In message
"Brian Watson" wrote:


"Graeme Wall" wrote in message
...
In message
"Clive Coleman." wrote:

In message , Graeme Wall
writes
You are definitely giving your age away! IIRC Whirlybirds was late 50s
and the machines used were Bell 47G 2 seaters (includes pilot, paint
first before assembly). Similar machine to the Sioux used in MASH.
I remember "Whirlybirds", the copter looked like a bubble with a tail
made of girder type structure.

That's the one!

Main characters were Chuck Martin and PT Moore, ISTR, though who played
them I can't recall.


How sad is this:

Chuck was played by Kenneth Tobey, PT by Craig Hill. The other regular
starts were Sandra Spence as Janet Culver and Nancy Hale as Helen Carter

--
Graeme Wall
This address is not read, substitute trains for rail.
Transport Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail/index.html

In message , at 21:55:37 on Thu,
22 Feb 2007, Graeme Wall remarked:
All right I'll leave you with the fantasy that the Royal family use public
transport just like other people if it pleases you.

The significant development is they way they now sometimes use trains
and planes on scheduled services, rather than exclusively using their
own private planes and trains. If you want to categorise that as "not
using public transport", then I'm afraid we must agree to disagree.
--
Roland Perry

In message , at 20:43:07 on Thu, 22
Feb 2007, Clive D. W. Feather remarked:
So we agree that they do use public transport, just not all varieties.
Not really, special arrangements are made, they get platform and lounge space
for themselves, the first class coach or section of cabin is for their use
only. That can hardly be sensibly referred to as using public transport in
the sense that everyone else does.

In the late 19th century, you could turn up at a station, proffer the
requisite amount, and have a carriage dedicated to yourself or even
have a special train run at your command. Is that public transport?
After all, it's open to any person able to pay the (documented) fare.

It's just as much public transport as a taxi. And taxis are normally
included within the definition of public transport.

(I won't mention the private taxi the Royal Family uses, at that will
just confuse people).
--
Roland Perry

In message , at 08:53:42 on
Fri, 23 Feb 2007, David Hansen
remarked:
How one would prevent millions of people leaving London is beyond
me.

Luckily we don't have to rely on you to do this.

Closing all the railway stations would be a good start - just look at
the chaos when even one line out of London is closed, let alone all of
them.
--
Roland Perry

"Clive Coleman." wrote

But in what scenario might this option be any better than a road or air
evacuation, or staying out? I can't imagine one.

Gas or other airborne attack.

But in any sort of mass attack, the Tubes are going to be paralysed by (a)
general panic; (b) absenteeism of key workers; (c) breakdown of supporting
infrastructure (communications, signalling, electricity) consequent on the
foregoing.

None of that applies to helo or road evacuation. And I bet there is a
gas-tight limo somewhere....

"Roland Perry" wrote

It would probably be more secret.

No-one knows where most of the Royals are anyway. Smuggling them out by help
or car seems less conspicuous than hijacking a train and seizing exclusive
use of part of the network for the necessary time.

And it depends what the risk is. If it
was a dirty biological bomb in London, and a riot amongst the populace who
were being prevented from leaving for fear of infecting the rest of the
country, it could well be the best of the three options.

But if mass panic has hit London, the Tube network will not be running
anyway.

In message
David Hansen wrote:

On Thu, 22 Feb 2007 21:06:50 +0000 someone who may be Roland Perry
wrote this:-

It would probably be more secret. And it depends what the risk is. If it
was a dirty biological bomb in London, and a riot amongst the populace
who were being prevented from leaving for fear of infecting the rest of
the country, it could well be the best of the three options.

The purple powder incident in the Westminster parliament
demonstrated the difference between plans and reality. The bods
should have been kept in the chamber to prevent potential
contamination of others, but they left.

How one would prevent millions of people leaving London is beyond
me.



There was a plan to clear a big open space all the way round London that
could be patrolled by armed police and military units that would prevent any
one trying to get out from the inner zone. Would have cost many millions of
pounds to put into practice.

--
Graeme Wall
This address is not read, substitute trains for rail.
Transport Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail/index.html

In message
Roland Perry wrote:

In message , at 21:55:37 on Thu,
22 Feb 2007, Graeme Wall remarked:
All right I'll leave you with the fantasy that the Royal family use public
transport just like other people if it pleases you.

The significant development is they way they now sometimes use trains
and planes on scheduled services, rather than exclusively using their
own private planes and trains. If you want to categorise that as "not
using public transport", then I'm afraid we must agree to disagree.

It's a good PR exercise, and as you have demonstrated, does seem to have
fooled some people.

--
Graeme Wall
This address is not read, substitute trains for rail.
Transport Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail/index.html

In message , at 11:01:59 on Fri,
23 Feb 2007, Andrew Clark
remarked:

No-one knows where most of the Royals are anyway.

In normal times it's published well in advance.

hijacking a train and seizing exclusive use of part of the network for
the necessary time.

But if mass panic has hit London, the Tube network will not be running
anyway.

Indeed. It will have been closed for normal traffic for some time. Which
is why it's easily available for various (not just Royal Family) special
operations.
--
Roland Perry

Graeme Wall wrote:

There was a plan to clear a big open space all the way round London
that could be patrolled by armed police and military units that would
prevent any one trying to get out from the inner zone. Would have
cost many millions of pounds to put into practice.

I'm now wondering if the Congestion Charge cameras have lasers fitted.