On 26/01/2024 17:59, "Worst Case"@dizum.com wrote:
> The Spirit moves me to descant upon the sorry state of search engines.
> They used to return determinate lists, which could be shortened by
> applying various filters upon date, keywords included, keywords
> excluded, and host domains. No longer, it seems. Perhaps this is in
> response to the emerging breadth of the Web. Nowadays, in order to
> produce a foreshortened list, a search engine tries to conjure the
> best sense of the search terms given and serves the most likely hits
> from a pool of already regularly served sources.

.... bearing in mind that the first priority is to get you to buy
something, or at least send you in the direction of things that may be
bought and which somebody has paid the search engine's creators to
advertise.

On Tue, 30 Jan 2024 01:26:21 +0000, Mike Fleming <mike@tauzero.co.uk>
wrote:

>On 26/01/2024 20:49, Turby wrote:
>> On 1/26/2024 7:21 AM, Colin Irvine wrote:
>>> On Fri, 26 Jan 2024 11:54:19 +0000, Champ <neal@champ.org.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 25 Jan 2024 15:05:25 -0800 (PST), WUN <nigel.eaton@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Drake is in 'is 'ammock, and all is right wiv the world....
>>>>
>>>> And another WUN-ism that I don't get, and the web won't help me with
>>>> :-(
>>>
>>> https://allpoetry.com/Drake's-Drum
>>>
>> Whoa! I started to read that, and my mouth opened. The words came out,
>> but not with a Yankee accent. I swear it was Devonese! Bizarre. But
>> beautiful.
>
>It has suddenly plugged a gap in my knowledge. In 1066 and All That, one
>of the test questions is "Cap'n, art thou sleeping there below?" with
>the footnote "Do not attempt to answer this question". I always wondered
>where the question came from.

Me too. It's only just dawned. Thank you!

--
Colin Irvine
R1250RS

On 30/01/2024 01:31, Mike Fleming wrote:
> On 26/01/2024 17:59, "Worst Case"@dizum.com wrote:
>> The Spirit moves me to descant upon the sorry state of search engines.
>> They used to return determinate lists, which could be shortened by
>> applying various filters upon date, keywords included, keywords
>> excluded, and host domains.  No longer, it seems.  Perhaps this is in
>> response to the emerging breadth of the Web.  Nowadays, in order to
>> produce a foreshortened list, a search engine tries to conjure the
>> best sense of the search terms given and serves the most likely hits
>> from a pool of already regularly served sources.
>
> ... bearing in mind that the first priority is to get you to buy
> something, or at least send you in the direction of things that may be
> bought and which somebody has paid the search engine's creators to
> advertise.

'+' and '-' still seem to work for searches on the bay of fleas -
however other things are desperately wrong with fleabay these days
unless you a) don't want to sell anything and actually get some money
and b) don't mind buying stuff of dubious origin from the 'far east'.

I blame the poor teaching of maths in schools these days...

Chris
--
The Deuchars BBB#40 COFF#14
Yamaha XV750SE & Suzuki GS550t
http://www.Deuchars.org.uk

On 30/01/2024 15:09, chrisnd @ukrm wrote:
> On 30/01/2024 01:31, Mike Fleming wrote:
>> On 26/01/2024 17:59, "Worst Case"@dizum.com wrote:
<snip>

>
>  '+' and '-' still seem to work for searches on the bay of fleas -
> however other things are desperately wrong with fleabay these days
> unless you a) don't want to sell anything and actually get some money
> and b) don't mind buying stuff of dubious origin from the 'far east'.
>
Avoiding buying dubious stuff from the far east is easy.
If it has a union flag on the item picture, avoid.
If it says "from UK stock", avoid.
If the sellers details show them as listed as HK or China, err avoid.

> Chris

--
Bruce Porter
"The internet is a huge and diverse community but mainly friendly"
http://ytc1.blogspot.co.uk/
There *is* an alternative! http://www.openoffice.org/

On Tuesday, January 30, 2024 at 12:08:49 AM UTC, Bruce Horrocks wrote:
> The point being the wiring fault was there all along but no one realised
> because the engines weren't used until the tugs had pulled the ship
> clear of the quay.
>
> (In case you missed it, the ship had been in for an engine refurbishment
> so this, I assume, was the first time they had been used following the
> work.)
>
> I think it has Diesel engines so maybe they were started in reverse by
> mistake?

Again, from aviation, one of the vital pre-takeoff checks is "Control
movements full, free, and in the correct sense". This is particularly
vital after maintenance. It's still depressingly common for engineers
to fuck this up, and pilots not to notice. Usually it ends in a big smoking
hole in the ground, sometimes they get lucky:
https://www.flightglobal.com/safety/control-check-routine-led-e190-upset-crew-to-miss-reversed-ailerons/139149.article

--
WUN

On 31/01/2024 02:59 WUN penned these words:
> On Tuesday, January 30, 2024 at 12:08:49 AM UTC, Bruce Horrocks wrote:
>> The point being the wiring fault was there all along but no one realised
>> because the engines weren't used until the tugs had pulled the ship
>> clear of the quay.
>>
>> (In case you missed it, the ship had been in for an engine refurbishment
>> so this, I assume, was the first time they had been used following the
>> work.)
>>
>> I think it has Diesel engines so maybe they were started in reverse by
>> mistake?
>
> Again, from aviation, one of the vital pre-takeoff checks is "Control
> movements full, free, and in the correct sense". This is particularly
> vital after maintenance. It's still depressingly common for engineers
> to fuck this up, and pilots not to notice. Usually it ends in a big smoking
> hole in the ground, sometimes they get lucky:
> https://www.flightglobal.com/safety/control-check-routine-led-e190-upset-crew-to-miss-reversed-ailerons/139149.article
>

My memory maybe a bit shonky but was not the M1 crash in the 80s caused by
crossed alarm wiring? Hence the pilots shut down the working engine?
--
Ian

"Man will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of
the last priest"

On 31/01/2024 07:13, Boots wrote:
> On 31/01/2024 02:59 WUN penned these words:
>> On Tuesday, January 30, 2024 at 12:08:49 AM UTC, Bruce Horrocks wrote:
>>> The point being the wiring fault was there all along but no one realised
>>> because the engines weren't used until the tugs had pulled the ship
>>> clear of the quay.
>>>
>>> (In case you missed it, the ship had been in for an engine refurbishment
>>> so this, I assume, was the first time they had been used following the
>>> work.)
>>>
>>> I think it has Diesel engines so maybe they were started in reverse by
>>> mistake?
>>
>> Again, from aviation, one of the vital pre-takeoff checks is "Control
>> movements full, free, and in the correct sense". This is particularly
>> vital after maintenance. It's still depressingly common for engineers
>> to fuck this up, and pilots not to notice. Usually it ends in a big smoking
>> hole in the ground, sometimes they get lucky:
>> https://www.flightglobal.com/safety/control-check-routine-led-e190-upset-crew-to-miss-reversed-ailerons/139149.article
>>
>
> My memory maybe a bit shonky but was not the M1 crash in the 80s caused by
> crossed alarm wiring? Hence the pilots shut down the working engine?

My recollection of that was different.

<Googles>

Yeah a series of unfortunate events, but there wasn't anything crossed over.

--
/Simon

On 31/01/2024 13:26, Simon Wilson wrote:
> On 31/01/2024 07:13, Boots wrote:
>> On 31/01/2024 02:59 WUN penned these words:
>>> On Tuesday, January 30, 2024 at 12:08:49 AM UTC, Bruce Horrocks wrote:
>>>> The point being the wiring fault was there all along but no one
>>>> realised
>>>> because the engines weren't used until the tugs had pulled the ship
>>>> clear of the quay.
>>>>
>>>> (In case you missed it, the ship had been in for an engine
>>>> refurbishment
>>>> so this, I assume, was the first time they had been used following the
>>>> work.)
>>>>
>>>> I think it has Diesel engines so maybe they were started in reverse by
>>>> mistake?
>>>
>>> Again, from aviation, one of the vital pre-takeoff checks is "Control
>>> movements full, free, and in the correct sense". This is particularly
>>> vital after maintenance. It's still depressingly common for engineers
>>> to fuck this up, and pilots not to notice. Usually it ends in a big
>>> smoking
>>> hole in the ground, sometimes they get lucky:
>>> https://www.flightglobal.com/safety/control-check-routine-led-e190-upset-crew-to-miss-reversed-ailerons/139149.article
>>>
>>
>> My memory maybe a bit shonky but was not the M1 crash in the 80s
>> caused by
>> crossed alarm wiring? Hence the pilots shut down the working engine?
>
> My recollection of that was different.
>
> <Googles>
>
> Yeah a series of unfortunate events, but there wasn't anything crossed
> over.

I was thinking of that. The building I worked in at the time was one of
the sight lines for EM Airport. The army spent days searching the fields
in front and behind for bits of broken rotor blade. We could hear the
grinders cutting up the airframe for about 10 days at home - about 3
miles away. Grim.

Chris

--
The Deuchars BBB#40 COFF#14
Yamaha XV750SE & Suzuki GS550t
http://www.Deuchars.org.uk

On Tue, 30 Jan 2024 10:59:56 -0800 (PST), WUN <nigel.eaton@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Tuesday, January 30, 2024 at 12:08:49?AM UTC, Bruce Horrocks wrote:

>> I think it has Diesel engines so maybe they were started in reverse by
>> mistake?

Some large marine 2-stroke engines[1] can run in reverse, true
but that ship was originally fitted with the Napier Deltic engine,
which
a) is a four stroke and I believe therefore could not run in reverse
(where's Sweller when you need him?) and
b) would, I think, rev far higher than the propellor would want to go
and would therefore need reduction gears anyway, so any advantage of
the simplicity of a reversable engine, i.e. a direct driveshaft with
no gearing, would be lost.
But ICBW (probably am) on this.

>Again, from aviation, one of the vital pre-takeoff checks is "Control
>movements full, free, and in the correct sense".

There isn't really a sytematic pre-flight-check equivalent for ships,
but as already stated I'm very sceptical about this. All else apart,
even if the ship had been pulled off the quay by a tug they would also
have been using the engine, even if, and this is just so unlikely,
maintenance on such a vital control system had been done and never
even tested.

[1] I'm particularly remembering one we did a cylinder liner[2] change
on.
[2] Which weighed three tons IIRC[3], and the bore was large enough to
stand up in.
[3] I do recall it mainly because the liner beinf lifted out using one
of the deck cranes managed to slip its fastening and dropped six
inches or so onto the Second Engineer's foot. Great advert for
Totector boots, standard issue, but did actually manage to squash his
toes just a little but, no actual injury though.
--
Ace
http://www.chaletbeauroc.com/

On 02/02/2024 09:48, Ace wrote:
> Some large marine 2-stroke engines[1] can run in reverse, true
> but that ship was originally fitted with the Napier Deltic engine,
> which
> a) is a four stroke and I believe therefore could not run in reverse
> (where's Sweller when you need him?) and

I know this from the train world, Napier Deltic engines are two stroke
diesels.

Is any lubricant added to the fuel, or is the diesel fuel enough
lubricant? And are they similar to small petrol 2 stroke engines, but
obviously a lot bigger?

On 02/02/2024 10:27, Alan Lee wrote:
> On 02/02/2024 09:48, Ace wrote:
>> Some large marine 2-stroke engines[1] can run in reverse, true
>> but that ship was originally fitted with the Napier Deltic engine,
>> which
>> a) is a four stroke and I believe therefore could not run in reverse
>> (where's Sweller when you need him?) and
>
> I know this from the train world, Napier Deltic engines are two stroke
> diesels.
>
> Is any lubricant added to the fuel, or is the diesel fuel enough
> lubricant? And are they similar to small petrol 2 stroke engines, but
> obviously a lot bigger?

Not a Deltic expert, but they are 2-strokes IIRC (anyway, as an opposed
piston engine, where would you put the valves for a four-stroke?) but
not like a small bike 2-stroke - they don't use crankcase induction so
as diesels anyway (the fuel burns as it is injected), no point in adding
lube to the fuel. They must use forced induction of some sort. The oil
would be pump fed the other side of the piston skirts, I think, where
the cranks, conrods etc. are.

In fact, using conventional 2T lube techniques on a diesel would be a
bad idea - the residual oil could ignite and cause the engine to run-on
even when the fuel injection was cut off.

A swift Google says that they are uniflow engines: exhaust ports opened
by one piston and transfers by the piston the at the other end of the
cylinder. Which rings a faint bell: ISTR that the piston timing is
pretty carefully arranged so that the the exhausts open and close first,
or something like that.

--

CHUMP #1 (CHarge Up Muppet)

Pip

PipL wrote:

>
> Not a Deltic expert, but they are 2-strokes IIRC (anyway, as an
> opposed piston engine, where would you put the valves for a
> four-stroke?) but not like a small bike 2-stroke - they don't use
> crankcase induction so as diesels anyway (the fuel burns as it is
> injected), no point in adding lube to the fuel. They must use forced
> induction of some sort. The oil would be pump fed the other side of
> the piston skirts, I think, where the cranks, conrods etc. are.

2-stroke diesels have valves like a 4 stroke and some kind of forced
induction so that while both valves are open the incoming air scavenges
the exhaust. Detroit diesels use a roots blower and sound great. That
typical soundtrack as the hero climbs aboard the Greyhound bus and
departs into the sunset.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/lqCSExXX60M

>
> In fact, using conventional 2T lube techniques on a diesel would be a
> bad idea - the residual oil could ignite and cause the engine to
> run-on even when the fuel injection was cut off.

I think they use conventional pressure lubrication. I once delivered
lubricating oil to a ship in Rotterdam. About 700L I think. When I
asked if it was time for an oil change, I was told no, they never
change the oil just keep topping up when it gets low.

>
> A swift Google says that they are uniflow engines: exhaust ports
> opened by one piston and transfers by the piston the at the other end
> of the cylinder. Which rings a faint bell: ISTR that the piston
> timing is pretty carefully arranged so that the the exhausts open and
> close first, or something like that.

The Commer "Knocker" TS3 had opposed pistons and indeed one piston
opens the exhaust port and the other piston does the intake, so no
transfers, also with a Roots blower for scavenging.

https://www.sa.hillman.org.au/TS3.htm

--

Geoff
NTV650

Ace wrote:

> a) is a four stroke and I believe therefore could not run in reverse
> (where's Sweller when you need him?) and

Busy at work.

Four strokes only run in one direction. Simple two strokes can run
'backwards' - I think in some old cases this was reverse.

Mistimed MZs are a bit prone to this. I've had little TS 150 cough and
sputter at traffic lights and much to my surprise started running
backwards. I only discovered this after the lights changed.

Deltics, whilst two stroke, weren't simple and only run in one
direction. They are also quite elderly technology.

--
Simon

On 28/02/2024 06:50, sweller wrote:
> Ace wrote:
>
>> a) is a four stroke and I believe therefore could not run in reverse
>> (where's Sweller when you need him?) and
>
> Busy at work.
>
> Four strokes only run in one direction. Simple two strokes can run
> 'backwards' - I think in some old cases this was reverse.
>
> Mistimed MZs are a bit prone to this. I've had little TS 150 cough and
> sputter at traffic lights and much to my surprise started running
> backwards. I only discovered this after the lights changed.
>
> Deltics, whilst two stroke, weren't simple and only run in one
> direction. They are also quite elderly technology.
>
I read somewhere that the Bond Minicar (200cc TS) could be started up in
reverse if you retarded the ignition, thus allowing a reverse gear -
otherwise not allowed if you were driving on a car-only licence.
--
Mike Headon
R69S R850R
IIIc IIIg FT FTn FT2 EOS450D
e-mail: mike dot headon at enn tee ell world dot com

On 28/02/2024 06:50, sweller wrote:
> Ace wrote:
>
>> a) is a four stroke and I believe therefore could not run in reverse
>> (where's Sweller when you need him?) and
>
> Busy at work.
>
> Four strokes only run in one direction. Simple two strokes can run
> 'backwards' - I think in some old cases this was reverse.

Actually, I did recently learn that some four stroke diesels can run
backwards. They can draw air into the exhaust and exhaust through the
intake. Obviously the injection timing would be all to cock, so it would
run badly.

It probably wouldn't work with a modern electronic common rail engine,
though the fuel rail pump would still work.

--

CHUMP #1 (CHarge Up Muppet)

Pip

On 02/03/2024 15:11, PipL wrote:
>On 28/02/2024 06:50, sweller wrote:
> > Ace wrote:
> >
> >> a) is a four stroke and I believe therefore could not run in reverse
> >> (where's Sweller when you need him?) and
> >
> > Busy at work.
> >
> > Four strokes only run in one direction. Simple two strokes can run
> > 'backwards' - I think in some old cases this was reverse.
>
>Actually, I did recently learn that some four stroke diesels can run
>backwards. They can draw air into the exhaust and exhaust through the
>intake. Obviously the injection timing would be all to cock, so it would
>run badly.
>
>It probably wouldn't work with a modern electronic common rail engine,
>though the fuel rail pump would still work.

It can happen if you try and bump start a diesel, the engine will run away,
but as the oil pump is turning backwards it won't last long
I believe some large marine diesels use this for forward/reverse. They run
on diesel in harbour for manoeuvering and then switch to heavy fuel oil
once at sea.

--
Geoff
NTV 650

Mike Headon wrote:

> On 28/02/2024 06:50, sweller wrote:
> > Ace wrote:
> >
> > > a) is a four stroke and I believe therefore could not run in
> > > reverse (where's Sweller when you need him?) and
> >
> > Busy at work.
> >
> > Four strokes only run in one direction. Simple two strokes can run
> > 'backwards' - I think in some old cases this was reverse.
> >
> > Mistimed MZs are a bit prone to this. I've had little TS 150 cough
> > and sputter at traffic lights and much to my surprise started
> > running backwards. I only discovered this after the lights changed.
> >
> > Deltics, whilst two stroke, weren't simple and only run in one
> > direction. They are also quite elderly technology.
> >
> I read somewhere that the Bond Minicar (200cc TS) could be started up
> in reverse if you retarded the ignition, thus allowing a reverse gear
> - otherwise not allowed if you were driving on a car-only licence.

Yes, a mate had a Messerschmitt KR200. The engine had two sets of
points for this purpose. Bit of a palavar though, stop engine, switch
over ignition and Dynostart, start engine, reverse and repeat. It was
often easier to ask the passenger (rear-gunner) to step out and push.

--

Geoff
NTV650

On 02/03/2024 11:05, Mike Headon wrote:

>>
> I read somewhere that the Bond Minicar (200cc TS) could be started up in
> reverse if you retarded the ignition, thus allowing a reverse gear -
> otherwise not allowed if you were driving on a car-only licence.

I rode in one abot 55 years ago and there was a switch to alter the
ignition timing IIRC

On 03/03/2024 08:50, geoffC wrote:
> On 02/03/2024 15:11, PipL wrote:
>> On 28/02/2024 06:50, sweller wrote:
>> > Ace wrote:
>> >
>> >> a) is a four stroke and I believe therefore could not run in reverse
>> >> (where's Sweller when you need him?) and
>> >
>> > Busy at work.
>> >
>> > Four strokes only run in one direction.  Simple two strokes can run
>> > 'backwards' - I think in some old cases this was reverse.
>>
>> Actually, I did recently learn that some four stroke diesels can run
>> backwards. They can draw air into the exhaust and exhaust through the
>> intake. Obviously the injection timing would be all to cock, so it
>> would run badly.
>>
>> It probably  wouldn't work with a modern electronic common rail
>> engine, though the fuel rail pump would still work.
>
> It can happen if you try and bump start a diesel, the engine will run away,
> but as the oil pump is turning backwards it won't last long
> I believe some large marine diesels use this for forward/reverse. They run
> on diesel in harbour for manoeuvering and then switch to heavy fuel oil
> once at sea.
>
>

It happens with my 3cyl Holder tractors as you pull something too heavy
and stall it as it does a wheely. The weight of the front coming down
restarts it backwards, with exhaust coming out the air cleaner for a few
revs until you kill it.

On Sun, 3 Mar 2024 08:50:32 -0000 (UTC), geoffC <me@home.nl> wrote:

>I believe some large marine diesels use this for forward/reverse. They run
> on diesel in harbour for manoeuvering and then switch to heavy fuel oil
> once at sea.

Yes, exactly that, and all automated of course, i.e. you just move the
engine control lever from Ahead to Stop, then to Astern and it
restarts t'other way. They actually had mechanical valves rather than
just relying on porting, IIRC, so I'm not sure exactly how the timing
was done but they did not run a reverse gas-flw, so exhaust still came
out of the right place.

That's what was being alluded to earlier, which I was suggesting was
unlikely to be the case in the incident in question.
--
Ace
http://www.chaletbeauroc.com/

Ace wrote:

> On Sun, 3 Mar 2024 08:50:32 -0000 (UTC), geoffC <me@home.nl> wrote:
>
> > I believe some large marine diesels use this for forward/reverse.
> > They run on diesel in harbour for manoeuvering and then switch to
> > heavy fuel oil once at sea.
>
> Yes, exactly that, and all automated of course, i.e. you just move the
> engine control lever from Ahead to Stop, then to Astern and it
> restarts t'other way. They actually had mechanical valves rather than
> just relying on porting, IIRC, so I'm not sure exactly how the timing
> was done but they did not run a reverse gas-flw, so exhaust still came
> out of the right place.
>
> That's what was being alluded to earlier, which I was suggesting was
> unlikely to be the case in the incident in question.

Ah yes, never seen one myself, just heard about them.
I think all 2 stroke diesels have valves and forced induction to
provide scavenging. Must be some clever mechanism on the camshafts to
provide 2 different timings for forward or reverse or may be something
to ensure that the cams always rotate in the same direction ? I shall
investigate.

--

Geoff
NTV650

On 03/03/2024 13:21, GeoffC wrote:
> I think all 2 stroke diesels have valves and forced induction to
> provide scavenging.

All the opposed piston ones derived from the Junkers, like the deltic,
commer ts3, napier nomad were piston ported uniflow engines with
scavenge pumps. Air went in past one piston and departed via the other.
This airflow was one reason they burned a lot of lubrication oilI think.

On 1/29/2024 4:08 PM, Bruce Horrocks wrote:
>
>
> I think it has Diesel engines so maybe they were started in reverse by
> mistake?
>
WTF? We've had a way to create fuel all this time and never used it?
humans really are stupid!

--
The erstwhile Thomas
FJR1300, R1200GS & ST1100 (in memoriam)

On 03/03/2024 08:50, geoffC wrote:
> on diesel in harbour for manoeuvering and then switch to heavy fuel oil
> once at sea.

Yeah, makes sense, though many marine diesels are two-strokes, so
reversing wouldn't be so hard. For a four-stroke you'd have to have
large valves to swap over intake and exhaust manifolds as well as the
injection timing.
--

CHUMP #1 (CHarge Up Muppet)

Pip

On 03/03/2024 16:08, Turby wrote:
> On 1/29/2024 4:08 PM, Bruce Horrocks wrote:
>>
>>
>> I think it has Diesel engines so maybe they were started in reverse by
>> mistake?
>>
> WTF? We've had a way to create fuel all this time and never used it?
> humans really are stupid!
>

Ssshhh! This Simple Trick is what Big Oil doesn't want you to know!

--

CHUMP #1 (CHarge Up Muppet)

Pip