dieseltaylor
-
Posts
5,269 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by dieseltaylor
-
-
noxnoctum - You are correct as testing a MkIv, a Panther and a Tiger they all reach the games generic reverse speed of slightly over 7.6mph within 15 seconds. It may be even quicker than 15 seconds but my test was really aimed at acceleration times forwards. Forward speeds for the 15seconds seem also to be around the 7mph mark.
I did not look at crews for reaction time differences.
For those unfamiliar with tanks the Tiger was a rarity in having multiple reverse gears that allowed it to reach 5.6mph far in excess of most other tanks in reverse.
As for accelearation on paved [cobbled?] I see that top speed is reached after 60 seconds and that the Tiger I and Panther G seemed to have the same top speed. It may be different on road.
-
When it first came out I spent some time looking at the way Tigers reacted in game and with the videos on the net. It did seem to me then that the Tigers accelerated and reversed too quickly and of course the rocking motion was overdone hugely given I was looking at the short movements that one commonly sees in the many videos.
BF have now gone to a one size fits all reverse speed - including in that the armoured cars with two drivers/positions who could travel at speed in either direction. The speed chosen is actually quite high. In the case of some tanks 300% higher than reality with the common Sherman 200%. The Tiger alone I thought from my tests is almost correct though VAB's test gives higher speeds than mine. Hid tests are more recent and if this reverese speed applies to all tanks the Churchill will be 400-500% faster than reality.
Also there is no benefit from turning the turret to allow the commander and gunner to assist in guiding the driver in reversing. In fact having the commander up confers no advantage facing either way. Bizarrely the driver is adept at reversing that he can reverse at full speed for kilometres through buildings with no problems. In real life drivers would try and recall recent movement so if required they could safely reverse quickly. Arguably then there should be some restriction on retrograde movement over more than very short distances unless the tank commander or a nearby tank was able to provide instructions. The wartime literature is full of cases of tanks reversing into buildings or ditching themselves due to no effective rearward vision.*
Obviously being in the middle of a field this would be not the same problem as if in a village.
Things may have changed in V2.00 which I only briefly opened after paying for the upgrade but not tested. It has been an enormous sore point to me that in a game touted as realistic BF in CMBN could not even get reverse movement right. It also had tanks firing on the move with extreme accuracy! What was going on at BF HQ? Is it all to make life simple for the AI or a cavilier attitude to game design.
I do think acceleration over distance may well be correct for things like the Daimler armoured car which I tested extensively. I have never tested on inclines.
*I wonder if on the Panther you could look through the shell ejection plate? Serious goggery!
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Girandoni_Air_Rifle
The advantages of a high rate of fire, no smoke from propellants, and low muzzle report granted it initial acceptance, but it was eventually removed from service for several reasons. While the detachable air reservoir was capable of around 30 shots it took nearly 1500 strokes of a hand pump to fill those reservoirs. Later, a wagon-mounted pump was provided. The reservoirs themselves, made from hammered sheet iron held together with rivets and sealed by brazing, proved very difficult to manufacture using the techniques of the period and were always in short supply. In addition, the weapon was very delicate and a small break could make it inoperable. Finally, it was very different from any other weapon of the time and any soldier using it needed to be highly trained.I am a bit disheartened thta none of my Napoleonic reference books is kind enough to give a indexed item either to the inventor or to air-rifle. With a reported air pressure of 800psi [!!!!!] one can only assume that thye may have been a bit delicate for normal warfare though as a seige defense weapon they would be a force multiplier.
Anyway here is the nub of the long article IMO
It certainly can be said that the airgun shooting demonstrations on the expedition were an enormous success. The airgun created great respect for these travelers. For one example: Private Whitehouse noted in his expedition journal entry of August 30, 1804, when Captain Lewis demonstrated his airgun to the Yankton Sioux in the Calumet Bluff area along the Missouri River, apparently on the Nebraska side:
"Captain Lewis took his Air Gun and shot her off, and by the Interpreter told them there was medicine in her, and that she could do very great execution. They all stood amazed at the curiosity; Captain Lewis discharged the Air Gun several times, and the Indians ran hastily to see the holes that the Balls had made which was discharged from it. at finding the balls had entered the Tree, they shouted a loud at the sight and the Execution that was done suprized them exceedingly." The Indians would not have been able to comprehend the gun shooting again and again and again without reloading - and without flash or smoke.. This would have been terrifying considering the "execution" that such a flashless, quiet gun had demonstrated as its potential!.
Air Power Diplomacy -Captain Lewis' "Assault Rifle"- The Key to the American West. Evidently Captains Lewis and Clark realized rather early in the expedition what a great impression could be made by dramatic demonstrations of the amazing properties and astonishing firepower of their "magic" airgun . Appearing in formal formation, flags and banners flying, dressed in their colorful full dress military uniforms with towering tasseled chapeaus, fancy coat tails, brilliant sashes, bright braid, and shining medals, the Corps built a tone of high theatre around the previously loaded and charged repeating air rifle. This painting illustrates one of these shows, as described by Private Whitehouse in his expedition journal entry of August 30, 1804, in which Captain Lewis demonstrated his airgun to a large group of high ranking Yankton Sioux in the Calumet Bluff area along the Missouri River. Some of the honor guard braves have run to the distant target tree and are incredulously reporting that numerous lead balls are buried in the wood even though the gun had not presented any smoke or fire and relatively little sound. Captain Clark, in later journal entries, made it clear that they implied that the Corps had a large number of these guns. (See notes about this painting and how to obtain copies at the end of this paper.)
............................
The above passages may be some of the most least appreciated, but most important, notes in all of the expedition journals. Captain Clark, and undoubtedly Captain Lewis as well, clearly realized the potential of the airgun, backed up by an assumed further inventory of them, as a tool of "firepower diplomacy". The presentation of the airgun by Captains Lewis and Clark certainly was not a casual matter, but rather a calculated, considered strategy that apparently paid enormous dividends.
This is the first presentation of the idea that the expedition's airgun, as an "assault weapon", backed up by an inferred stock of more of them (or even perhaps the implication that all of their long arms could fire indefinitely without reloading), may well have been basic to the success of this important expedition. Lest we think that this idea might not have been inherent in the thinking of the expedition's leaders, we need only consider Captain Clark's remarks above and the previously unappreciated insight to Clark's thinking revealed during a frightening and complex confrontation with Chief Black Buffalo, commanding hundreds of aggressive Teton Sioux, on Sept.25, 1804, near the very start of the trip. Angered by threats, Clark recalled that "I felt My Self warm& Spoke in verry positive terms". Sergeant Gass recorded that Clark's "verry positive terms" included that "he had more medicine on board his boat than would kill twenty such nations in one day". For the very first time, we finally have an understanding as to what "secret weapon(s)" Clark was alluding. The implication apparently was that they had a large supply of these wonder guns right there on his boat. And, as noted, Captain Lewis, only three weeks earlier, had warned other Sioux viewing an airgun demonstration that "there was medicine in her, and that she could do very great execution". "Medicine", of course, was an Indian term referring to great, generally inexplicable, force - the kind of force which could be presented by many smokeless, fireless guns which could fire lethal, highly accurate balls with incredible rapidity, apparently an infinite number of times, without loading - yes, with enough "medicine" to kill, execute, twenty nations of Indians in one day!
-
Thanks for the information Marcus. Always been a great site for groggery.
BTW for nu. read:
-
http://www.conscript-heroes.com/Art48-Lockhart.htmWilliam Guy Lockhart and his tour with 161 SD Squadron as a Lysander Pilot
When I first launched this Conscript Heroes website, I included a page about other evaders mentioned in my father's diaries or otherwise connected to the story. One of those evaders was Sgt Pilot William Guy Lockhart. Some time later that entry was picked up by James Crowden who offered to put me in touch with Tanya Lockhart, Guy's daughter. We soon found that we all lived quite close to one another, arranged to meet for lunch, and have kept in touch ever since. In April 2011, James called to say that someone else had become interested in Guy's story and another lunch date was agreed. By this time James had acquired all kinds of information about Guy, including details of his time with 161 SD Squadron flying Lysanders to France. I already had the basic details of his missions - and had passed them on to Tanya - but James had acquired documents from the National Archives at Kew (thanks to Len Barnett) that included the Squadron Diary and Guy's original flight reports. I have used these documents as the basis for this article on the grounds that they are (or could be) typical of the experiences of a 161 SD Lysander pilot in 1942. Most of the passenger details (which are not included in the flight records) come from Hugh Verity's book 'We Landed by Moonlight' together with additional information from other sources – details on request.
Guy Lockhart first joined the RAF in October 1935. He was granted a short service commission as Acting Pilot Officer and sent to No 2 Flying School at Digby the following month. In October 1936 he was posted to 65 Squadron and in March 1937, to 87 Squadron at Tangmere flying the Hawker Fury. In July 1937 the squadron was moved to Debden and re-equipped with Gloster Gladiators. In May 1938 Lockhart was involved in a low-flying incident at Stoke-on-Trent Municipal Airport at the Empire Air Day Flying Display that resulted in a court martial. He resigned his commission in August and became a flying instructor with the West Suffolk Aero Club. In 1939 Lockhart re-enlisted with the RAFVR as a Sergeant Pilot and after ITU, joined 7 (later 57) OTU flying Miles Master trainers and Spitfires. In June 1941 he was posted to 602 Squadron flying Spitfires. Later the same month he was transferred to 74 Squadron and on 7 July 1941, shot down over France in Spitfire W3317. He evaded capture and returned to the UK in October 1941. The following month he was posted to 138 Squadron as a Pilot Officer (on probation) and in February 1942, transferred to the new 161 Special Duties Squadron, flying the Westland Lysander.
1 March 1942 (SOE Operation Crème): This was F/O Lockhart's first operational Lysander flight to France. He took off from Tangmere at 20.25 hrs in Lysander V9428 and crossed the French coast near Cabourg at 9,500 feet. After some difficulty in finding his target, Lockhart landed in a field near Les Lagnys (Indre, NNE of Chateauroux) at 01.30 hrs. Less than two minutes later, and with his passengers Stanlislas Mangin and Louis Andlauer safely on board, he took off again. The return flight was made at low altitude because of heavy cloud, crossing the French coast east of Cherbourg at 1,200 feet and landing back at Tangmere at 04.07 hrs without incident.
26 March 1942 (SOE Operation Baccarat II): F/O Lockhart took off from Tangmere in Lysander V9367 at 21.25 hrs on with BCRA agent Gilbert Renault-Roulier (Remy) on board. Heavy cloud cover prevented pinpointing his position as they crossed the French coast and Lockhart flew on instruments until he reached the river Loire at about 23.30 hrs. He then turned east to Saumer before turning south for his target. On receiving the correct signal from the ground and responding, he landed in the Roi de Coeur field north-west of St Leger de Montbrillais at 23.45 hrs. He landed close to the landing lights and applied full brakes but the aircraft still ran on and fell into two troughs of ploughed ground. On turning the aircraft, he sank up to the wheel spats and despite applying full power was unable to extricate himself. He sent Remy to get help and the reception party pulled the aircraft around until Lockhart was able to taxi to firmer ground. Two passengers (Christian Pineau and Francois Faure) climbed on board and Lockhart took off again after seventeen minutes on the ground. Visibility was still very restricted by clouds and it wasn't until shortly before the English coast that it cleared enough to make a safe landing at Tangmere, touching down at 01.45 hrs. Note that there is now a memorial at the landing site commemorating this operation.
24 April 1942 (SIS/SOE Operations Apostle and Jellyfish): F/Lt Lockhart took off from Tangmere in Lysander V9597 at 23.30 hrs and set course for Cabourg but bad weather over the Channel and a failing magneto forced him to turn back. However on retesting the engine five minutes later he found only a marginal drop in performance and so he turned again for France. He crossed the French coast west of Le Havre at 00.30 hrs but worsening weather forced him to return to Tangmere, landing at 01.45 hrs.
26 April 1942 (SOE Operations Gazelle and Jellyfish): F/Lt Lockhart took off from Tangmere in Lysander V9597 at 22.35 hrs with Pierre Beech (Gazelle) as his passenger plus some baggage. The weather deteriorated over the Channel but improved as he pinpointed himself over Cabourg at 23.30 hrs. The weather continued to improve until the target area where there was ten-tenths cloud at 5,000 feet. Lockhart had some difficulty in locating his target but received the agreed signal at 01.45 hrs and landed at Faucon field (10 miles NNE of Chateauroux) three minutes later.
I quote this account of events from Lockhart's report dated 29 April although it should be noted that a subsequent report dated 10 May is nowhere near as entertaining. The later version is presumably the result of a letter dated 4 May 1942 from the Air Ministry to W/Cdr Fielden complaining that S/Ldr Murphy's reports in particular 'rather savours of the mess fireside' but also commenting on Lockhart's original report on Gazelle/Jellyfish, and saying they weren't suitable for passing up the line to C.A.S (Chief Air Staff).
"After some difficulty in finding the target, I received the agreed signal at 01.45 and touched down three minutes later. Unfortunately the landing ground was on a hill and as I descended Mother Earth came up to meet me, the result being a dull thud. The engine commenced to burn with considerable ill-feeling so I switched off and searched for a fire extinguisher, but could find only an incendiary bomb. Meanwhile Gazelle disembarked with luggage and faded into the gloom, leaving me to go up with the aircraft like a good Captain. After six or seven minutes I was about to burst into tears as a last resort but this was unnecessary as the flames died out unaided. I therefore started up and taxied back to light A where the two passengers embarked like men possessed. Airborne again at 02.00, I set course for Cabourg, pinpointing myself there at 03.15. Weather was bad over the Bay of the Seine but excellent over the Channel. I called up Medoc when five miles south of Littlehampton and landed at 04.00."
The two passengers were Gaston Tavian (Collin) and Lt de Vaisseau Mariotti (Rousseau) and it was Tavian who had chosen the landing field and nearly caused a disaster – future landing sites were only to be selected and marked by agents trained in England.
28 May 1942 (SOE Operation Gean): F/Lt Lockhart took off from Tangmere in Lysander V9597 at 23.25 hrs. He was carrying one passenger and 150lbs of baggage and intended to fly to landing field north of Chateauroux, 2 kms east of Les Vignots. Although the weather was fine across the Channel, it deteriorated as he approached his target area. Receiving no return signal from the landing field, nor the two alternate fields that he circled for an hour, he was forced to abandon the mission and return to Tangmere, landing at 05.20 hrs.
That same night, F/Lt John Mott landed his Lysander near Issoudin (SIS Operation Tentative) to deliver radio operator Alex Nitelet for the Pat O'Leary escape line. Mott's aircraft had bogged down on landing and although Nitelet got away, Mott was soon arrested. Mott was sent to la Chatre barracks at Chateauroux where he joined André Simon, the landing officer for Guy Lockhart's operation who had been caught earlier ...
On the nights of 23/24 June, 25/26 June and 26/27 June, F/Lt Lockhart flew one of four Lysanders tasked with bombing missions to Normandy, the first to the marshalling yards at Sequeux and the other two to a chemical works at Oissel. Each Lysander carried two 250lb bombs but I have no details of the success or otherwise of these operations. There was a period from June to August 1942 when the networks in France were in such turmoil that pick-up operations were suspended and so the Lysanders were sent on alternate missions to France - 161 Lysanders also carried out at least two more similar bombing raids at the end of July.
23 August 1942 (SIS Operation Mercury): S/Ldr Lockhart took off from Tangmere in Lysander V9597 at 21.45 hrs with one passenger (who Verity identifies as the Belgian agent William Ugeux). His target is given in latitude and longitude and corresponds to a present-day airstrip at Thalamy (east of Ussel, Limousin) where he landed at 01.05 hrs. Lockhart reports the field as being excellent except that it is on a slope and that the flare path had been laid down-wind and down the hill, requiring him to switch off his engine to avoid the aircraft from running away. He was on the ground for eight minutes, during which time his passenger got out to be replaced by another (identified as Leon Faye (Aigle) of Alliance) before taking off again at 01.13 hrs and landing back at Tangmere at 03.55 hrs.
31 August 1942 (SIS Operation Boreas II): S/Ldr Lockhart took of from Tangmere in Lysander V9597 at 21.50 hrs. His target is given in latitude and longitude and corresponds to a field near Arbigny (about 20 kms NNE of Macon) but whether this was his intended destination (he circled Catfish first without receiving any signal) or where he actually landed (Boreas 2) is not clear from the report. Lockhart touched down at 01.45 hrs to deliver one (unidentified) passenger and three packages but on taxiing, crashed into a grass covered ditch and destroyed the aircraft's undercarriage. This incident was later described by the OC of 161 as an inexcusable error on the part of the ground party.
"I then destroyed the IFF and disembarked the passenger, who, with reception committee, made their escape after arranging that I would wait one hour before burning the aircraft. At 02.10 heard a Lysander (see below) overhead and gave signal of letters of my name, but received no response. At 02.55 hours, having destroyed auxiliary petrol tank with axe, I set fire to aircraft with incendiary bomb. Aircraft burst into flame at once and went on burning for two hours (I received information the same afternoon that the aircraft was entirely destroyed, type practically unrecognisable). After destroying the aircraft I followed the reception party to pre-arranged rendezvous."
The only other Lysander pilot out that night was P/O McIndoe on Operation Catfish who reported a series of dots from torches from the ground which he apparently interpreted as a warning not to land. The established procedure for ground parties was for the landing lights to be extinguished immediately after the aeroplane had touched down, so when McIndoe arrived there would have been no lights showing. The agreed signal from the ground to tell a pilot there was a problem and that he was not to land, was a series of flashes, and in the continued absence of a flare path, to leave the area, so McIndoe's actions seem entirely reasonable.
The reception party would have included Lockhart's intended passengers for the return flight Christian Pineau (who Lockhart had collected in March and who had subsequently returned to France in April) and Jean Cavailles.
I don't have the details of Lockhart's (second) evasion from France but whatever the story, Lockhart was picked up from the beach at Narbonne on the night of 5/6 September by the Polish felucca Seadog and taken to Gibraltar on Operation Leda. Lockhart was flown from Gibraltar to the UK and returned to Tempsford on 13 September. It is believed that Lockhart was helped in France by Yves Farges and it may be possible to get details of his evasion from ‘Histoire de la Resistance – Rebelles, Soldats, Citoyens' by Yves Farges - but I don't have a copy ...
18 November 1942 (SOE Operations Skid and Skate): S/Ldr Lockhart took off from Tangmere in Lysander V9353 at 20.55 hrs. He had two (unnamed) passengers and six packages on board to deliver to Les Lagnys field 15 miles NNE of Chateauroux. Lockhart flew in formation with P/O Vaughan-Fowler in a second Lysander as far as the Loire where they lost contact and reported dense cloud from 2,000 to 5,000 feet with thick fog around the target area. He circled the target several times but received no signals from the ground and so at 01.10 hrs set course for Cabourg (sic). He flew below the cloud to the French coast before climbing into the cloud and then encountered search-lights and heavy flak near St Malo. After 'extensive evasive action' he climbed out of the cloud near Jersey where he was attacked by seven Fw190s.
Two made a head-on attack while another fired by rear starboard quarter. Throttled back and spun down to cloud cover. Was fired on accurately in cloud so dived for sea level. Passenger warned of another fighter astern and after avoiding balloon, climbed into cloud again. Flew in cloud for twenty minutes asking for heading. Received information I was over Selsey Bill (Sussex) three minutes after passing over Alderney (Channel Islands). Continued in cloud until estimated in mid-channel and gave order “prepare to jump”. After further agreement with Zonia, Woodcock, Pelmet, Medoc and passengers decided not to jump. Landed at Warmwell (Dorset) at 04.40 hrs. Took off with 215 gallons, landed with 5 gallons.
I believe that Zonia, Woodcock, Pelmet and Medoc were DF homing stations or radio direction aids and (I am told on good authority) were used together with a Dalton computer strapped to the pilot's leg.
17 December 1942 (SOE Operations Chub, Minnow, Menhaven and Starfish): S/Ldr Lockhart took off from Tangmere in Lysander V9283 at 21.20 hrs. He had two passengers (Louis Kerjean and Jean Simon) and eighteen packages to deliver to the Univers landing field at Chavannes, south of Bourges, and two passengers (one of them Cdt Marchal) for the return.
"I was airborne at 21.20 and after contacting Zonia set course for Cabourg. With no delays I reached the target at 00.30 in the face of a headwind. The signal was received promptly and I landed over the wood from NNE to SSW touching down precisely at light A. After passing light B there was a severe jolt and I found elevators and rudder were inoperable. I climbed down and found the tail wheel snapped back into the fuselage. After breaking bottom rudder struts to free the rudder, I embarked with two passengers and took off on the tail trimmer as the stick was immovable fore and aft. Luckily became airborne. Flew aircraft by throttling back and stalling aircraft every two-three minutes to allow nose to fall to horizon. Finally landed at base at 04.00 hrs, again by use of tail-trimmer and throttle."
22 December 1942 (SIS Operation Jaguar): S/Ldr Lockhart took off from Tangmere in Lysander V9367 at 20.00 hrs. His destination was a field at Sermoyer, near Macon, where he was due to collect an SIS agent. Visibility was clear until Lockhart reached Blois (on the river Loire) at which point he encountered thick fog and cloud, forcing him abandon the mission and return, landing back at Tangmere at 02.30 hrs.
In Janury 1943 S/Ldr Lockhart was transferred to the Air Ministry (A.I.2c) and in November 1943, to the newly formed 627 Squadron at Oakington flying the de Havilland Mosquito - but that's another story ...
My thanks to James Crowden and Roger Green for much of the information used here
-
"The longest operator of the Lysander in the Indian Air Force was No.4 Squadron. About the time No.1 Squadron was involved in the thick of the battles over the retreating battle at Burma , No.4 Squadron, IAF was officially raised at Peshawar on 1 February 1942 as the third operator of the Lysander. The core of the squadron was made up of the pilots who returned via the middle east after an year long stint with the RAF fighter command in 1941 in the UK. Plt Offrs MM Latif, Edwin Nazirullah and MS Pujji were the first to report from this lot, they were followed in later days by Plt Offrs Ranjan Dutt , Shiv Dev Singh and OP Sanghi. Habib Ullah Khan, a Cranwell trained officer formally took command on the 12 February. " http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/IAF/History/1940s/Lysander02.html But are Indians relevant to the book??
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Indian_Air_Force I had no ideea it was of 1932 origin!. If the author wishes to stray into seniority territory vis a vis The Navy and Army I would mention that both had fairly senior officers and indeed a colonial governor. I have a copy of the 1939 "Flying Reference Book" which has nothing useful on colour but is intriguing for being pre-war guide to aviation. The BBC had its own flying club at Redhill!!.
-
The full shortlist and their share of the vote:
1) Goblinproofing One's Chicken Coop by Reginald Bakeley (Conari Press) 38%
2) How Tea Cosies Changed the World by Loani Prior (Murdoch Books) 31%
3) God's Doodle: The Life and Times of the ***** by Tom Hickman (Square
Peg) 14%
4) How to Sharpen Pencils by David Rees (Melville House) 13%
5) Was Hitler Ill? by Hans-Joachim Neumann and Henrik Eberle (Polity Press)
3%
6) Lofts of North America: Pigeon Lofts by Jerry Gagne (Foy's Pet Supplies)
1%
And you can read more here:
http://www.thebookseller.com/news/goblinproofing-ones-chicken-coop-wins-diagram-prize.html
-
Nice map/chart?.
I have a this book which is interesting on early travel.
http://www.questia.com/library/407387/touring-in-1600-a-study-in-the-development-of-travel
-
I side with the comments about the terrain. I think BF made a major error by having Normandy as the first in the series as it is expecting new players to the system to deal with by far the hardest terrain. It would have been a big ask even if the game system had been up to scratch which it was not.
However we have now reached V2. But lets face it given the choice most real soldiers in WW2, I suspect, and most gamers prefer not to operate in a claustrophobic environment.
-
Seems the BBC have picked up omit also with an article today:
By the time of the election in November 1968, LBJ had evidence Nixon had sabotaged the Vietnam war peace talks - or, as he put it, that Nixon was guilty of treason and had "blood on his hands".The BBC's former Washington correspondent Charles Wheeler learned of this in 1994 and conducted a series of interviews with key Johnson staff, such as defence secretary Clark Clifford, and national security adviser Walt Rostow.
But by the time the tapes were declassified in 2008 all the main protagonists had died, including Wheeler.
-
CMAK for me : )
-
To be honest I am very surprised that most contributors here has not already got a copy, or at least have a large enough WW2 library that the stories are not new and therefore did not feel the need to buy it.
But perhaps I am very book oriented.
-
The Companion is excellent reading and I would recommend it to anyone.
The problem appears to be the shipping costs being disproportionately high. Has anyone investigated the chances of slipping them across them in bulk to a reseller in Europe and Canada? I was in New Brunswick in October so somebody giving me 50 copies coming up from Maine [OK so its an 8 hour round trip to Woodstock but ..] I could be selling them here against receipt of funds.
How many are left?
-
I have heard it said that the British defended the slab nature of the tank armour on the bais that in combat it would rarely be perpendicular to an enemy gun. Literally true but one feels it may be a post-event rationalisation.
The Valentine did actually have curved armour. I do have an English tank commanders memoir where he retreats from the enemy firing over the back deck. As he put it it had more slope than the front and he liked the idea of having armour and the engine between him and the enemy. The difference in speeds between a Valentinne in reverse and full speed across country probably being reasonable it does make some sense.
Now whether someone took this view for the Archer design .... : ) I kid.
-
I read the article linked below today and wondered how one deals with people in power who misuse it. Apparently Nixon prolonged the Vietnam war by sabotaging the 1967 Vietnamese peace talks on the premise it would help his election prospects. Now if we can get back to milk conspiracies .... : )
-
The growth of towns and cities is quite an interesting subject. The necessity of a town within half a days travel was quite an important driver to expand commerce from the village. All other things being equal you could find towns a certain distance from each other being twice a half days travel. Obviously towns themselves had reasons to be where they were - good communications, river for travel or crossing, a pass, or raw resources. Salt being one of the prime ones from earliest times. You can download free travel books and my favourite for travel descriptions and a very clever plot is "The Lightning Conductor" by C.N & A.M Williamson October 1902. I have the eighth edition dated November 1904. http://www.gutenberg.org/files/33845/33845-h/33845-h.htm For context: " By the start of the 20th century, the automobile industry was beginning to take off in Western Europe, especially in France, where 30,204 were produced in 1903, representing 48.8% of world automobile production that year."
-
Travel in the US from 1800. Though an obvious booboo is that there were no trains in the US in 1800 and few in 1830 so despite the blurb it is not just trains being considered. : ) " This first map from the 1932 Atlas of the Historical Geography of the United States shows the rate of travel by rail from New York City in 1800. " http://www.treehugger.com/slideshows/public-transportation/how-fast-could-you-travel-across-usa-1800s/page/2/#slide-top
-
This came up yesterday and I took the novel approach of actually reading the proposal. First and foremost is that nobody is trying to change the definition of milk or add any hidden ingredients.
I am impressed that you take the words above from the link as being the final word. I too read the application before posting originally and see it as an example of weaseling of the highest order. Milk apparently can contain nutritive additives without mentioning it in the name and now we are looking at a request that non-nutitrives can be added also without providing any warning to the casual consumer. And not just milk but 17 other products.
Now I may be daft but I like foods to say what they are and when it is a natural product like water, milk , eggs if there is any tweaking I want to know about it. And I do not mean by reading the list of ingredients on what should be a fundamentally pure product.
It does seem to slide past people that the amount of consumer time devoted to reading small labels with ingredients might be better served if there were some categories of food which were ALWAYS know to be pure.
So to "promote honesty and fair dealing" a natural product can also be adulterated and sold under the same word. If they truly cared for honesty why not actually categorise milk and sweetened milks. If you care to buy a sweetened milk then you know to read the label.
-
-
I see that the US Dairy industry is asking for milk to be redefined so that added sweetners would not be mentioned as an ingredient! Cute.
One of the applicants is the grandly named:
International Dairy Foods Association
which actually seems to be solely US companies and includes the like of Abbott Labratories. Anyway I am sure there is an uproar in the US but perhaps not as it will only affect milk and 17 other milk based foods.
One of the sweetners that could be added is aspartme which has quite a catalogue of doubts. As you are what you eat it does seem that a great con is being had on the general population.
But bear in mind the good intentions of the lobby:
Finally, IDFA and NMPF argue that the proposed amendments to the milk standard of identity would promote honesty and fair dealing in the marketplaceYou could not make it up could you!
-
-
Ah yes the Chinese versus the Japs and perhaps also the early and late Russian battles. COuld be some serious mileage in the Chinese market. : )
-
And then its not only drones but also people who drone on and on on their on-line accounts
It is going to be a very complex problem and I can see that the drone manufacturers and the gun industry would both probably the fruits of a continued stand-off. As for enforcing any public land/private land border shootings ..... nightmare.
Gustav Line - Shipping Costs
in Combat Mission Fortress Italy
Posted
Just to show I care and that with goodwill most things can be accomplished.
From a UK consumer site
Personally I think this guy and his family watch way way too much trashy TV
Come to think of it I like Cnadian broadcasting so why I am suggesting watching US pulp I have no idea: (