In message , at 15:55:43 on Wed, 22 Jun
2016, d remarked:

I've spent enough time studying all of those to "get" them, and also
know how to find someone to do this week's implementation.

So if someone asked you to design a car engine or a class D audio amplifier
or a new forth bridge you wouldn't have a problem them?

We were taught enough about structures (and did a first year project
designing a cantilever) that I could have done the latter, and did work
professionally in the design of audio amps back in the mid-70's. Today
I'd know where to look for those with up to date skills because these
days I'm more of a project manager than a hands-on engineer.
--
Roland Perry

On Wed, 22 Jun 2016 21:15:02 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
Yes, there are two similar Class 139 PPM60 vehicles, both LPG powered, with
2.3l four cylinder industrial engines used to spin up the flywheel:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Class_139

I wonder why they didn't build an electric one. Have a contact shoe and short
piece of 3rd rail (of a design to keep HMRI or whoever happy) to charge up the
flywheel at each end.

battery to regenerate and store power. It sounds like a good idea, but
Parry hasn't managed to sell any more People Movers.

Probably not much of a market. For the sort of passenger numbers they carry
you might as well use a bus.

--
Spud

On Thu, 23 Jun 2016 00:15:08 +0100
JNugent wrote:
[material dishonestly and unconvincingly snipped by spud because he
couldn't deal with it]

ITYM because it was BS.

Oh right, glad we cleared that up. So its just supposition then.

I cleared up your lie about "suddenly", which was entirely your word,
never mine.

So when will they go up? You're the economic expert and so sure about it so
fill us in. Airlines are a good example of where supply drives demand, not
the other way around.

So many claim. If the enviroment goes tits up no amount of Adam Smiths or
Keynes or Friedmans will be riding to the rescue.

"If".

Well its doing a pretty good warm up act in the last few decades.

I care about my kids future. You only apparently give a **** about yourself
and your cheap holidays. I wonder which one of us in the future would be
judged the selfish git?

Like I said, it's only "little people" you want priced out of travel.

Do you work on a farm? The number of straw men that keep popping up in your
arguments one has to wonder.

I don't care one way or the other about the price. I simply want the number
of flights in and out of the UK capped.

Or perhaps people like you should just keep your noses out of other
peoples' business?

If it negatively affects me and my descendents it IS my business.

Does that apply to everything that might affect you?

Yes.

Jawohl, mein Fuhrer.

Paging Mr Godwin...

You're the nazi hereabouts.

Oh, here he comes. I think he's brought his entire family to watch you
spectactularly lose any credibility you had in this.

--
Spud

On Thu, 23 Jun 2016 00:15:55 +0100
JNugent wrote:
On 22/06/2016 14:22, d wrote:
That would be at board level. The average project level manager just needs to
know how to use Word and powerpoint and how to pass the buck down the
heirarchy
effectively.

And is that why you ignore every law and tenet of economics?

What makes you think I'm a manager. Thats for the plodders who can no longer
cut it and need to be promoted out of harms way. Plus I can earn far more self
employed than most low and mid level managers and with half the stress.

--
Spud

wrote:
On Wed, 22 Jun 2016 21:15:02 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
Yes, there are two similar Class 139 PPM60 vehicles, both LPG powered, with
2.3l four cylinder industrial engines used to spin up the flywheel:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Class_139

I wonder why they didn't build an electric one. Have a contact shoe and short
piece of 3rd rail (of a design to keep HMRI or whoever happy) to charge up the
flywheel at each end.

The Parry People Mover has been promoted for a while and this was its first
production deployment. So it's more of a case of a technology seeking a
market, rather than a solution to this need. Without these rail buses, the
line will probably revert to using a class 53.

On 23/06/2016 09:32, d wrote:

JNugent wrote:

[material dishonestly and unconvincingly snipped by spud because he
couldn't deal with it]

[An he's now snipped even more context relating to things he can't deal
with. There's a surprise.]

ITYM because it was BS.

I meant what I said.

Oh right, glad we cleared that up. So its just supposition then.

I cleared up your lie about "suddenly", which was entirely your word,
never mine.

So when will they go up?

You must be referring to the inevitable rise in the price of airfares
after your desired restriction in supply. It is necessary to say that
because you've snipped the context (again).

A change in prices will occur when supply moves out of equilibrium with
demand. That will happen when the restriction is imposed. When will that
happen? Answer that and you have the answer to your question.

You're the economic expert and so sure about it so
fill us in. Airlines are a good example of where supply drives demand, not
the other way around.

You don't even know what that means.

So many claim. If the enviroment goes tits up no amount of Adam Smiths or
Keynes or Friedmans will be riding to the rescue.

"If".

Well its doing a pretty good warm up act in the last few decades.

Whatever that means.

I care about my kids future. You only apparently give a **** about yourself
and your cheap holidays. I wonder which one of us in the future would be
judged the selfish git?

Like I said, it's only "little people" you want priced out of travel.

Do you work on a farm? The number of straw men that keep popping up in your
arguments one has to wonder.

I don't care one way or the other about the price.

That is obvious. And it's because you don't care about the consumer.

I simply want the number of flights in and out of the UK capped.

And if it is capped, the price of airfares will rise (relative to other
prices, which is a way of saying "in real terms").

Why are you seeking to deny that?

You've already admitted *and* demonstrated that you don't understand,
and don't want to understand, the first few pages of Economics 101.

Or perhaps people like you should just keep your noses out of other
peoples' business?

If it negatively affects me and my descendents it IS my business.

Does that apply to everything that might affect you?

Yes.

[more snipping, by spud, of material he can't deal with.]

So you claim the right of an absolute ruler. No-one may do anything
which you think might affect you, withouit your permission.

Jawohl, mein Fuhrer.

Paging Mr Godwin...

You're the nazi hereabouts.

Oh, here he comes. I think he's brought his entire family to watch you
spectactularly lose any credibility you had in this.

Burned any good books lately?

The bits you ddon't understand, at least.

On 23/06/2016 09:37, d wrote:


JNugent wrote:
On 22/06/2016 14:22, d wrote:

That would be at board level. The average project level manager just needs to
know how to use Word and powerpoint and how to pass the buck down the
: heirarchy effectively.

And is that why you ignore every law and tenet of economics?

What makes you think I'm a manager.

I don't.

Thats for the plodders who can no longer
cut it and need to be promoted out of harms way. Plus I can earn far more self
employed than most low and mid level managers and with half the stress.

You don't say.

On Thu, 23 Jun 2016 09:27:35 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
wrote:

wrote:
On Wed, 22 Jun 2016 21:15:02 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
Yes, there are two similar Class 139 PPM60 vehicles, both LPG powered, with
2.3l four cylinder industrial engines used to spin up the flywheel:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Class_139

I wonder why they didn't build an electric one. Have a contact shoe and short
piece of 3rd rail (of a design to keep HMRI or whoever happy) to charge up the
flywheel at each end.

The Parry People Mover has been promoted for a while and this was its first
production deployment. So it's more of a case of a technology seeking a
market, rather than a solution to this need. Without these rail buses, the
line will probably revert to using a class 53.

Oops, class 153, obviously.

On Thu, 23 Jun 2016 11:16:53 +0100
JNugent wrote:
On 23/06/2016 09:32, d wrote:

JNugent wrote:

[material dishonestly and unconvincingly snipped by spud because he
couldn't deal with it]

[An he's now snipped even more context relating to things he can't deal
with. There's a surprise.]

I can't deal with your meandering opaque arguments, thats certainly true.

ITYM because it was BS.

I meant what I said.

I'm sure you did. Doesn't make it right.

A change in prices will occur when supply moves out of equilibrium with
demand. That will happen when the restriction is imposed. When will that
happen? Answer that and you have the answer to your question.

See below.


You're the economic expert and so sure about it so
fill us in. Airlines are a good example of where supply drives demand, not
the other way around.

You don't even know what that means.

Then you're a bit thick arn't you. No one was clamouring for 20 quid flights
to Bordeaux , there weren't street protests or questions in parliament about
the price of airfares or there being no routes to obscure airfields in the
middle of nowhere for Place In the Sun 2nd home owners. The cheap airlines came
along and created that market in the same way that coffee shop chains have
created the market for overpriced hot milk in a cardboard cup.

Well its doing a pretty good warm up act in the last few decades.

Whatever that means.

Moron. Can you use google?

I don't care one way or the other about the price.

That is obvious. And it's because you don't care about the consumer.

Consumerism is overated and is used as an easy prop for economies in the
dumps. Get idiots to buy **** they don't need over and over. Obviously
you're one of them.

I simply want the number of flights in and out of the UK capped.

And if it is capped, the price of airfares will rise (relative to other
prices, which is a way of saying "in real terms").

Why are you seeking to deny that?

I don't know, its not a shoe in. But as I've said, I don't care. Quality of
life for those of us who have to put up with the noise and pollution trumps
anything to do with ticket prices or shareholders dividends.

You've already admitted *and* demonstrated that you don't understand,
and don't want to understand, the first few pages of Economics 101.

Here's something for you pal:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BsthGCMCUAArhRe.png

Oh, here he comes. I think he's brought his entire family to watch you
spectactularly lose any credibility you had in this.

Burned any good books lately?

You sad little man.

--
Spud

On 23/06/2016 11:49, d wrote:

JNugent wrote:
On 23/06/2016 09:32, d wrote:
JNugent wrote:

[material dishonestly and unconvincingly snipped by spud because he
couldn't deal with it]

[An he's now snipped even more context relating to things he can't deal
with. There's a surprise.]

I can't deal with your meandering opaque arguments, thats certainly true.

You are the one who introduces the red herrings ("immediately", etc).

ITYM because it was BS.

I meant what I said.

I'm sure you did. Doesn't make it right.

A change in prices will occur when supply moves out of equilibrium with
demand. That will happen when the restriction is imposed. When will that
happen? Answer that and you have the answer to your question.

See below.

You're the economic expert and so sure about it so
fill us in. Airlines are a good example of where supply drives demand, not
the other way around.

You don't even know what that means.

Then you're a bit thick arn't you.

You can't read either.

It means that *you* are thick (I wouldn't jave put it that way, but
since you initiated it...).

No one was clamouring for 20 quid flights to Bordeaux ,

No-one was clamouring for Beatles LPs in 1960, either.

And for exactly thye same reason.

there weren't street protests or questions in parliament about
the price of airfares or there being no routes to obscure airfields in the
middle of nowhere for Place In the Sun 2nd home owners. The cheap airlines came
along and created that market in the same way that coffee shop chains have
created the market for overpriced hot milk in a cardboard cup.

There was already a market for flight.

But they were expensive and only the well-heeled (and business users)
were in that market.

What the entrepreneurs did was *reduce* the price, thereby increasing
the demand.

You'd know this if you'd bothered to study.

Well its doing a pretty good warm up act in the last few decades.

Whatever that means.

Moron. Can you use google?

I'm not running after you clearing up your mess.

I don't care one way or the other about the price.

That is obvious. And it's because you don't care about the consumer.

Consumerism is overated

I see.

and is used as an easy prop for economies in the
dumps. Get idiots to buy **** they don't need over and over. Obviously
you're one of them.

You are REALLy angry that ordinary people can travel nowadays, aren't you?

I simply want the number of flights in and out of the UK capped.

And if it is capped, the price of airfares will rise (relative to other
prices, which is a way of saying "in real terms").
Why are you seeking to deny that?

I don't know,

Ne'er a truer word...

its not a shoe in. But as I've said, I don't care.

You DO care.

You obviously care a lot.

Quality of life for those of us who have to put up with the noise and
pollution trumps anything to do with ticket prices or shareholders
dividends.

You see... the trouble is that it plainly *doesn't*.

Which is what has you in that almighty strop.

You've already admitted *and* demonstrated that you don't understand,
and don't want to understand, the first few pages of Economics 101.

Here's something for you pal:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BsthGCMCUAArhRe.png

No, thanks.

Oh, here he comes. I think he's brought his entire family to watch you
spectactularly lose any credibility you had in this.

Burned any good books lately?

You sad little man.

Nail on the head, eh?