dark light

paul1867

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 961 through 975 (of 1,315 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Duxford Diary (2015) #925206
    paul1867
    Participant

    At least the elderly gent

    Veteran, Propstrike, veteran!:D

    in reply to: Two Mark One Spitfires changing owners soon #925297
    paul1867
    Participant

    Not too shabby to be giving the other one for charity especially, in part to the RAF Benevolent Fun. Any body know his motivation to donate in the UK

    in reply to: Two Mark One Spitfires changing owners soon #925330
    paul1867
    Participant

    Ah my source was not an armchair by the way :apologetic:

    in reply to: Duxford Diary (2015) #925413
    paul1867
    Participant

    and a lemon juice bath?

    Maybe.:D

    in reply to: Two Mark One Spitfires changing owners soon #925419
    paul1867
    Participant

    Andy the cat must be out of the bag as there was a suite at the fence answering questions with info as with previous posts. Obviously a PR guy as he didn’t know if it was a black and white just the standard blurb.

    in reply to: Duxford Diary (2015) #925533
    paul1867
    Participant

    I know where there is a P38 if they don’t get one from the States. Just needs a bit of tidying up.:D

    in reply to: Two Mark One Spitfires changing owners soon #925538
    paul1867
    Participant

    There was a media presentation for P9374 at DX today with a veteran present and an engine run. No display though.

    paul1867
    Participant

    Touché!!;) ……but there is a link…….

    There certainly is and here it is.

    http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?134732-A-Visit-To-the-RAF-MANSTON-Museum

    Must work faster.:highly_amused:

    paul1867
    Participant

    Not so much drift more like hijack.:D

    in reply to: General Discussion #269956
    paul1867
    Participant

    Rather perversely last week was DROWNING PREVENTION and WATER SAFETY WEEK run by the Chief Fire Officers Association.

    http://www.cfoa.org.uk/19402

    This poster was produced to warn of, er, cold water shock

    https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8715/17270178245_e9dd3f7f05_b.jpg_82358435_picture by p_meddemmen, on Flickr

    In August 2013 a woman died in the approved Ladies section of Hampstead Pond surrounded by other swimmers and a life guard on duty. She disappeared and could not be found by other swimmers or life guard. Her body was later found by police divers.

    She had a bad heart and had a heart attack brought on by, er, cold water shock.

    OTHER SWIMMERS AND THE LIFE GUARD COULD NOT FIND HER IN THE APPROVED SWIMMING AREA!!!!

    I wonder what was in the minds of the rescue services last week?

    paul1867
    Participant

    Rather perversely last week was DROWNING PREVENTION and WATER SAFETY WEEK run by the Chief Fire Officers Association.

    http://www.cfoa.org.uk/19402

    This poster was produced to warn of, er, cold water shock

    https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8715/17270178245_e9dd3f7f05_b.jpg_82358435_picture by p_meddemmen, on Flickr

    In August 2013 a woman died in the approved Ladies section of Hampstead Pond surrounded by other swimmers and a life guard on duty. She disappeared and could not be found by other swimmers or life guard. Her body was later found by police divers.

    She had a bad heart and had a heart attack brought on by, er, cold water shock.

    OTHER SWIMMERS AND THE LIFE GUARD COULD NOT FIND HER IN THE APPROVED SWIMMING AREA!!!!

    I wonder what was in the minds of the rescue services last week?

    in reply to: General Discussion #269973
    paul1867
    Participant

    Apologies.

    Moggy

    Totally not necessary I made a statement of fact not a criticism! Just thought you were raising another case regarding criticism of the police but got involved in the criteria.

    Have no fear, despite Charlie’s theory of why threads drift, I have every intention of returning to the subject of the original post:D

    Wholly laudable, and not in any way removed from my own feelings. But you have yet to explain how diving into a random area of a large pond is ‘an effort to help’ rather than a pointless gesture which might entail others putting themselves at risk to ‘help’ you?

    Moggy

    …………putting themselves and others at risk to ‘help’ you?

    paul1867
    Participant

    Apologies.

    Moggy

    Totally not necessary I made a statement of fact not a criticism! Just thought you were raising another case regarding criticism of the police but got involved in the criteria.

    Have no fear, despite Charlie’s theory of why threads drift, I have every intention of returning to the subject of the original post:D

    Wholly laudable, and not in any way removed from my own feelings. But you have yet to explain how diving into a random area of a large pond is ‘an effort to help’ rather than a pointless gesture which might entail others putting themselves at risk to ‘help’ you?

    Moggy

    …………putting themselves and others at risk to ‘help’ you?

    in reply to: General Discussion #270017
    paul1867
    Participant

    Hindsight is a wonderful thing.
    Jim.
    Lincoln .7

    The Fire Officer in charge was, I believe, part of the Water Rescue Unit. He took the decision that nobody should go in as the victim was not visible and the risk of cold shock. The papers and Mr. Public are now castigating him. Thus the research into what is good practise and the risks involved. No doubt he would have been criticised if he had let somebody go in and they drowned. Whilst we would all like to think that one would do their best in such a situation there becomes a point where stupidity can make matters worse. Be guided by the trained man actually on the spot.

    I have no doubt the posters who say they would jump in would do so regardless of any other consideration but this does not mean they would be successful and could well add to the death toll.

    paul1867
    Participant

    Hindsight is a wonderful thing.
    Jim.
    Lincoln .7

    The Fire Officer in charge was, I believe, part of the Water Rescue Unit. He took the decision that nobody should go in as the victim was not visible and the risk of cold shock. The papers and Mr. Public are now castigating him. Thus the research into what is good practise and the risks involved. No doubt he would have been criticised if he had let somebody go in and they drowned. Whilst we would all like to think that one would do their best in such a situation there becomes a point where stupidity can make matters worse. Be guided by the trained man actually on the spot.

    I have no doubt the posters who say they would jump in would do so regardless of any other consideration but this does not mean they would be successful and could well add to the death toll.

Viewing 15 posts - 961 through 975 (of 1,315 total)