In message
-septe
mber.org, at 15:35:54 on Tue, 12 Jun 2018, Recliner
remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message
-sept
ember.org, at 15:03:59 on Tue, 12 Jun 2018, Recliner
remarked:

And did you get taken to the Microsoft Store?

Yes, and got staff discount. But maybe everyone gets that?

I thought you had to be accompanied by a Microsoft employee.

I was, because that's who I was visiting, so they showed me around.

Yes, I think that's part of the standard offer to Redmond visitors.

My first visit was to the former Belleview office. Due to the local
taxation system in the US, they lost out big time when MS relocated the
majority of its operations.

Of course, in those days, MS-UK was emulating the Liberal Party with the
entire head count fitting in one taxi. De Montford Road (nothing to do
with any universities) near Reading station, but located in Reading for
the usual reason at the time - the MD lived in Pangbourne and wanted a
short commute.

They were quite surprised when I politely declined, on each of the
occasions I was invited to visit the Store.

In those days it was still the case that US-dollar prices for things
were translated to UK-pound prices, and what with the discount it was
well worth picking up a few things.

Like you, when I had spare time on one visit, I rode the monorail to the
Space Needle, but was disappointed by how dated it seemed.

It wasn't that old when I visited it in the mid-80's

On the other hand, the Underground Seattle tour, highly recommended to
me by a MSFT super techie, was excellent.

Originating like the Atlanta Underground, which was refurbished, and
trading again, when I visited in the late 80's, but struggled to find
its niche and has now closed for a second time.
--
Roland Perry

On 12/06/2018 09:50, wrote:
On Mon, 11 Jun 2018 16:37:28 +0100
Robin wrote:
On 11/06/2018 16:21, wrote:
Well somehow planes managed to land at manston for decades so why not ask
them
how they solved it.


I do know that actually, having first landed at Manston in 1965 in a
Chipmunk. But why not share your figures for Manston's previous peak
performance and tell us where the extra flight paths will come from to
justify I also know that Manson never achieved a fraction of the
movements necessary to justify the infrastructure investment you are
calling for? Or are they Scotch mist (mist being something Manston used
to be rather good at)

Flight paths are not fixed tracks in the sky, they can be adjusted to suit.

Actually they are.



--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On Tue, 12 Jun 2018 15:41:44 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
The same way they currently get to Gatwick. Road or train via London (if a
station was built there).

Gatwick is already too far for such people, and it has excellent motorway
and rail links.

Which part of investing in infrastructure for manston did you have a problem
comprehending?

I endure flying because the holiday at the other end is worth it. No way
would
I fly 50 times to the US simply for work business class or not. They could
shove the job.

Obviously you wouldn't, as you're afraid of flying. I enjoy it.

Do change the record you old soak. And the amount of times you flew for your
job its quite apparent you're one of those sad *******s who lived to work
rather than worked to live. Some of us have lives outside our work which we'd
rather spend time in. Clearly you didn't.

On Tue, 12 Jun 2018 20:20:44 +0100
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 12/06/2018 09:50, wrote:
On Mon, 11 Jun 2018 16:37:28 +0100
Robin wrote:
On 11/06/2018 16:21, wrote:
Well somehow planes managed to land at manston for decades so why not ask
them
how they solved it.


I do know that actually, having first landed at Manston in 1965 in a
Chipmunk. But why not share your figures for Manston's previous peak
performance and tell us where the extra flight paths will come from to
justify I also know that Manson never achieved a fraction of the
movements necessary to justify the infrastructure investment you are
calling for? Or are they Scotch mist (mist being something Manston used
to be rather good at)

Flight paths are not fixed tracks in the sky, they can be adjusted to suit.

Actually they are.

They're not fixed infrastructure such as roads and rails, they can be changed
with little effort.

On 13/06/2018 09:28, wrote:
On Tue, 12 Jun 2018 20:20:44 +0100
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 12/06/2018 09:50, wrote:
On Mon, 11 Jun 2018 16:37:28 +0100
Robin wrote:
On 11/06/2018 16:21, wrote:
Well somehow planes managed to land at manston for decades so why not ask
them
how they solved it.


I do know that actually, having first landed at Manston in 1965 in a
Chipmunk. But why not share your figures for Manston's previous peak
performance and tell us where the extra flight paths will come from to
justify I also know that Manson never achieved a fraction of the
movements necessary to justify the infrastructure investment you are
calling for? Or are they Scotch mist (mist being something Manston used
to be rather good at)

Flight paths are not fixed tracks in the sky, they can be adjusted to suit.

Actually they are.

They're not fixed infrastructure such as roads and rails, they can be changed
with little effort.


No they can't. It takes quite a lot of effort on an international scale
to change them.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On 2018\06\11 12:05, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 10:53:46 on Mon, 11 Jun
2018, remarked:

a hub airport brings very little to the UK other than pollution and
profit for Heathrow Plc.

It brings a great deal of employment (on the airport and off it).

It also makes routes which were not otherwise economic to operate,
available to locals to fly on.

.... which makes London one of the most connected places in the owrld to
locate a business HQ, which brings more money and talent into the country.

--
Basil Jet - listening to music from 1981(G-Q) ... Gang Of Four - Gary
Numan - Glenn Branca - Grace Jones - Heaven 17 - Holger Czukay - Japan -
Joe Jackson - Josef K - Killing Joke - Kissing The Pink - Klaus Nomi -
Kraftwerk - MX-80 Sound - Madness - Magazine - Massacre - Material -
Maximum Joy - Meat Puppets - Michael Nyman - Minutemen - Mission Of
Burma - Moebius & Plank - New Musik - New Order - Orange Juice - Palais
Schaumburg - Public Image Ltd - Pulp

Basil Jet wrote:
On 2018\06\11 12:05, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 10:53:46 on Mon, 11 Jun
2018, remarked:

a hub airport brings very little to the UK other than pollution and
profit for Heathrow Plc.

It brings a great deal of employment (on the airport and off it).

It also makes routes which were not otherwise economic to operate,
available to locals to fly on.

... which makes London one of the most connected places in the owrld to
locate a business HQ, which brings more money and talent into the country.


Indeed so, which is why the business community is so keen on the next
runway being at Heathrow. London has been losing out to Amsterdam, Paris
and Frankfurt, and government after government has been agreeing with the
plan in principle, but then failing to confirm it. It'll be ironic if it's
the dithering Maybot that finally does what Cameron, Brown and Blair failed
to do.

On Wed, 13 Jun 2018 10:02:59 +0100
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 13/06/2018 09:28, wrote:
On Tue, 12 Jun 2018 20:20:44 +0100
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 12/06/2018 09:50, wrote:
On Mon, 11 Jun 2018 16:37:28 +0100
Robin wrote:
On 11/06/2018 16:21, wrote:
Well somehow planes managed to land at manston for decades so why not ask
them
how they solved it.


I do know that actually, having first landed at Manston in 1965 in a
Chipmunk. But why not share your figures for Manston's previous peak
performance and tell us where the extra flight paths will come from to
justify I also know that Manson never achieved a fraction of the
movements necessary to justify the infrastructure investment you are
calling for? Or are they Scotch mist (mist being something Manston used
to be rather good at)

Flight paths are not fixed tracks in the sky, they can be adjusted to suit.

Actually they are.

They're not fixed infrastructure such as roads and rails, they can be changed
with little effort.


No they can't. It takes quite a lot of effort on an international scale
to change them.

Why would low level approach flight paths purely over the UK require an
international effort to change?

On Wed, 13 Jun 2018 10:56:55 +0100
Basil Jet wrote:
On 2018\06\11 12:05, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 10:53:46 on Mon, 11 Jun
2018, remarked:

a hub airport brings very little to the UK other than pollution and
profit for Heathrow Plc.

It brings a great deal of employment (on the airport and off it).

It also makes routes which were not otherwise economic to operate,
available to locals to fly on.

.... which makes London one of the most connected places in the owrld to
locate a business HQ, which brings more money and talent into the country.

There's plenty of talent in this country already. The whole "we need overseas
talent" argument used by business and remoaners is actually code for "we want
to hire the cheapest and foreigners fit the bill because they're desperate for
a job and will work for less".

I've noticed recently that now a lot of east europeans are clearing off a lot
of the coffee shops in county towns have managed to find english staff. These
apparently are the english who we were told are lazy and unwilling to do
menial jobs.

On Wed, 13 Jun 2018 10:09:16 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
Basil Jet wrote:
On 2018\06\11 12:05, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 10:53:46 on Mon, 11 Jun
2018, remarked:

a hub airport brings very little to the UK other than pollution and
profit for Heathrow Plc.

It brings a great deal of employment (on the airport and off it).

It also makes routes which were not otherwise economic to operate,
available to locals to fly on.

... which makes London one of the most connected places in the owrld to
locate a business HQ, which brings more money and talent into the country.


Indeed so, which is why the business community is so keen on the next
runway being at Heathrow. London has been losing out to Amsterdam, Paris
and Frankfurt, and government after government has been agreeing with the

Losing out how exactly? You do know that London is the largest financial
centre in europe and even after Brexit only unilever has shifted to amsterdam
and thats only legally. Oh, and Paris is 2 hours away by train - much quicker
than the plane overall, not that many executives want to work in france with its
45% tax rate for high earners and punitive job laws.