That’ll be the beer, then. Sorry, it’s right-hand. As you were..

Hey! Moving house and new job training! But.. that’s quite a find.. so I will take time out the evening to study it over a beer..

Thanks P&P

Schneiderman, try http://aerade.cranfield.ac.uk/ to search R&M’s. They are having tech problems at the moment, but it still kind of works.

I am very happy to see this thread on here! The only thing that would make Mrs. Beermat even more attractive to me would be be if she developed a pathological fixation with aerofoils to match my own.

One thing to bear in mind is that the max t/c ratio as described by convention at the time was a hypothetical t/c as at the centreline of the aircraft if the wings were carried on through, not that at the root. This was to avoid variations in where this was measured – instead it was made deliberately non-measurable, just a geometric ‘point in mid air’. Thus a Wellington could potentially have a max t/c of 17.7%, but a t/c at root of 17%. Not sure it did, just it’s possible.

I think it would be unlikely that Vickers would change the aerofoil between protoype and production. It would render much of the prototype flight testing irrelevant, for a start, as well as requiring fundamental re-drafting of the design.

Yup, the blades will differ – or at least they should. Blade profile has to do in equal amounts with engine and the desired ‘envelope’. So a Merlin powering a Spitfire would have a completely different prop from the same engine in a Lancaster. Different optimum speeds – or rather speeds at which the highest translation of engine power to thrust is most important. There are other considerations too.

In reality blades varied even within more or less the same envelope and on the same engine. Spitfire and Hurricane, for example

.unless you want it to be. And if you do, differentiating between races in terms of laziness or otherwise in precisely the way that Dianne Abbott never has, what would that make you?

John, shame on you.

Has the ‘D. Tel’ ever covered the concept of a ‘zero hours contract’? No?

When you walk into a JobCentre you are greeted with one or more big banner adverts offering you immediate work. As someone trying to do the right thing you would likely sign up for this. You immediately go into the ‘paid work’ caregory as defined by the Government and the Daily MadeUpGraph

These ‘jobs’ are basically you sitting by your phone waiting for someone to call you with a few hours, at any time of night or day.. Or not.

If those enjoying the fruits of such rosy boom times in this way are taken off the figures things look worse. A lot worse.

But your newspaper carries on printing this stuff, which is becoming further and further divorced from the real world outside of your front door, and you will continue to lap it up.

This must be why you believe brexit has been so good for our economy. Please, John, you’re a bright chap, read something else.

I agree Paul – and there is a lot of bad stuff happening that is not being dealt with because it will be seen as racist that the majority brought to book will be of ‘minorities’.. Dame Lowell Goddard is finding out to her cost what describing a certain ‘delicate’ (actually appalling) situation leads to. Now to address this would take a very brave Home Secretary indeed.

John, it was pointlessly mangled. It was also devoid of meaning. It wasn’t a clever play on words or a witty misquote. Unless you meant to say that EEL shouldn’t have voted leave because he is a sinner for using that word, or he shouldn’t have used that word because he is a sinner for voting leave, both of which are versions of the sense of the original but neither of which was conveyed by the mangled version, you were suggesting that abusive language is ok as long the person is a leave voter.

Back to that ‘Say something really stupid then tell people it was really clever but they don’t understand’ thing.