re-opening Bletchley Park

[Robert Harvey]

With the exciting news that the government wants to use Bletchley Park to
teach cybersecurity the BBC says that 'codebreakers will return to
Bletchley park'.

Obviously Mrs May wants to create a warm nostalgic feel to Brexit. What
else, I wonder, will be dredged up from our past?
* LCC have already started turning off streetlamps round here (except, I
notice, in the daytime) so the blackout is back already.
* I noticed the other day in the council offices a notice which was a
straight paraphrase of 'is your journey really neccessary?'
* John Lewis was offering lovatt green trenchcoats for ladies.
* Will we be encouraged to put strips of brown paper on window panes?
* Will obesity be tackled with ration books?

The real bonus, I suppose, would be to buy a few ships for the Navy, who
seem woefully underequipped in that department. Not quite so sure about
building new Lancasters, but I am not a strategist.

[Zephirum]

On 24 Nov 2016 09:19, Robert Harvey wrote:

>
> The real bonus, I suppose, would be to buy a few ships for the Navy, who
> seem woefully underequipped in that department. Not quite so sure about
> building new Lancasters, but I am not a strategist.
>
>

I thought there were two aircraft carriers being built but just no
aircraft for them?

--
Flying on Per Ardua ad Astra

[Ahem A Rivet's Shot]

Put the Harrier back into production.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/

[Nick Odell]

On 24/11/2016 09:19, Robert Harvey wrote:
> With the exciting news that the government wants to use Bletchley Park to
> teach cybersecurity the BBC says that 'codebreakers will return to
> Bletchley park'.

<snip>

Not quite so sure about
> building new Lancasters, but I am not a strategist.
>

I can help with that. I was given the Haynes Manual for the Lancaster
Bomber for Christmas last year so obviously I now know all there is
about taking them apart and putting them back together again.

Nick

[Richard Robinson]

Nick Odell said:
>
> I was given the Haynes Manual for the Lancaster
> Bomber for Christmas last year so obviously I now know all there is
> about taking them apart and putting them back together again.

I know someone who has the Haynes Manual for chickens ...


--
Richard Robinson
"The whole plan hinged upon the natural curiosity of potatoes" - S. Lem

My email address is at http://www.qualmograph.org.uk/contact.html

[Jim Price]

On 24/11/16 12:26, Richard Robinson wrote:
> Nick Odell said:
>>
>> I was given the Haynes Manual for the Lancaster
>> Bomber for Christmas last year so obviously I now know all there is
>> about taking them apart and putting them back together again.
>
> I know someone who has the Haynes Manual for chickens ...

Tell him not to bother giving it to the cavalry ...

--
╔═╦═╦═════╦═══╗
║ ║ ║ ║ ║
╔═╝ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ╔═╝
╚═══╩═╩═╩═╩═╩═╝ -- JimP.

[Geoff Ellis]

On 24/11/2016 10:46, Znep wrote:
> In uk.rec.sheds, (Zephirum) wrote in
> <e9nsgg...@mid.individual.net>::

> Surely that makes them just "carriers". Or perhaps sea-going football
> pitches.
>
USN 3rd string

[Richard Robinson]

Jim Price said:
> On 24/11/16 12:26, Richard Robinson wrote:
>> Nick Odell said:
>>>
>>> I was given the Haynes Manual for the Lancaster
>>> Bomber for Christmas last year so obviously I now know all there is
>>> about taking them apart and putting them back together again.
>>
>> I know someone who has the Haynes Manual for chickens ...
>
> Tell him not to bother giving it to the cavalry ...

They don't practice with lances any more ?


I also have the Haynes Clarinet Manual. I can take a clarinet apart without
a book (*and* put it back together)[q], but it's simpler just to read about
it.


[q] a set of jewellers' screwdrivers is more useful.

[Tone]

On 24/11/2016 10:46, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Nov 2016 10:08:25 +0000
> Zephirum <ct6...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 24 Nov 2016 09:19, Robert Harvey wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> The real bonus, I suppose, would be to buy a few ships for the Navy, who
>>> seem woefully underequipped in that department. Not quite so sure about
>>> building new Lancasters, but I am not a strategist.
>>>
>>>
>> I thought there were two aircraft carriers being built but just no
>> aircraft for them?
>
> Put the Harrier back into production.
>

We could probably manage The Swordfish.

Tone

[RustyHinge]

On 24/11/16 09:19, Robert Harvey wrote:

> With the exciting news that the government wants to use Bletchley Park to
> teach cybersecurity the BBC says that 'codebreakers will return to
> Bletchley park'.
>
> Obviously Mrs May wants to create a warm nostalgic feel to Brexit. What
> else, I wonder, will be dredged up from our past?
> * LCC have already started turning off streetlamps round here (except, I
> notice, in the daytime) so the blackout is back already.

Must have *some* significance...

> * I noticed the other day in the council offices a notice which was a
> straight paraphrase of 'is your journey really neccessary?'

Well, is it?

> * John Lewis was offering lovatt green trenchcoats for ladies.
> * Will we be encouraged to put strips of brown paper on window panes?

> * Will obesity be tackled with ration books?

No, but it would be with rationing and *no* ration books.

> The real bonus, I suppose, would be to buy a few ships for the Navy, who
> seem woefully underequipped in that department. Not quite so sure about
> building new Lancasters, but I am not a strategist.

Well, they need gnu turrets on the underslide as well as the ones
they've already got - and that's assuming any putin^h^h^h^putative
anemone is using pissed-on engined frighter planes. Personally, I goove
the Vulcan would be betterer, or a remolish of TSR2.

Excavated ovine, a Vickers Vimy or two might fool them for a bit.

--
Rusty Hinge
To err is human. To really foul things up requires a computer and the BOFH.

[RustyHinge]

Or the Seafire, at a push.

[Tone]

On 24/11/2016 13:41, RustyHinge wrote:
> On 24/11/16 13:09, Tone wrote:
>> On 24/11/2016 10:46, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>> On Thu, 24 Nov 2016 10:08:25 +0000
>>> Zephirum <ct6...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 24 Nov 2016 09:19, Robert Harvey wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The real bonus, I suppose, would be to buy a few ships for the Navy,
>>>>> who
>>>>> seem woefully underequipped in that department. Not quite so sure
>>>>> about
>>>>> building new Lancasters, but I am not a strategist.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> I thought there were two aircraft carriers being built but just no
>>>> aircraft for them?
>>>
>>> Put the Harrier back into production.
>>>
>> We could probably manage The Swordfish.
>
> Or the Seafire, at a push.
>

You'd need arrester wires for that. The Swordfish can do VTL if the ship
is doing 30 knots into a stiff breeze.

Tone

[Richard Robinson]

RustyHinge said:
> On 24/11/16 13:09, Tone wrote:
>> On 24/11/2016 10:46, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>> Zephirum <ct6...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On 24 Nov 2016 09:19, Robert Harvey wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The real bonus, I suppose, would be to buy a few ships for the Navy,
>>>>> who seem woefully underequipped in that department. Not quite so sure
>>>>> about building new Lancasters, but I am not a strategist.
>>>>>
>>>> I thought there were two aircraft carriers being built but just no
>>>> aircraft for them?
>>>
>>> Put the Harrier back into production.
>>>
>> We could probably manage The Swordfish.
>
> Or the Seafire, at a push.

How far back do we want to take our country, anyway ?

[Jim Price]

On 24/11/16 13:09, Richard Robinson wrote:
> Jim Price said:
>> On 24/11/16 12:26, Richard Robinson wrote:
>>> Nick Odell said:
>>>>
>>>> I was given the Haynes Manual for the Lancaster
>>>> Bomber for Christmas last year so obviously I now know all there is
>>>> about taking them apart and putting them back together again.
>>>
>>> I know someone who has the Haynes Manual for chickens ...
>>
>> Tell him not to bother giving it to the cavalry ...
>
> They don't practice with lances any more ?

No, they were caught cheating with those, and the chickens didn't like
it up 'em.

> I also have the Haynes Clarinet Manual. I can take a clarinet apart without
> a book (*and* put it back together)[q], but it's simpler just to read about
> it.

I do simler with bicycles and the other things. Some days are simpler
than other thobut.

> [q] a set of jewellers' screwdrivers is more useful.



--

╔═╦═╦═════╦═══╗
║ ║ ║ ║ ║
╔═╝ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ╔═╝
╚═══╩═╩═╩═╩═╩═╝ -- JimP.

[Richard Robinson]

Huge said:

> On 2016-11-24, Richard Robinson <rich...@privacy.net> wrote:
>> RustyHinge said:
>>> On 24/11/16 13:09, Tone wrote:
>>>> On 24/11/2016 10:46, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>>>> Zephirum <ct6...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On 24 Nov 2016 09:19, Robert Harvey wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The real bonus, I suppose, would be to buy a few ships for the Navy,
>>>>>>> who seem woefully underequipped in that department. Not quite so sure
>>>>>>> about building new Lancasters, but I am not a strategist.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> I thought there were two aircraft carriers being built but just no
>>>>>> aircraft for them?
>>>>>
>>>>> Put the Harrier back into production.
>>>>>
>>>> We could probably manage The Swordfish.
>>>
>>> Or the Seafire, at a push.
>>
>> How far back do we want to take our country, anyway ?
>

> Judging from the spittle flecked rants from the Brexiteers, quite a long
> way. I guess most of them have a somewhat rose-tinted view of the past.
> "What, there's no central heating? Or colour TV? Or TV? And people still
> die of TB? And lots of other things? (although that's coming.)

Yes. The mythical golden age of before-we-were-born.

Personally, I think we got the '70s wrong and should have a second try, but
maybe that's just me.


But hey, rumours that Farrago might piss off crosspond and go live with his
new friend. It'd be nice not have to have to listen to so much noise about
how we're suppoosed to try and take him seriously.

[Brian Gaff]

You thought much the same as myself when I heard this. However somebody
suggested it was a school for hackers so they could all go out into the
world and nick everyone elses money.

We may have to have blackouts if the EDF plan for nuclear does not pan out
or something major goes wrong with a big gas station before its built. It
would be interesting to know how good the wind farms have been recently with
all this wind. I bet its not been in the right place or too gusty or they
are jammed up with fallen leaves or some such excuse. Without power storage
systems wind and solar are not very good alternatives.
Brian

--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...
bri...@blueyonder.co.uk
Blind user, so no pictures please!
"Robert Harvey" <no_e...@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:1482636410.5016...@nntp.aioe.org...

[Brian Gaff]

The daft thing is that they have not bothered to develop further the Harrier
which may have been just the job for most of the campaigns we get involved
in. Do we really need super agile multiple sound barrier breaking long range
fighter bombers at the moment that don't do any of the things as well as
individual aircraft designed to do these things separately?

Brian

--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...
bri...@blueyonder.co.uk
Blind user, so no pictures please!

"Zephirum" <ct6...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:e9nsgg...@mid.individual.net...

[Tone]

On 24/11/2016 14:35, Huge wrote:
> On 2016-11-24, RustyHinge <rusty...@foobar.girolle.co.uk> wrote:
>
> [12 lines snipped]

>
>>> * I noticed the other day in the council offices a notice which was a
>>> straight paraphrase of 'is your journey really neccessary?'
>>
>> Well, is it?
>

> Yes, otherwise I wouldn't be making it.
>

Necessary to what though??

Tone

[Brian Gaff]

There is nothing wrong with Harriers for short range missions. Very agile
especially the us version with the composite wings and fly by wire
avionics. Hang on we might need to pay them for our own designs.. Argh.


In any case I suspect in the future all wars with be fought by drones and
robots and anyone in the way is just called collateral damage.

Brian

--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...
bri...@blueyonder.co.uk
Blind user, so no pictures please!

"Richard Robinson" <rich...@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:0f2dnafu3dhibavF...@brightview.co.uk...

[Nick Odell]

Our first stealth bomber. Your radar would never have known that bundle
of sticks and string and cloth was up there - always presuming you had
had the radar in the first place.

Nick

[Tone]

On 24/11/2016 16:56, Huge wrote:

> Necessary to get where I'm going.
>
>

Is that necessarily so?

Tone

[Richard Robinson]

Huge said:
> On 2016-11-24, Tone <To...@gnospam.com> wrote:

> Necessary to get where I'm going.

Yebbut, if you didn't make the journey you wouldn't be going there, so then
it wouldn't be necessary any longer ?

[Ahem A Rivet's Shot]

On Thu, 24 Nov 2016 10:13:31 -0600
Richard Robinson <rich...@privacy.net> wrote:

> Personally, I think we got the '70s wrong and should have a second try,
> but maybe that's just me.

I wouldn't object to doing the 70s again - at least the second half.

[Mike Causer]

On Thu, 24 Nov 2016 13:41:44 +0000
RustyHinge <rusty...@foobar.girolle.co.uk> wrote:

> > We could probably manage The Swordfish.
>
> Or the Seafire, at a push.

Spits were said to be horribly complicated to make, thats why there were
more Hurricanes in the Battle of Britain. But the Spit- and eventually
Seafire had more development potential.

Ye Stringbag (TSR-1 doncha know) being steel toobs and Oirish Linen
would be much simplerer. And Her Majesty's enemies' compooter
gunsights probably can't cope with airspeeds in the single digit
nano lightyears / fortnight range


Mike

[Mike Causer]

On Thu, 24 Nov 2016 17:27:11 +0000
Tone <To...@gnospam.com> wrote:

> Is that necessarily so?

Well millions of Jones have lived in Wales, so it must be.


[Vijio] Hunts CD shelves for Miles Davies' rendering [not rendering].
[Orgio] Plays it.


Mike

[Mike Causer]

On Thu, 24 Nov 2016 16:59:39 +0000
Nick Odell <nick....@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > Excavated ovine, a Vickers Vimy or two might fool them for a bit.
> >
> Our first stealth bomber. Your radar would never have known that
> bundle of sticks and string and cloth was up there - always presuming
> you had had the radar in the first place.

Yup, those wooden engines help too.



Mike

[Richard Robinson]

Ahem A Rivet's Shot said:
> On Thu, 24 Nov 2016 10:13:31 -0600
> Richard Robinson <rich...@privacy.net> wrote:
>
>> Personally, I think we got the '70s wrong and should have a second try,
>> but maybe that's just me.
>
> I wouldn't object to doing the 70s again - at least the second half.

Okay, deal.

[Mike Spencer]

Richard Robinson <rich...@privacy.net> writes:

> How far back do we want to take our country, anyway ?

Early 15th c. Henry V. All your Senapr are belong to us. (not US)

So much for Brexit.

--
Mike Spencer Nova Scotia, Canada

[The Older Gentleman]

Brian Gaff <bri...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

> The daft thing is that they have not bothered to develop further the Harrier
> which may have been just the job for most of the campaigns we get involved
> in.

The supersonic version was one of the designs cancelled by the Labour
gummint in the 1960s. Along with the STOL transport designed to support
the Harrier.

--
H2 R100RS Street Triple XT660 Tenere
R60/6 CB400F TS250x2 CD200 CG125 KH100EX
neil underscore murray at fastmail dot fm
A fool and his spanners are soon parted

[Robert Harvey]

Ahem A Rivet's Shot <ste...@eircom.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Nov 2016 10:13:31 -0600
> Richard Robinson <rich...@privacy.net> wrote:
>
>> Personally, I think we got the '70s wrong and should have a second try,
>> but maybe that's just me.
>
> I wouldn't object to doing the 70s again - at least the second half.

Think big. Lets do the 19thC agian. We wuz top nation, and there were
more brass bands.

[Robert Harvey]

Richard Robinson <rich...@privacy.net> wrote:
> I also have the Haynes Clarinet Manual. I can take a clarinet apart without
> a book (*and* put it back together)[q], but it's simpler just to read about
> it.

And more tuneful? (D&rfc)

[Robert Harvey]

Mike Spencer <m...@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> wrote:
>
> Richard Robinson <rich...@privacy.net> writes:
>
>> How far back do we want to take our country, anyway ?
>
> Early 15th c. Henry V. All your Senapr are belong to us. (not US)
>
> So much for Brexit.

Whot puzzles me is that in two world wars we took France orf the Germans,
but we own neither France nor Germany. Why?

[Nick Odell]

It had engines? I thought that the pilot and the navigator just pedalled
very fast.

Nick

[Tone]

Twoz a big lacky band (not a lacky band).

Tone

[Tone]

Truth in that. The reason the three Gladiators lasted so long on Malta
was because the NME kept deflecting aim too far. Even if they were hit,
they had to be hit in something vital like an engine, fuel tank or pilot.

Tone

[Richard Robinson]

Mike Spencer said:
>
> Richard Robinson <rich...@privacy.net> writes:
>
>> How far back do we want to take our country, anyway ?
>
> Early 15th c. Henry V. All your Senapr are belong to us. (not US)
>
> So much for Brexit.

Stage left ?

[Richard Robinson]

Shyy rzcyblzruag sbe puvyqera ?

I think we should try and unforget stuff like where cholera comes from.

[Mike Fleming]

In article <1482636410.5016...@nntp.aioe.org>, Robert

Harvey <no_e...@invalid.invalid> writes:

> * John Lewis was offering lovatt green trenchcoats for ladies.

terra

That's a goodun.

--
Mike Fleming

[Mike Fleming]

In article <57hd3cl7mtb5t2354...@4ax.com>, Znep
<E-0C0013...@cleopatra.co.uk> writes:

> In uk.rec.sheds, (Zephirum) wrote in
> <e9nsgg...@mid.individual.net>::

>
> >On 24 Nov 2016 09:19, Robert Harvey wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> The real bonus, I suppose, would be to buy a few ships for the Navy, who
> >> seem woefully underequipped in that department. Not quite so sure about
> >> building new Lancasters, but I am not a strategist.
> >>
> >>

> >I thought there were two aircraft carriers being built but just no
> >aircraft for them?
>

> Surely that makes them just "carriers". Or perhaps sea-going football
> pitches.

Piano launchers.

--
Mike Fleming

[Mike Fleming]

In article <0f2dnafu3dhibavF...@brightview.co.uk>,

Richard Robinson <rich...@privacy.net> writes:

> RustyHinge said:
> > On 24/11/16 13:09, Tone wrote:

> >> On 24/11/2016 10:46, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:

> >>> Zephirum <ct6...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> On 24 Nov 2016 09:19, Robert Harvey wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> The real bonus, I suppose, would be to buy a few ships for the Navy,
> >>>>> who seem woefully underequipped in that department. Not quite so sure
> >>>>> about building new Lancasters, but I am not a strategist.
> >>>>>
> >>>> I thought there were two aircraft carriers being built but just no
> >>>> aircraft for them?
> >>>

> >>> Put the Harrier back into production.
> >>>

> >> We could probably manage The Swordfish.
> >
> > Or the Seafire, at a push.
>

> How far back do we want to take our country, anyway ?

I liked the 70s. Nowadays the bikes are better but the music is worse,
and I seem to have lots of aches and pains that I didn't have then.

--
Mike Fleming

[Tim Wright]

I could get out of my recliner without sound effects.

--
The only difference between death and taxes is that death doesn't get
worse every time Congress meets.
Will Rogers



Tim W

[Mike Fleming]

In article <20161124185115.6cab404b@amaterasu>, Mike Causer

<m.r.c...@goglemail.com> writes:

> On Thu, 24 Nov 2016 17:27:11 +0000
> Tone <To...@gnospam.com> wrote:
>
> > Is that necessarily so?
>
> Well millions of Jones have lived in Wales, so it must be.

But did Jonah make his home in a fish's abdomen? Whales are, after
all, mammals.

--
Mike Fleming

[Richard Robinson]

Tim Wright said:
> On 11/24/2016 17:42, Mike Fleming wrote:
>> Richard Robinson <rich...@privacy.net> writes:
>>> RustyHinge said:
>>>> On 24/11/16 13:09, Tone wrote:
>>>>> On 24/11/2016 10:46, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>>>>> Zephirum <ct6...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 24 Nov 2016 09:19, Robert Harvey wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The real bonus, I suppose, would be to buy a few ships for the Navy,
>>>>>>>> who seem woefully underequipped in that department. Not quite so sure
>>>>>>>> about building new Lancasters, but I am not a strategist.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I thought there were two aircraft carriers being built but just no
>>>>>>> aircraft for them?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Put the Harrier back into production.
>>>>>>
>>>>> We could probably manage The Swordfish.
>>>>
>>>> Or the Seafire, at a push.
>>>
>>> How far back do we want to take our country, anyway ?
>>
>> I liked the 70s. Nowadays the bikes are better but the music is worse,
>> and I seem to have lots of aches and pains that I didn't have then.
>>
> I could get out of my recliner without sound effects.

That's what's wrong with the music, see ? Bring back the unsound effects !

[Ahem A Rivet's Shot]

On Thu, 24 Nov 2016 21:39:22 +0000
Znep <E-0C0013...@cleopatra.co.uk> wrote:

> In uk.rec.sheds, (Ahem A Rivet's Shot) wrote in
> <20161124174949.16fa...@eircom.net>::

>
> >On Thu, 24 Nov 2016 10:13:31 -0600
> >Richard Robinson <rich...@privacy.net> wrote:
> >
> >> Personally, I think we got the '70s wrong and should have a second try,
> >> but maybe that's just me.
> >
> > I wouldn't object to doing the 70s again - at least the second
> > half.
>

> +1. I'd like to have another go at uni. And buy some Microsoft shares.

Buy them in 1977 ride the big rise and then go for Yahoo! buy in
1995, sell in 2001, buy in 2002, sell in 2005 then buy ARM. That little run
should be good for about four orders of magnitude. Shorting Acorn around
1983 would be effective too.

[The Older Gentleman]

Nick Odell <nick....@hotmail.com> wrote:

> I can help with that. I was given the Haynes Manual for the Lancaster
> Bomber for Christmas last year so obviously I now know all there is
> about taking them apart and putting them back together again.

With how many bits left over?

[The Older Gentleman]

Nick Odell <nick....@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Our first stealth bomber. Your radar would never have known that bundle
> of sticks and string and cloth was up there - always presuming you had
> had the radar in the first place.

The signals, noise and radar, from two bloody enormous and unsilenced
engines might be a clue, thobut.

[Mike Causer]

On Thu, 24 Nov 2016 22:08:01 +0000
Nick Odell <nick....@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > Yup, those wooden engines help too.
> >
> >
> It had engines? I thought that the pilot and the navigator just
> pedalled very fast.

The chickens [2000] helped too.



[2000] Plasticine not rubber.


Mike

[Richard Robinson]

Nah, frozen. They fired them from a catapult to push the plane along, or
keep it up there at a safe distance.

[Mike Causer]

On Fri, 25 Nov 2016 12:09:21 -0600
Richard Robinson <rich...@privacy.net> wrote:

> > The chickens [2000] helped too.
> >
> > [2000] Plasticine not rubber.
>
> Nah, frozen. They fired them from a catapult to push the plane along,
> or keep it up there at a safe distance.

Like Dyson's Project Orion, or if the catapult is ship^Wground-based like
the Moties' laser drive then?


Mike

[Nick Odell]

On 25/11/2016 14:34, The Older Gentleman wrote:
> Nick Odell <nick....@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I can help with that. I was given the Haynes Manual for the Lancaster
>> Bomber for Christmas last year so obviously I now know all there is
>> about taking them apart and putting them back together again.
>
> With how many bits left over?
>
>

Usually just one part on each occasion. If I have to take something
apart several times until I get it right (1972 and the Adler Tippa S
come to mind...) and if I have one bit left over each time then the
finished article might only contain a Brexitvotesworth more parts than
the pile of pieces lying by its side.

Nick

[Ahem A Rivet's Shot]

On Fri, 25 Nov 2016 18:18:29 +0000
Mike Causer <m.r.c...@goglemail.com> wrote:

> Like Dyson's Project Orion

Perhaps the least stealthy flying machine ever invented.

[Tone]

Unless they were on bird strike...

Tone

[Mike Causer]

On Sat, 26 Nov 2016 11:17:57 +0000
Tone <To...@gnospam.com> wrote:

> Unless they were on bird strike...

Penguins on picket duty? Blackbirds waving banners? Nuthatches
negotiating?


Mike

[Richard Robinson]

Jaimie Vandenbergh said:
> On 25 Nov 2016 22:55:58 GMT, Huge <Hu...@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:

>>On 2016-11-25, Mike Causer <m.r.c...@goglemail.com> wrote:
>>> Richard Robinson <rich...@privacy.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> > The chickens [2000] helped too.
>>>> >
>>>> > [2000] Plasticine not rubber.
>>>>
>>>> Nah, frozen. They fired them from a catapult to push the plane along,
>>>> or keep it up there at a safe distance.
>>>
>>> Like Dyson's Project Orion,
>>

>>For one terrible moment I thought you meant James rather than Freeman.
>
> "I'm returning this nuclear bomb-propelled rocket because the plastic's
> cracked..."

[consults Wikipedia] Good grief.

[Ahem A Rivet's Shot]

On Sat, 26 Nov 2016 14:31:37 -0600
Richard Robinson <rich...@privacy.net> wrote:

> Jaimie Vandenbergh said:
> > On 25 Nov 2016 22:55:58 GMT, Huge <Hu...@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
> >>On 2016-11-25, Mike Causer <m.r.c...@goglemail.com> wrote:
> >>> Richard Robinson <rich...@privacy.net> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> > The chickens [2000] helped too.
> >>>> >
> >>>> > [2000] Plasticine not rubber.
> >>>>
> >>>> Nah, frozen. They fired them from a catapult to push the plane along,
> >>>> or keep it up there at a safe distance.
> >>>
> >>> Like Dyson's Project Orion,
> >>
> >>For one terrible moment I thought you meant James rather than Freeman.
> >
> > "I'm returning this nuclear bomb-propelled rocket because the plastic's
> > cracked..."

AIUI some parts of that project are still classified because they
dealt with making very small nukes.

[Richard Robinson]

Znep said:
> In uk.rec.sheds, (Huge) wrote in <e9rtru...@mid.individual.net>::

>
>>
>>> Like Dyson's Project Orion,
>>

>>For one terrible moment I thought you meant James rather than Freeman.
>

> Hmm. Atomic vacuum cleaner. To go with Ned's Atomic Dustbin?

To empty into it, I should think.


Was that Neddy Seagoon, The Brains Behind The Windscale Disaster ?

[RustyHinge]

On 24/11/16 13:54, Richard Robinson wrote:

> How far back do we want to take our country, anyway ?
>

Well, not much before the end of WWII, or the rapidly becoming useless
before something else is discovered auntie biotics would be unavailable.

--
Rusty Hinge
To err is human. To really foul things up requires a computer and the BOFH.

[RustyHinge]

On 24/11/16 14:35, Huge wrote:
> On 2016-11-24, RustyHinge <rusty...@foobar.girolle.co.uk> wrote:
>
> [12 lines snipped]
>
>>> * I noticed the other day in the council offices a notice which was a
>>> straight paraphrase of 'is your journey really neccessary?'
>>
>> Well, is it?
>
> Yes, otherwise I wouldn't be making it.
>
There's a nice obedient goodie-goodie...

[RustyHinge]

On 24/11/16 18:53, Mike Causer wrote:

> On Thu, 24 Nov 2016 16:59:39 +0000
> Nick Odell <nick....@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> Excavated ovine, a Vickers Vimy or two might fool them for a bit.
>>>

>> Our first stealth bomber. Your radar would never have known that
>> bundle of sticks and string and cloth was up there - always presuming
>> you had had the radar in the first place.
>

> Yup, those wooden engines help too.

ITYM they wooden help?

[RustyHinge]

On 25/11/16 18:09, Richard Robinson wrote:
> Mike Causer said:
>> On Thu, 24 Nov 2016 22:08:01 +0000
>> Nick Odell <nick....@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> Yup, those wooden engines help too.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> It had engines? I thought that the pilot and the navigator just
>>> pedalled very fast.
>>
>> The chickens [2000] helped too.
>>
>>
>>
>> [2000] Plasticine not rubber.
>
> Nah, frozen. They fired them from a catapult to push the plane along, or
> keep it up there at a safe distance.
>

IRTA 'fried them from a catapult'

[Richard Robinson]

RustyHinge said:
> On 24/11/16 13:54, Richard Robinson wrote:
>
>> How far back do we want to take our country, anyway ?
>>
> Well, not much before the end of WWII, or the rapidly becoming useless
> before something else is discovered auntie biotics would be unavailable.

We want to be bombed by autonomous flying thingies ?

Incidentally, I'm still seeing references to 'the last war' which seem to
mean WWII. We've been involved in a lot of other wars since then.

[Richard Robinson]

RustyHinge said:
> On 25/11/16 18:09, Richard Robinson wrote:
>> Mike Causer said:
>>> Nick Odell <nick....@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Yup, those wooden engines help too.
>>>>>
>>>> It had engines? I thought that the pilot and the navigator just
>>>> pedalled very fast.
>>>
>>> The chickens [2000] helped too.
>>>
>>> [2000] Plasticine not rubber.
>>
>> Nah, frozen. They fired them from a catapult to push the plane along, or
>> keep it up there at a safe distance.
>>
> IRTA 'fried them from a catapult'

Blimey. How big a catapult would you need to reach that kind of speed ?

[John Williamson]

On 03/12/2016 12:33, Znep wrote:
> In uk.rec.sheds, (Richard Robinson) wrote in

>> Incidentally, I'm still seeing references to 'the last war' which seem to
>> mean WWII. We've been involved in a lot of other wars since then.
>

> They're only counting the ones that involve home fixtures.
>
The last international home fixture for the English was 1066 near
Hastings, the last one for the Scots was 1740 at Culloden. The Welsh
never had a proper one. IIRC. BICBW...

The one at Calais at the Field of the Cloth of Gold might count as a
home game for us, as we ruled that bit of Senapr at the time.

Assuming you count the fireworks and such in the 1940s as overspill from
the away match...
--
Tciao for Now!

John.

[Richard Robinson]

Znep said:
> In uk.rec.sheds, (Richard Robinson) wrote in

>>RustyHinge said:
>>> On 24/11/16 13:54, Richard Robinson wrote:
>>>
>>>> How far back do we want to take our country, anyway ?
>>>>
>>> Well, not much before the end of WWII, or the rapidly becoming useless
>>> before something else is discovered auntie biotics would be unavailable.
>>
>>We want to be bombed by autonomous flying thingies ?
>>
>>Incidentally, I'm still seeing references to 'the last war' which seem to
>>mean WWII. We've been involved in a lot of other wars since then.
>

> They're only counting the ones that involve home fixtures.

The last one we really couldn't ignore no matter how hard we tried ? Very
likely. Or, the last one everybody would agree we won ? Or were right in ?

[Kerr Mudd-John]

On Sat, 03 Dec 2016 13:12:25 -0000, John Williamson
<johnwil...@btinternet.com> wrote:

> On 03/12/2016 12:33, Znep wrote:
>> In uk.rec.sheds, (Richard Robinson) wrote in
>
>>> Incidentally, I'm still seeing references to 'the last war' which seem
>>> to
>>> mean WWII. We've been involved in a lot of other wars since then.
>>
>> They're only counting the ones that involve home fixtures.
>>
> The last international home fixture for the English was 1066 near
> Hastings, the last one for the Scots was 1740 at Culloden. The Welsh
> never had a proper one. IIRC. BICBW...

ITYF Edward the I did a lot in that regard.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conquest_of_Wales_by_Edward_I

there was a later home match:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Owain_Glyndŵr

>
> The one at Calais at the Field of the Cloth of Gold might count as a
> home game for us, as we ruled that bit of Senapr at the time.
>

I gooved that was just a game of diplomacy, not a full on fixture.

> Assuming you count the fireworks and such in the 1940s as overspill from
> the away match...


--

Bah, and indeed, Humbug

[John Williamson]

On 03/12/2016 23:13, Kerr Mudd-John wrote:
> On Sat, 03 Dec 2016 13:12:25 -0000, John Williamson
> <johnwil...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>> The last international home fixture for the English was 1066 near
>> Hastings, the last one for the Scots was 1740 at Culloden. The Welsh
>> never had a proper one. IIRC. BICBW...
>
> ITYF Edward the I did a lot in that regard.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conquest_of_Wales_by_Edward_I
>
> there was a later home match:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Owain_Glyndŵr
>

Thanks, I'd forgotten about that. I sort of thought it was mostly political.

>
>>
>> The one at Calais at the Field of the Cloth of Gold might count as a
>> home game for us, as we ruled that bit of Senapr at the time.
>>
> I gooved that was just a game of diplomacy, not a full on fixture.
>

That sort of thing always struck me as a very civilised way to resolve a
dispute. It may have prevented a full on fixture, though.

[Richard Robinson]

John Williamson said:
> On 03/12/2016 12:33, Znep wrote:
>> In uk.rec.sheds, (Richard Robinson) wrote in
>
>>> Incidentally, I'm still seeing references to 'the last war' which seem to
>>> mean WWII. We've been involved in a lot of other wars since then.
>>
>> They're only counting the ones that involve home fixtures.
>>
> The last international home fixture for the English was 1066 near
> Hastings, the last one for the Scots was 1740 at Culloden.

1746

[Richard Robinson]

Znep said:
> In uk.rec.sheds, (John Williamson) wrote in

>>On 03/12/2016 12:33, Znep wrote:
>>> In uk.rec.sheds, (Richard Robinson) wrote in
>>
>>>> Incidentally, I'm still seeing references to 'the last war' which seem to
>>>> mean WWII. We've been involved in a lot of other wars since then.
>>>
>>> They're only counting the ones that involve home fixtures.
>>>
>>The last international home fixture for the English was 1066 near
>>Hastings, the last one for the Scots was 1740 at Culloden. The Welsh
>>never had a proper one. IIRC. BICBW...
>

> If you're limiting it to "boots on the ground", even that's not right.
>
> The septics briefly landed a raiding party near Blackpool during the war
> of 1812, apparently.
>
> But try telling a Blitz survivor that it didn't count....
>
> I'll open the door and sell tickets.

The Glorious Revolution of 1688 involved a few hundred Dutch warships
landing a good several thousand Dutch boots on the ground, in case we needed
persuading how Glorious it was. Evidently they were successful.

[Richard Bos]

John Williamson <johnwil...@btinternet.com> wrote:

> On 03/12/2016 12:33, Znep wrote:
> > In uk.rec.sheds, (Richard Robinson) wrote in
>
> >> Incidentally, I'm still seeing references to 'the last war' which seem to
> >> mean WWII. We've been involved in a lot of other wars since then.
> >
> > They're only counting the ones that involve home fixtures.
> >
> The last international home fixture for the English was 1066 near
> Hastings,

A-*HEM*.

Richard, Dutchman.

[C. o'Jones]

On 04/12/2016 16:12, Richard Bos wrote:

>> The last international home fixture for the English was 1066 near
>> Hastings,
>
> A-*HEM*.
>
> Richard, Dutchman.

http://www.newsbiscuit.com/2008/01/21/anti-dutch-racism-at-crisis-levels-281/

--
coj

"it's all part of growing up and being british"
"he won't get the green stuff on his knees"

[Robert Harvey]

Richard Robinson <rich...@privacy.net> wrote:
>
>> The last international home fixture for the English was 1066 near
>> Hastings, the last one for the Scots was 1740 at Culloden.
>
> 1746

Been wondering about that. PShirley the English home fixtures must include
* The original Roses series
* the run up to Naseby
* Monmouth's invasion
* the 3-way series with the Hollanders, 1667, 1688, 1797

Even if the first two are disqualified as being first team vs reserves,
rather than international fixtures, the last two were foreign
interventions. And the 'glorious revolution' was a full-blown conquest!

[John Williamson]

<makes notes to do 1000 lines> "I must bone up on my history"

<Thinks about looking up how to do it quickly>

[Robert Harvey]

Richard Robinson <rich...@privacy.net> wrote:
>
> The Glorious Revolution of 1688 involved a few hundred Dutch warships
> landing a good several thousand Dutch boots on the ground, in case we needed
> persuading how Glorious it was. Evidently they were successful.

Orange rays!

[RustyHinge]

On 02/12/16 16:29, Huge wrote:

> On 2016-12-02, RustyHinge <rusty...@foobar.girolle.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 24/11/16 14:35, Huge wrote:
>>> On 2016-11-24, RustyHinge <rusty...@foobar.girolle.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>> [12 lines snipped]
>>>
>>>>> * I noticed the other day in the council offices a notice which was a
>>>>> straight paraphrase of 'is your journey really neccessary?'
>>>>
>>>> Well, is it?
>>>
>>> Yes, otherwise I wouldn't be making it.
>>>
>> There's a nice obedient goodie-goodie...
>

> I beg your pardon?
>
Granted.

[Richard Robinson]

Don't worry about them. It's a natural phenomenon called "the sun", it
happens every few months. It goes away before long.

[Kerr Mudd-John]

On Sun, 04 Dec 2016 13:00:15 -0000, Znep
<E-0C0013...@cleopatra.co.uk> wrote:

> In uk.rec.sheds, (John Williamson) wrote in

> <eaful9...@mid.individual.net>::

>
>> On 03/12/2016 12:33, Znep wrote:
>>> In uk.rec.sheds, (Richard Robinson) wrote in
>>
>>>> Incidentally, I'm still seeing references to 'the last war' which
>>>> seem to
>>>> mean WWII. We've been involved in a lot of other wars since then.
>>>
>>> They're only counting the ones that involve home fixtures.
>>>
>> The last international home fixture for the English was 1066 near
>> Hastings, the last one for the Scots was 1740 at Culloden. The Welsh
>> never had a proper one. IIRC. BICBW...
>

> If you're limiting it to "boots on the ground", even that's not right.
>
> The septics briefly landed a raiding party near Blackpool during the war
> of 1812, apparently.
>

Legendarily (gosh it spell checks OK!) some Welsh women saw off a
Napoleonic (whoo!) landing in Fishguard -thobut a bit early than your
latest.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Fishguard


Yrtraqnevyl
Ancbyrbavp
Svfuthneq

errurrh </Lurch>

Pah, it was pre Napoleon anyhow.

> But try telling a Blitz survivor that it didn't count....
>
> I'll open the door and sell tickets.

They had a go at workington I goov.