Model Boat Mayhem

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length.
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 [18] 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32   Go Down

Author Topic: Nautical "Strange but True!"  (Read 151583 times)

Bryan Young

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6,893
  • Location: Whitley Bay
Re: Nautical "Strange but True!"
« Reply #425 on: September 12, 2009, 06:36:33 pm »

Hi Bryan, that would be interesting to see, it is a few years since I had a wander around there. With regards the pub at the top of the walkway off the ferry, do you know if it is even still there as I'm sure it was boarded up last time I passed, so it might be a yuppie block of flats by now  <:(

Mike
I'll keep you informed. Sometime next week with any luck. BY.
Logged
Notes from a simple seaman

BarryM

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,692
  • Location: West Lothian
Re: Nautical "Strange but True!"
« Reply #426 on: September 12, 2009, 08:43:58 pm »

Bryan,

I'll be very interested to see the results. Take care though; at one time using a camera in that locale could cause the locals to take grave offence in case it might be used in evidence against them.  Maybe still does.

Sad news about Flora - some of the regulars at the Jungle were well-known as enthusiastic educators of maritime youth in advanced biology.  %)

Cheers,

Barry M

PS. I don't suppose you want to nip down to Middlesborough and check out the Robin Hood while you're at it?   {-)  %%
Logged

Bryan Young

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6,893
  • Location: Whitley Bay
Re: Nautical "Strange but True!"
« Reply #427 on: September 12, 2009, 10:10:09 pm »

Bryan,

I'll be very interested to see the results. Take care though; at one time using a camera in that locale could cause the locals to take grave offence in case it might be used in evidence against them.  Maybe still does.

Sad news about Flora - some of the regulars at the Jungle were well-known as enthusiastic educators of maritime youth in advanced biology.  %)

Cheers,

Barry M

PS. I don't suppose you want to nip down to Middlesborough and check out the Robin Hood while you're at it?   {-)  %%
No.
Logged
Notes from a simple seaman

derekwarner

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8,484
  • Location: Wollongong Australia
Re: Nautical "Strange but True!"
« Reply #428 on: September 12, 2009, 10:57:36 pm »

Two pubs side by side but different just up the road from .........Garden Island naval base in Sydney.......Bryan will remember the Rock & Roll pub @ Woolloomoolloo - patrons spilling out onto the footpaths  O0 %% [Elton John does his OZ TV interviews behind the bar] ....

...but just accross the road another similar sized pub & if you walked in you could discharge a 12 gauge shotgun in the bar & not hit anyone  ;D :o ........Derek
Logged
Derek Warner

Honorary Secretary
Illawarra Live Steamers Co-op
Australia
www.ils.org.au

BarryM

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,692
  • Location: West Lothian
Re: Nautical "Strange but True!"
« Reply #429 on: September 12, 2009, 11:41:27 pm »

No.

Ha! The bright lights of the big city on the Tees too much for a Geordie?  :P

Barry M
Logged

Bryan Young

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6,893
  • Location: Whitley Bay
Re: Nautical "Strange but True!"
« Reply #430 on: September 13, 2009, 04:00:39 pm »

As the lake was unusable today I took the pics I mentioned re the pubs etc.
2590
The restored and elegant edifice directly opposite the N.Shields ferry landing, with unsurpassed views over the river to beautiful downtown South Shields. The "Jungle" was in the centre part of the building entered under the portico. The "Crane" pub is at bottom left.
2591
The "Crane". The facade has been retained, but the pub itself has been made into the entrance for the apartment building that's been grafted on to it. Looks OK really.
2596
The dear old "Wolsy". I said earlier that the pub was less than 50 yards from the main gate. The remains of the gate are at bottom right. So I should have said 5 yards, rather than 50.
2598
Whats left of Smiths Docks. Once the largest ship repairer in the world with (I think) more than 13 large dry docks. I imagine that the 2 in the pic are being kept as a "waterfront feature" for the expensive new housing that's being built there.
Logged
Notes from a simple seaman

fooman2008

  • Guest
Re: Nautical "Strange but True!"
« Reply #431 on: September 17, 2009, 05:01:27 am »

Tom Clancy;
I saw a mention of the Tom Clancy and here is a good story from a yank.  Clancy tried almost every publisher in New York for Hunt for Red October, no takers. Finally on the advice of friend (Larry Bond), he submitted the story to Naval Institute Press, the United States Naval Academy's publishing house.  Which had not bought a work of fiction for over two decades.
They bought it, published it, in an elaborate leather bound edition that was premium priced and it did almost no sales (retail was something like $35 U.S.).  Ronald Reagan's chief of staff his first term was Donald Regan (sp?), he was Naval Academy alumni and found it in the offerings from naval institute press and bought a copy.  Ronnie had a voracious appetite for anything to read and apparently ran out of stuff and asked his chief of staff what he recommended, Regan gave him the book.  Ronnie started to read, got about two chapters in and started yelling about who gave up their security clearance to this guy Clancy?!
He yells for someone to get the head of the CIA (William Casey) on the phone and get him down there (the White House).  Now the only reason I know that any part of that is true is because a classmate of mine's father was a White House policeman, and saw Casey getting out of his chauffeured Caprice in the very early A.M. on that day. (maybe that is coincidence)
Anyway a Congressman got wind of this and called for hearing over where Mr. Clancy had gotten his information for the book, and called for hearings.  I, fortunately, had the day off from school and could attend (we lived 21 miles from Capital Hill).  Here comes Tom Clancy, not exactly and intimidating guy, with thick glasses.  Following him is his late teenage son, carrying a huge pile of papers (almost to his head).  The Congressman calls the hearing to order and glares at Clancy to intimidate him and asks that he state his name, place of residence and occupation.
Clancy gives a slight smile; and replies "My name is Thomas Clancy Jr. and I am and insurance salesman from Hartford Connecticut, hoping to become a best selling author....."  This completely stunned the committee, and caused a ripple of laughter through the gallery watching this.  It turned out that Clancy had just signed with Doubleday (I think I cannot remember who it was) for the paperback rights to Red October.  Literally in the hallway that morning!  Over the course of the next two days (I could only attend one), he went through all his sources (NY Times, Newsweek, Time, Daily Mail, etc.) and none it was classified, he just took small facts and wove them into a hell of a story.  And invented a new genre, Technothriller.
It definitely falls in the strange but true category, as for the ship part how bout Red October?
Foo
P.S. The Naval Institute Press has only bought two works of fiction in the last five decades (Red October, and Red Phoenix), both have been in the #1 bestseller spot on the N.Y. Times list, not a bad record for them?
Logged

BarryM

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,692
  • Location: West Lothian
Re: Nautical "Strange but True!"
« Reply #432 on: September 17, 2009, 09:55:42 am »

Bryan,

2590 - Memories!! Is there no plaque on the wall to credit the Jungle with 'Services to Seamen'? Who could imagine what went on behind such a respectable frontage

2691 - The Crane. Isn't that an unfortunate location and direction for the 'Toilets' sign?

2598 - Smiths. Memories of my own wanderings around the Yard with my Supers hat on. I also recall that the sem-sub diving support Uncle John used to dock here with a pontoon in each of two parallel drydocks and the pontoon cross-braces just clearing the land between. Whoever realised it could be done that way should have got a very big bonus.

Thanks for the memories - I'm getting quite mist-eyed.  <:(

Cheers,

Barry M

PS. Now pick up the Brownie and off you go to Middlesborough; you could make a reputation out of this.  :P
Logged

Bryan Young

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6,893
  • Location: Whitley Bay
Re: Nautical "Strange but True!"
« Reply #433 on: September 17, 2009, 06:02:14 pm »

Barry,et al.
Pic 85 is the no8 pontoon being "inaugurated" in 1892. Were you there for this one? Seriously though, Smiths did a lot of pioneering work that this area should be proud of.
Re.the pic of the "ex" Jungle. What would you consider an appropriate plaque illustration/coat of arms? An "umbrella" stuck in a slab of "margarine"? (Ex sailors will understand the "umbrella" reference....and that was the way it was spelled!)
I was going to remove the twisted "Toilets" sign, but I thought that leaving it in would just add that bit mmore "ambience" (so to speak). Bryan.
Logged
Notes from a simple seaman

BarryM

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,692
  • Location: West Lothian
Re: Nautical "Strange but True!"
« Reply #434 on: September 19, 2009, 05:50:23 pm »

Bryan,

Yes, that me waving my flag at the Inauguration.

No 'umbrella' for me - always had my raincoat on.   O0    As for the 'Toilets' sign, I think it was a reference to their beer.   <:(

Cheers,

Barry M
Logged

john strapp

  • Guest
Re: Nautical "Strange but True!"
« Reply #435 on: September 21, 2009, 10:12:42 pm »

Smiths docks North Shields had only 8 dry docks, not counting the "Haddock Shop"
Logged

BarryM

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,692
  • Location: West Lothian
Re: Nautical "Strange but True!"
« Reply #436 on: September 21, 2009, 10:50:02 pm »

 er yes?

BM
Logged

BarryM

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,692
  • Location: West Lothian
Re: Nautical "Strange but True!"
« Reply #437 on: September 22, 2009, 03:15:00 pm »

Bryan,

No offence taken whatsoever. Actually you are closer than you think to those of us fortunate enough to live north of the border and not just because of the saying "A Geordie's just a Scotsman with his brains bashed oot".  I of course would never say such a thing.  :P

The Battle of the Standard (or Northallerton) was fought between English and Scottish forces in 1138. The Scots lost on a technicality as a result of some stroppy Galwegians - not Glaswegians - and very poor gamesmanship by the English. However, in the resultant negotiations, it was agreed that the Scotland/England border would run from "Derwentwater to the Tyne". (What happened to the bit that was West of Derwentwater I don't know - not thought worth arguing over?)

The Border was held at that line for ten years but then the English reneged on the deal; possibly because the Southern Lords wanted to keep a buffer of expendable English Northerners between them and the Scots. ('The slaughter of a few Northerners is worth it to keep the South prosperous' - does that ring a bell?)  :((

Thus if the English had kept their word, you would live in Scotland and that lot in South Shields would be over the Border in England. I bet that makes you cry into your Broon Ale!

Why (och) Aye,

Barry M
Logged

Bunkerbarge

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2,367
  • Location: Halifax, UK
Re: Nautical "Strange but True!"
« Reply #438 on: September 24, 2009, 12:16:42 am »

Just to keep everyone in the picture after a chat with Bryan and the moderating team we have decided to clean up this thread and remove as much as possible all the posts that are not relevent.  This of course will allow the pertinent posts to be read more clearly, in particular of course Bryans excellent, informative and entertaining reminisces.

If in the process of tidying up the thread I remove any members posts that they object to I apologise but I'm sure you all agree there is some value in a bit of housekeeping.     
Logged
"Dirty British coaster with a salt-caked smoke stack, Butting through the Channel in the mad March days"

Bryan Young

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6,893
  • Location: Whitley Bay
Re: Nautical "Strange but True!"
« Reply #439 on: September 24, 2009, 04:41:19 pm »

May I have the (possibly) final word before Martin does his strip? I've enjoyed the recent lighthearted banter on this thread. Helped me over a bit of a sticky patch. Thanks to you all. Bryan.
Logged
Notes from a simple seaman

Colin H

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 697
  • Location: Nottingham England
Re: Nautical "Strange but True!"
« Reply #440 on: October 01, 2009, 09:57:06 pm »

Bryan,

I think I have found out why you enjoyed working for the RFA or at least put up with some of the bad times.

I was watching a program the other night `Warship` when the fleet commander visited RFA Wave Ruler and whilst they were there the TV crew took time to speak to a member of the crew, a P.O. I think. He explained the advantages of the RFA over the RN.

(1) Better rates of pay. (2) More shore leave. (3) Far, far better accommodation. They went to his cabin, big enough for 6 to 8 matelots, with easy chair, desk with computer, on suite facilities, family visits on board, etc, etc. The only down side according to the P.O. was that he would have to work till he was 60 before retirement.

As and aside you may like to google Wave Ruler and look at the captains CV. From what I have read of you excellent articles it would seem you may well have ran into him in his younger days.

Yours Colin H.
In anticipation of the next episode.
Logged
do every thing today tomorrow may not arrive.

Bryan Young

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6,893
  • Location: Whitley Bay
Re: Nautical "Strange but True!"
« Reply #441 on: October 07, 2009, 06:31:32 pm »

Although I had been with "olwen" for nearly 4 months, most of my nights had been spent at home. So it wasn't all that difficult for me to agree to stay on for the round trip to Aussie and points east. Another 6 months. Turned out to be the worst decision I'd made in years. I should have remembered that apart from being the "unluckiest" of the trio, she was also the crappiest one (although she was still pretty good in comparison to some other ships)...and my ill fated week or so in 1977 when I had a major falling out with her mad and dictatorial captain.Most of the guys who'd done the refit were, in the nicest possible way, "left-overs" from before the refit and were more than ready to go on leave...especially as most of them were "southerners". So although I knew the ship and all that, it was a bit of a culture shock to have to start over again with a new crew. But, as usual, that was just the beginning. Re-storing is always a nightmare...and re-ammunitioning is even worse.
Before going into a refit all "not required for refit" stores are either put into a "lay-apart" store at the presumed re-storing base, or put into "Chacons" or "Devcons".
A long digression here.

"Chacons" and "Devcons" are wooden boxes about 7ft cubed. "Chacons" have a number that said they belonged to Chatham, and similarly "Devcons" came from Devonport. I never heard of a "Roscon". But at the time very few RFAs or RNs had any sort of shelter for the gangway staff. So guess what. These "boxes" (with a little ingenuity) could easily be converted into "Wendy Houses" for adults. I can't answer for the RN, but many RFAs converted them into real little gingerbread cottages. First job was to "fix" one of the double doors and cut an opening window into it. Fit a bench under the window so guests could be signed in and out. Fit a shore telephone connection. "Obtain" a fitted carpet. Make a connection for the ships power supply and fit a "Black Heater" (basically a lump of iron that acted a bit like a warm hotplate). Naturally, a chair, stool and bookcase soon followed...and interior lighting. When painted up they looked nothing like the original....and at least on an RFA they could be stowed below decks when the ship was at sea. All very pretty and practical. I imagine that both Chatham and Devonport dockyards had to employ someone whose sole pupose was to recover their missing containers. Fat chance. I don't know if any were ever recovered, but certainly none from any RFA that I was in.

Anyway. So a lot of them are needed before refit. Lists of contents are made up and then loaded on to trucks to be taken to goodness knows where. I'm not telling porkies when I say that it wasn't unusual for an officer plus a rating to be despatched from the Tyne to Exeter to track down a bit of kit that was belatedly found to be needed. The RN (or should I say the MoD) had these stores dpots all over the UK...sometimes in the most unlikely of places. So "our" stuff could be anywhere. And was. The RN Supply and Transport system (the "Stonnery") did all this with the aid of their own impenetrable filing system. So large boxes going "walkabout" throughout the UK was not unexpected. I've even seen 35ft lifeboats "lost" in this system, only to be found in somewhere like Loch Ewe. I'm not joking. The transport costs alone must have been horrendous.

Another little detour:- I once left a ship in Florida, was flown to Washington (!) and then via Ottawa to the UK. I had had to leave most of my "stuff" behind and just put my faith in the "system". The system worked OK. About 2 weeks after I got home an RN truck arrived outside my house with one box on it. Mine. I thanked the driver and asked if my box was just the last of a larger load. No. Then he drove back to Rosyth. The box would have fitted into the back of most hatchbacks. I'll leave you to consider esoteric stuff like "value for money".

Perhaps not many of you are aware that the MoD has a telephone system that runs independently of the BT network. I suppose it should be obvious for all sorts of reasons, but probably not a thing that has been at the minds forefront. But it's a godsend when trying to chase up missing items. Not being a novice at this game, generally one of my first calls would be to an RAF (not RFA) maintenance depot....generally the one that used to be in Carlisle...dyslexia does still rule in some areas. Quite often our "missing" bit were "found" in an RAF establishment. Equally often. because the RAF staff didn't know what they were dealing with, our "boxes" had been opened an inevetably some items went missing. It worked the other way as well. Very often we had packages posted to RAF "Olwen" (or somesuch). Naturally we re-directed them back to the sender emphasising that we were a ship and not an RAF base. Funnily enough, I never ever had anything meant for the Royal Field Artillery. Odd, that. Some of you may recall a newspaper report regarding 10 tons of anchor cable being delivered to an "Argos" store when it was clearly marked for RFA "Argus" which was refitting in a nearby yard.

I'll stop there and then continue as I have no desire to be "blocked" again! BY.

Logged
Notes from a simple seaman

Bryan Young

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6,893
  • Location: Whitley Bay
Re: Nautical "Strange but True!"
« Reply #442 on: October 08, 2009, 05:59:03 pm »

Brian I specifically asked you if you wanted me to tidy up this thread back to your own original stories and you agreed.  After putting a considerable amount of time into this and carefully weighing up whether to leave or remove a post you come out with a comment like that.  Needless to say I'll not be touching this thread anymore.
Hey, hang about here will you! You've got absolutely the wrong end of the stick. I more than appreciate what you are doing. My reply was to another post and was (honestly) meant as a jocular answer to someone who I've been bantering with for awhile on the "Northumbrian" thread.
I was, and still am, hoping that the "trite" and/ or totally irelevant postings could be deleted. But as you will well have observed, some of the answers / queries are relevant to the topic. And those are the ones I was referring to. Sorry to have got your back up. Very unintentional. Regards. Bryan.
Logged
Notes from a simple seaman

Bryan Young

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6,893
  • Location: Whitley Bay
Re: Nautical "Strange but True!"
« Reply #443 on: October 08, 2009, 07:36:10 pm »

Going back to the lack of understanding between the services.
When "stuff" goes adrift there is a procedure to be followed. Form filling. Back then (1988 - as a reminder) All 3 services had different ways of doing this. Now we have a "Joint Services" organisation I hope it's better.
So, how does one make out a "missing" item report when it isn't clear about the "who", "where" and "why" business? The easiest way was just to fill in a form saying the lost item couldn't be found, and pass it up the line. Bending the truth (or at least the suspicions) a little. Personally, I think that this sort of "theft" fuelled an awful lot of "Antique" and "Surplus" shops at the time. Especially with items of clothing.

One great advantage that the USN has over the RN is that there Naval Bases are run and operated by USN personnel. Ours are run by civil servants. Actual ships are an encumbrance to the smooth running of the Dockyard. Unless we actually need to go to war when the system can (and does) go into an efficient sort of overdrive. But in peacetime the pen-pushers and bean counters rule.

Back to post-refit re-storing. This would take perhaps another month. This may seem pretty excessive to some of you, but believe me, it's necessary. An RN ship will probably take 3 times as long. An RFA may well be classified as a "Merchant Ship" (for various legal reasons) but there are many aspects that would never be found in a standard Merchant ship. For a start, there is the communications system. Testing and tuning of both the old and new equipment. Refining new Engine room systems. Getting new "rigs" to work...the list seems endless. The "big" one for the deck department is the re-building of the fuelling rigs. This ( in my experience) was always done by the Bosun and his "gang". Perhaps 15 of them. The hoses are heavy. 6" or so in dia and perhaps 30' long. An "O" boat had 8 rigs plus a stern one. That's a lot of hoses at 5000 or so each (plus spares). Maybe 7 connected hoses per rig. But there isn't just one hose. There could be up to 8 hoses matched and lashed per rig. FFO, Deisel, Avcat, Lube oil, Fresh water and so on. All have a dedicated hose for obvious reasons.

Then there is the Pursers group. They only know they have to stock up as far as they can for 6 months or so. Of course, some items are perishable and need to be re-stocked now and again, but the "core" has to be there. But at this stage it wouldn't be known if we were to have an embarked flight or not. This time it was a "not". But as luck would have it we were to have an embarked "force" (or 2 in this case). Both itinerant. First, we were to be the floating home for the Royal Marines Band. That sounded promising (no pun intended), and secondly to be a base and platform for a bunch of BAE rocket scientists who had been tasked to try and sell a high-tech high-altitude target rocket. More on both of them later.  Now it was clear why no flight would be embarked.

After the usual palaver at Portland many of the crew were relieved (in more senses than one), as the MoD played its usual trick again. A lot of the senior POs and Ratings who had taken the ship through Portland were re-assigned and peplaced by others who in the main were experienced....but the crew cohesiveness was lost. A sorry tale really, and it had gone on for years. To some of us it really make us wonder about the "worthwhileness" of doing a work-up. In effect, we had to do it all over again....but on our own while at sea.  Naturally, those guys who had done the Portland bit were more than a bit "xxxxx" off. But needs must.

The "Rocket Crew" were an interesting bunch. My memory of them is rather typical of cartoon characters. They all seemed to have beards and were a touch on the paunchy side. They'd also spent more time than I would consider healthy squatting on some remote western Scottish island testing their "missiles". I believe the name given to the rockets was "Petrel". Developed from something to do with weather forecasting....beats me why you need a rocket for that, but there you go. Before we departed for "Forrin Shores" we had to load up their equipment. It filled the double hangar. (Hence no embarked flight)....apart from one little corner where we parked a "Scout" (a Wasp without wheels) that was destined for a museum near Sydney. The "electronics" were stowed in the torpedo prep room. And then they all disappeared, not to be seen again until we got to Singapore.

Another little "odd-ball" was the Mini-Moke bought by the 2/O(N) for "jollies" in far flung places. God alone knows how long it took him to get clearances for it, but certainly months rather than days. He was also a bit miffed about the ships "plunge pool" being inoperable..so he bought his own. A medium sized "kiddies" paddling thing. But this had a sorry end. One breezy night in the Indian Ocean. The pool had been emptied but not weighted down. It was found the next morning wrapped around the radar gear in a shredded mess. There were repurcussions.
But that part of the trip is totally unmemorable apart from doing all the exercise stuff.
Life could get a bit wearysome at times. BY
Logged
Notes from a simple seaman

Bryan Young

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6,893
  • Location: Whitley Bay
Re: Nautical "Strange but True!"
« Reply #444 on: October 13, 2009, 05:38:31 pm »

I've noticed (easy to do) that the number of responses to my meanderings have gone from "some" to "zero" recently.
This is in all probablity due to an unfortunate misunderstanding between myself and Bunkerbarge. I plead guilty. But the wee spat has been amicably resolved between us, and life will go on. However, spending so much time and depletion of my remaining brain cells without any "feedback" whatsoever is pretty depressing. So any comments from you are welcome. On the other hand, perhaps all interest has been lost. In which case I should retire gracefully and with as much of my remaining dignity that remains.
Ah, the "blessed" peace of reduncancy!. Regards to you all. Bryan Y.
Logged
Notes from a simple seaman

Bryan Young

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6,893
  • Location: Whitley Bay
Re: Nautical "Strange but True!"
« Reply #445 on: October 13, 2009, 08:04:51 pm »

Bryan,

It is good, we want it, rub, rub, rub. WHAT MORE DO YOU WANT? We cannot argue with you, it all happened to you not to us.

Please carry on, it is well worth it.

I herebye promise to comment on EVERY episode.

Roger in France
Roger....I don't "want" anything. I just thought that a couple of comments and responses may have deterred people from responding just in case their comments my be deleted before "publishing" as it were.
All your comments, criticisms, downright denials and corrections are welcome. Although they will give Bunkerbarge a mild seizure. By the by...the "cleaning-up" process wasn't initially thought up by me, surprise, surprise.
It began when I mentioned what I was writing to my son and he said that it might be nice for my grandaughter to have something of me . Not to mention the fact that he hasn't a clue as to what I got up to while I was "employed"....so I think it would be for him as much as his daughter.
It all started off when I asked Martin if the thread could be lifted off and stuck on to a disc. It would appear not. So in the best Naval tradition he delegated the job to a minion. The "minion" being a rather senior officer on a rather large cruise ship. A nice regard for protocol  here...we all need to be reminded of where the heirachy really is.
So my heartfelt thanks do go to Bunkerbarge for his conscripted efforts. A real answer to the call of "duty". (when he gets out of the oily boilersuit). So I suppose Martin is just sitting back in his swivel chair, wondering what other little bombshells he can drop into the laps of the other moderators.
However, completely out of context, the "Maiden Voyage" of Northumbrian went without a hitch. Some say it could do with a bit more ballast. Not sure. Very stable in a strong breeze. New photos will be done once I get the people and some people on board.
Apropos of that.....against my better judgement I bought some "G" scale figures from "Virtual Village". I was correct in my initial post. These are "rip-offs" from Preiser. They have only done the "easy" ones, and not all that well either.OK for stuffing indoors, but not good enough for outdoors. So biting the bullet I've got a shed load of "proper" ones (I won't tell you the cost, but it's in 3 numbers). And most of them were unpainted! Similarly with vehicles. So many advertised are American. And the Shields ferry didn't see many of them.
Enough for one answer. Thanks for that. I shall continue......Bryan.
Logged
Notes from a simple seaman

Bryan Young

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6,893
  • Location: Whitley Bay
Re: Nautical "Strange but True!"
« Reply #446 on: October 13, 2009, 08:14:51 pm »

C'mon Bryan, you're just fishing for compliments! You know we like it - just get on with it. Wear a dressing gown if you like.  ok2

Colin
No,Colin, I'm not "fishing". I welcome any sort of feedback as it helps me a lot. Also I don't "know" you like it. How could I unless I'm told?  It isn't like sticking an article in a magazine. It's more personal than that. To me it's more like chatting and arguing over a decent dinner. And in that situation one needs other points of view. Sorry to rain on your parade. BY.
Logged
Notes from a simple seaman

omra85

  • Guest
Re: Nautical "Strange but True!"
« Reply #447 on: October 13, 2009, 08:24:12 pm »

Hello Bryan
We're all still here and reading your episodes. If you keep your eye on the viewing figures of "Nautical, Strange but True" (currently 14306) you will be able to see how many read it.  I'm pretty sure that if we thought it was rubbish, you wouldn't be getting anywhere near that number of views.
Anyway, you can't stop now, I'm looking forward to getting lots of free pints down the pub when I regale them with MY adventures in the RFA (only joking, I wouldn't really steal your exploits and claim them for my own just to get a few free drinks .............. probably)  %)
Danny

Logged

BarryM

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,692
  • Location: West Lothian
Re: Nautical "Strange but True!"
« Reply #448 on: October 13, 2009, 08:37:47 pm »

Aw c'mon, stop dragging it out. Get on with the next chapter where you start a new life as a drag artist and become Danny La Rue's dress designer.  :o

Cheers,

Barry M
Logged

Bryan Young

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6,893
  • Location: Whitley Bay
Re: Nautical "Strange but True!"
« Reply #449 on: October 13, 2009, 09:47:20 pm »

Aw c'mon, stop dragging it out. Get on with the next chapter where you start a new life as a drag artist and become Danny La Rue's dress designer.  :o

Cheers,

Barry M
So here we go again,eh? I hadn't realised you went to the "Grab a Granny" night at the Rex. To come all the way down from Thurso ,man: you must have been desperate. Or did you travel on the "go-anywhere for 50p" ticket. Even so, you must have given some consolence to the poor shaky mite of your choice....but as they all wobble when they walk I couldn't be sure which one it was. The grinning one without teeth, I thought. My dresses are made up for me by my 6 year old adopted Capuchin. As "he" (or perhaps "she"...can't tell yet) is Brazilian there isn't much conversation....but who needs words when your'e in love? Most nights at the Rex "it" does a "stand-in" night for me. Gets more applause, but I get the money. Perhaps Floras talents went far beyond our shores. Who knows.  BY.
Logged
Notes from a simple seaman
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 [18] 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32   Go Up