Ground Hits Plane Video

The second rule of flight is that every aircraft is always able to reach the ground. Take a look at this video of what appears to be a Pitts Special ending its display unconventionally by shunting a car. I once saw a K-13 glider shunt a Montego a couple of yards after ground looping. Amazingly, it appeared the K-13 escaped with just a dented nose and a shattered canopy but a full engineering inspection was merited. What annoys me is the amateur, nay ignorant, style of the report by the Beeb hack. What does "the bottom frame off the airplane" mean? The undercarriage, the undersurface of the fuselage, the lower wing or all three? And given that the BBC is the British Broadcasting Corporation, what is an airplane when the proper word is aeroplane or aircraft? Arrgh! Flying can be reported properly by the BBC as this post shows.

The BBC Drops a Clanger With Torchwood, Children of Earth

Torchwood Children of Earth, the 5 part mini-series was well up to its usual standards, although the central characters ("Captain"* Jack, Gwen and Ianto) were easily out-acted by everyone else from Peter Capaldi downwards. Within its genre of trashy scifi it is good and I enjoyed it, watching the first three episodes back-to-back on iPlayer.
One thing made me laugh, however. The original dozen children abducted by the alien 456** species to act as drug implants (ugh) were secretly provided by the British Government of the time in return for a virus antidote. It was clearly stated several times that the handover took place in 1965. 1965! When was Harold Wilson's Labour Government*** in office? 1964-1970! So the BBC is accusing Labour of perpetrating the most ghastly crime against the weakest members of our nation, not only that the children were from a Scottish care home. Could Torchwood be evidence that the BBC is attempting to curry favour with its next licence setter, the Tory Party? After all, changing the original abduction date to any time between 1951 and 1964 would have been easy for the set dressers and costumiers (because no changes were needed).

* Why "Captain" when he wears RAF Group Captain / ROC Observer Captain rank slides on his greatcoat?
** Why did an alien civilisation capable of interplanetary flight use a radio wavelength to communicate with earth instead of the much better DAB? Probably because DAB is crap, by and large.
*** Which promoted the "white heat of technology" ie cancelling TSR2 and AW681. Still, the Open University is excellent and Harold kept us out of Vietnam and Europe.

The Party Wall etc, Act 1996

I've been concentrating on other more presssing things lately (the title of this blog will give a hint). In general, the PWA , despite it emerging from the Gummerite Department of Environment, is a pretty good piece of legislation. Essentially an updating of a 1938 Act that originally applied only to London, the PWA now applies to England and Wales as well. It is necessary in a small, overcrowded island where they're not making land anymore. It enables property owners to develop their property while at the same time protecting the interests of adjoining owners and keeping 98% of developments out of the courts thereby saving time and money. One or two party wall surveyors are appointed to draw up a schedule of condition of the properties with photos and produce a Party Wall Award setting out things like order of work etc. The common law duty of the owner to the neighbour is thus formalised and clear, agreed evidence is available in case anything goes wrong with the build.
As is made clear in the excellent explanatory booklet for the layperson, the owner must serve either one or two months' notice on the neighbour before starting works. Of course, with the neighbour's written consent, work can start earlier. But, here is the flaw in the Act. Although it states in the Act that the owner must serve notice, the only recourse for the adjoining owner in those cases where the neighbour fails to serve notice is to obtain an injunction to cease work until the PWA procedure is carried out. Failure to obey an injunction is contempt of court which may result in a fine or imprisonment. However, injunctions cost about £1,000+ and one may have to return to court to have one enforced - more expense and bother. Compare this arrangement with the duty of the adjoining owner to allow the neighbour's surveyor and builders unobstructed access onto his land for working and placing foundations. Refusal to comply is a criminal offence punishable by a fine of up to £1,000 (s.16 PWA, 1996).
My modest one clause amendment to the Act is the creation of the offence of failing to serve proper notice on an adjoining owner. The punishment will be on the same level 3 scale as obstructing or hindering.
And yes, if you are wondering, our delightful neighbours attempted to foist a ten day take it or leave it otherwise any damage is your responsibility letter on us back in May. Their PWA surveyor apponted by their solicitor, they are really that nice sort of people, was still waiting to be formally appointed last week. Their builders dug out a trial pit on the boundary to assess foundation depths on Wednesday (still not filled in) without notice - I thought works were starting prematurely, to be blamed in reply by the husband for causing a three month delay to works. My advice to any neighbour of property developers is to read the links, and consult a RICS PWA surveyor as soon as possible if you think your neighbour can't be trusted to treat you as they would expect you to treat them. The building owner pays for both parties' survey costs (indeed with reasonable neighbours a single PWA surveyor is sufficient) so you have nothing to lose.

Come To Redacted England

Spend a week in England, home of Parliamentary Privilege, Data Protection and Anti-Terrorism Legislation, spend anything actualy as we need your money to pay our MPs and Lords. See our sights (no photography allowed without permits).

I Am Religious Therefore I Can Make Up My Own Rules

Another Christian Registrar is complaining that she is expected to conduct gay civil partnerships against her beliefs. Earth to Plant Faith: You conducted non-religious civil marriage ceremonies for £28,000 per year yet didn't exhort the happy couple to adjourn to the nearest church instead. If you wanted pick'n'mix why didn't you work for Woolworths? Oh, and how would you feel if a member of a political party for anyone from 9 to 99 (IQ that is) had objected, for their own deeply held reasons, to be married by a non-aryan/nordic ubermensch?
It is about time that all public servants are required to park their religious beliefs at the door before they start work just like the no communism or fascism rule when I joined the Civil Service. They would then be able to give their employers the same care and attention when dealing with them. Money would be saved by not having to accommodate prayer rooms (go outside with the smokers if necessary), for example. And for those people who claim that faith makes people more honest than atheists or humanists, look at the religious affiliations of our allowance-sponging "Honourable" Members. They run the whole gamut of holy hypocrisy.

Hypocrisy And The Journalists' Closed Shop

Compare the ongoing case of Suzanne Breen in Northern Ireland with the outing of Nightjack, the serving Detective Constable by Partick Foster of the Times. It appears that the ethics of the dead tree press learned at journalism colleges only stretch as far as their fellow chapel members. If only Nightjack had sold his information to a newspaper to increase its circulation and preserve hacks' jobs instead of blogging it himself he would still retain his anonymity. Triples all round!

Nick Thingummy Pelted With Eggs

click on screen capture to enlarge

Whoever's responsible for updating the Sky News webpage might be looking for a job with Law Dallan tomorrow. Surely everyone knows the difference between "Nice" Nick Clegg (LimpDims) and "Nasty" Nick Griffin (BNP and Eastenders)?

With thanks to Sky News.