > no province, but gets a mandatory mangling if presented in a text form.
>
> That's only memetic echoing from Tonto and Totoro, of course. Toronto ON may
> be the main exception to the "wait, it's in a province?" USAn atitude, come to
> think of it.
>

Kevin R

Learned much geography as a kid, reading THE SPORTING NEWS.

* http://reddeerrebels.com/ (AB)

http://blazerhockey.com/ (BC)

[Dimensional Traveler]

On 10/23/2017 8:40 AM, Kevrob wrote:
>
> It helps to be a hockey fan.
>
> Heck, I know where Red Deer and Kamloops are, from following hockey.*
> Same reason I know Kenora used to be Rat Portage. They won the
> Stanley Cup!
>

Those are some awfully big rats!


--
Inquiring minds want to know while minds with a self-preservation
instinct are running screaming.

[Kevrob]

On Monday, October 23, 2017 at 12:53:30 PM UTC-4, Dimensional Traveler wrote:
> On 10/23/2017 8:40 AM, Kevrob wrote:
> >
> > It helps to be a hockey fan.
> >
> > Heck, I know where Red Deer and Kamloops are, from following hockey.*
> > Same reason I know Kenora used to be Rat Portage. They won the
> > Stanley Cup!
> >
> Those are some awfully big rats!
>

see also: the Albany River Rats:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albany_River_Rats

Kevin R

[William Hyde]

On Monday, October 23, 2017 at 10:19:01 AM UTC-4, Peter Trei wrote:

>
> Poking around, I found some poorly sourced numbers:
>
> http://forums.sjgames.com/showthread.php?t=67016&page=2
> (Age of Sail forum)
> - start quote -
> At any rate, going by numbers for the British Napoleonic-era system (and all
> crew or gun numbers are approximate, +/- 20%)
>
> Rate
> 1st (3 decks, 120 guns): 850

On the whole these numbers seem reasonable. Though most ships were never fully staffed in wartime.

Quibbling while I wait for the coffee to kick in ...

Virtually all British first rates were 100 guns (Victory, Royal Sovereign, and Britannia at Trafalgar, for example). By the revolutionary era French first rates were 120 guns (sometimes 110). Though particularly in the case of the British, the number of rated guns would be supplemented by short range carronades on the upper deck.

The French 120 L'Orient was supposed to have a crew of 1130. How many it had at the battle of the Nile is unclear - the British reported picking up 70 survivors, a French admiral 750 or so. Which must have made the fleeing French ships very crowded.

> 2nd (3 decks, 90 guns): 725

The 90 was the basic design. Most were rerated as 98s by the addition of eight quite light guns (later carronades) on the upper deck. This trivial change obscures a bigger one - 98s were being built larger, and even old 90s were reduced to their constituent timbers and "rebuilt" larger. So more crew.

> 3rd (2 decks, 74 guns): 600

The British had a few two decked 80s and never managed to phase out the old 64s until after 1815. But the 74s were the bulk of the battle fleet.

By 1800 the British were producing medium-sized 74s in such numbers that crews were down to 450. Napoleon thought this a grave weakness and cited this number in an attempt to get more aggression from his admirals.

> 4th (2 decks, 50 guns): 370
> 5th (1/2 decks, 32-44 guns): 250
> 6th (1 deck, 28 guns): 200
> Sloop of war: 16-20 guns, 100 men
> Gunboat/cutter: 6-12 guns, 10-20 men
>
> As has been mentioned, most of these are "excess" crew so you can fight the ship
> and sail it at the same time, board and repel boards, detach crews for prizes,
> and take casualties. Merchant crews or prize crews are _much_ smaller, perhaps a
> dozen men. Merchants don't want to pay any more salary than they have to.
>
> The "East Indiamen" operated by the British company were an intermediate case,
> heavily armed for a merchantman, and had about half as many crew as a Royal Navy
> man-of-war of similar size.
>
> - end quote -
>
> Consider this:
> Full rigged
> HMS Victory 1758, 3500 tons, crew 850

According to the Victory website they were almost fully crewed at Trafalgar, with 831 men. Youngest 12 oldest 67.

That is surprising to me, but the ship had just been to England and perhaps topped up its crew there.

William Hyde

[Dan Tilque]

James Nicoll wrote:
> In article <l1miucd8g7qjnhb50...@4ax.com>,
> Gene Wirchenko <ge...@telus.net> wrote:

>> Vancouver, BC and Vancouver, WA are in the southwest of their
>> respective province/state. Fairly close.

About 300 miles apart. If you say Vancouver in this part of the country,
you mean the city across the Columbia. You need to tack on the BC to
mean the other one.

A lot of people think the one in BC is older, probably because it's so
much bigger. But the one in the USA is some 60 years older.

>
> Also, the people who named Canadian towns and cities were not over-
> burdened with originality. Not just reusing old world city names without
> tacking a New on the front. At least once the post office had to intervene
> to keep four nearby but still different towns from using the same name.

I've been doing a lot of research involving names of towns in the US and
Canada recently. Other than all the amalgamation in Canada driving me
crazy,[1] there's very little difference in their naming patterns.
Canada has a lot more named for Scottish and Ukrainian places and the US
has lots more German and Mexican names. But otherwise, after allowing
for the different population sizes of the countries, there's no real
differences.

BTW, the results of my research:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_non-US_cities_with_a_US_namesake
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_non-Canadian_cities_with_a_Canadian_namesake


[1]Seriously, lets knock off all the merging of towns up there. There's
no need for all that combining and it confuses the poor researchers.

--
Dan Tilque

[Chrysi Cat]

On 10/24/2017 2:36 PM, Dan Tilque wrote:

<snip>

>
> [1]Seriously, lets knock off all the merging of towns up there. There's
> no need for all that combining and it confuses the poor researchers.
>

You know you'd have a lot more room to talk if there weren't 10
neighborhoods of Portland itself that were separate cities as little as
90 years ago, right? (and let's not even get started on how many cities
Los Angeles swallowed before the state constitution started forbidding
it) :-P

Sometimes it's just easier if you don't have totally different laws
because you cross one block in a massive metro area.

[J. Clarke]

On Wed, 25 Oct 2017 03:27:45 -0600, Chrysi Cat <chry...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On 10/24/2017 2:36 PM, Dan Tilque wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>>
>> [1]Seriously, lets knock off all the merging of towns up there. There's
>> no need for all that combining and it confuses the poor researchers.
>>
>
>You know you'd have a lot more room to talk if there weren't 10
>neighborhoods of Portland itself that were separate cities as little as
>90 years ago, right? (and let's not even get started on how many cities
>Los Angeles swallowed before the state constitution started forbidding
>it) :-P
>
>Sometimes it's just easier if you don't have totally different laws
>because you cross one block in a massive metro area.

Flashing on "Tunnel in the Sky" in which Rod Walker lived in a house
that was part of "Greater New York". It had a window facing the Grand
Canyon. Heinlein took pains to make it clear that it wasn't any kind
of "virtual" window.

[James Nicoll]

In article <oso86s$au7$1...@dont-email.me>,

Dan Tilque <dti...@frontier.com> wrote:
>
>
>[1]Seriously, lets knock off all the merging of towns up there. There's
>no need for all that combining and it confuses the poor researchers.

Some of that is an attempt to streamline administrative needs and some
was just Harris' Tories trying to create cities whose mayors would
always be conservatives and thus perfect idiots.
--
My reviews can be found at http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/
My Livejournal at http://www.livejournal.com/users/james_nicoll
My patreon is at https://www.patreon.com/jamesdnicoll

[James Nicoll]

In article <osq98b$2ke$1...@reader2.panix.com>,

James Nicoll <jdni...@panix.com> wrote:
>In article <oso86s$au7$1...@dont-email.me>,
>Dan Tilque <dti...@frontier.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>[1]Seriously, lets knock off all the merging of towns up there. There's
>>no need for all that combining and it confuses the poor researchers.
>
>Some of that is an attempt to streamline administrative needs

Given what a pain in the ass Cambridge is to deal with, I wonder
how obstructive Preston, Heslper and Galt were before the merger.

[Greg Goss]

Chrysi Cat <chry...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On 10/24/2017 2:36 PM, Dan Tilque wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>>
>> [1]Seriously, lets knock off all the merging of towns up there. There's
>> no need for all that combining and it confuses the poor researchers.
>>
>
>You know you'd have a lot more room to talk if there weren't 10
>neighborhoods of Portland itself that were separate cities as little as
>90 years ago, right? (and let's not even get started on how many cities
>Los Angeles swallowed before the state constitution started forbidding
>it) :-P
>
>Sometimes it's just easier if you don't have totally different laws
>because you cross one block in a massive metro area.

Well, after soaking up Hastings Mill, Kerrisdale and such, Vancouver
stabilized -- letting Burnaby etc keep their identity.

The death of Rutland, where I grew up, was by fiat from Victoria, not
by any local choices.
--
We are geeks. Resistance is voltage over current.

[Wolffan]

On 2017 Oct 23, William Hyde wrote
(in article<fb92e43b-6a06-4973...@googlegroups.com>):

> An exception would be some East Indiamen which had enough guns to resist a
> frigate, but never enough crew to man them, about 150 on the very largest
> (for contrast an English third rate, about the same size, should have a crew
> of 550). At a guess they'd hold off a small frigate like the Boston, but they
> were no match for French 40 gun frigates.

The East Indiaman Exeter _captured_ a French frigate.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Action_of_4_August_1800

[William Hyde]

I was unaware of this. Thanks.

> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Action_of_4_August_1800

Well, yes, but the captured frigate surrendered under the mistaken assumption that the opponent was a ship of the line - not the only time East Indiamen took advantage of their resemblance to ships of the line to bluff superior opponents. The result was usually flight, not surrender.


The Medee was a mere 32. A 40 would be 40-50% stronger and might try a couple of rounds against a small ship of the line, whereupon the deception would have been revealed by the Indiaman's weak response.

On the other hand, a link in that same article does show a merchantman doing well against a frigate. The light French frigate, Franchise (36), fleeing from the above action, tried to capture the armed merchantman Weymouth.

Though the latter had 32 guns, all were 6 and 9 pounder to the frigate's twelves (and the French pound was heavier by about ten percent). The Weymouth only had 90 people on board, including passengers, while another link gives the Franchise's crew as about 190. Nonetheless in a combat lasting an hour, the Weymouth didn't take a single casualty.

So this is an exception to the rule. But the Weymouth was fairly heavily armed, and any British (or American) captain who failed to press the attack in that circumstance would have been court-martialed and convicted. The article does not tell us the fate of the Franchise's captain.

William Hyde