|
|
#46
06.02.2008, 16:05
|
|
|
|
|
Jo Lonergan wrote...
> >That's reminded me of this morning's Toady item about the Munich air >crash. IIRC everybody who survived that had been seated facing >backwards. When I first used to fly Basel-London there were still >planes (Tridents?) with backward-facing seats, but they were phased >out because passengers didn't like them. It's true that taking off was >an odd sensation, but landing was more comfortable. > Particularly when landing again unexpectedly at Munich? |
|
|
|
#47
06.02.2008, 16:16
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 6 Feb 2008 16:05:44 +0000, Martin Clark <martin> wrote:
>Jo Lonergan wrote... >> >>That's reminded me of this morning's Toady item about the Munich air >>crash. IIRC everybody who survived that had been seated facing >>backwards. When I first used to fly Basel-London there were still >>planes (Tridents?) with backward-facing seats, but they were phased >>out because passengers didn't like them. It's true that taking off was >>an odd sensation, but landing was more comfortable. >> >Particularly when landing again unexpectedly at Munich? Do airlines run crash courses in safety? |
|
#48
06.02.2008, 17:13
|
|
|
|
|
Paul Herber wrote...
>On Wed, 6 Feb 2008 16:05:44 +0000, Martin Clark <martin> wrote: >>Do airlines run crash courses in safety? > If so, I expect they are very down to earth. |
|
#49
06.02.2008, 18:31
|
|
|
|
|
In article <gdF8DcGSreqHFwzB>, martin says...
> Paul Herber wrote... > If so, I expect they are very down to earth. > These puns are often a let down, but they do sometimes hit the spot. |
|
#50
06.02.2008, 18:35
|
|
|
|
|
In message <q$ner0CYrdqHFwBD>, Martin Clark <martin>
writes >>That's reminded me of this morning's Toady item about the Munich air >>crash. IIRC everybody who survived that had been seated facing >>backwards. When I first used to fly Basel-London there were still >>planes (Tridents?) with backward-facing seats, but they were phased >>out because passengers didn't like them. It's true that taking off was >>an odd sensation, but landing was more comfortable. >> >Particularly when landing again unexpectedly at Munich? BTN! |
|
#51
06.02.2008, 20:17
|
|
|
|
|
Jenny M Benson wrote:
> In message <q$ner0CYrdqHFwBD>, Martin Clark <martin> > writes >>> That's reminded me of this morning's Toady item about the Munich air >>> crash. IIRC everybody who survived that had been seated facing >>> backwards. When I first used to fly Basel-London there were still >>> planes (Tridents?) with backward-facing seats, but they were phased >>> out because passengers didn't like them. It's true that taking off was >>> an odd sensation, but landing was more comfortable. >>> >> Particularly when landing again unexpectedly at Munich? > > BTN! Hmm, no, sorry. Close, but no cigar. |
|
#52
06.02.2008, 20:55
|
|
|
|
|
Jane Vernon wrote...
[..] |
|
#53
06.02.2008, 23:09
|
|
|
|
|
Plusnet <not> wrote:
|spectacles with tiny lenses shaped like letter boxes Those aren't nearly as bad as they look once you start wearing them. I was cautious at first, but have now taken to the letterbox shape. Not least because they're cut down, the lenses aren't very thick at the edges. n |
|
#54
06.02.2008, 23:55
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 6 Feb 2008 17:13:54 +0000, Martin Clark <martin> wrote:
>Paul Herber wrote... >If so, I expect they are very down to earth. I understand there is falling participation in parachuting. |
|
#55
07.02.2008, 02:56
|
|
|
|
|
In article <h9fkq3pqbauih3m3t0vge4msrd37v8knvi>,
alex.foster says... > Plusnet <not> wrote: > > |spectacles with tiny lenses shaped like letter boxes > > Those aren't nearly as bad as they look once you start wearing them. I was > cautious at first, but have now taken to the letterbox shape. Not least > because they're cut down, the lenses aren't very thick at the edges. > But but but.. If the lenses are so tiny in the heighth* dimension, they only have to slip down one's nose by one or two millimeters & you're looking over them & not through them. This movement can only be prevented by clamping them to one's face with enormous force, or some form of spot-welding. If the good lord had intended us to peer through letter-boxes...... |
|
#56
07.02.2008, 04:29
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 06 Feb 2008 23:55:40 +0000, Paul Herber
<SubstituteMyFirstNameHere> wrote: >On Wed, 6 Feb 2008 17:13:54 +0000, Martin Clark <martin> wrote: >>I understand there is falling participation in parachuting. If only a few more people would take the plunge. |
|
#57
07.02.2008, 08:21
|
|
|
|
|
On Feb 7, 5:29 am, Stephen <stephenbow> wrote:
> On Wed, 06 Feb 2008 23:55:40 +0000, Paul Herber >> > <SubstituteMyFirstNameH> wrote: >> >> >> If only a few more people would take the plunge. Maybe they're worried about the strings attached. |
|
#58
07.02.2008, 09:41
|
|
|
|
|
On Thu, 7 Feb 2008 02:56:53 -0000, Plusnet <not> wrote:
>If the good lord had intended us to peer through letter-boxes...... .......he wouldn't have put so many of them at almost ground level like wot ours is (it was already there when we moved in, honest) lff |
|
#59
07.02.2008, 09:47
|
|
|
|
|
Plusnet <not> writes:
>alex.foster says... >> Plusnet <not> wrote: >> >> |spectacles with tiny lenses shaped like letter boxes >> >> Those aren't nearly as bad as they look once you start wearing them. I was >> cautious at first, but have now taken to the letterbox shape. Not least >> because they're cut down, the lenses aren't very thick at the edges. > >But but but.. > >If the lenses are so tiny in the heighth* dimension, they only have to >slip down one's nose by one or two millimeters & you're looking over >them & not through them. those of us who are long-sighted often find this useful. think of half-moon glasses (wot don't seem so common any more). >This movement can only be prevented by clamping them to one's face with >enormous force, or some form of spot-welding. i find blu-tak does the job rather well, and it's less drastic than araldite or spot-welding. my own glasses have springy arms, which keeps them more-or-less in place. but then, they're not letterbox shaped. >If the good lord had intended us to peer through letter-boxes...... he'ld have got us all jobs in mi5 |
|
#60
07.02.2008, 10:10
|
|
|
|
|
On Feb 7, 10:47 am, r...@cl.cam.ac.uk (Robin Fairbairns) wrote:
> Plusnet <n> writes: >> >> those of us who are long-sighted often find this useful. think of > half-moon glasses (wot don't seem so common any more). >> i find blu-tak does the job rather well, and it's less drastic than > araldite or spot-welding. my own glasses have springy arms, which > keeps them more-or-less in place. but then, they're not letterbox > shaped. A DIY alternative: - http://hackedgadgets.com/2006/06/01/...ridge-of-nose/ |
|
|
|
|
| Similar Threads | |
| Down the slide with Woolies Just been to our local Wilkinsons in Wellington. Dreadful. Much of the useful stuff seems to have vanished in a refit. The shop has around a third of its floorspace devoted... |
|
| the wonder of Woolies Thought I'd beat Sheeel to this... [..] [..] [..] |
|
| Woolies and MFI go into adminstration [..] for MFI. No link yet (just a "More soon" in the BBC News headline) for Woolies. So no-one wanted to buy Woolworth even for £1. Much like their merchandise, really ;-) |
|
| Woolies & MFI!! Oh my goodness, but both have gone in to administration today...... Personally, not over bothered about MFI - although I *did* get a rather nice kitchen [eventually] from... |
|
| Bike in Woolies Apologies if this is a "newbie" observation. But after reading a bit about bikes one thing I noticed about unnecessary things adding weight to a bike, and cheap bikes often... |
|
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 08:53. | Privacy Policy
|
OT The Wonder of Woolies