Flyby PC

Just a distinction Duce, the nanny state isn't the welfare system, but health and safety requirements which fly in the face of common sense. One example would be kids forced to wear goggles when playing conkers, or teachers having to stand back and watch somebody being assaulted because they're not allowed to lay a hand on the bully. - There are some nanny overtones about paying tax to support spongers who get everything on a plate, but the NHS is something quite separate from that kind of welfare. The 'nanny' sentiment is most commonly expressed when there's a feeling the system has gone to far, or over-reacted. It isn't the system itself, but where the system has failed or got something wrong. I don't buy your self help argument. It's what I meant when I said rich folks will be hiring mercenaries because the army is under funded. It's a delusion. They might feel better about it in the short term, but you don't get a better army out of it, but fractured and ineffective bands of militia all pulling in different directions to suit their own agenda. Who pays for research? A good big 'un is always better than a good little 'un as they say. Don't you think it's fairer for everybody to pay a little less into a collective kitty which supports a centralised army and/or system of healthcare which is open, fair and free to all? And nor do I buy your 'teaching a man to fish' argument either. You're actually expressing a socialist concept which has nothing to do with free market economics. In a ruthless free market economy, why should I as teacher, forfeit my time to teach somebody else to fish? The hungier he gets, the more I can charge per lesson, and if he actually starves to death then there's all the more fish for me and my family. Besides, if I teach him how to fish, he might start teaching others and then I'm out of a job. Teach him to fish? Don't be daft. Fk 'em. He can come and buy my fish, today, and tomorrow, and the day after .....That's the free market economy for you. Teach a man to shoot buffalo, and he'll feed his family for what, about 100 years or so, and see the last 30 million buffalo wiped out to virtual extinction inside 10 years. Self reliant pioneers alright....... of unregulated free market economics.

A small extract from the Declaration of Arbroath, 6th April 1320, six years after Bannockburn. (A letter to the Pope written in Latin and signed by 38 Scots Lords. It is formal affirmation of Scotland's independence which was recognised by the Pope). Yet if he (meaning King Robert the Bruce) should give up what he has begun, and agree to make us or our kingdom subject to the King of England or the English, we should exert ourselves at once to drive him out as our enemy and a subverter of his own rights and ours, and make some other man who was well able to defend us our King; for, as long as but a hundred of us remain alive, never will we on any conditions be brought under English rule. It is in truth not for glory, nor riches, nor honours that we are fighting, but for freedom -- for that alone, which no honest man gives up but with life itself. Quite similar expressions of sentiment don't you think? I cannot help but wonder what such people would think about our current 'democracy'.

Another belated thought on the matter regarding medical insurance... We've had the NHS in the UK for 62 years, and now we all complain about the 'nanny' state we live in. But take a moment, - it wasn't the NHS who invented the concept, but private Insurance companies trying to avoid payouts by off loading liability back onto the victim, and more particularly the victims employer. (The employer MUST have insurance by law - coincidence???). It's a direct consequence of that, that we're now living in a 'nanny state' world which they've conspired to create. We don't live in natural fear we might be injured, but the contrived fear we might be sued. If we're collectively sick of being fleeced for cash and treated like idiots, then lets be certain we all agree where the blame lies. If a American national health service takes power away from these insurance companies, then as far as I can see, that has to be a step in the right direction.

Its more complicated than a one tick answer Rabu. I can only speak personally, but simulators which go out of their way to put similar issues in your head which the real servicemen had to face for real are a very good thing. I know they cannot recreate everything, but they are faithful in what they can. As for shoot 'em ups and entertainment games, I don't know. They don't interest me, but I don't see them as harmful either. When I was a nipper, we'd all run about for fun playing Jerries and British with pretend machine guns. We'd all kill each other millions of times, shooting and bayoneting each other regularly, and all just for a laugh. Are PC games any different? Well yes, less social interaction with your buddies, much less exercise, and more powerful images of violence, but 'different' isn't necessarily all bad. As the saying goes, all things in moderation....

I was just browsing, and came across this. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cordite It's interesting(ish) to learn the finer points about making cordite, but wouldn't you just love to be a member of the "Explosives Committee"? Dirty job but somebody's got to do it..... (Piccy is a WW1 British 18 pounder field gun shrapnel round BTW).

Thanks, but I meant an 'in game' window with the skin mapped onto the aircraft - not a separate viewer.

Apologies if this has been discussed before, (and further apologies if you can do this already but I just haven't seen the button), but can I make a request for a modification to the workshop? Would it be possible to include a window or pop up to preview an aircraft's skin while you're in the workshop? There are masses of different skins to choose from, but personally, I feel the absence of a quick preview, not just to help pick skins I want, but also to cycle through the list for interest's sake. Seems to be a lot of work which might not otherwise get the exposure it fully deserves. I also wonder whether you should be compiling a dossier of all your research, not just skins but everything, and get it in front of a publisher. That would make a superb book I for one would like to read.

That's cool Pol, totally relaxed about it - just an observation.

Haven't tested it in OFF lately, but when I made videos, you could see the prop move with an external view. If you were flying yourself, no auto pilot, you'd see your prop turning. Turn on auto pilot and it would stop. Took practice to 'fly' by proxy so the prop would keep turning.

Thanks for that Duce. So the actual healthcare itself is a side issue? Seems to me your enemy isn't national healthcare, but disreputable lawyers and insurance companies running out of control, abusing the system in their pursuit of profit at whatever cost. - Not unlike other 'untouchables' like the Banks, and we all know how well that one's turning out....

I had loads of fun in my Fiat 128. Looked like a Lada, but it was a great little car & quite nippy. Sit at 90 all day, and could sqeeze the ton if the hill was long and steep enough. I'll never forget driving 'the lads' back to Dundee at about 3am after a night out in Edinburgh. The heater was broken, and it was so cold my mate was spraying anti freeze on the inside of the windscreen so I could see where I was going. (Not kidding). We passed a cop car doing about 85, and just kept the foot down. If he didn't stop us for speeding, we'd be home that much quicker, and if he did stop us for speeding, then a night in the cells couldn't possibly be any colder and more miserable than the remainder of the journey. Have to admit I've had loads of laughs in my various Landrovers over the years. Drove one for about a month with only 1st and 4th gear and no clutch. That was a real laugh in heavy traffic. Absolutely hilarious. Landrover used to advertise 'every journey was an adventure'. Yup, certainly was for that month.

I'm not being political, but can somebody explain the US hostility towards a National Health Service? I don't get it. In the UK, part of your tax pays for the NHS so medical care is free. It's like buying a lottery ticket when you can't lose. If you need medical treatment, you get it. If you don't need any treatment, you still have the peace of mind of knowing help is there if you ever do need it. If you want to pay twice for private medicine then that's up to you. But follow the logic, and rich people will soon be hiring mercenaries because they think the army is under funded. God forbid they may have to wait to be defended! Would I trust the NHS over and above private health care? Absolutely. The NHS is there to get me better, not to profit from my misfortune for the benefit of shareholders. People run down the UK NHS because it's chronically under funded and fails people from time to time, but don't be fooled. The NHS is a wonderful institution and something the UK should rightly be very proud of and fight hard to defend. My grandpa on my mother's side went self employed in his own timber yard in the late 40's. Unfortunately, shortly afterwards, he fed his fingers into a saw and lost three of them. I don't recall the details exactly, but an important letter hadn't been sent, either the insurance form or maybe registration for the NHS. Bottom line is he lost out big time. He got nothing. No payout, no compensation, lost the yard, his livelihood and such like, and life became a lot tougher for my gran. He was a grizzley old git. When I was a toddler I used to suck my index finger all the time as kiddies do, but grandpa would jank my finger out my mouth and wave his stumps at me saying that's what happened if you sucked your fingers too much. Old git. Scared the life out me. (Stopped sucking my finger though).

Nearly right ... Correct book, p150. It wasn't an officer but a sergeant who shot them for ignoring his order to halt. He was court martialled and lost a stripe. Hard to believe life was ever so cheap.

UK tried that, with the Fair Play on Fuel protests back in 2000, but caved in on the brink of victory when they felt they'd made their point. Govt proceeded to make 'contingencies', such as storing more fuel, (oh, and confiscating driving liscences from protestors), to ensure they wouldn't be caught on the hop again. Fuel was then around 80p / litre. Fuel is now 118p / litre, and going up again.

I read somewhere.... (Did read it, forget which book). The British sappers who dug the British mines were sometimes taken straight from the coal face, stuck in a uniform and taken to the front line. They weren't proper soldiers, they were only there to dig and weren't trained to fight or even wear their uniform correctly. On one occassion, two walked past an officer without saluting. The officer took offence at their general demeanor and apparent lack of respect so he shot them on the spot. I think I read it in Forgotten Voices - compiled by Max Arthur, but wouldn't swear to it ....

Greed isn't new. Not so long ago the sun never set on the British Empire. I think the problem is the level of expectation we have. We expect we'll be able to afford to buy a house. We expect we'll be able to afford a car. We expect there'll be a place at University for our children. We expect we'll have a good pension when we retire. In the past, people might hope for these things, but wouldn't take any of them for granted. In 1953, the percentage of home ownership in the UK was 35%. It's now 70%, and we're constantly reminded how first time buyers need to get on the property ladder now or fall into the bottomless pit of despair. We're encouraged to raise our aspirations higher and higher, and it's this which makes our society so easy to manipulate and exploit. We all need to start living within our means, - whatever those means are. Money you borrow is never yours. Once your in debt, 'they've' got you.

When I see people lining up to get into £900,000.00 of debt to buy a crappy house costing £350,000.00, which I reckon costs less than £100,000.00 to build with a 50 year design lifespan, you don't have to be a genius to realise it's going to end in tears. Why is it worth £350,000.00? - because the one next door is! Yeah???? What I find depressing is the same clowns in suits who created this house of cards are lauded as the experts who're going to fix everything. The solution isn't difficult. If you want to buy something for £350,000.00, first of all have £350,000.00, and secondly, make sure what you're buying is actually worth £350,000.00. You'll sleep like a baby.

It's that man Tochy again. Absolutely superb. http://www.k4.dion.ne.jp/~suppon/

Never seen these before, but they are superb. 10/10 for Ronny Bar.

Just for a minute there I was back in a mathematics class at school, complete with the bearly audible whistle of things going over my head.

Hope it's not a spoiler for you, but prior to reading this, I didn't appreciate pilots could 'see' artillery shells at the top of their trajectory. - You couldn't make up that kind of detail unless you'd actually been there....

Everybody's at it..... Snipe, Snipe, Snipe, Dumbledor.....

Going off on a tangent, what is it with the names for these aircraft? A snipe is a harmless little wading bird, not some blood and guts air warrior like a Goshawk or Sparrowhawk or something. A camel? Ok, maybe the fuselage has a bit of a hump, but what's particularly warlike about a flying into battle on a camel? You're going to burp and smell on the enemy? (No offense to any Bedouin pilots who happen to be watching). Pup? Aw, give it a biscuit. Dolphin? Go get 'em Flipper. Tabloid? ...... I give up. Were these names supposed to appear harmless in their packing crate as in calling landships 'tanks'? Sad but true, even later, they very nearly called the Spitfire the 'Shrew'. Somehow "Achtung Shrew!" doesn't get the blood pumping. Was there a policy for naming these aircraft? I'm not overly impressed with Mosquito, but then I do know the Scottish Midge, and you do from time to time get some nasty twin engined little f*!"ers.

Hmmmmmm. Have you read the petition? "...By using the planned version of DRM, people will likely not by (buy) games they want to, or simply pirate them instead". "....Those unwilling to accept the DRM measures are more likely to then turn to piracy". IMHO the wording goes too far, and even by citing possible piracy, it may even cross the border into Extortion County. 'Extortion is a criminal offense which occurs when a person unlawfully obtains either money, property or services from a person, entity, or institution, through coercion'. As I read it, the petition says Dear Ubisoft, if we don't get what we want, some of us may resort to piracy, and it'll all be your own fault. - That is coercion, piracy is unlawful, so if so inclined, you could interpret that petition as one definition of extortion. OK it's a very mild form of extortion, but it's extortion all the same. The idea itself of having a petition is sound, it's just this one is very badly worded IMHO. If you want to complain about DRM, keep it simple. Dear Ubisoft, I don't like DRM. I think it breaches my privacy. If you keep using it, I'll stop buying your products. Love and kisses, FlybyPC. - The end.

I was looking at the picture wondering where everybody was. It seemed rather bold to be taking photographs of an aircraft production line while everybody was having a tea break. Good way to get yourself shot as a spy I reckoned. No mystery when you see the date...