In article , Max Demian
wrote:
On 02/02/2019 12:54, Terry Casey wrote:
In article ,
says...

In article ,
harry wrote:

On Friday, 1 February 2019 15:58:14 UTC, Bob Eager wrote:
On Thu, 31 Jan 2019 20:32:57 -0500, S Viemeister wrote:

Watching the Eddie Izzard film on the development of radar, I was
surprised that they used 'megahertz' rather than 'megacycle'. Was
this usage accurate for the period?

The same film apparently has a plug being wired with
brown/blue/gren-and- yellow flex.

You often see modern light switches in period films. Also roads with
parallel ruts,ie no horse tracks in the middle.

Watching an episode of Foyle's War larse night. There was a wartime
(presumably prewar model) car that had two rear lights. I thought that
was only a postwar requirement.

It became compulsory from 1st October 1958. The firm of Duke & Co in
Romford Road, Manor Park dealt in a lot of surplus radio equipment and
obviously got his hands on a very large quantity of red lights that
just happened to match the minimum diameter specified by the new law.

People stuck them on the rear mudguards and wired them to the existing
single rear light (which also lit the number plate) so they had three
lights to the rear. I don't know whether cars had brake lights at the
time.

I can just remember my parents car - bought in 1935. As you say: one light
fitting atb the back which lit the rear numberplate as wellas showing red
to the rear. No reflectors or other rear lighting.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

On 01/02/2019 08:25, Brian Gaff wrote:

Oh and as somebody why has experienced an RF burn. touching a
transmitting aerial is definitely not a good thing to do.
Brian


Still have the scar on the palm of my hand and I wasn't even touching
the conductor. Just a shade under 1kw @27Mhz from a bank of PL519s and
the spark jumped from the antenna to my hand when some idiot keyed up
the rig. My fault for not locking it out I guess.

Interestingly my partner works at a place where they do RF welding, lots
of warnings/safety interlocks etc. And so there should be.

On 02/02/2019 14:51, charles wrote:
In article , Max Demian
wrote:
On 02/02/2019 12:54, Terry Casey wrote:
In article ,
says...

In article ,
harry wrote:

On Friday, 1 February 2019 15:58:14 UTC, Bob Eager wrote:
On Thu, 31 Jan 2019 20:32:57 -0500, S Viemeister wrote:

Watching the Eddie Izzard film on the development of radar, I was
surprised that they used 'megahertz' rather than 'megacycle'. Was
this usage accurate for the period?

The same film apparently has a plug being wired with
brown/blue/gren-and- yellow flex.

You often see modern light switches in period films. Also roads with
parallel ruts,ie no horse tracks in the middle.

Watching an episode of Foyle's War larse night. There was a wartime
(presumably prewar model) car that had two rear lights. I thought that
was only a postwar requirement.

It became compulsory from 1st October 1958. The firm of Duke & Co in
Romford Road, Manor Park dealt in a lot of surplus radio equipment and
obviously got his hands on a very large quantity of red lights that
just happened to match the minimum diameter specified by the new law.

People stuck them on the rear mudguards and wired them to the existing
single rear light (which also lit the number plate) so they had three
lights to the rear. I don't know whether cars had brake lights at the
time.

I can just remember my parents car - bought in 1935. As you say: one light
fitting atb the back which lit the rear numberplate as wellas showing red
to the rear. No reflectors or other rear lighting.

Are you sure about no reflectors? Even bicycles had them in the 20s I
think, as they are passive.

--
Max Demian

Jethro_uk wrote:
And when did "Islamic" become "Islamist" ?

I don't think it did. Islamic means related to or of the
religion in question, whereas


Islamist (noun) an advocate or supporter of Islamic militancy or
fundamentalism. (adjective) relating to, advocating, or supporting
Islamic militancy or fundamentalism.


So while "islamist" might be regarded as an extremist subset of
"islamic", the word "islamic" itself is not synonymous with "islamist".

Mind you, older forms did not seem to distinguish the two meanings, in
opposition to modern usage, presumably because nowadays the distinction
is a useful and important one; e.g. wiktionary says:

Islamist (plural Islamists)

(now rare) A Muslim. [from 19th c.]
A scholastic Muslim who specializes in Muslim academics. [from 1910s]
A Muslim who espouses Islamic fundamentalist beliefs. [from 1980s]


#Paul

"Tim Streater" wrote in message
.. .
In article ,
harry wrote:

On Friday, 1 February 2019 15:58:14 UTC, Bob Eager wrote:
On Thu, 31 Jan 2019 20:32:57 -0500, S Viemeister wrote:

Watching the Eddie Izzard film on the development of radar, I was
surprised that they used 'megahertz' rather than 'megacycle'. Was this
usage accurate for the period?

The same film apparently has a plug being wired with
brown/blue/gren-and-
yellow flex.

You often see modern light switches in period films.
Also roads with parallel ruts,ie no horse tracks in the middle.

Watching an episode of Foyle's War larse night. There was a wartime
(presumably prewar model) car that had two rear lights. I thought that
was only a postwar requirement.

But were two rear lights actually illegal? If not, it may have been unusual
but not impossible. I think I've seen some 1940s/50s cars with one central
brake light but still two tail lights.

Hard to believe that one light front or rear was ever legal, since side/head
and tail/brake lights serve to define the width of the vehicle to other
vehicles (oncoming or approaching from behind).

But even now the Highway Code and Constructions and Use rules baffle me in
terms of what they permit which I would say was wrong:

- permitted to use dipped headlights (only sidelights) in a street-lit
section of road (I'd say that lighting up regulations should mandate dipped
headlights, not just sidelights, irrespective of whether the road is lit or
not)

- allowed to place indicators next to dipped headlights or brake lights,
rather than mandating that they are spaced far enough away (eg in or under
bumpers) that they can still be seen against brake/head lights.

- permitted to have just one rear fog light, rather than requiring two of
them, co-sited with the tail lights (since tail and fog lights do the same
job of defining the width, as seen by someone behind - just different
brightness depending on whether there is fog)

"2987fr" wrote in message
...
And when did airfield become airport.

I tend to make a distinction based on airfield being for military or
privately chartered flights; airport being larger and for scheduled flights.

wrote in message
...
On Saturday, February 2, 2019 at 12:26:27 AM UTC, Roger Hayter wrote:
NY wrote:

"Roger Hayter" wrote in message
...
Light frequencies, and especially infrared, are often still described
as
a wavelength in nanometres.

Whereas at one time they were quoted in Angstroms - when 1 ? is 0.1 nm
or
100 pm.

I remember them! I came across them regarding X-rays, I don't know if
they are still used in that field.

In our lab at BP we quoted small wavelengths in nanometres.

I would imagine that Angstroms fell out of use around the time that normal
scientific and engineering practice was to use powers of 10 which are
multiples of three: eg 1-999x 10^-9, 10^-6, 10^-3, 1, 10^3, 10^6, 10^9. And
not to use powers that are in between - eg the ridiculous 0-70 x 100 rpm (as
opposed to 0-7 x 1000 rpm) on older car rev counters.

"Tim Streater" wrote in message
.. .
Might have been, but plenty of cars had them in the 30s

OK - so not an anachronism then. I must have been given the wrong
impression by someone as a skoolboy.

Probably not mandatory to have two, but also not mandatory to have only
one - so you can have either one or two.

"Terry Casey" wrote in message
...
Watching an episode of Foyle's War larse night. There was a wartime
(presumably prewar model) car that had two rear lights. I thought that
was only a postwar requirement.

It became compulsory from 1st October 1958.

As late as that? Wow! I presume it had been common practice for a fair time
before it became compulsory.

When did they finally outlaw (in the UK) the use of red rear indicators
(flashing brake lights) and white front indicators (flashing side lights).
My mum's 1959 Morris Minor originally had Trafficators, then these were
supplemented by flashing red/white indicators, then I remember Dad having it
further modified in the late 60s to have separate amber indicators front and
back. Maybe the late 60s is when red/white indicators became illegal. The
trafficators were not actually disabled and continued to pop out in
conjunction with the flashing indicators until they finally jammed - maybe
at that point they were disconnected to prevent the solenoid being
permanently powered whilst ever the indicators were on, instead of switching
itself off as soon as the arm had become "fully erect".

I can remember early Ford Cortinas (the pre-Aeroflow model, with the very
long gear lever and the rigid metal arms that stuck out either side of the
steering wheel for indicator, lights, wipers flip-switches) and they had
oval sidelights which doubled as (white) front indicators; I presume right
from the start the Cortina used the iconic Trivial Pursuit / CND
three-segment rear light clusters.

On 02/02/2019 11:03, Bob Eager wrote:

Hard work. On call 24/7 weekdays, 1 in 4 weekends. Dead students at 3
a.m. First one was 3 weeks after I started.

I suppose you just killed the really naughty ones?

Bill

On 02/02/2019 19:09, NY wrote:
"Tim Streater" wrote in message
.. .
Might have been, but plenty of cars had them in the 30s

OK - so not an anachronism then. I must have been given the wrong
impression by someone as a skoolboy.

Probably not mandatory to have two, but also not mandatory to have only
one - so you can have either one or two.

Or three, or more.

Bill

On 02/02/2019 19:01, NY wrote:

Hard to believe that one light front or rear was ever legal, since
side/head and tail/brake lights serve to define the width of the vehicle
to other vehicles (oncoming or approaching from behind).

Ah, your thinking is anachronistic. It didn't occur to anyone that the
width of the other vehicle was worth marking. they hadn't thought that
far. The lights were simply to let you know the other vehicle was there.
After that it was up to you.

Bill

On Sat, 2 Feb 2019 10:13:06 +0000, (Roger Hayter)
wrote:

Custos Custodum wrote:

On Sat, 2 Feb 2019 00:25:47 +0000, (Roger Hayter)
wrote:

NY wrote:

"Roger Hayter" wrote in message
...
Light frequencies, and especially infrared, are often still described as
a wavelength in nanometres.

Whereas at one time they were quoted in Angstroms - when 1 ? is 0.1 nm or
100 pm.

I remember them! I came across them regarding X-rays, I don't know if
they are still used in that field.

X-rays and gamma rays are usually described in terms of their photon
energy (in electron volts). It yields more sensible numbers and in
most cases is the only property that can be readily measured.

I agree there is a lot to be said for using a property you can actually
measure, especially if referring to properties like dispersion, but
doesn't a photon energy imply a specific wavelength theoretically?

Yes, of course. They are linked by a simple equation:

Wavelength = hc/E
where
h=Planck's constant
c=speed of light
E=photon energy

"harry" wrote in message
...
On Friday, 1 February 2019 23:03:49 UTC, 2987fr wrote:
"Jethro_uk" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 31 Jan 2019 20:32:57 -0500, S Viemeister wrote:

Watching the Eddie Izzard film on the development of radar, I was
surprised that they used 'megahertz' rather than 'megacycle'. Was this
usage accurate for the period?

Not quite as specialist, but cropped up in chat a few days ago, is when
did Centigrade become Celcius in the UK ? Because we sure as hell used
centigrade at school.

(also when did Peking change it's name ? And Bombay ?

When lazy colonists showed up originally, and
back to the original when they went home.

And when did "Islamic" become "Islamist" ? )

And when did airfield become airport.

We always called them "Aerodromes" in the UK.

Not always, particularly with the military ones before and during WW1,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_...orps_airfields

NY wrote:


Watching an episode of Foyle's War larse night. There was a wartime
(presumably prewar model) car that had two rear lights. I thought that
was only a postwar requirement.

But were two rear lights actually illegal? If not, it may have been unusual
but not impossible. I think I've seen some 1940s/50s cars with one central
brake light but still two tail lights.

Many of the posher horse drawn carriages had lights on both sides, we had a
set from a long disappeared vehicle ,candle lit with a spring to push the
candle up through a hole as it burned .Frontwards clear in a vertically
oriented glass about 4€� x 5€� and to the rear a small circular window about
1€� diameter with a red glass.

They would be mounted one each side, obviously horse drawn wont come under
motor vehicle regulations but I cant see them being illegal for powered
vehicles when custom and practice already allowed for two.
More likely the reason for one rear lamp on many prewar cars was that once
they gave up fitting oil ,acetylene lamps and fitted electric only having
one rear lamp eased the load on the early electrical systems, ICBW but I
think some didnt even have a dynamo and relied on the battery being
charged between journeys.

But even now the Highway Code and Constructions and Use rules baffle

- permitted to have just one rear fog light, rather than requiring two of
them, co-sited with the tail lights (since tail and fog lights do the same
job of defining the width, as seen by someone behind - just different
brightness depending on whether there is fog)

Isnt the idea that it extends the range of when the vehicle can be seen?
Once you have seen the bright foglamp you would be slowing down till you
saw the normal rear lights or stay back anyway and follow at a safe
distance.
width of the vehicle wont matter before that unless you want to gamble at
overtaking in fog.

GH

"charles" wrote in message
...
In article , Max Demian
wrote:
On 02/02/2019 12:54, Terry Casey wrote:
In article ,
says...

In article ,
harry wrote:

On Friday, 1 February 2019 15:58:14 UTC, Bob Eager wrote:
On Thu, 31 Jan 2019 20:32:57 -0500, S Viemeister wrote:

Watching the Eddie Izzard film on the development of radar, I was
surprised that they used 'megahertz' rather than 'megacycle'. Was
this usage accurate for the period?

The same film apparently has a plug being wired with
brown/blue/gren-and- yellow flex.

You often see modern light switches in period films. Also roads with
parallel ruts,ie no horse tracks in the middle.

Watching an episode of Foyle's War larse night. There was a wartime
(presumably prewar model) car that had two rear lights. I thought that
was only a postwar requirement.

It became compulsory from 1st October 1958. The firm of Duke & Co in
Romford Road, Manor Park dealt in a lot of surplus radio equipment and
obviously got his hands on a very large quantity of red lights that
just happened to match the minimum diameter specified by the new law.

People stuck them on the rear mudguards and wired them to the existing
single rear light (which also lit the number plate) so they had three
lights to the rear. I don't know whether cars had brake lights at the
time.

I can just remember my parents car - bought in 1935. As you say: one
light
fitting atb the back which lit the rear numberplate as wellas showing red
to the rear. No reflectors or other rear lighting.

Google images has bugger all of the back of cars of that era.

On Friday, February 1, 2019 at 5:01:05 PM UTC, Custos Custodum wrote:
"Max Demian" wrote in message
o.uk...
3*10^8 isn't all that 'rational' as it has a 3 in it. Why not redefine the
foot so that c is 10^9 ft/s?

Because the foot is a "toy" folk unit as opposed to a serious scientific
unit ;-)

Let's define pi=3 and e=3 while we're at it ;-)

The state of Indiana attempted to redefine pi to be exactly 3 (in 1897).

Robert

On Friday, February 1, 2019 at 6:12:56 PM UTC, wrote:
On Friday, February 1, 2019 at 12:34:23 PM UTC, Fredxx wrote:
On 01/02/2019 12:24:36, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Thu, 31 Jan 2019 20:32:57 -0500, S Viemeister wrote:

Watching the Eddie Izzard film on the development of radar, I was
surprised that they used 'megahertz' rather than 'megacycle'. Was this
usage accurate for the period?

Not quite as specialist, but cropped up in chat a few days ago, is when
did Centigrade become Celcius in the UK ? Because we sure as hell used
centigrade at school.

Wikipedia says, "Centigrade, a historical forerunner to the Celsius
temperature scale, synonymous in modern usage"

I was told at college that Centigrade was ambiguous as it is also a unit of angle as used in France.

The 'grad' being a 100th of a right angle.

Robert

"NY" wrote in message
o.uk...
"2987fr" wrote in message
...
And when did airfield become airport.

I tend to make a distinction based on airfield being for military or
privately chartered flights; airport being larger and for scheduled
flights.

Thats true now, but the term airport wasnt used at all initially, it
was just airfield and later had aerodrome added and then airport.

In message , Max
Demian writes
On 01/02/2019 12:34, Fredxx wrote:
On 01/02/2019 12:24:36, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Thu, 31 Jan 2019 20:32:57 -0500, S Viemeister wrote:

Watching the Eddie Izzard film on the development of radar, I was
surprised that they used 'megahertz' rather than 'megacycle'. Was this
usage accurate for the period?

Not quite as specialist, but cropped up in chat a few days ago, is when
did Centigrade become Celcius in the UK ? Because we sure as hell used
centigrade at school.
Wikipedia says, "Centigrade, a historical forerunner to the Celsius
temperature scale, synonymous in modern usage"

(also when did Peking change it's name ? And Bombay ? And when did
"Islamic" become "Islamist" ? )

Islamic just means Muslim, a follower of Mohammed. Islamists are the
more fanatical kind.

What I find annoying is the weird pronunciation of Islamist - as
iz-la-MIST (instead of the obvious iz-LAAM-ist).


--
Ian

NY wrote:

wrote in message
...
On Saturday, February 2, 2019 at 12:26:27 AM UTC, Roger Hayter wrote:
NY wrote:

"Roger Hayter" wrote in message
...
Light frequencies, and especially infrared, are often still described
as
a wavelength in nanometres.

Whereas at one time they were quoted in Angstroms - when 1 ? is 0.1 nm
or
100 pm.

I remember them! I came across them regarding X-rays, I don't know if
they are still used in that field.

In our lab at BP we quoted small wavelengths in nanometres.

I would imagine that Angstroms fell out of use around the time that normal
scientific and engineering practice was to use powers of 10 which are
multiples of three: eg 1-999x 10^-9, 10^-6, 10^-3, 1, 10^3, 10^6, 10^9. And
not to use powers that are in between - eg the ridiculous 0-70 x 100 rpm (as
opposed to 0-7 x 1000 rpm) on older car rev counters.

Of course the micron still survives despite abolition. It took me a
long time when first studying microscopy to realise it was a synonym for
the micrometre, I sort of assumed it must be different by a factor of
10. It has the twin advantages of saving two syllables and not being
mistaken for an instrument when reading quickly.


--

Roger Hayter

"Marland" wrote in message
...
- permitted to have just one rear fog light, rather than requiring two of
them, co-sited with the tail lights (since tail and fog lights do the
same
job of defining the width, as seen by someone behind - just different
brightness depending on whether there is fog)

Isnt the idea that it extends the range of when the vehicle can be seen?
Once you have seen the bright foglamp you would be slowing down till you
saw the normal rear lights or stay back anyway and follow at a safe
distance.
width of the vehicle wont matter before that unless you want to gamble at
overtaking in fog.

For any given thickness of fog there is a large range of distances between
when you can first see one fog light ("there is a vehicle in front of me,
unknown distance away from me") and when you can see both tail lights ("ah,
*now* I can work out how wide the vehicle appears to be and therefore (and
this is the critical bit) how far away from me it is").

In other words, having two lights allows you to work out what the safe
distance is that you need to keep - which will be further away than you'd
follow the vehicle in clear conditions.

wrote in message
...
On Friday, February 1, 2019 at 6:12:56 PM UTC, wrote:
On Friday, February 1, 2019 at 12:34:23 PM UTC, Fredxx wrote:
On 01/02/2019 12:24:36, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Thu, 31 Jan 2019 20:32:57 -0500, S Viemeister wrote:

Watching the Eddie Izzard film on the development of radar, I was
surprised that they used 'megahertz' rather than 'megacycle'. Was
this
usage accurate for the period?

Not quite as specialist, but cropped up in chat a few days ago, is
when
did Centigrade become Celcius in the UK ? Because we sure as hell
used
centigrade at school.

Wikipedia says, "Centigrade, a historical forerunner to the Celsius
temperature scale, synonymous in modern usage"

I was told at college that Centigrade was ambiguous as it is also a unit
of angle as used in France.

The 'grad' being a 100th of a right angle.

So a centigrad would be an incredibly small unit. I suppose if 100 grads are
equivalent to 90 degrees in a right angle, then a centigrad would be of a
similar order of size to a minute. In other words, probably not in daily
usages, but used in engineering and navigation, as for the second.

Did the French actually produce marine maps marked with latitudes and
longitudes in grads, centigrads and 10^-4 grads (what's the prefix for
10^-4 - decimilli?) from some meridian - presumably through Paris as that
was a close contender to Greenwich for the worldwide longitude meridian.

Bloody hell! I was joking when I said that the prefix for 10^-4 was
decimilli, on the grounds that I couldn't find anything that mentioned this
odd power, so I invented something that was logical. Now I've found a site
which says that it really is decimilli; likewise 10^-5 is centimilli.

"Rod Speed" wrote in message
...


"NY" wrote in message
o.uk...
"2987fr" wrote in message
...
And when did airfield become airport.

I tend to make a distinction based on airfield being for military or
privately chartered flights; airport being larger and for scheduled
flights.

Thats true now, but the term airport wasnt used at all initially, it
was just airfield and later had aerodrome added and then airport.

Yes, I was talking about the modern, 21-century usage of the words. I agree
that all sorts of words have been used in the past for different sizes and
usages of runway-plus-terminal-buildings.

I suppose "airport" started to become a logical word when air travel to
foreign countries became common, in the same way that (broadly speaking) a
harbour is for boats that travel out and back (eg fishing) and for boats
that travel along the coast, whereas a port is for boats that travel to
another country. At least in British usage, where you *have* to go by boat
to get to *any* foreign country (until the advent of the Channel Tunnel),
whereas you can go by land-based means (road, rail) to get elsewhere within
the country.

In article
,
says...

On 02/02/2019 12:54, Terry Casey wrote:

It became compulsory from 1st October 1958. The firm of Duke &
Co in Romford Road, Manor Park dealt in a lot of surplus radio
equipment and obviously got his hands on a very large quantity
of red lights that just happened to match the minimum diameter
specified by the new law.

People stuck them on the rear mudguards and wired them to the existing
single rear light (which also lit the number plate) so they had three
lights to the rear. I don't know whether cars had brake lights at the time.

The architypal London Transport RT bus was exempted from the
1958 law and retained its one rear and one brake light
arrangement on the offside (the brake light was originally
amber but later changed to red.)

What is amazing about this is that this wasn't confined to the
red Central area fleet but also included the extensive green
Country bus fleet which covered vast areas of the Home
Counties until 1970, with many routes on unlit country roads.
They could alo be driven with only the nearside headlight
turned on!

Many of these buses were bought both by preservationists and
provincial operators but the moment ownership pased from LT,
it was ilegal to drive them on the public highway!

--

Terry

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com

Terry Casey wrote:
In article
,
says...

On 02/02/2019 12:54, Terry Casey wrote:

It became compulsory from 1st October 1958. The firm of Duke &
Co in Romford Road, Manor Park dealt in a lot of surplus radio
equipment and obviously got his hands on a very large quantity
of red lights that just happened to match the minimum diameter
specified by the new law.

People stuck them on the rear mudguards and wired them to the existing
single rear light (which also lit the number plate) so they had three
lights to the rear. I don't know whether cars had brake lights at the time.

The architypal London Transport RT bus was exempted from the
1958 law and retained its one rear and one brake light
arrangement on the offside (the brake light was originally
amber but later changed to red.)

Wasnt just the older London buses that had dispensation from some things,
the later models of the 70s and 80s were still permitted to use the older
style silver letters on a black background style of registration plates
for many years after other vehicles had to have reflective Black on White
at front ,Black on yellow at rear.

GH

"NY" wrote in message
o.uk...
"Rod Speed" wrote in message
...


"NY" wrote in message
o.uk...
"2987fr" wrote in message
...
And when did airfield become airport.

I tend to make a distinction based on airfield being for military or
privately chartered flights; airport being larger and for scheduled
flights.

Thats true now, but the term airport wasnt used at all initially, it
was just airfield and later had aerodrome added and then airport.

Yes, I was talking about the modern, 21-century usage of the words. I
agree that all sorts of words have been used in the past for different
sizes and usages of runway-plus-terminal-buildings.

I suppose "airport" started to become a logical word when air travel to
foreign countries became common,

IMO its more likely we picked it up from yank
movies, same as we with with terms like OK etc.

in the same way that (broadly speaking) a harbour is for boats that travel
out and back (eg fishing) and for boats that travel along the coast,
whereas a port is for boats that travel to another country.

Thats a bit different in that how its named officially is more
likely to be what people call it. Plenty of ours are called ports
even tho they are hardly ever used to travel to another country.

In fact one of ours, Sydney, is where much of the travel to
another country is done from by sea and is called a harbour.
Melbourne isnt tho, its official name is Port Melbourne for
the area where the ships dock. Port Botany tho for the
one south of Sydney.

At least in British usage, where you *have* to go by boat to get to *any*
foreign country (until the advent of the Channel Tunnel), whereas you can
go by land-based means (road, rail) to get elsewhere within the country.

In article ,
says...

Terry Casey wrote:


The architypal London Transport RT bus was exempted from the
1958 law and retained its one rear and one brake light
arrangement on the offside (the brake light was originally
amber but later changed to red.)

Wasn?t just the older London buses that had dispensation from some things,
the later models of the 70?s and 80?s were still permitted to use the older
style silver letters on a black background style of registration plates
for many years after other vehicles had to have reflective Black on White
at front ,Black on yellow at rear.


The plate style depends on the registration date and applies
equally to all vehicles as you can see on older cars and other
vintage vehicles of any kind.

However, a lot of ex LT Routemasters were bought by Scottish
operators who re-registerd them so they have to carry new
style plates

There is alarge selection of vehicles with old style plates at
http://lvvs.org.uk/

As you can see from the descriptions, many of them are
currently MOT'd taxed{1] and insured but the pictures show
that they still carry the original plates.

[1] Although the tax on older vehicles is now free, they still
have to be 'taxed' although, of course, they no longer get
issued with tax discs.

--

Terry

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com

Terry Casey wrote:


The architypal London Transport RT bus was exempted from the
1958 law and retained its one rear and one brake light
arrangement on the offside (the brake light was originally
amber but later changed to red.)

Wasn?t just the older London buses that had dispensation from some things,
the later models of the 70?s and 80?s were still permitted to use the older
style silver letters on a black background style of registration plates
for many years after other vehicles had to have reflective Black on White
at front ,Black on yellow at rear.


The plate style depends on the registration date and applies
equally to all vehicles as you can see on older cars and other
vintage vehicles of any kind.

Which is what I was getting at,

Vehicles registered from sometime in 1973 had to have the reflective style
though they could have been used voluntary from 1968.

However London Transport or whatever it was at the time seemed to still be
allowed to use the White on Black for a few years later such as on this
1979 vehicle. https://goo.gl/images/YAAX3a or this on
https://goo.gl/images/fSMBEj. which shows that they still were using the
old style into the early 80s.
So it cannot have applied equally to all vehicles .
Incidentally I see due to a quirk some vehicles that had to have compulsory
reflective from 1973 can now have white on black due to them moving into
the historic taxation class which allows non reflective plates.

GH

In article , Lee
scribeth thus
On 01/02/2019 08:25, Brian Gaff wrote:

Oh and as somebody why has experienced an RF burn. touching a
transmitting aerial is definitely not a good thing to do.
Brian


Still have the scar on the palm of my hand and I wasn't even touching
the conductor. Just a shade under 1kw @27Mhz from a bank of PL519s and
the spark jumped from the antenna to my hand when some idiot keyed up
the rig. My fault for not locking it out I guess.

Now what were you doing with 1 K on 27 M/cs?...


JOOI what gave more Pout a PL519 or an 807

Interestingly my partner works at a place where they do RF welding, lots
of warnings/safety interlocks etc. And so there should be.

--
Tony Sayer

In article ,
says...


Vehicles registered from sometime in 1973 had to have the reflective style
though they could have been used voluntary from 1968.

Interesting - I didn't realise it went that far back.

However London Transport or whatever it was at the time

The London Transport Executive (under the GLC from 1970 to
1983

seemed to still be
allowed to use the White on Black for a few years later such as on this
1979 vehicle. https://goo.gl/images/YAAX3a or this on
https://goo.gl/images/fSMBEj. which shows that they still were using the
old style into the early 80?s.
So it cannot have applied equally to all vehicles .

Incidentally I see due to a quirk some vehicles that had to have compulsory
reflective from 1973 can now have white on black due to them moving into
the historic taxation class which allows non reflective plates.

I hadn't realised that, either

--

Terry

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com

On 05/02/2019 09:34, tony sayer wrote:

Now what were you doing with 1 K on 27 M/cs?...

Wasn't me and sadly, said person is no longer around. People living
around here at the time will not have failed to notice the Sigma IV said
person also used. Though not with that 1Kw linear. Mostly they used a
Bremi 200W with that.

That incident was a stupid experiment with a Firestik. Why? Who the hell
knows it was a very long time ago and we were too young to know much
better.



JOOI what gave more Pout a PL519 or an 807

I don't know, I guess the PL509/519 were popular at the time just
becuase they were so easily available.