Flyby PC

The roof is where our theory breaks down a bit. Timber trusses are hard to beat, and there's nothing better we can contribute from the stone world. But, if we know we can confine the timber related problems to the roof, then at least we are still reducing dependancy on a perishable material. If you don't heat your roof space, you can ventilate the loft to your hearts content and control the rot that way. Many old churches which have lain derelict for decades with the rain poring in still have roof timbers sound as a bell because there is so much free air movement. Fire remains a risk, but you're not losing your whole building, just the roof. With our system, the only fire which would reach the roof is one that started there, and that means people are still able to get out, and firemen have less fear of collapsing floors, and have a stable refuge from which to attack the fire. I didn't know that about the truss plates in the roof trusses. They are common here too, but the press release always stresses that they make a stronger joint than the timber itself, - it's never mentions the performance in a fire. I'm not keen on pre-fab trusses anyway because the wood they are made from is so close to kindling.Perhaps they reckon by the time a fire get's to the roof it's already game over too. There is also an argument you could make that you do want your roof to burn quicky, so toxic fumes and heat are discharged outside where they are less harmful, and not allowed to build up momentum in a confined space. I'm not anti-timber. I actually want timber doors and windows, with all the maintenance and problems that go with them. There's something souless and sterile about uPVC, but bespoke doors and windows made by proper craftsmen just can't be beaten. I wish somebody would re-invent the concept of prestige when designing buildings. We wouldn't be moved to buy a car because it was cheap and easy to build. We'd all be driving Trabants which all looked the same, not so very unlike modern housing.

We are actually experimenting with our stonework, because the big black mark against traditional stonework is that it's hopeless at keeping the heat in. However, by ditching traditional stonework, the building trade has thrown the baby out with the bath water. We have gone back to basics and found a way to make stonework work in a thermal way, so we enjoy all it's other benefits too. Unfortunately, because this is an innovation and a departure from the norm, surveyors take the attitude it's 'non-standard' construction, and people won't get a mortage to build a house. To get this to take off, we need to finance independent research to confirm what we already know, and despite what you may read about grant assistance being available to grow your business through innovation and training, promoting traditional crafts, and developing sustainabilty in the modern low carbon building industry, -it's all government propaganda, complete horses**t. Nobody will give our ideas the time of day, never mind some help. So be it. Fk 'em. We will do it ourselves, but that's when the credit crunch kicked our customers where it hurts, so with even less income available, the mountain we have to climb is bigger than ever. But I still think it's worth it. Just a pity we live in such a cheapskate country. @BH - Local material helps a lot, but we can do anything nowadays.If you have swamp, you likely have clay, and if you have clay, you could have brick. But, with your big US wagons hauling what, 30 tons plus? For your stone component I reckon you'd only need 2 wagons brought from your nearest quarry, - wherever that might be. You could even use river boulders, but you'd need a good mason to be sure it was done right, and that would take you down to a single load of stone. The harder bit would be the slab for the dressed stone for quoins and sills etc, but 5 tones of the right slab will be enough if you can get it there, but 5 tons is only 2 trips with a trailer on the van.

Timber frame in this country is meant to be protected with firestops, every 6m in any one direction, around all openings and changes of direction, and at floor levels. But being there, and being functional are not the same thing. A firestop is typically a 50x50mm timber batten with some DPC (damp proof course) wrapped around it, and it's intended to prevent smoke and flame spreading out of control. But, it only works if the cavity is sealed, but it isn't sealed by design with slot vents in the cladding, and in specific regard to the firestops and the quality of air tight seal depends how close the cladding abutts the firestop. In my experience, the gap, particularly with stone which is open 'cupped' at the back, leaves such gaps that the firestop will be significantly compromised. If it isn't air tight, it isn't smoke tight, and if smoke gets past, so does heat. Bear in mind, any weakness, and in this locality this means undesired air flow, the air is going to rush through the bottleneck like a river pinched between rocks, and thus fan and oxygenate any flame which is there. Furthermore, the modern drive for thermal perfomance means often insulation is Polystyrene based rather than mineral wool, but increasingly sheep's wool is used. Now these often have flame retarders added so won't burn themselves, but they will still distort and shrink away from a flame leaving that part of a frame which is supposed to be filled as an open chimney like void. The Building standards are designed to inhibit fire long enough to give you time to get out. They may or may not actually do this. But as a minimum requirement, I feal for the time and stability it will take to escape a five storey block of flats, and I also fear for the safety of any fire or rescue teams who may be required to enter the burning building to save people, and lastly, no part of these standards is dedicated towards actually saving your property. You're going to have a life long dependancy on property insurance. If you have the choice to build something other than timber frame, I would recommend that you do it. @ UKW - Depends what you mean by timber chalet. If you mean a log cabin, you'll be fine. The timber used for them is solid and won't burn as such, but will char at a rate of 1/2 inch per hour. Big heavy timbers are fine in a fire, and structurally often performing much, much better than steel. Timber frame however is not 'big timber' but typically pared right down to the minimum section which is structurally viable. This means its wood has a greater % surface area exposed, will burn quicker, and reach the point of failure that much faster. And certainlty in the UK, the timber used in structural frames is fast grown low density pine which is just not the stuff used in traditional joinery, and nothing like the slow grown timber dense pine grown in Scandinavia. Don't be too dispondent about what I've said, because you're not going to get trapped in a chalet, and if you've a fire, you have a fighting chance to get out. What I object to is the modern practice of general house construction, where people think they're building an asset to hand down to their kids. These traditional types of property are not currently being built. Personally, I don't think people are getting value for money, but neither the market, property surveyors, nor the Building Standards Authorities are listening to the likes of me. We're a voice in the wilderness with nobody buying into our message. Architects don't like us because we can ask them awkward questions. With regards cost, it depends. If you were building a timber frame property with stone cladding, stone quions, sills, lintels etc I could build you something much more durable for the same money. We use structural masonry to the fullest extent possible, with traditional heartening. We will use a highter tonnage of stone, but only that which you see is the more expensive finishing quality stone, the rest is rough rubble and offcuts at £14 a ton, it's not going to break the bank. For general purpose rubble, you'll likely pay more for the haulage than you will for the purchase. It might take me longer to build it, but nobody has ever given me a watertight reason why that should really matter in the long run. We like to think we have a contract with your grand kids.

You're correct Tamper, I was indeed looking at a 9 pin serial... So that means the only graphics I have on my PC is the graphics card, 2 of which don't work, which is either really unlucky, or the problem is something more complicated. I wonder if a small tap with a hammer might help....

OK, so it seems it isn't the graphics card. I've exchanged the graphics card for another, and there's still no signal going to the monitor. I'll have to get male & female VGA cable and see if the on board graphics works. What a pain in the jacksie. Getting the DT's from not flying....

You know what scares me? In this country, people now build 5 storey flats out of timber frame. If the moisture content of the timber anywhere in the building is 30% or over, (say like under the shower tray, or where condensation drips off the WC cistern, or even the bowl where people 'miss'), - that timber will be consumed by dry rot. If the moisture content is between 15% to 30 %, it won't be consumed by rot, but the rot fungus itself will survive and be sustained indefinitely while it seeks out more moisture. To avoid rot, a timber frame seeks to keep it's timber dry, with a moisture content below 15% and it does this by ventilating the cavity. That timber is going to be dry, with ventilation present to all recesses, a bit like a chimney, and if it ever does catch fire, it's going burn like a firework, and if you survive you still have your mortgage but you don't have a house. With our stonework construction, we can get a U value better than the 0.24 we require, but nothing in our wall fabric will rot or burn. - Correction, our insulation would burn, but it has a minimum of 200mm non flammable masonry protecting it so flames can't reach it to set it alight. Even if it did burn somehow, nothing falls down and your home survives. We have no timber floors or lintels, but concrete. We have no timber dry linings internally, not even traditional lathe below the plaster, - we plaster on the hard. Our buildings are not going to rot, and they're not going to burn, and we hope they'll stand proud for 200 years plus. What people put in them is another story, but at least we're trying to do our bit as stonemasons. Timber frame dwellings? Maybe they are quick to erect, but I'm sorry, speaking as a stonemason, I'm just not interested in owning one, never mind building one.

So what actually killed him? I know the ejector seat blew, but isn't that supposed to be surviveable? I assume the canopy didn't blow, but I would have thought the canopy glass blowing out would be linked to the ejector seat detonation as a failsafe. I seem to recall hearing that after an ejection, pilots can suffer spinal compression injuries with the sheer acceleration. Perhaps if the ejection came with no warning, he wasn't sitting primed and ready for it to happen and simply broke his neck. This fatal accident must have been desperately close to a surviveable incident. Whatever the cause, it must be awful for his family. Such a waste of a great pilot.

....Hmmmm, somewhere in the household we have an aluminium letter opener which is made from an airship. Only saw it when I was a kid, but there was some 'momento' value to it but I forget what exactly. All I can say is it sounds a lot more impressive than it looks, if memory serves correctly.

Not saying it's faked, but for somebody in a panic, his camera stays pretty steady.... Let's just say I'm a tiny, tiny, tiny bit suspicious. If that was me, F!!*"%! the camera! I'd have ripped that pilot out his harness and be climbing over him to get hold of the controls.

There's definitely something about colour.... Did anybody else read the bit about the French Poilus? I knew they were called Poilus, but never knew why. "Poilus" (hairy) is the nickname to French WWI soldiers, since they could not afford the luxury of regular shaving. It is a term of affection, especially now.

It's only wrong if you're caught.

There is a VGA slot for onboard graphics but wouldn't you know it, it's a male to male connection for all 3 of the VGA cables I have. I also have a 256 graphics card, but it doesn't fit the slot. Sigh.... Think calm thoughts, ....It's just one of those Mondays....

I'd like to volunteer myself as the worlds worst diary keeper. In my 45 years, the longest I've maintained any written record is about 3 or 4 days. I must have some 'issue' in my personality, because I know it's ok to forget a few days, and simply go back to it or leave a gap, and keep up from that point forward. I don't know if it's OCD or being a perfectionist, but for me that would be a diary with a gap, and it's no good, - as a diary your document is fatally flawed forevermore. Whether that's the reason I let it go, or just the excuse it doesn't change anything. You resolve to start all over again - 1st January next year. I don't know what that says about me, probably nothing good, but my inability to keep a diary comes from deep within and hasn't changed in any way or capacity in all of those 45 years through good times and bad, happy or sad. I do 'get' the new ledger excitement, and having a good quality ledger and the opportunity to fill those crisp inviting pages full of something that really interests you. I can and do feel that intensely,....but only for 3 or 4 days. I don't find my past is exceptionally dull, but reading my own words about my own past I just find is incredibly dull. When I read my own diarys I don't find myself recalling the events which happened, instead I find myself recalling what I was thinkig when writing the words down. It's like trying to read a badly written novel when you already know how it ends. I salute you gents. I envy your capacity to do it and your dedication.

For a football governing body, they don't seem particularly up to speed with the concept of scoring own goals. I think that's utterly disgraceful, almost as obscene as the money footballers earn. FIFA - a four letter word beginning with F.

You know if somebody phoned me up and said they were leaving again in five minutes, but needed a spare passenger for ballast, I'd drop everything to go along. I frankly cannot think of a better way to spend 16 hours and 27 minutes.

Stumbled across this on my travels, and I thought it might interest the skinners amongst us. They are 1918 -1920 skins of aircraft relating to the smaller nations trying to establish their nationalist identity post collapse of the pre WW1 Russian Empire... http://worldatwar.net/chandelle/v2/v2n3/whitfalc.html

Thanks for that Hasse Wind. I have to admit it's not a part of history, nor indeed a part of the world I know much about. I also recently learned that the Germans actually encouraged the Russian Revolution, assisting Lenin get to Moscow etc, in order to destabilise Russia, and have them removed from the War. Sometimes there is just so much history, it's a challenge just to know where to begin....

Its the Finnish and Latvian swastikas that struck me. I didn't realise the blue swastika was nothing to do with the Nazis. I know the symbol itself has ancient wider 'positive' and good luck meanings, but I'd always assumed it was the Nazi's who had first adopted the swastika [n their aircraft, and the Fins who copied it since they shared a common enemy in the Russians. I've obviously been quite wrong. The Fins were not simply 'blue Nazis'. Sorry Finlands Air Force, I've been getting that wrong for years....

Doesn't take fancy graphics to guarantee a good game. Many Moons ago I liked UFO - Enemy Unknown. By todays standards, you'd laugh / cringe at the graphics, but it was still fun to play long after many other slicker looking games came out. And all of it packed into 4Mb!!! Could never decide if I liked the Psionic weapon to kidnap the bad guys and make them blow themselves up, or the programmeable rocket launcher you could plan where the route it would follow and divert around corners and blow things up big style. Ah, they don't make them like they used to...

Miss.

Just been learning some things about my Dad's picture of the British Fleet anchored in Gibraltar in 1938. I'll spare you the dull searching information story, it interests me but won't you, but I recently found this site, and in particular some pictures in the Higginson Part 6 collection. There is a picture there taken by Jim Higginson from HMS Hood, of four capital ships which he names. I've checked the profiles of the ships to confirm, and I'm happy to say thats 6 of the big ships positively named in my dads pic. I now know HMS Rodney from her sistership HMS Nelson, HMS Warspite I hadn't a name for, but I thought HMS Malaya might have been been HMS Barham. I actually had HMS Royal Oak correct!!! Even Hood I thought I had right, but there is a very similar ship to Hood behind Hood, and still at sea. Jim Higginson also has a picture of HMS Repulse with the red white and blue neutrality turret, so Repulse must be in there too somewhere... I count at least three County Class heavy cruisers, I'm guessing that by the three funnels and size, but County class breaks down into three sub-classes, Kent London and Norkolk, and I can't tell class from class, nevermind ship from ship. Edit - London class had 2 funnels, so assuming these are either Kent Class or Norfolk class, there are 9 alternatives to pick. I'm hoping some of the Hood veterans might recall some additional names. The only slightly sour note is the picture Jim Higginson has of the fleet, and the fact it's taken from a similar viewpoint as my fathers picture. What this unfortunately has to mean is that my father wasn't flying over the fleet in his Swordfish as we always assumed, but the picture is taken from a vantage point on the Rock itself. That's a bit of a bummer, but I'll get over it, it's still a great picture. It actually solves two mysteries, - first, how he took such a good panorama shot while flying at speed, and second, why his logbook never mentioned flying over the whole fleet. Initially, we didn't even know where the picture was taken, and we all took it for given that the picture came from an aircraft. I'm sorry the picture is so big, but it's just so you can read the names I've found out. Woops forgot the link - http://www.hmshood.c.../higginson6.htm This is good too - http://www.hmshood.c...l/percival2.htm Melville Percival has a picture with HMS Glorious berthed, whereas she is still at sea in my dad's pic.

My Dad's logbook also has numerous entries marked as HF for anti aircraft artillery, the HF I'm sure standing for Height Finding. You can work out what that means the same as I can, but I'm not sure if that also used some piece of ranging equipment or aid to work out geometry. A ranging compass or Azimuth detector perhaps. Here is a picture of a compass for navigating by the stars. Had a hunt for more pictures, and this is interesting with regards anti aircraft artillery equipment. http://www.lonesentry.com/manuals/88mm-antiaircraft-gun/german-artillery-fire-control-equipment.html Speaking of the Battle of the River Plate, it's on TV again later today. I shall consider it vital homework to watch it again, then update my list of spares for a Swordfish cockpit.

Those mountings? Courtesy of the CO, Royal Navy Historic Flight, Yeovilton, (who fly historic Swordfish):- The mountings you are interested in would have been used for all manner of things! During operational service they would have held a further compass or searchlight (even signal light) to allow the Telegraphist Air Gunner (TAG) to search the ocean.

How neat to bring things back to WW1 aviation relevance. That second carrier we've found, HMS Furious? She was the carrier which launched the two flights of Sopwith Camels which bombed the Zeppelin base at Tondern in July 1918, - the first ship borne strike force in naval aviation history. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tondern_raid

Thanks BH. Those accommodation hulks remind me of the frigate, HMS Unicorn in Dundee. She's a 19th Century warship which is now used for functions. Many years ago, there was a party on the Unicorn. Me and my mates were a bit early and it was a bit quiet, so we left the party to head into town for a few more drinks. When we returned later on, the party was heaving, and it had got so busy there were bouncers on the door only letting people on as people came off. We couldn't get in. Thing is, one of my mates who'd already been inside had left his jacket on board, and now couldn't get in to get it. Being a little the worse for drink, he decides to knock on the window to ask someone inside to bring out his coat. It was a private function, so we knew lots of people on board. Thing is, Unicorn is a ship, in a harbour, with an 8 - 10 feet gap between ship and dry land which is filled with a little bit of the North Sea. In his defence, it was dark, but as my mate walked forward to tap on the window, just like the roadrunner cartoons he walked into space and plonked himself in the drink. I remember his hand being raised to tap on the window - all the way down until he hit the water. We all lined the quayside, til up he came gurgling "I'm up, Im up I'm alright", as he started to swim. We noticed some steps further along and told him to swim in that direction, and I jumped down on some platform to help him out the water. We'd been very lucky I know, but we fished him out without any problem. However, as we climbed back up the stairs two of my other mates were in a pitched battle with the bouncers, who'd apparently called my mate an 'arse' for jumping in the harbour. So next we had to calm that down, but then heard the sirens of the cops coming so we all just legged it. We'd just reached the harbour gates when three cop cars arrived, and I swear it's true, they stopped beside my mate who'd been in the water, and asked him if he'd seen 'some nutter' jumping in the harbour. My mate, still dripping, raised his dripping arm to point and said "yes officer, he went that way!" and off shot these three police cars to look for him as we all disappeared into the night. We hadn't actually done anything wrong, (apart from a little boxing with the bouncers but even that was self defence), but we reckoned explaining ourselves in Bell Street nick just wasn't the ideal way to end the evening. So like the responsible citizens we were, we all did the decent thing and ran away as fast as our drunk little carcasses would let us. Funny? Well you had to be there perhaps, but yes. It was *!%*!! hilarious.