T BAR KEY
Mike Hadley
easy to make
Nick Catford
"Mike Hadley" <mic...@hadleym.fsbusiness.co.uk> wrote in message
news:9fu2vd$e9q$1...@newsg1.svr.pol.co.uk...
> The t bar key is made from 1-4 inch steel in the shape of a t bar and very
> easy to make
But if you don't get the lug the right size and in the right place it won't
work.
Nick
G.J.Martin
diagram! Can someone make a little drawing of a T-Bar key or something
to show what it looks like?
Best Wishes,
Gareth.
Doddy
John Vaughan
put up the message re. site no longer active...
John
--
Dover Underground
http://website.lineone.net/~johnvaughan01/
"Doddy" <david_...@lineone.net> wrote in message
news:tiq39q5...@corp.supernews.co.uk...
Paul Whippey
news:tiq3p4d...@corp.supernews.co.uk...
> Post the URL again please! I knocked your site off my links page when you
> put up the message re. site no longer active...
>
> John
http://website.lineone.net/%7Edavid_dodwell/
HTH,
Paul.
S McGurk
> http://website.lineone.net/%7Edavid_dodwell/
>
Shows an English T-Bar key only.
Scottish Posts have an entirely different key - and then there is a Torlift
Hatch!!
Happy Hunting!!!
Shuggie McGurk
Nick Catford
"S McGurk" <Shuggi...@NoSpamhotmail.com> wrote in message
news:tja5qie...@corp.supernews.com...
The Scottish key is somewhat more complicated to make (I have a couple of
examples) and is a much more sophisticated lock. Every time you slam the
hatch shut it automatically locks. Torlift keys are still available for the
manufacturer but they are £40 each.
Nick
Gareth James Martin
it just economics?
Best Wishes,
Gareth.
Gary Marden
(Gareth James Martin) wrote:
Dunno. The scottish lock would be harder to pick, and I suppose many of
them were in more remote spots that down here.
Gary
Nick Catford
"Gareth James Martin" <g.j.m...@durham.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:3B3A2037...@durham.ac.uk...
I've always wonderd why. The Scottish lock is a much more sophisticated
system and a much better and more secure lock. The minute you cross the
border the lock changes, 100 yards on the south side English lock, 100 yards
on the north side, Scottish locks almost without exception. Robin Ware did
find a Scottish lock on a post closed prior to 1968 in Sussex. I wonder why
?
Nick
Robin Ware
Did someone mention my name??
The one thing that I have found with Scottish locks is that they don't
seize
up. Even the locks in the most inhospitable parts of Scotland still work
whereas it is all too easy to find a seized standard 'English' lock. And
yes
they are difficult, although not impossible, to pick.
Robin Ware
patrick keele
Patrick
Robin Ware <bob...@YOURSHOESclara.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3B3B8A84...@YOURSHOESclara.co.uk...
Steve Walker
"Nick Catford" <Ni...@swanley1.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:9heh5n$43c$1...@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk...
> I've always wonderd why. The Scottish lock is a much more sophisticated
> system and a much better and more secure lock. The minute you cross the
> border the lock changes, 100 yards on the south side English lock, 100
yards
> on the north side, Scottish locks almost without exception. Robin Ware did
> find a Scottish lock on a post closed prior to 1968 in Sussex. I wonder
why
Perhaps the powers-that-be thought the Scots were more likely to try to
break in?
Gary Marden
> break in?
It's certainly true that a good number of posts in England were broken
into, sometimes with explosives! The post at Olney was only fitted with a
Torlift hatch when a CND activist blew the old one off! The old hatch
remains nearby, lying in the bushes. The chap concerned was pretty well
known and had 'done' a fair number of posts in the area.
Cheers
Gary
G.J.Martin
Scottish Island and the Bothy I was in had no locks on the doors so
every night when I went to bed I never locked the door. Nothing was ever
stolen and no-one came into my room, and I ha a £200 camera, chess
computer, binoculars, CD player etc. They're a pretty trustworthy lot.
Maybe the locking mechanism provides better resistance to weathering or
even to seal the hatch more efficiently to keep out rain or even
draughts. You never know. What are the hatch mechanisms near places like
Lossimouth and Gairlochead where there are large military bases?
> It's certainly true that a good number of posts in England were broken
> into, sometimes with explosives! The post at Olney was only fitted with a
> Torlift hatch when a CND activist blew the old one off!
Is it me or do others think the CND were misinformed idiots (now I've
offended someone out there, sorry!)? The ROC were there with the purpose
of providing the information to keep people ALIVE in the event of
nuclear war and had nothing to do with nuclear weapons. Did they not
understand this? Some people.
All the best,
Gareth.
Shawn Sanders
"G.J.Martin" <G.J.M...@durham.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:3B408A4C...@durham.ac.uk...
> Is it me or do others think the CND were misinformed idiots (now I've
> offended someone out there, sorry!)? The ROC were there with the purpose
> of providing the information to keep people ALIVE in the event of
> nuclear war and had nothing to do with nuclear weapons. Did they not
> understand this? Some people.
I remember being informed by my friends Mum (a CND member and Greenham
Common protestor) that the strange hatch in the playground of the local park
(Leigh on Sea ROC post, Essex) was a bolt hole where all the politicians and
local business people would hide out in the event of a nuclear war. Would
have been a bit of a squeeze I think . . . .
And yes, even the ones who knew what was down there seem to have been
startlingly off track as to the posts purpose.
Regards
Shawn
Gary Marden
(G.J.Martin) wrote:
> Is it me or do others think the CND were misinformed idiots (now I've
> offended someone out there, sorry!)? The ROC were there with the purpose
> of providing the information to keep people ALIVE in the event of
> nuclear war and had nothing to do with nuclear weapons. Did they not
> understand this? Some people.
No, not really. They clearly felt strongly about the situation, and if I'd
been older at the time I would probably have been a member myself. The ROC
were probably seen (by some) as a handy/local target representing the
government and MOD.
Cheers
Gary
Hugo 'NOx' Tyson
> In article <3B408A4C...@durham.ac.uk>, G.J.M...@durham.ac.uk
> (G.J.Martin) wrote:
> > Is it me or do others think the CND were misinformed idiots (now I've
I'm certain some or many were - just like the anti-everything bandwagon
jumpers who today tunnel under roadworks or throw stones at the
G7/IMF/whatever meetings.
> > offended someone out there, sorry!)? The ROC were there with the
> > purpose of providing the information to keep people ALIVE in the event
> > of nuclear war and had nothing to do with nuclear weapons. Did they not
> > understand this? Some people.
Ah, well, the ROC posts are part of the system that promulgated the *myth*
of survivability, was the view. That myth made armageddon more likely.
Debunking it publicly made armageddon less likely.
See the thread a few weeks ago about propaganda?
- Huge
G.J.Martin
> > > Is it me or do others think the CND were misinformed idiots (now I've
>
> I'm certain some or many were - just like the anti-everything bandwagon
> jumpers who today tunnel under roadworks or throw stones at the
> G7/IMF/whatever meetings.
I guess I should have inserted the phrase "mostly made of" before
misinformed idiots. It seems a shame when organisations which do have a
valid point are undermined by a certain minority.
Best Wishes,
Gareth.
patrick keele
What uses can roc posts be put to.
Not a lot by the sound of it!Cellphone stations.Not likely.Aerial mast would
be a dead give away,plus all the expensive radio gear inside.Where would the
power supply come from in the middle of nowhere?
Breeding hamsters what a good idea!
Death traps they most certainly are.
Monuments.is anyone THAT interested?especially as they are in "secret"
locations,prior to Nick putting them on inet.
Possible "future" refuge for a war in the future..maybe..for those that know
where they are.
As i have already said to GARY.The actual effectiveness in my opinion is of
serious doubt,especially as NEMP would have almost certainly knocked out the
comms system down a phone line.The RADIO comms is of serious doubt to.Ok in
theory.
The MOST incredible thing of all is the absolute uselessness of offering any
worthwhile protection to the occupants.What with no filtration of any
kind,no lead shielding,possibly not even using NBC suits as well.Someome was
tellng porkies when roc staff were recruited me thinks.I suppose they MIGHT
have survived slightly longer than the rest of us.I for one would not to
have liked to open the hatch "after" a nuke war,can't imagine what i might
have seen,can anyone else?maybe this has all been said before?the other
point being,the actual bunkers being discovered now could never be used
again.We all know where they all are....don't we.(NOT roc posts).
Patrick
Shawn Sanders
"patrick keele" <pkg...@g1dra.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:9ht7g5$lja$1...@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk...
> hello
Hello Patrick,
> What uses can roc posts be put to.
> Not a lot by the sound of it!Cellphone stations.Not likely.Aerial mast
would
> be a dead give away,plus all the expensive radio gear inside.Where would
the
> power supply come from in the middle of nowhere?
No different to the problems involved in siting any other of the tens of
thousands of base stations around. I believe it is the geographical
location (high spots) and the fact that the compounds tend to be a very
handy size that makes them particuarly attractive, not usually the presence
of the post itself. Why should the mast being a 'dead give away' be a
problem ?
> Breeding hamsters what a good idea!
Hmmmm. One is used for growing mushrooms I believe. There's a 'wine
cellar' application also IIRC.
> Death traps they most certainly are.
Hmmmm again. Most things are potentially a 'death trap' if approached in
the wrong way or misused. Bridges, cars, scissors etc etc
> Monuments.is anyone THAT interested?especially as they are in "secret"
> locations,prior to Nick putting them on inet.
Well, quite a number of people on this newsgroup, including myself, seem
interested. Many people I have mentioned them to in passing have also
expressed quite an interest in their history. The fact remains that for a
long time these men and women dedicated a lot of their time, for no
financial reward, to training towards an event that most people tried to
ignore. They would have provided a vital service with regards to
forecasting fall out patterns etc etc, and in many cases, they would have
been the ones to 'sound the alert'. The manner of their 'standing down'
must have left a sour taste in their mouths. I should say certainly worthy
of a monument or two.
> Possible "future" refuge for a war in the future..maybe..for those that
know
> where they are.
Not sure how practical they'd be now, with no stores and little chance of
reaching one in time in the event of a surprise attack. I'm sure some
survivalists have got them mapped out though ;-)
> As i have already said to GARY.The actual effectiveness in my opinion is
of
> serious doubt,especially as NEMP would have almost certainly knocked out
the
> comms system down a phone line.The RADIO comms is of serious doubt to.Ok
in
> theory.
Can't really comment at length on this, not having a comms background.
Certainly cluster master posts (those with RT kit) have substantial earthing
as some defence against EMP. I seem to recall seeing somewhere that
overhead lines were used for the BT kit as they would be easier to repair
'post attack'.
> The MOST incredible thing of all is the absolute uselessness of offering
any
> worthwhile protection to the occupants.What with no filtration of any
> kind,no lead shielding,possibly not even using NBC suits as well.Someome
was
> tellng porkies when roc staff were recruited me thinks.I suppose they
MIGHT
> have survived slightly longer than the rest of us.I for one would not to
> have liked to open the hatch "after" a nuke war,can't imagine what i might
> have seen,can anyone else?maybe this has all been said before?the other
> point being,the actual bunkers being discovered now could never be used
> again.We all know where they all are....don't we.(NOT roc posts).
Whilst in no way professing to be an expert in these matters, I can state,
as a relatively recent ex-member of HM Forces, that it is considered likely
that personnel (even those quite close to a strike point) with suitable
protective clothing and respirators would remain effective for quite some
time after a strike if they took simple precautions immediately post strike.
I appreciate that most of this training was geared towards tactical weapons,
and not the strategic ones likely to have been encountered in any UKWMO
scenario. However, a reinforced concrete structure with earth cover would
provide quite substantial protection against all but a localised hit. The
louvres provided on the air shafts would prevent most 'fall out'
(radioactive dust and similar particles) entering the post. With a clean
food and water supply, survivability would be greatly enhanced, in the short
term at least. There are a lot of myths about the affects of nuclear
weapons. Locations some distance from ground zero would not remain
immediately leathal for a great period of time, although they may not be
healthy places by any stretch of the imagination.
I'm sure ROC staff were better informed (whether through official channels
or self-learned out of curiousity) than most of the population as to the
likely events in the aftermath of a nuclear exchange.
Of course, I may be talking out of my rear end on a lot of this. I'm sure
the regulars will correct me though ;-)
>
> Patrick
Regards
Shawn
Nick Catford
Cellphone companies generally don't use the post, they just want the site.
The post is usually demolished and a new surface building and aerial mast
erected within a new compound on the site of the post. One or two cellphone
sites in Wales have utilised the monitoring room and occasionally, if the
ROC compound is big enough there is sufficient room for the new
installations without demolishing the post.
Nick
G.J.Martin
> What uses can roc posts be put to.
I did hear that the ROC post in Hartington, Derbyshire, was being used
as a cheese store. This was before I had no idea what an ROC post looked
like and I stumbled upon the Hartington post (in fact I tripped over the
metal pipe which was part of the observation post on the hill behind it
(read the ROC website and the entry for this post) and ended up staring
stright at it!). My Mam asked one of the local bar keepers who told me
it was a cheese store. Can't say I believe him, though you never know!
Best Wishes,
Gareth.
G.J.Martin
>Whilst in no way professing to be an expert in these matters, I can >state, as a relatively recent ex-member of HM Forces, that it is >considered likely that personnel (even those quite close to a strike >point) with suitable protective clothing and respirators would remain >effective for quite some time after a strike if they took simple >precautions immediately post strike. I appreciate that most of this >training was geared towards tactical weapons, and not the strategic >ones likely to have been encountered in any UKWMO scenario. However,
>a reinforced concrete structure with earth cover would provide quite >substantial protection against all but a localised hit. The louvres >provided on the air shafts would prevent most 'fall out' (radioactive >dust and similar particles) entering the post. With a clean food and >water supply, survivability would be greatly enhanced, in the short >term at least. There are a lot of myths about the affects of nuclear >weapons. Locations some distance from ground zero would not remain >immediately leathal for a great period of time, although they may not >be healthy places by any stretch of the imagination.
>I'm sure ROC staff were better informed (whether through official >channels or self-learned out of curiousity) than most of the population >as to the likely events in the aftermath of a nuclear exchange.
>Of course, I may be talking out of my rear end on a lot of this. I'm >sure the regulars will correct me though ;-)
> Shawn
I have to completely agree with Shaun. ROC posts (I've never calculated
but I assume it is so) should easily have a protection factor of +1000
(i.e. the observers inside should recieve a radiation dose 1000 times
less than they would if they were standing outside). A typical ROC post
is built to much better specifications than some expident shelters
described in Cresson H. Kearny's book "Nuclear War Survival" (if you
want the web page of this entire book e-mail me and I'll send you the
URL) and some of them were tested to blast overpressures of 50psi or
something like that. Anyway fallout radiation takes approximately 2
weeks to decay to a quite negligible level and they would be extremely
well protected from this. As for air filters? Well a piece of cloth and
some wire wool put in the ventiliation unit would more than suffice to
block out all dangerous particles. As luck would have it though the
larger fallout particles which would settle to the ground much faster
are so big that they are easily filtered out. The smaller particles
which can easily get into our lungs are so small they stay aloft for
many weeks, by which time radioactive decay has rendered them much, much
less harmless. If there was anywhere I would like to be in a Nuclear
exchange then it would be in a ROC post.
I do however have my doubts about the group commands though. I live
in Durham and frequently visit the site of Durham Group Command (Group
23) which is now a car park. Had Durham city centre taken a strike from
a tactical weapon of something in the order of 50kT I think Durham Group
HQ would have been flattened for the simple reason it is on an open
floodplain and only about 500m from the city centre!
Best Wishes,
Gareth.
Nick Catford
It seems very odd that somebody would want to carry cheese across a couple
of fields and then lower it down a shaft. Hartington isn't exactly close to
any roads. Do you think the bar keeper was winding your mum up or did he
seem serious ? Most bizarre.
Nick
Neil
<pkg...@g1dra.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>The MOST incredible thing of all is the absolute uselessness of offering any
>worthwhile protection to the occupants.What with no filtration of any
>kind,no lead shielding,possibly not even using NBC suits as well.Someome was
>tellng porkies when roc staff were recruited me thinks.I suppose they MIGHT
>have survived slightly longer than the rest of us.I for one would not to
>have liked to open the hatch "after" a nuke war,can't imagine what i might
>have seen,can anyone else?maybe this has all been said before?the other
>point being,the actual bunkers being discovered now could never be used
>again.We all know where they all are....don't we.(NOT roc posts).
If you take a look a the figures the posts probably had a protective
factor of over 1000 ( possibly as high as 4000). filtration was not
considered necessary as fallout particles like all "dust" doesn't turn
corners well. Yes some would get in but the effect would be small.
Picture if you wish hot coals. One or two in a room won't cause a
problem but spread a layer all over the place and you will burn. it is
the fact that fallout was spread over an area that gave the big dose.
50% of your dose came from fallout within a 50 ft radius if standing
in the open 25% from 50- 200 ft and 25% from beyond 200 ft. The
inverse square law does not apply as fallout is not a point source.
Neil
patrick keele
So....in the event of a nuke war the then situation was....
The roc survive,government survive,and the rest of us just end up
dead.Clever that.
As i said in a "private" message i sent to someone who subscribes to this
newsgroup,did anyone really think that in the event of a nuke war,that a
married man with children was really going to say to his family "sorry love
i've just got to go my roc post and take a few measurements,i might not a
see you again.Bye"Is that really believable? In reality that's what they
were faced with...wasn't it?
Patrick
Nick Catford
did anyone really think that in the event of a nuke war,that a
> married man with children was really going to say to his family "sorry
love
> i've just got to go my roc post and take a few measurements,i might not a
> see you again.Bye"Is that really believable? In reality that's what they
> were faced with...wasn't it?
> Patrick
That was one of the big drawbacks of a volunteer force. I'm sure that would
have happened and the cover would have been at best patchy.
Nick
M.J.Powell
dra.freeserve.co.uk> writes
But isn't that just what all the married servicemen did in WW II?
Mike
--
M.J.Powell
Neil
A few of the ROC members who frequent this NG have commented that this
was an active topic for discussion. However, it is worth keeping in
mind that a nuclear war / crisis would probably build up and
deteriorate suddenly at the end. So at what point would you desert
your post? ( and I intend NO slight on those who did volunteer I am
using this as a hypothetical).
By the time things have deteriorated enough to make you want to quit
your post it would probably be too late. Once the alert sounded you
would not have time to do anything probably not even get home. So
those who joined would turn up as they had already considered this to
a lesser of greater extent.
Organisations in general seem to use this as part of their planning.
We have a volunteer army in the UK this does not seem to cause a
problem. In the final analysis all those in a crisis could simply walk
away in general they do not if they feel they have a duty.
Neil
Dan McKenzie
news:3b44c27e...@news.demon.co.uk...
> Organisations in general seem to use this as part of their planning.
> We have a volunteer army in the UK this does not seem to cause a
> problem. In the final analysis all those in a crisis could simply walk
> away in general they do not if they feel they have a duty.
The difference being serving soldiers in our Volunteer Army (The TA) are
subject to Military law.
Does anyone know if the ROC were also subject to this ?
--
Dan McKenzie
"Send lawyers, guns and money
The shit has hit the fan"
patrick keele
> Does anyone know if the ROC were also subject to this ?
I would imagine they were,subject to military law.That being the, case
refusal to goto their local post in a war perhaps might have had dire
consequences?What a terrible situation they night have found themselves in
having to choose between obeying orders and staying with their families.
The fact that the posts were as far as i know in secret locations,not
normally on a map in an easily distinguishable symbol,must mean they were
restricted or above that level,under the official secrets act/s?A matter of
national security?I one for one know that when, during an INTEX excercise i
"appeared" at the Cheddington post a VERY indignified ROC "officer" demanded
to know how i knew the location of the post.I had been involved in WARMON
and INTEX excercises when i was in RAYNET and using amateur radio.Most of
all having lived in the Tring area most of my life might have explained
knowing about this "bunker"! I think NICK knows how to identify the things
on maps anyaway.
patrick
Hugo 'NOx' Tyson
Ne...@tbbdnc.demon.co.uk (Neil) writes:
> On Thu, 5 Jul 2001 17:05:20 -0700, "patrick keele"
> <pkg...@g1dra.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >All very interesting stuff about the roc posts.
> >So....in the event of a nuke war the then situation was....
> >The roc survive,government survive,and the rest of us just end up
> >dead.Clever that.
> >As i said in a "private" message i sent to someone who subscribes to this
> >newsgroup,did anyone really think that in the event of a nuke war,that a
> >married man with children was really going to say to his family "sorry love
> >i've just got to go my roc post and take a few measurements,i might not a
> >see you again.Bye"Is that really believable? In reality that's what they
> >were faced with...wasn't it?
>
> was an active topic for discussion. However, it is worth keeping in
> mind that a nuclear war / crisis would probably build up and
> deteriorate suddenly at the end. So at what point would you desert
> your post? ( and I intend NO slight on those who did volunteer I am
> using this as a hypothetical).
Exactly; it's not as if when the 4-minute warning sounded, they would pack
a bag, kiss the missus and set off for the post. I would guess that they
might well have been in there (in shifts?) for 72 hours or more had the
politics/war been that scary.
> By the time things have deteriorated enough to make you want to quit
> your post it would probably be too late. Once the alert sounded you
> would not have time to do anything probably not even get home. So
> those who joined would turn up as they had already considered this to
> a lesser of greater extent.
Are you sure the posts wouldn't have been manned in advance? OK, if we're
talking about a "sneak attack" you're right - and I agree that they would
go not least because of the sense of outrage at the sudden attack.
> Organisations in general seem to use this as part of their planning.
> We have a volunteer army in the UK this does not seem to cause a
> problem. In the final analysis all those in a crisis could simply walk
> away in general they do not if they feel they have a duty.
And their boss is legally entitled to shoot them? Seriously, I think duty
is the most important part. But did the senior person in each post get a
firearm at all? Is that secret still, they would be issued only at DEFCON
ULTRAVIOLENT or whatever?
- Huge
G.J.Martin
evnt of a nuclear war. I figure that ROC observers were far more
knowledgeable than the ordinary public and so understood the effects of
radiation, fallout etc. Maybe they would have built shelters for their
families (not the lean to!) in which they may stand a good chance of
survival. You never know. It may be interesting to ask a former ROC
member what he or she would have done in this event.
On another note my best mate's Dad was cheif architect for a regional
council and he told my mate that they were asked that in the event of a
nuclear was to go into the hardened bunker below the council office
building and stick it out there to "control" the situation. My mate's
Dad told them to stick it somewhere (or words to that effect) but he
said he was amazed at the amount of people who were willing to leave
their families behind and go into the bunker. Greed? Being scared?
Survival of the fittest? We'll hopefully never know and need to find
out.
Best Wishes,
Gareth.
Andrew Cleland
De-lurking after a few months (and sub-brit membership!)
WRT to the ROC posts and UKWMO, it seems to me from the talk of how warnings
would be sounded for approaching fall-out that the expectation was that a
nuclear exchange would be essentially tactical with military/significant
targets getting hit by small devices.
Therefore a nuclear exchange would be essentially survivable for the
majority of people outside the immediate area of the device.
In which case the ROC observers would have an important job to do, and would
essentially be contributing to the survival of their families etc, in that
they would be warning them to take cover if fall-out approached the area.
Of course, strategic use of nuclear weapons and the arrival of the H-bomb
did tend to negate all this....
Andy C.
patrick keele
. It may be interesting to ask a former ROC
> member what he or she would have done in this event.
Well,howabout it then?there are supposed to be former roc members in this
newsgroup,so why not identify yourselves and tell us all how you would have
handled a callout in the event of imminent nuclear strike(me thinks i ain't
spelt imminent right)!!What training did you have to cope with psychological
"situations"?
I think this same problem goes far beyond just the roc.What about the
police,army,CEPO'S,EPO'S and perhaps i shouldn't mention amateur radio here
RAYNET personnel .Raynet would have also had to "deploy" to EC's as
well...to back up/replace the "official" radio comms when they if/went down
for whatever reason.Although raynet had "official" id as in being recognised
by the "authorities"there is no guarantee they would have been let into an
EC or other official building/bunker.
I can well imagine the OIC of a roc post being armed.But for what reason?To
shoot himself?the posts occupants,or to ward of potential intruders trying
to get into the post to save their own lives?
It makes you wonder,at least it does me.If you think about the
practicalities of actually getting to a roc post in time of war,it might not
have been as easy as we all think?Martial law would have been in force,as
would emergency war time laws.We know the roc wore uniforms,presumably they
had ID to.But...would your local mr PLOD or the army man on-the-spot have
let them through any barriers being erected?Personally i dont think any
former roc volunteers will tell us what was what.I can't help thinking they
are under the official secrets act/s and won't be able to.No harm in asking
though?
Patrick
Steve Walker
"Hugo 'NOx' Tyson" <hm...@redxhatx.com> wrote in message
news:wwtd77e...@masala.cambridge.redhat.com...
> And their boss is legally entitled to shoot them? Seriously, I think duty
> is the most important part. But did the senior person in each post get a
> firearm at all? Is that secret still, they would be issued only at DEFCON
> ULTRAVIOLENT or whatever?
hehe.....
Maybe they had DEFCON OHBUGGER, DEFCON OOPS &
DEFCON WHATDOESTHISBIGREDBUTTONDOSARGE too?
Martin Sylvester
"Steve Walker" <steve-...@invalid.net> wrote in message
news:9i6v2s$klg$1...@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk...
> > [...] issued only at DEFCON
> > ULTRAVIOLENT or whatever?
>
> hehe.....
>
> Maybe they had DEFCON OHBUGGER, DEFCON OOPS [...]
Also known as Bikini Brown Uniform?
Martin.
--
I do not intend to imply that any views expressed above represent the policy
of any organisation, nor do I warrant any information to be accurate.
URL: http://www.sylvesternet.freeserve.co.uk/martin/ for: Daria books/video;
Parish of St Peter & St Paul, Swadlincote, Derbyshire, UK; Catholic books.
patrick keele
can any one state the following:
thickness of access shaft walls?
thickness of roof/ceiling?
thickness of walls in monitoring room?
thickness of floor in monitoring room?
Is there a photo/picture of an complete post NOT in the ground to see what
it looks like,like an exploded view or plan?
were these things built as a structure and then lowered into the ground?and
were they made of reinforced concrete?
--
Patrick
John Duell
>
> . It may be interesting to ask a former ROC
> > member what he or she would have done in this event.
>
> Well,howabout it then?there are supposed to be former roc members in this
> newsgroup,so why not identify yourselves and tell us all how you would
have
> handled a callout in the event of imminent nuclear strike(me thinks i
ain't
> spelt imminent right)!!What training did you have to cope with
psychological
> "situations"?
Well I'm not a former ROC member, "but a know a man who is".
Don't you think that crew members spent a reasonable amount of time thinking
about what they would do, and discussing it with each other? Of course they
did - after all the whole point of being in the ROC was to be prepared for a
nuclear attack/accident/whatever.
My 'source' says that there was an agreement that the families of those
crewmembers who were in the Post when it was buttoned down might go to the
homes of other crew members who hadn't gone. As already mentioned, ROC
people understood far better than Joe Public what would ensue, and would
have tackled Blast & Fallout protection measures with alot more ingenuity
than someone reading 'Protect & Survive' for the first time. They wouldn't
have had to do a mad scramble to the supermarket like the Public either, as
many had stored 'plenty' of provisions.
Think about it - If you spent your spare time training to measure the
effects of a nuclear weapons strike on your home town, you would probably
have worked out a few ideas about what you might do IF it ever happened.
As for nobody turning up on the big day - it was expected. But if a Post
had, say 20 members, then you're only looking for 3 people to crew it. You
might expect perhaps that the men and women with families MIGHT not turn up,
but then again some people might find a protected Post a rather sensible
place to be when told that it's going to happen soon - who knows, thank God
we didn't put it to the test.
I was told by a man who was responsible for such things that at Group level
they were instructed to go out onto the streets and physically drag the
required number of people in. After all, what's a bit of ABH & kidnap
compared with what's coming next ? After they calmed down (!), the new
recruits would be taught how do the duties of the missing ROC personnel.
Well, that's the theory.
There'ya go, who wants to lay into me for that ?
John Duell
Roy Smith
I have started a page on the truly massive underground V1 and V2 factory in
the Harz mountains in Germany that I visited recently. Also included is the
Concentration Camp "Dora" that housed the workforce. I hope to enlarge the
page as time permits.
And there is a page on the beautiful Harz National Park area.
http://www.geocities.com/lupinpooter/index
or
http://freespace.virgin.net/roy.smith5/index
and go to the appropriate page
Also the former Stasi (East German State Security) HQ in Leipzig is now a
museum and displayed are the tools of the snooper's trade, see them at
http://www.runde-ecke-leipzig.de/index.htm
There is a Stasi "Evasion" Bunker for the Leadership that is open on the
last Saturday in each month from 1 pm to 4 pm. I have the directions if
anyone need them.
Some of the links don't work, don't know why yet. Anyone had problems with
German addresses?
Regards,
Roy
Roy Smith
The Cold War was a stand-off, a war of bluff. Like a game of poker or going
one better than the Jones's next door.
If you could convince your opponent and potential enemy (ie Soviet Bloc)
that you are prepared for all eventualities and have got bigger multi-smart
bombs and more of them, that you can deliver them by IBM, 'plane, submarine,
suitcase. And that you are prepared to fire the last shot. Have big
expensive gizmos that can detect when he fires his IBM's and if any of his
do get through and detonate, we are prepared, with bunkers, HQ's, citadels,
hardened comms. NBC suits, plenty of spare T-bar keys handy for our
watchfull volunteers and lots of food to survive.
All this we did with plenty of publicity and perhaps "leaked" RSG snippits.
We showed how very, very prepared we were.
The ROC was just a small part of this strategy.
In the end I belive the Soviet beakup was due to the fact that the younger
generation had forgotten the Great Patriotic War and would rather have video
games, MacDonald (ugh) junk and wear trainers. Gorby sensed this too.
Regards,
Roy
Andrew P Smith
Smith <roy.s...@virgin.net> writes
>We showed how very, very prepared we were.
Should that be how prepared we >thought< we were.
--
Andrew
E Mail can be altered electronically and therefore the integrity of this
communication can not be guaranteed.
Views expressed in this E Mail are those of the author and not associations or
companies I am involved with.
Tony Smith
ROTFL
Sounds like a line from 'Whoops Apocalypse'
Mmm, I wonder how ROC members would have been portrayed in that film?
Answers on a postcard....
Tony Smith
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Gary Marden
pkg...@g1dra.freeserve.co.uk (patrick keele) wrote:
> Just curious about the way roc posts were built.
> can any one state the following:
There are a few photographs in the book Attack Warning Red which show the
post at Riseley, Beds being built. The walls are concrete reinforced with
steel rods and look to be about six inches thick. They were built in-situ
with wooden shuttering used to provide the form for the poured concrete.
The photos aren't the best quality so wouldn't scan very well.
Cheers
Gary
Andy Wells
mean ICBM? A slightly different kettle of fish ! :-)
Andy
"Roy Smith" <roy.s...@virgin.net> wrote in message
news:YF127.12394$B56.2...@news2-win.server.ntlworld.com...
Nick Catford
"Gary Marden" <majik...@cix.co.uk> wrote in message
news:memo.20010709...@majikthise.compulink.co.uk...
In the first edition they are better quality pictures, I can scan them and
stick them up somewhere if anyone is interested.
Nick
Gareth James Martin
Best wishes,
Gareth.
Nick Catford
"Gareth James Martin" <g.j.m...@durham.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:3B4A302F...@durham.ac.uk...
> Sorry for being ignorant but what does RSG stand for?
Is is the Subterranea Britannica cold war Research Study Group or
alternatively Regional Seat of Government
Nick
patrick keele
NICK will get very annoyed.It was a mistake on MY part,letters the wrong way
round!
Patrick
Gareth James Martin <g.j.m...@durham.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:3B4A302F...@durham.ac.uk...
John Boyle
seem to be "tiled". Was this a feature of the wooden concrete shuttering
that was
used?
"patrick keele" <pkg...@g1dra.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:9i7s1e$i8u$1...@newsg1.svr.pol.co.uk...
Shawn Sanders
"John Boyle" <jo...@j-boyle.com> wrote in message
news:tkl796b...@corp.supernews.co.uk...
> And.... can anybody explain why the inside on the ROC posts consistently
> seem to be "tiled". Was this a feature of the wooden concrete shuttering
> that was
> used?
John,
Well it may be to do with the fact that many of the posts which survived the
1968 standdown *are* tiled. Some have polystyrene ceiling tiles all over
the walls and ceiling in the Monitoring Room, whereas some have polystyrene
sheets, similar to lining paper. I've always assumed they were an attempt
to thermally insulate the post.
The roilet recess and access shaft are not tiled, and on these (and in 1968
closures) you can faintly see the pattern of the wooden boards used as
shuttering.
I'm not sure when the tiles / sheets were applied, Nick Catford should be
able to answer that one. I would guess around the same time that the rubber
matting went down on the floors.
Regards
Shawn
Roy Smith
"Andy Wells" <an...@wellshouse.worldonline.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3b4a1...@mk-nntp-1.news.uk.worldonline.com...
> I have tried firing my IBM but there were no explosions. Do you perhaps
> mean ICBM? A slightly different kettle of fish ! :-)
> Andy
Roy
G.J.Martin
> In the first edition they are better quality pictures, I can scan them > and stick them up somewhere if anyone is interested.
>
> Nick
That would be great. I wouldn't mind see a post being built.
Best Wishes,
Gareth.
Nick Catford
>
> John,
>
> Well it may be to do with the fact that many of the posts which survived
the
> 1968 standdown *are* tiled. Some have polystyrene ceiling tiles all over
> the walls and ceiling in the Monitoring Room, whereas some have
polystyrene
> sheets, similar to lining paper. I've always assumed they were an attempt
> to thermally insulate the post.
>
> The roilet recess and access shaft are not tiled, and on these (and in
1968
> closures) you can faintly see the pattern of the wooden boards used as
> shuttering.
>
> I'm not sure when the tiles / sheets were applied, Nick Catford should be
> able to answer that one. I would guess around the same time that the
rubber
> matting went down on the floors.
>
> Regards
>
> Shawn
I too can only assume that it is to help with the insulation, (it will
probably also help them to pin papers to the wall which without the tiles is
virtually impossible. In many posts you still see many papers pinned to the
walls.) I know there were a lot of complaints from observers about feeling
cold, especially in the winter. The rubber mats (old coal board conveyor
belts) were acquired for this reason and the tiles could have gone up at the
same time. Fires were not allowed although many posts ignored the
regulations and I have seen a number of paraffin fires in posts.
Nick
Gareth James Martin
as well as for thermal insulation? I guess a 1Mt weapon detonating
nearby would be just a tad loud (!).
Best Wishes,
Gareth.
Shawn Sanders
Hopefully not a kettle of fish !
Regards
Shawn
David Mapley
Most post members talked about arrangements for TTW. On our post we decided
what members had cellars, basements etc and would have distributed off duty
crew members and their immediate families (if they wanted) to them as the
international situation deteriorated. As several of our members were also
RAYNET members communication between the post and shelters would not have
been too much of a problem and we could have kept them up to speed on
conditions etc (assuming we had not lost contact with group.)
The obvious hole in this of course was that our post MAI50 was situated in a
target area. Folkestone would have been one of the main reinforcement ports
for British NATO forces and would I believe have been the target of two
SS20's (1 air and 1 ground burst.) This I believe would have rendered our
plans as somewhat academic. At best we could have hoped for warhead
fratricide which would have reduced damage. Also our post was perched very
perilously above Folkstone on Crete Road West above the Channel Tunnel
Terminal at Cheriton, one could imagine it disapearing down the hill shortly
after the attack warning red!
Just to put another fact right there were no plans to arm the ROC during
wartime. However, the ROC could have contributed a substantial amount of
relatively 'healthy' and uncontaminated personel to regional government in
the aftermath of a strike and these members could well have ended up
reinforcing police mobile columns etc and be armed. During WWII members of
ROC post in Kent were armed and several older ex members can remember taking
a pot shot at passing enemy aircraft.
Contrary to popular myth most of the police would not have been armed
either. Most regular police officers would have been formed into mobile
columns and been sent in comandeered transport to non target areas to ride
out an attack. Small groups would have been left at comandeered food depots
where necessary to supplement home defence troops. Some police officers
would also have been retained at reinforcement ports such as Folkestone
(British Transport Police) where they would have been the 'front men' at the
beginning of the defended area. There job would have been to front up home
defence troops guarding the ports to give an apearance of 'normality.' This
was somewhat academic as the Royal Engineers visited the Folkestone port
area in 1981 to discuss with us what buildings in the locality would be
blown up (i.e most of the area) to give defending troops a good field of
fire!
Most of the police stations in town would have been manned by special (read
expendable) constables. This as most regular officers would have agreed
would have been a fitting end to them.... I believe locally they would have
had to use the boiler room under the station on Shorncliffe Rd as a shelter.
More fortunate were officers at Rochester who had a purpose shelter built
when the new police station was constructed in the early 60's.
God I have gone off topic...
Dave
patrick keele
David Mapley <Caul...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:9inhc7$532$1...@neptunium.btinternet.com...
so my definition of roc members is correct?(if you read through the news).
Do you happen to know the callsigns of the amateurs who were in the roc
and raynet?
What is TTW,and did every post have an id number?
MA150?
Patrick
Gareth James Martin
i.e. makeshift air filters, blast doors etc?
Best Wishes,
Gareth.
David Mapley
> What is TTW,and did every post have an id number?
> MA150?
TTW - Transition to War
Every ROC post had a designation. After 1971 they changed from the old
aircraft reporting designation to one more appropriate to data transmission.
The post designation tells you a lot about a post:
MAI - refers to the group in this case Maidstone
50 - tells us that this was a master (or radio equiped post.)
or
HOR22 would tell us that this post was in Horsham (No.2 Group) and its
master post would have been HOR20.
All ROC posts were grouped in clusters of between 2 and 4 posts ie MAI10,
11, 12, 13 etc. As you would never have more than 4 posts in a cluster posts
ending with '5' were also master posts i.e, MAI45.
At group on the PDP's (post display boards) you would also have seen a
further designation - on one or more posts in the group you would have found
the post number surrounded by 4 small dayglo red triangles. This would
denote that the post was also a ROCMET post. Rocmet posts had very basic
meterological instruments and would have sent regular met reports to group.
Other posts used SUPMET which relied on visual observations.
Dave Mapley
squilsh
last week (Clipston), which is 176m above sea level, got me thinking about
using it as an amateur VHF site, and how AR and the ROC could have worked
together.
--
"What happen?"
"Somebody set us up the bomb."
Main screen turn on.
ALL YOUR NEWSGROUP ARE BELONG TO US
patrick keele <pkg...@g1dra.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:9inhjf$60c$1...@news8.svr.pol.co.uk...
>
> David Mapley <Caul...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> news:9inhc7$532$1...@neptunium.btinternet.com...
> > I confess to being an ex ROC member!
> >
> > Most post members talked about arrangements for TTW. On our post we
> decided
> > what members had cellars, basements etc and would have distributed off
> duty
> > crew members and their immediate families (if they wanted) to them as
the
> > international situation deteriorated. As several of our members were
also
> > RAYNET members communication between the post and shelters would not
have
> > been too much of a problem and we could have kept them up to speed on
> > conditions etc (assuming we had not lost contact with group.)
> >
>
> Do you happen to know the callsigns of the amateurs who were in the roc
> and raynet?
>
> Patrick
>
>
>
transl...@qdnet.pl
200km of undergound bunkers on the near the Polish border with Germany - the
Germans were real pros when it cam to such fortifications..
Richard Hill
ex G6GGE
patrick keele
*******************************************************************
I was never in the ROC so why refer to members?????????
As several of our members were
> also
> > > RAYNET members communication between the post and shelters would not
> have
> > > been too much of a problem and we could have kept them up to speed on
> > > conditions etc (assuming we had not lost contact with group.)
CORRECTION
the above text enclosed in "*" i did NOT write.So why has someone wrongly
attributed this text to me (Patrick)???????
> > Do you happen to know the callsigns of the amateurs who were in the roc
> > and raynet?
> >
I wrote this i agree
Patrick
squilsh
--
"What happen?"
"Somebody set us up the Bomb."
Carrier receiver turn on.
ALL YOUR POST ARE BELONG TO US
patrick keele <pkg...@g1dra.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:9iqcga$q91$1...@newsg3.svr.pol.co.uk...
Derek Ripley wrote the above text, judging by the thread in
uk.rec.subterranea.
Sorry for any confusion caused with my cross-posting (it does produce more
interesting threads!).
Ian
Lurk mode off: polystyrene tiles came in many years previous to the
conveyor belt - maybe as early as the '70s. Conveyor belts were
(surprise!) after the decimation of the collieries in the mid/late
'80s.
The belts were more danger than they were worth - condensation made
for a very slippery surface.
ejb
"Ian" <I...@tocsin.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:ea56lt0hdn6a2ipci...@4ax.com...
old
belting.
They were bloody awful,rubbed your skin away.
ejb
Gary Marden
pkg...@g1dra.freeserve.co.uk (patrick keele) wrote:
>
> *******************************************************************
> I was never in the ROC so why refer to members?????????
> <snip...>
> ********************************************************************
> CORRECTION
> the above text enclosed in "*" i did NOT write.So why has
> someone wrongly attributed this text to me (Patrick)???????
Cock-ups in the quoting occur all the time. The depth of the chevrons >>
usually indicates how far back in the thread the quoted text was penned.
Cheers
Gary
Gary Marden
squ...@ntlworld.com (squilsh) wrote:
> I came across this in uk.rec.subterranea, after visiting my
> local ROC post last week (Clipston), which is 176m above sea
> level, got me thinking about using it as an amateur VHF site,
> and how AR and the ROC could have worked together.
Yes Clipston is quite high, with a commanding view of the surrounding
countryside. Any idea what the pond behind the post was for, or the
peculiarly-shaped top of the ventilation shaft?
Cheers
Gary
Shawn Sanders
> conveyor belt - maybe as early as the '70s. Conveyor belts were
> (surprise!) after the decimation of the collieries in the mid/late
> '80s.
>
> The belts were more danger than they were worth - condensation made
> for a very slippery surface.
>
They certainly were. My friend and I recently pumped out a partly flooded
post with two layers of this 'belt' matting, and found that there was a
large quantity of a really nasty, black, oily substance covering them . I
can't think of anything that could have produced it other than the matting.
It was about as slippery as it could get. I wonder if it was something from
the mats actual construction or something it absorbed during its 'previous
life'.
Out of interest, did any of these insulative measures have any appreciable
affect on conditions inside the post ?
Regards
Shawn
Shawn Sanders
> Yes Clipston is quite high, with a commanding view of the surrounding
> countryside. Any idea what the pond behind the post was for, or the
> peculiarly-shaped top of the ventilation shaft?
I wondered that. I seem to recall seeing one or two others that have that
recess on top, although I couldn't name them right now. Maybe a bit of
flamboyance on behalf of the builder ?
Clipston certainly has a nice location.
Regards
Shawn
Ian
<sh...@spambegone.ntrigue.demon.co.uk> wrote:
[snip]
>
>Out of interest, did any of these insulative measures have any appreciable
>affect on conditions inside the post ?
>
>Regards
>
>Shawn
>
As there was no authorised form of heating (except our cooling bodies]
it was hard to tell. Closing down the post and taking time over a
shift change did make us *think* things were getting warmer!
It is true that the feet and lower legs were the first to feel the
cold, hence the attempt made to lay the belting. There was very
little opportunity to exercise to keep the body temperature up, and as
for No.3 trying to sleep - cold and the WB system did for that!
I would estimate that the temperature difference between summer and
winter was about 4 degrees F.
The insulation measures did mean that we felt someone was trying to
help - even if I did later take the belting up and store it in a
nearby farm outbuilding! What was really demoralising was overhearing
a plotter at Group HQ complaining about the heat ;-)
Regards,
Ian
(Ex 23/32 Post, NBCC Boulmer, current 609(WR) Sqn RAuxAF)
Shawn Sanders
> It is true that the feet and lower legs were the first to feel the
> cold, hence the attempt made to lay the belting. There was very
> little opportunity to exercise to keep the body temperature up, and as
> for No.3 trying to sleep - cold and the WB system did for that!
I'm sure a lot of your discomfort could have been solved with a better issue
of personal equipment, but as decent cold weather equipment was only just
coming on general issue to front-line units when I left the Army in early
1996 I don't suppose there was not much hope of that before 1991 !
What was the 'standard' order of dress down the post ? Looking at pictures
they all seem to show what looks like battledress but most of those pics
seem to be from the '50s or '60s. I know the posts all had their colonies
of welly boots, but I'm guessing the standard footwear would have been of
the DMS ankle type in the latter years. I know the later but similar hi-leg
DMS were awful in every respect, whereas the ECW boots I had on issue for my
last year kept my feet warm even standing ankle deep in icy water for
extended periods. And the 'onion skin' principle of layered clothing would
have been useful down there I'm sure.
Mind you, the bean counters in the MOD have never been keen on improving the
comfort of the troops if it means spending money. Clapped out conveyor
belts from the NCB and a couple of hundred polystyrene tiles from Texas
Homecare were probably about the max they were prepared to shell out.
Regards
Shawn
Ian
<sh...@spambegone.ntrigue.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>I'm sure a lot of your discomfort could have been solved with a better issue
>of personal equipment, but as decent cold weather equipment was only just
>coming on general issue to front-line units when I left the Army in early
>1996 I don't suppose there was not much hope of that before 1991 !
>
>What was the 'standard' order of dress down the post ? Looking at pictures
>they all seem to show what looks like battledress but most of those pics
>seem to be from the '50s or '60s. I know the posts all had their colonies
>of welly boots, but I'm guessing the standard footwear would have been of
>the DMS ankle type in the latter years. I know the later but similar hi-leg
>DMS were awful in every respect, whereas the ECW boots I had on issue for my
>last year kept my feet warm even standing ankle deep in icy water for
>extended periods. And the 'onion skin' principle of layered clothing would
>have been useful down there I'm sure.
>
>Mind you, the bean counters in the MOD have never been keen on improving the
>comfort of the troops if it means spending money. Clapped out conveyor
>belts from the NCB and a couple of hundred polystyrene tiles from Texas
>Homecare were probably about the max they were prepared to shell out.
>
Shawn,
It remains my belief that the main stand-down of the ROC occurred
because we had started spending enough (particularly in the comms
front) to become a line item in an accountant's budget. When we
didn't spend enough to appear in the big budgets, we survived!
Standard issue was shoes, black. At the posts we wore whatever was
needed. I favoured thermal everything, Swiss Army socks, and pilot's
gauntlets with thermal inners...
Various hand warmers were tried, a favourite was the gel bag
(energised in the microwave), along with self-heating cans of food.
We always had to be aware of the limited escape and limited air
supply.
As an aside, when I started in the mid '70s, battledress was still the
issue - pyjamas were an essential underclothing - talk about hairy!
This was later replaced by the wooly pully and the "bus conductor"
zip-front jacket.
Regards,
Ian
Nick Catford
Having just returned from the North of Scotland, a notoriously cold area, I
noticed a lot of very thick duffle coats left in posts, strangely many of
them in unopened packets. As they were all identical I guess these must have
been official issue in Scotland.
Nick
spar...@usa.net
warmer! We had to paint them every few years with special fire retardant paint.
As for heating the posts, tried primuses and hot water bottles plus thermal gear
but as you were sitting still most of the time it still got cold. The best
solution I found was to bring along a small (1.5kVA) genny which was hooked up to
a fan heater and 60W light in the post: result a nice bright snug post.... until
somebody had to go upstairs! I understand that some master posts were issued with
new Honda-type gennys which had a 240V output, just before standdown.
Andy (sparkgapATcwcomDOTnet)
David Mapley
pig to haul it up and down the shaft. I gather the issue of several
different types of generators was to allow some committe at UKWMO to decide
which was best value. The only difference it made to us was the fact you
could use Gordons B&D strimmer up top to keep the weeds down.
Russell W. barnes
8><-----------------------------------------
>I understand that some master posts were issued with
> new Honda-type gennys which had a 240V output, just before standdown.
>
> Andy (sparkgapATcwcomDOTnet)
--
I believe the Penrith ROC had one of these. The chap I know who was
in it said they used to bury a jerry-full of petrol in the turf around
the side of the shelter, and cover it over with a divot or two!
Regds,
Russell W. B.
http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~rwbarnes
Paul
have a can of petrol inside the post if anything happened.
--
Paul Charlton
G0UKL / VK6GBL
Ducati ST2
"Russell W. barnes" <rwba...@globalnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:f3860a72.01091...@posting.google.com...
Nick Catford
"Paul" <Pa...@nospamrockhopper.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:9nlgfi$ql2$1...@news8.svr.pol.co.uk...
> I think number three observer was required to do that anyhow. Not good to
> have a can of petrol inside the post if anything happened.
>
> --
> Paul Charlton
>
> www.Paulcharlton.org.uk
>
> G0UKL / VK6GBL
Having seen the film 'Hole in the Ground' I don't think I would have wanted
to have been No. 3 Observer, he was the expendable one who had to do all the
outside jobs like repairing the phone line immediately after the blast!
Nick
G1??? - sorry it's so long (17 years) since I've used my callsign I've
forgotten what it is/was
Bill
writes
>On 10 Sep 2001 15:29:02 -0700, rwba...@globalnet.co.uk (Russell W.
>barnes) made me spill my meths when I read:
>
>>I believe the Penrith ROC had one of these. The chap I know who was
>>in it said they used to bury a jerry-full of petrol in the turf around
>>the side of the shelter, and cover it over with a divot or two!
>
>it was, took a photo of it. Roughly made from Dexion, serves useful
>secondary purpose as mantrap. First time I've seen one at all the posts
>I've checked on in Yorkshire. There may be some more but I managed not
>to fall into them. Usually the only other items surrounding are the
>lashing eyes for a mast where appropriate.
>
>Talking of which, I have a mast, not from ROC to my knowledge. Each
>section pushes up and is locked by means of a collar. A quarter turn
>usually does it. Each collar gets smaller as each section gets smaller.
>The collars have three equally spaced dowels, presumably for a key or
>spanner type tool to help lock it. Anyway, getting to the point, does
>anyone have a guy rope set and base plate, or know of one for sale. I
>could make one up but would wait if something better is available.
>
Anchor Supplies had a large box full of Clarke guy ropes on
metal hoops a couple of weeks ago.
(Try anchor-supplies.ltd.uk or similar.)
>All the best
>--
>Wayne Davies, Harrogate, North Yorkshire. 07932 081776
>Ex-mil Land Rovers and Windsor School at www.yorkshire.u-net.com
>Warning, spellchecker is switched off, tryping may be errotic.
>
-- Bill
Terence W. Wiseman
>I believe the Penrith ROC had one of these. The chap I know who was
>in it said they used to bury a jerry-full of petrol in the turf around
>the side of the shelter, and cover it over with a divot or two!
I tripped over this at the Darley post near Menwith Hill. Wondered what
it was, took a photo of it. Roughly made from Dexion, serves useful
secondary purpose as mantrap. First time I've seen one at all the posts
I've checked on in Yorkshire. There may be some more but I managed not
to fall into them. Usually the only other items surrounding are the
lashing eyes for a mast where appropriate.
Standard Post Instructions were that the can of petrol for the generator was
to be buried within the Post compound. Not a very good idea to take down
into the Post !
Terry Wiseman
One time Chief Observer,
40 Post, 15 Group.
______________________________________________________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Still Only $9.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
With Seven Servers In California And Texas - The Worlds Uncensored News Source