Tacet

We have tied-up there in order to shop at Tesco. Getting out of the site and onto the road is possible, if a little awkward.

Put another way: Think of a number - add a number - subtract the same (latter) number and guess what! You now have the same number you first though of. Assuming you can add and subtract. For the pedantic, and putting aside the whole year issue, only in 2018 will the total be 2018. Quelle surprise.

It's not a repair as such, but very small weeps on the hot side sometimes seal when the chalk and crystals form through evaporation of the water. Your limited use of the cylinder to store hot water might mean you can't wait long enough to test your luck.

You could get a calor gas poker - and you still can.

My grandfather put a metal door at the top of the flue, in the loftspace. The trick was to throw the correct quantity of water through the door. If you got it just right, the water largely turned to steam and extinguished the chimney fire. Too much, and it made a terrible mess on the floor. The opening for the door was pre-made following an incident with a stuck chimney brush. He would also move a fire from one room to another by taking a shovelful of blazing coal,

The link doesn't say it was an exclusively navy thing - nor that sack trolleys were invariably used. I don't claim any direct experience - but my Dad wasn't in the Navy. It does seem remarkable (or unbelievable) these days - which is why I made the post. The kids today... Returning to the one CWT sacks of recent years, the technique of the coal man was well considered. The sacks were taken off the truck at shoulder height and rolled around he shoulder into the bunker - which meant that he didn't have to raise the sack manually. If the bunker was too high for easy discharge, a sack or two were put down on the ground to form a step. The coal man wore a leather wimple (or is there another name) of hat and shoulder. It must have eased chafing and reduced the quantity of coal dust passing between neck and collar. Even then, the annual delivery was something of interest to me.

Well, I don't remember it. As a kid in the 1960s it was my task to count the 40 x 1cwt sacks that were delivered when summer prices prevailed. But my father told me that 2cwt sacks were previously in use- and wikipedia offer some support for a unit known as the large sack https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sack_(unit)

I lost confidence in the use of sound signals when a boat ahead announced its engines were going astern. On the first few occasions, it had me convinced - but after a while it became apparent that the invariable practice was three short blasts at every bridge hole and slight bend.

There was a time when coal was delivered by the large sack - that is 2cwt or a bit over 100kg.

This was explained to a boater who asked why his boat had mysteriously spun round on two occasions that day above County Lock, when heavily in flood And I thought that it had been understood - until he asked which end of his boat was the upstream end.

I need to turn the clock back a good few years, but an 18hp two stroke on a Norman 17 used a near-ruinous 1 gallon per hour - aka 4.5 litres per hour. A change to a Honda 75 reduced consumption to a gallon every 6 hours - or thereabouts - aka 0.75 litres per hour. The Honda was one of the first in the country; I recall going to Uxbridge in around 1972 to collect it. I still have the engine and its runs OK - but it is no longer used.

A question really. If you are lifting the cabin off, can the angle/upstand be welded on such that it is inside the cabin even if behind the linings? It would weather better.

So a bit like a shop, then? You know, the customer sends a speech message to a member of staff and the goods are delivered at the till (known as a counter) when shopping is complete. The customer has a hand written gadget in the form of a schedule or shopping list.

The units are a nonsense. It probably means 150W (300ah per day at 12 volts) - but that is not what its says

In 1978, you mother's tenancy was quite probably protected by the Rent Act 1977. This limited the rent to "fair rent" which made the unreal assumption that there was no scarcity of accommodation to rent in the locality. It is questionable whether, even with that important assumption, the tone of established for fair rents met its definition. Whilst a fair rent seems very laudable, the effect was that landlords were unwilling to grant tenancies and the market shrank. Any property that was subject to a regulated tenancy was worth, as a rule of thumb, one third of its vacant possession value as there was significant security of tenure. So only those wished who wished to lose two thirds of the value would let a flat or house. Housing is a very important issue. Come the revolution it will be different, but In a broadly capitalist society expecting one sector (property owners) to bear the responsibility for housing the less-wealthy at non-market rates isn't going to work for long, if at all. It makes no more sense than requiring car owners to provide a cheap public transport system or expecting doctors to work for minimum wage. Income to landlords should (as it is) be subject to tax on broadly the same principles as income from other types of investments. And responsibility for providing for the housing, health, public transport, pensions, benefits and hand-outs of the less-fortunate is a shared responsibility via the government.