Discussion:
Spa, 1962
(too old to reply)
Sir Tim
2017-01-27 13:00:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Just found this footage, which I have never seen before:



The old circuit of course. Jimmy Clark feared and hated Spa, but always
did well there.
--
Sir Tim

“Growing old is mandatory; growing up is optional”
a425couple
2017-01-27 23:56:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sir Tim
http://youtu.be/r_PxCW8uS9g
The old circuit of course. --
Sir Tim
Thanks for posting that.

Yes. And it shows film from a street car at normal
speeds going around the old long course.
When we were there in April I very much enjoyed
driving around exploring the remains of the old long
course. And surprisingly to me (who lives in a area
of the USA where increasing population and building
and change is great) an awful lot of roads and buildings
were still very recognizable.
I could even recognize the uphill 'field' that Sterling Moss
crashed into when Chapman's Lotus 18 failed in 1960.
Post by Sir Tim
Jimmy Clark feared and hated Spa, but always did well there.
Yes, because although Chapman had a very currupted
brain, he was very good at pushing toward his goal of
winning.
(By the way before the critics hit:
No, I do not think winning at the cost of that many deaths
and serious injuries and broken promises is a proper cost
of the sport.)
So starting in 1961, Colin Chapman was pushing sales
of what was to be his Lotus factory 1962 car, the Lotus 24.
A fair number bought his car. Then at this race in 1962 at
Spa Team Lotus shows up with the new monocoque car,
the Lotus #25. Harsh words were spoken.

by the way
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/motorsport/formulaone/3039669/Dark-clouds-taint-Lotus-founder-Colin-Chapman.html
"Dark clouds taint Lotus founder Colin Chapman
By Brian Stater 12:01AM GMT 14 Dec 2002
Colin Chapman is mostly remembered as the man who brought unprecedented
flair to British motor racing through Lotus, the company he founded in a
workshop attached to his father's pub.
But now, at the 20th anniversary of his death, a rather different picture
has emerged. In place of Chapman, the inspirational engineer, we have
Chapman as a liar, cheat and drug abuser who was spared a prison sentence
only by the fatal heart attack he suffered, in December 1982, aged 56. -----
"
Read the whole cite before disagreeing.

Actually, a fellow novice with me, while I went off to SE Asia,
went to England to try for his big racing break, and delt a number of
times with Chapman. He found he had to count his fingers
after each meeting!
Post by Sir Tim
“Growing old is mandatory; growing up is optional”
Well, except a fair number of racers did not grow old!!

http://www.f1technical.net/articles/12773
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Formula_One_fatalities
http://forums.autosport.com/topic/10558-what-caused-the-jochen-rindt-crash-at-monza-in-1970/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Team_Lotus
"While very innovative, Chapman also came under criticism for the structural
fragility of his designs. The number of top drivers seriously injured or
killed in Lotus machinery was considerable – notably Stirling Moss, Alan
Stacey, Mike Taylor, Jim Clark, Mike Spence, Bobby Marshman, Graham Hill,
Jochen Rindt and Ronnie Peterson."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lotus_24
"However, that (2nd) would be its best Championship finish; the Lotus 25 had
arrived on the scene and was obviously the way ahead, much to the chagrin of
those who had paid good money for their 24. Colin Chapman had promised his
customers that the team cars would be mechanically identical to the customer
cars, leaving himself free to alter what he classified as the cars'
"bodywork".[2]
Bobster
2017-01-28 05:58:32 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by a425couple
by the way
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/motorsport/formulaone/3039669/Dark-clouds-taint-Lotus-founder-Colin-Chapman.html
"Dark clouds taint Lotus founder Colin Chapman
By Brian Stater 12:01AM GMT 14 Dec 2002
Colin Chapman is mostly remembered as the man who brought unprecedented
flair to British motor racing through Lotus, the company he founded in a
workshop attached to his father's pub.
But now, at the 20th anniversary of his death, a rather different picture
has emerged. In place of Chapman, the inspirational engineer, we have
Chapman as a liar, cheat and drug abuser who was spared a prison sentence
only by the fatal heart attack he suffered, in December 1982, aged 56. ---
Meh. I'm unimpressed by most of that. It's knee jerk moralising. Ooh! He took DRUGS! Looks to me like he was taking something to sleep and then something else to get going again in the morning. This is not the healthiest way to live (barbiturates being notoriously easy to overdoes on) but spare me the moral judgement. These days he'd get safer hypnotics with lesser side effects.

And it smacks of the routine resentment against the rich. A recent article about Ecclestone mentioned that when he returned to F1 in the late 60s as Rindt's manager he was a wealthy many and that "no satisfactory explanation" had been given for this wealth. Excuse me? You to satisfactorily explain your income? To whom> And decides what is satisfactory?

I had a wealthy man in my family ("had" because he is deceased). He worked hard, he had what a lot of folks called "luck" but was really about paying a lot of attention to what was going on around him.

I'm also unimpressed by the stories of people who bump into somebody rich and successful and find that things are uncompromising. That is why they are rich and successful. I used to work for a man who I came to understand was a good and a decent man, but he struck very, very hard bargains and negotiated ferociously. If you wanted R1 for something, he would offer you 50c. Becaue that was his job - to get the best possible deal for his company so that company and it's shareholders and it's employees might do better (yes, I know. But in this case the company did pay it's employees well and had a profit share scheme that was not just in name). I know of people who, a decade later, will wince when the name is mentioned and they recall a bruising (not physically) negotiation. But the man I am referring to was decent, honest man.

There is DeLorean. I've had a quick butcher's. What happened there? DeLorean never went to jail. Something clearly went on on the Lotus because Chapman lied to the authorities about the routes through which he had received money. However, the main source for the allegations against him turns out to be Lawrence - and I'm not impressed by Lawrence (OK... impressed by his style, but not the substance of what he writes). Bushell was charged and sentenced for defrauding the DeLorean company.
Sir Tim
2017-01-28 13:08:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sir Tim
Jimmy Clark feared and hated Spa, but always did well there.
Yes, because although Chapman had a very corrupted
brain, he was very good at pushing toward his goal of
winning.
<snip>
Okay, Chapman was a crook. I think that was established during the
course of the Fred Bushell's trial. But then motor racing seems to
attract picaresque characters who, how shall I put this delicately, have
an ambivalent attitude towards the finer points of business ethics.
Bernie himself, Flavio Briatore, Vijay Mallya come to mind, I'm sure
there are many more.

Chapman may have adapted other people's ideas, but then designers do
that all the time and 7 WCCs, 6 WDCs and a win at the Indy 500 surely
attest to Chapman's brilliance.

A more serious charge seems to me to be that Chapman ignored safety
concerns in his pursuit of success. Certainly Lotus cars were
notoriously fragile and failures seem to have been way above the norm.

I agree that many Lotus 24 owners had every right to feel aggrieved at
the introduction of the 25 (which was *much* lighter and stiffer than
the 24)having been promised parity with the works cars.

Chapman was certainly no saint.
--
Sir Tim

“Growing old is mandatory; growing up is optional”
Bobster
2017-01-28 15:57:07 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sir Tim
Post by Sir Tim
Jimmy Clark feared and hated Spa, but always did well there.
Yes, because although Chapman had a very corrupted
brain, he was very good at pushing toward his goal of
winning.
<snip>
Okay, Chapman was a crook. I think that was established during the
course of the Fred Bushell's trial. But then motor racing seems to
attract picaresque characters who, how shall I put this delicately, have
an ambivalent attitude towards the finer points of business ethics.
Bernie himself, Flavio Briatore, Vijay Mallya come to mind, I'm sure
there are many more.
I was reading about Chapman and Bushell today, and it seems, according to some long time Lotus employees, that a change came over Chapman at some point. They tie it to the sponsorship deal with Essex, with Essex people, awash with oil money, introduced Chapman to the good life, 5 star hotels, the best restaurants and so on. After that Chapman spent less time with his engineers, more time dining out, and seemed to become less interested in the business.

Though that seems to me to be about the time that Chapman was getting disinterested in F1 in the aftermath of the twin chassis car being prevented from racing.

It's further noted that "Lotus" was actually several individual companies. There's a tale of a "Team Lotus" van going to fill up at the local garage. They get told no, Team Lotus has not paid it's account.

So what about "Lotus Engineering". No, that account isn't paid up either.

"Lotus Components"? No (I am making up the names of the various companies, but the punch line stays the same).

"Lotus Transmission Services"? No. They haven't paid.

What about "Lotus Auto Consulting"? Oh... hang on. I'll go into the office and have a look.

Comes back and says "that account's OK. You can fill up on that one."

Bushell had set everything up so that the financial year ends were all different, and used to move money around as one company closed it's books and another was nearing year end.

The various companies were also a way of saving their customers VAT. You'd buy different parts of the car from different companies - so it wasn't a car, it was a kit. And then you could get a different company, which just happened to a name starting with Lotus, to put all those bits together for you.

But later they started moving money around between the various companies, and apparently the sponsors got fed up because they were paying, or thought they were paying, for this year's championship campaign, but the money would go to paying off outstanding debts incurred by another of the Lotus companies as Bushell moved the money around between them.
Post by Sir Tim
Chapman may have adapted other people's ideas, but then designers do
that all the time and 7 WCCs, 6 WDCs and a win at the Indy 500 surely
attest to Chapman's brilliance.
I think some of it was that some engineer (maybe outside of Lotus) had come up with something, but Chapman could see how that might be applied.

He's not the only one. Williams engineers have talked about how you can show Patrick Head something and he immediately sees the implications of it, even if you can't.
Post by Sir Tim
A more serious charge seems to me to be that Chapman ignored safety
concerns in his pursuit of success. Certainly Lotus cars were
notoriously fragile and failures seem to have been way above the norm.
Yes. The road cars were fragile too. Jackie Stewart said he would never have driven for Chapman for exactly that reason. When Rindt had a pair of offers - Lotus and Brabham - Stewart told him that if he wanted to win a championship he should drive for Lotus, but if he wanted to retire one day he should drive for Brabham.

Was it wilful ignoring the danger, or was it just that he put lightness and his theories above everything?

I recall reading that Chapman was a big admirer of Ferry Porsche, and especially Porsche's idea that a race car should complete the race distance and then immediately fall apart into it's components, and if it hadn't done that it was overbuilt. Some observed that Chapman took it just a bit too far.
Post by Sir Tim
I agree that many Lotus 24 owners had every right to feel aggrieved at
the introduction of the 25 (which was *much* lighter and stiffer than
the 24)having been promised parity with the works cars.
Chapman was certainly no saint.
--
Sir Tim
“Growing old is mandatory; growing up is optional”
Halmyre
2017-01-28 16:57:35 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bobster
Post by Sir Tim
Post by Sir Tim
Jimmy Clark feared and hated Spa, but always did well there.
Yes, because although Chapman had a very corrupted
brain, he was very good at pushing toward his goal of
winning.
<snip>
Okay, Chapman was a crook. I think that was established during the
course of the Fred Bushell's trial. But then motor racing seems to
attract picaresque characters who, how shall I put this delicately, have
an ambivalent attitude towards the finer points of business ethics.
Bernie himself, Flavio Briatore, Vijay Mallya come to mind, I'm sure
there are many more.
I was reading about Chapman and Bushell today, and it seems, according to some long time Lotus employees, that a change came over Chapman at some point. They tie it to the sponsorship deal with Essex, with Essex people, awash with oil money, introduced Chapman to the good life, 5 star hotels, the best restaurants and so on. After that Chapman spent less time with his engineers, more time dining out, and seemed to become less interested in the business.
Though that seems to me to be about the time that Chapman was getting disinterested in F1 in the aftermath of the twin chassis car being prevented from racing.
It's further noted that "Lotus" was actually several individual companies. There's a tale of a "Team Lotus" van going to fill up at the local garage. They get told no, Team Lotus has not paid it's account.
So what about "Lotus Engineering". No, that account isn't paid up either.
"Lotus Components"? No (I am making up the names of the various companies, but the punch line stays the same).
"Lotus Transmission Services"? No. They haven't paid.
What about "Lotus Auto Consulting"? Oh... hang on. I'll go into the office and have a look.
Comes back and says "that account's OK. You can fill up on that one."
Bushell had set everything up so that the financial year ends were all different, and used to move money around as one company closed it's books and another was nearing year end.
The various companies were also a way of saving their customers VAT. You'd buy different parts of the car from different companies - so it wasn't a car, it was a kit. And then you could get a different company, which just happened to a name starting with Lotus, to put all those bits together for you.
But later they started moving money around between the various companies, and apparently the sponsors got fed up because they were paying, or thought they were paying, for this year's championship campaign, but the money would go to paying off outstanding debts incurred by another of the Lotus companies as Bushell moved the money around between them.
Post by Sir Tim
Chapman may have adapted other people's ideas, but then designers do
that all the time and 7 WCCs, 6 WDCs and a win at the Indy 500 surely
attest to Chapman's brilliance.
I think some of it was that some engineer (maybe outside of Lotus) had come up with something, but Chapman could see how that might be applied.
He's not the only one. Williams engineers have talked about how you can show Patrick Head something and he immediately sees the implications of it, even if you can't.
Post by Sir Tim
A more serious charge seems to me to be that Chapman ignored safety
concerns in his pursuit of success. Certainly Lotus cars were
notoriously fragile and failures seem to have been way above the norm.
Yes. The road cars were fragile too. Jackie Stewart said he would never have driven for Chapman for exactly that reason. When Rindt had a pair of offers - Lotus and Brabham - Stewart told him that if he wanted to win a championship he should drive for Lotus, but if he wanted to retire one day he should drive for Brabham.
And yet Stewart started his F1 career driving a Lotus at the Rand Grand Prix. Would probably have won too, but it broke...

Stewart was also aware that he would very much be #2 to Clark at Lotus, and Lotus #2s were way down the pecking order.
Sir Tim
2017-01-28 23:23:57 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bobster
The various companies were also a way of saving their customers VAT.
You'd buy different parts of the car from different companies - so it
wasn't a car, it was a kit. And then you could get a different company,
which just happened to a name starting with Lotus, to put all those bits together for you.
Actually the tax involved was Purchase Tax. Unlike VAT, which replaced it
in 1973, this was applied at the wholesale or manufacturing level. A car in
kit form was not liable to Purchase Tax as long as assembly instructions
were not included, however the rules said nothing about the inclusion of
*disassembly* instructions, so Chapman got round the rules by including
these with the Lotus 7 kit. All the enthusiast had to do was to follow them
in reverse.

At that time I had a friend who was a senior civil servant involved with
Purchase Tax. He had had several brushes with Chapman and was incensed by
the above, and by the later practice, which you mention, whereby a customer
could effectively have the kit assembled for him.
--
Sir Tim
"Growing old is mandatory; growing up is optional"
a425couple
2017-01-29 04:08:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
The various companies were ----
Change of subject.
Sir Tim, when you were taking your canal boat
around England, did you ever go to Bath?
(Spa --- into Bath, whatever!!!)
I'm seeing pictures of the Pulteney Weir
(like 4 one foot water stairsteps) and perhaps
a boatable channel (for a canoe or kayak???)
down the middle of the V.
But the tour boats right next to the waterfall
look a bit scary,,,,, but if it is smooth cement
and only one or 2 inches of water going over,
oh well.
Please tell me what you remember or know.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Pulteney+Weir/@51.3826535,-2.3574672,3a,75y,90t/data=!3m8!1e2!3m6!1s-2Q5cbHrsek0%2FV9Mm7YGVubI%2FAAAAAAAAKRY%2FAOTMILVQAtkFibIkKMfasEJIP1SwXHKhgCJkC!2e4!3e12!6s%2F%2Flh3.googleusercontent.com%2F-2Q5cbHrsek0%2FV9Mm7YGVubI%2FAAAAAAAAKRY%2FAOTMILVQAtkFibIkKMfasEJIP1SwXHKhgCJkC%2Fs203-k-no%2F!7i3024!8i3024!4m5!3m4!1s0x0:0x792f509e82fdd1a9!8m2!3d51.3826535!4d-2.3574673!6m1!1e1
geoff
2017-01-29 05:16:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
The various companies were ----
Change of subject. Sir Tim, when you were taking your canal boat
around England, did you ever go to Bath? (Spa --- into Bath,
whatever!!!)
Maybe he went to Poole ....

geoff
Sir Tim
2017-01-30 18:00:49 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by a425couple
The various companies were ----
Change of subject.
Sir Tim, when you were taking your canal boat
around England, did you ever go to Bath?
Yes indeed. We moored at The Weirs, just under North Parade Bridge.
Post by a425couple
I'm seeing pictures of the Pulteney Weir
(like 4 one foot water stairsteps) and perhaps
a boatable channel (for a canoe or kayak???)
down the middle of the V.
But the tour boats right next to the waterfall
look a bit scary,,,,, but if it is smooth cement
and only one or 2 inches of water going over,
oh well.
Please tell me what you remember or know.
You don’t normally have to pay a mooring fee for short term visits but
at this popular spot the city charged us (1998) 4 UK pounds for 24 hours.

We winded (canal term for turning round) just below the weir; I don’t
remember it being any particular problem, certainly not as scary, at
least for me (vertigo) as the 19 foot Bath Deep Lock.

We have moored quite safely in the middle of London, Birmingham and
Manchester and certainly did not anticipate problems in Bath, which is
regarded by Brits as a city of culture and refinement. We were wrong!
At The Weirs we had stones dropped on us from the bridge, suffered the
mindless yelling of a group of youngsters, who then started swinging
upside down on the nearby railings so that they could peer in through
our windows and a party of squawking females who woke us up in the
middle of the night.

On our return journey we moored in a different part of the city and
twice had the boat violently rocked: once by three small boys (who did
not expect a 60-year-old man to chase after them, and shouted “wanker”
at me as soon as they were a safe distance away) and once in the middle
of the night when the rocking was accompanied by loud shouts of ‘Wake up!’

It ain't all peace and tranquillity on the English waterways :-)
--
Sir Tim

“Nothing so perfectly combines cleanliness with godliness as 'My Lord
Bishop of Bath and Wells'”
a425couple
2017-01-30 23:10:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by a425couple
Change of subject.
Sir Tim, when you were taking your canal boat
around England, did you ever go to Bath?
On our return journey we moored in a different part of the city and twice
had the boat violently rocked: once by three small boys (who did not
expect a 60-year-old man to chase after them, and shouted “wanker” at me
as soon as they were a safe distance away) and once in the middle of the
night when the rocking was accompanied by loud shouts of ‘Wake up!’
It ain't all peace and tranquillity on the English waterways :-)
Hooligans!! Hooligans I tell you!
Did it make you wish you could chase them down and
taser them until their teeth light up like Christmas Trees?
Frighten them back onto path of righteousness, I tell you!

Did you ever read this story?

Story of Husband Who Self Taser-ed Himself

Just try reading this without laughing till you cry!!!
This is hilarious!!
Pocket Taser Stun Gun, a great gift for the wife. A guy who purchased his
lovely wife a pocket Taser for their anniversary submitted this:

Last weekend I saw something at Larry's Pistol & Pawn Shop that sparked my
interest. The occasion was our 15th anniversary and I was looking for a
little something extra for my wife Julie. What I came across was a
100,000-volt, pocket/purse-sized taser. The effects of the taser were
supposed to be short lived, with no long-term adverse affect on your
assailant, allowing her adequate time to retreat to safety and every woman
needs something to protect herself with, right??

WAY TOO COOL! Long story short, I bought the device and brought it home. I
loaded two AAA batteries in the darn thing and pushed the button. Nothing!

I was disappointed. I learned, however, that if I pushed the button AND
pressed it against a metal surface at the same time; I'd get the blue arc of
electricity darting back and forth between the prongs. AWESOME!!!
Unfortunately, I have yet to explain to Julie what that burn spot is on the
face of her microwave.

Okay, so I was home alone with this new toy, thinking to myself that it
couldn't be all that bad with only two triple-A batteries, right?

There I sat in my recliner, my cat Gracie looking on intently (trusting
little soul) while I was reading the directions and thinking that I really
needed to try this thing out on a flesh & blood moving target. I must admit
I thought about zapping Gracie (for a fraction of a second) and thought
better of it. She is such a sweet cat. But, if I was going to give this
thing to my wife to protect herself against a mugger, I did want some
assurance that it would work as advertised. Am I wrong?

So, there I sat in a pair of shorts and a tank top with my reading glasses
perched delicately on the bridge of my nose, directions in one hand, and
taser in another. The directions said that a one-second burst would shock
and disorient your assailant; a two-second burst was supposed to cause
muscle spasms and a major loss of bodily control; a three-second burst would
purportedly make your assailant flop on the ground like a fish out of water.
Any burst longer than three seconds would be wasting the batteries.

All the while I'm looking at this little device measuring about 5' long,
less than 3/4 inch in circumference; pretty cute really and (loaded with two
itsy, bitsy triple-A batteries) thinking to myself, 'no possible way!'

What happened next is almost beyond description, but I'll do my best...?

I'm sitting there alone, Gracie looking on with her head cocked to one side
as if to say, 'don't do it dummy,' reasoning that a one second burst from
such a tiny little ole thing couldn't hurt all that bad. I decided to give
myself a one second burst just for heck of it. I touched the prongs to my
naked thigh, pushed the button, and . . HOLY MOTHER OF GOD . . .
WEAPONS OF
MASS DESTRUCTION . ... WHAT THE HECK!!!

I'm pretty sure Jessie Ventura ran in through the side door, picked me up in
the recliner, then body slammed us both on the carpet, over and over and
over again. I vaguely recall waking up on my side in the fetal position,
with tears in my eyes, body soaking wet, both nipples on fire, testicles
nowhere to be found, with my left arm tucked under my body in the oddest
position, and tingling in my legs?

The cat was making meowing sounds I had never heard before, clinging to a
picture frame hanging above the fireplace, obviously in an attempt to avoid
getting slammed by my body flopping all over the living room.

Note: If you ever feel compelled to 'mug' yourself with a taser, one note of
caution: there is no such thing as a one second burst when you zap yourself!
You will not let go of that thing until it is dislodged from your hand by a
violent thrashing about on the floor.. A three second burst would be
considered conservative?
IT HURT LIKE HELL!!!

A minute or so later (I can't be sure, as time was a relative thing at that
point), I collected my wits (what little I had left), sat up and surveyed
the landscape. My bent reading glasses were on the mantel of the fireplace.
The recliner was upside down and about 8 feet or so from where it originally
was. My triceps, right thigh and both nipples were still twitching. My face
felt like it had been shot up with Novocain, and my bottom lip weighed 88
lbs. I had no control over the drooling. Apparently I pooped on myself, but
was too numb to know for sure and my sense of smell was gone. I saw a faint
smoke cloud above my head which I believe came from my hair. I'm still
looking for my testicles and I'm offering a significant reward for their
safe return!!

'If you think education is difficult, try being stupid.'
http://www.dailycognition.com/index.php/2009/02/21/story-of-husband-who-self-taser-ed-himself.html
a425couple
2017-01-30 23:59:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sir Tim
Post by a425couple
Change of subject.
Sir Tim, when you were taking your canal boat
around England, did you ever go to Bath?
Yes indeed. We moored at The Weirs, just under North Parade Bridge.
Post by a425couple
I'm seeing pictures of the Pulteney Weir
(like 4 one foot water stairsteps) and perhaps
a boatable channel (for a canoe or kayak???)
down the middle of the V.
But the tour boats right next to the waterfall
look a bit scary,,,,, but if it is smooth cement
and only one or 2 inches of water going over,
oh well.
I see the Pulteney Weir (V shaped waterfalls)
and then there is another channel around the side.

Is the purpose of the Weir, to remove enough
volume of water flow, so that boats are able to go
upstream in the boat channel?
(and not just get flushed downstream)

How much speed are most canal boats capable of?
Sir Tim
2017-01-31 16:13:07 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sir Tim
Post by a425couple
Change of subject.
Sir Tim, when you were taking your canal boat
around England, did you ever go to Bath?
Yes indeed. We moored at The Weirs, just under North Parade Bridge.
Post by a425couple
I'm seeing pictures of the Pulteney Weir
(like 4 one foot water stairsteps) and perhaps
a boatable channel (for a canoe or kayak???)
down the middle of the V.
But the tour boats right next to the waterfall
look a bit scary,,,,, but if it is smooth cement
and only one or 2 inches of water going over,
oh well.
I see the Pulteney Weir (V shaped waterfalls) and then there is another
channel around the side.
Is the purpose of the Weir, to remove enough volume of water flow, so
that boats are able to go upstream in the boat channel? (and not just
get flushed downstream)
More importantly to prevent flooding above the weir

On the Thames all locks have a weirs but, unlike Pulteney, these are
usually situated to one side. In the event of heavy rain the lock keeper
will fully open the weir gates (and sometimes the lock gates as well).
Of course this creates a very strong flow in the reach below and in
these conditions boats are usually issued with a red card telling them
that they use the river at their own risk.

Lady Tim has reminded me that we did in fact go up one of the side
channels at Pulteney so that we could turn above the weir and come down
the other channel. Intricate steering by SWMBO!
How much speed are most canal boats capable of?
The average narrowboat can manage about 4 mph but of course it's often
necessary to go much slower, especially when passing moored boats.
--
Sir Tim

“Growing old is mandatory; growing up is optional”
brafield
2017-01-28 21:55:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Saturday, January 28, 2017 at 5:08:15 AM UTC-8, Sir Tim wrote:

Dr. Robert Post, who spent over 20 years following, studying, and writing about the technology and culture of US drag racing, concluded shrewdly that the builders and drivers in that branch of motor sport "have what is, at bottom, a criminal mindset."

I agree. Nobody set out to design, build, or race in order to be a saint and devoutly follow the spirit and letter of the rules.
Halmyre
2017-01-28 23:09:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by brafield
Dr. Robert Post, who spent over 20 years following, studying, and writing about the technology and culture of US drag racing, concluded shrewdly that the builders and drivers in that branch of motor sport "have what is, at bottom, a criminal mindset."
I agree. Nobody set out to design, build, or race in order to be a saint and devoutly follow the spirit and letter of the rules.
That's a bit of a sweeping statement. I think the good Doctor Post has inhaled a bit too much nitro-methane.
Halmyre
2017-01-28 14:33:26 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by a425couple
Post by Sir Tim
http://youtu.be/r_PxCW8uS9g
The old circuit of course. --
Sir Tim
Thanks for posting that.
Yes. And it shows film from a street car at normal
speeds going around the old long course.
When we were there in April I very much enjoyed
driving around exploring the remains of the old long
course. And surprisingly to me (who lives in a area
of the USA where increasing population and building
and change is great) an awful lot of roads and buildings
were still very recognizable.
I could even recognize the uphill 'field' that Sterling Moss
crashed into when Chapman's Lotus 18 failed in 1960.
Post by Sir Tim
Jimmy Clark feared and hated Spa, but always did well there.
Yes, because although Chapman had a very currupted
brain, he was very good at pushing toward his goal of
winning.
No, I do not think winning at the cost of that many deaths
and serious injuries and broken promises is a proper cost
of the sport.)
So starting in 1961, Colin Chapman was pushing sales
of what was to be his Lotus factory 1962 car, the Lotus 24.
A fair number bought his car. Then at this race in 1962 at
Spa Team Lotus shows up with the new monocoque car,
the Lotus #25. Harsh words were spoken.
by the way
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/motorsport/formulaone/3039669/Dark-clouds-taint-Lotus-founder-Colin-Chapman.html
"Dark clouds taint Lotus founder Colin Chapman
By Brian Stater 12:01AM GMT 14 Dec 2002
Colin Chapman is mostly remembered as the man who brought unprecedented
flair to British motor racing through Lotus, the company he founded in a
workshop attached to his father's pub.
But now, at the 20th anniversary of his death, a rather different picture
has emerged. In place of Chapman, the inspirational engineer, we have
Chapman as a liar, cheat and drug abuser who was spared a prison sentence
only by the fatal heart attack he suffered, in December 1982, aged 56. -----
"
Read the whole cite before disagreeing.
Actually, a fellow novice with me, while I went off to SE Asia,
went to England to try for his big racing break, and delt a number of
times with Chapman. He found he had to count his fingers
after each meeting!
Post by Sir Tim
“Growing old is mandatory; growing up is optional”
Well, except a fair number of racers did not grow old!!
http://www.f1technical.net/articles/12773
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Formula_One_fatalities
http://forums.autosport.com/topic/10558-what-caused-the-jochen-rindt-crash-at-monza-in-1970/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Team_Lotus
"While very innovative, Chapman also came under criticism for the structural
fragility of his designs. The number of top drivers seriously injured or
killed in Lotus machinery was considerable – notably Stirling Moss, Alan
Stacey, Mike Taylor, Jim Clark, Mike Spence, Bobby Marshman, Graham Hill,
Jochen Rindt and Ronnie Peterson."
You can't lay all those at Chapman's door:

Alan Stacey - bird strike
Jim Clark - puncture
Mike Spence - collided with retaining wall
Bobby Marshman - collision
Graham Hill - puncture
Ronnie Peterson - racing accident

Although he crashed due to mechanical breakage, Jochen Rindt would probably have survived had he been properly belted in - he wasn't wearing crotch straps.
Loading...