Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

George,

I don't think your...is a joke... comment is all that extreme. My reply was not having a go at that part of your post, as I am sure that most people including yourself think the basic need of H and S are well intended and required.

greekman---I didn't think for one minute that you were 'having a go' I've read enough of your posts to realise that. Yes H&S has it's place of course.
2517

It doesn't help when you get Idiot teacher's taking children out to sea in canoe's and up mountain's when they have been warned about bad weather.

aldwickk-------you are right, one of my ex colleagues lost his son in the Lime Bay canoe disaster.
2517

George,

OK. Just did not wish to be misunderstood, as if you had taken my remark the wrong way and it had upset you, you might require counseling.

Counseling, now there is another word that has been overstretched in use.
In my own profession as a Police Traffic Officer, my force bought in a system where if you had attended any road death, or other traumatic experience the welfare office would contact you to see how you were dealing with the aftermath of that incident.
I had no trouble with that, nor did I need there services, but some did. The problem now is, that we, the general public are offered counseling almost as a must have.
Many years ago before most police forces closed their bars, the best way of dealing with a traumatic incident was to have the final stages of any debrief in the bar.
I found that those involve were far more likely to 'open up' after a couple of pints, than under counseling.
Yes there is stress out there in the big wide world, and sometimes help is needed, but we have gone so far down the 'counseling mollycoddling' route that it is almost required that you have to admit that you have a problem.
Me, a couple of pints after work did the trick fine. Being driven home after of course.

Too late greekman been to see my shrink already because I was so upset at your comment. Ha!Ha! Couple of pint sorts me out as well, my daughters reckon two pints is more than I can take these days.
2517

That bring's us on to post traumatic stress in war zones.

One to look out for in 2012. It's going to be much faster than a bullet! (well, most bullets!)

Northampton engineers helping to power record-breaking attempt to reach 1,000mph

Northampton Chronicle
Sat Nov 13, 2010



ENGINEERS from Northampton are working on an engine which will help power a record-breaking attempt to drive a car at more than 1,000 mph.

Workers from Northampton, St James- based Cosworth have built a special version of their Formula 1 engine to be used in the Bloodhound Supersonic Car, which it is hoped will reach 1,050mph when it is driven across a South African desert in 2012.

Cosworths chief executive, Tim Routsis, said staff at the Northampton firm had been delighted to work on such a prestigious project.

He said: The invitation to participate in such a high profile and adventurous project is both exciting and a privilege for Cosworth.

We look forward to working with the Bloodhound team to develop the new technology necessary to achieve the record and inspire a new generation of engineers and scientists.

Bloodhound has been designed by the British team which set the current land speed record of 763 mph with their Thrust car in 1997.

As well as the Cosworth power unit, Bloodhound will also be powered by both a rocket and a jet engine.

The Cosworth engine will be used to supply fuel to the rocket, pumping the fluid at an average speed of 75 pints a second.

As well as their engine, Cosworth will also supply electronics for Bloodhound which will help control the vehicle and allow engineers and members of the public to see data beamed back from the car during its record attempts.

The car will be driven by Wing Commander Andy Green, who piloted Thrust in 1997.

He said: Ive met graduate engineers who are adamant our previous record was what inspired their career choice as youngsters.

That sort of thing makes all the effort worthwhile. Bloodhound will be so much faster and, we hope, will fire up every school kid about science and technology.

Bloodhounds record-breaking attempt is planned to be held on the Hakskeen Pan in South Africa, a space the size of 4,800 football pitches, during summer 2012.

Last week, the Cosworth engine secured another success with its first pole position (*) since the company returned to Formula 1 earlier this year.

(*) Nico Hulkenberg's surprise run to pole position for the Brazilian Grand Prix

"Hollie" in a 360 degree pose:

Here

Lovely lines, the ones on the Bloodhound aren't bad either.
2517

ShareCrazy Gold Poll http://www.popmodal.com/video/798/Margaret-Thatcher-The-Iron-Lady-at-her-Best


Who is the greatest PM Britain has ever had?
Gladstone
4%
Churchill
36%
Thatcher
49%
Blair
4%
Walpole
7%
Total Votes: 123

No Gordon Brown? ;)

No Cameron or his vanity box. 8-)

Edit,

What a poser he is!

Can't seem to see the last two posts for some odd reason. Have I missed anything important?

Nor did I. Thank technology.

Isaacs,

Perhaps, your medication.

If you want to see Gordon Brown top a poll it would be ' Who is the worst Prime Minister we have had'
2517

The Times's Top 50 Prime Ministers
Name Party Term in office The Times Rating [8] Matthew Parris Rating [9] Peter Riddell Rating [10] Ben MacIntyre Rating [11]
1 Robert Walpole Whig 1721-1742 9 14 16 7
2 Spencer Compton, 1st Earl of Wilmington Whig 1742-1743 50 51 42
3 Henry Pelham Whig 1743-1754 29 19 34 20
4 Thomas Pelham-Holles, 1st Duke of Newcastle-upon-Tyne Whig 1754-1756 41 40 32 41
5 William Cavendish, 4th Duke of Devonshire Whig 1756-1757 44 35 44 47
6 Thomas Pelham-Holles, 1st Duke of Newcastle-upon-Tyne Whig 1757-1762 41 40 32 41
7 John Stuart, 3rd Earl of Bute Tory 1762-1763 46 44 49 40
8 George Grenville Whig 1763-1765 48 51 48 39
9 Charles Watson-Wentworth, 2nd Marquess of Rockingham Whig 1765-1766 32 30 42 38
10 William Pitt, 1st Earl of Chatham Whig 1766-1768 16 25 14 18
11 Augustus FitzRoy, 3rd Duke of Grafton Whig 1768-1770 49 42 50 49
12 Frederick North, Lord North Tory 1770-1782 50 49 37 44
13 Charles Watson-Wentworth, 2nd Marquess of Rockingham Whig 1782 32 30 42 38
14 William Petty, 2nd Earl of Shelburne Whig 1782-1783 26 29 41 5
15 William Cavendish-Bentinck, 3rd Duke of Portland Whig 1783 39 27 43 37
16 William Pitt the Younger Tory 1783-1801 4 12 5 3
17 Henry Addington, 1st Viscount Sidmouth Tory 1801-1804 39 36 39 36
18 William Pitt the Younger Tory 1804-1806 4 12 5 3
19 William Grenville, 1st Baron Grenville Whig 1806-1807 43 39 40 35
20 William Cavendish-Bentinck, 3rd Duke of Portland Whig 1807-1809 39 27 43 37
21 Spencer Perceval Tory 1809-1812 36 38 47 33
22 Robert Jenkinson, 2nd Earl of Liverpool Tory 1812-1827 19 22 22 15
23 George Canning Tory 1827 8 36 23
24 Frederick John Robinson, 1st Viscount Goderich Tory 1827-1828 37 52 51
25 Arthur Wellesley, 1st Duke of Wellington Tory 1828-1830 24 18 30 17
26 Charles Grey, 2nd Earl Grey Whig 1830-1834 8 9 10 6
27 William Lamb, 2nd Viscount Melbourne Whig 1834 25 26 21 32
28 Arthur Wellesley, 1st Duke of Wellington Tory 1834 24 18 30 17
29 Robert Peel Conservative 1834-1835 6 6 8 8
30 William Lamb, 2nd Viscount Melbourne Whig 1835-1841 25 26 21 32
31 Robert Peel Conservative 1841-1846 6 6 8 8
32 John Russell, 1st Earl Russell Whig 1846-1852 21 15 29 14
33 Edward Smith-Stanley, 14th Earl of Derby Conservative 1852 18 23 19 16
34 George Hamilton-Gordon, 4th Earl of Aberdeen Whig 1852-1855 42 41 31 43
35 Henry John Temple, 3rd Viscount Palmerston Tory 1855-1858 11 20 11
36 Edward Smith-Stanley, 14th Earl of Derby Conservative 1858-1859 18 23 19 16
37 Henry John Temple, 3rd Viscount Palmerston Liberal 1859-1865 11 20 11
38 John Russell, 1st Earl Russell Whig 1865-1866 21 15 29 14
39 Edward Smith-Stanley, 14th Earl of Derby Conservative 1866-1868 18 23 19 16
40 Benjamin Disraeli Conservative 1868 10 7 6 9
41 William Ewart Gladstone Liberal 1868-1874 3 4 2 4
42 Benjamin Disraeli Conservative 1874-1880 10 7 6 9
43 William Ewart Gladstone Liberal 1880-1885 3 4 2 4
44 Robert Cecil, 3rd Marquess of Salisbury Conservative 1885-1886 11 10 12 25
45 William Ewart Gladstone Liberal 1886 3 4 2 4
46 Robert Cecil, 3rd Marquess of Salisbury Conservative 1886-1892 11 10 12 25
47 Gladstone Liberal 1892-1894 3 4 2 4
48 Archibald Primrose, 5th Earl of Rosebery Liberal 1894-1895 45 46 46 50
49 Robert Cecil, 3rd Marquess of Salisbury Conservative 1895-1902 11 10 12 25
50 Arthur Balfour Conservative 1902-1905 30 28 38 31
51 Henry Campbell-Bannerman Liberal 1905-1908 22 24 26 30
52 H. H. Asquith Liberal 1908-1916 11 21 9 26
53 David Lloyd George Liberal 1916-1922 2 2 3 2
54 Bonar Law Conservative 1922-1923 34 47 35 24
55 Stanley Baldwin Conservative 1923-1924 14 20 11 13
56 Ramsay MacDonald Labour 1924 33 48 33 29
57 Stanley Baldwin Conservative 1924-1929 14 20 11 13
58 Ramsay MacDonald Labour 1929-1935 33 48 33 29
59 Stanley Baldwin Conservative 1935-1937 14 20 11 13
60 Neville Chamberlain Conservative 1937-1940 35 45 28 52
61 Winston Churchill Conservative 1940-1945 1 1 1 1
62 Clement Attlee Labour 1945-1951 7 5 7 22
63 Winston Churchill Conservative 1951-1955 1 1 1 1
64 Anthony Eden Conservative 1955-1957 47 43 45 48
65 Harold Macmillan Conservative 1957-1963 15 17 13 21
66 Alec Douglas-Home Conservative 1963-1964 36 32 27 34
67 Harold Wilson Labour 1964-1970 20 33 17 19
68 Edward Heath Conservative 1970-1974 23 13 18 46
69 Harold Wilson Labour 1974-1976 20 33 17 19
70 James Callaghan Labour 1976-1979 27 31 24 27
71 Margaret Thatcher Conservative 1979-1990 5 3 4 10
72 John Major Conservative 1990-1997 28 16 23 28
73 Tony Blair Labour 1997-2007 16 34 15 12
74 Gordon Brown Labour 2007-2010 36 52 25 45

Can you really compare Robert Walpole , 1721 to 1742 to say PM's of 1900 to 2010 ?
For a start how strong were trade union's in 1700's compared to the 1960's