Things you've always wondered about but couldn't be bothered to find out

[Tazio]

5 minutes ago, graygo said:

 

Yes, I think it was used as a reservoir. Not sure that it is still supplied by the water works anymore tbh.

Wrong end of the stick. I meant the springs at Alnwickhill. 

[Tazio]

This is the thing, spring heads at Comiston.  
 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-50042933

[graygo]

2 minutes ago, Tazio said:

Wrong end of the stick. I meant the springs at Alnwickhill. 

 

Just now, Tazio said:

This is the thing, spring heads at Comiston.  
 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-50042933

 

👍

[graygo]

4 minutes ago, Tazio said:

This is the thing, spring heads at Comiston.  
 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-50042933

 

That's just reminded me that I did one of those city bus tours of Edinburgh many years ago and the guide pointed out a house which I think is next to the Fox spring, because it is higher than the spring it couldn't be gravity fed so was the only house in Edinburgh that had water pumped to it.

[Maple Leaf]

2 hours ago, graygo said:

 

It's an artificial loch and the water is fed into it from Alnwickhill water works.

 

Thanks.  So there are pumps somewhere?  Unless Alnwickhill is higher than Dunsapie.

 

PS.  As is obvious, I have no idea where Alnwickhill is. 

[graygo]

Just now, Maple Leaf said:

 

Thanks.  So there are pumps somewhere?  Unless Alnwickhill is higher than Dunsapie.

 

 

Don't think it's higher but gravity let it build up enough steam to get up to Dunsapie for years. A water turbine (powered by gravity fed water) has been added but still 2/3rds of it is gravity fed.

 

Info here. 

 

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edinburgh_Water_Company

 

By 2008, there were 13 service reservoirs supplying Edinburgh, at Fairmilehead, Alnwickhill, Marchbank, Firrhill, Humbie, Hillend, Torduff, Clermiston, Harlaw, Kinleith, Langloan, Dunsapie, and Craig Park,[30] which were supplied from four water treatment works, at Rosebery, Fairmilehead, Alnwickhill and Marchbank.[31] In 2006, Scottish Water considered ways to improve the city's water supply, and particularly the Alnwickhill works, dating from 1885, and that at Fairmilehead, dating from 1909. The solution adopted was to build a new treatment works at Glencorse, to replace both of them. One of the factors affecting the choice of site was that raw water could reach it from the main reservoirs at Talla, Fruid and Megget by gravity, using the existing Victorian pipeline, and it was at a sufficient elevation that the treated water could reach Edinburgh by gravity, removing the need for pumping, with its associated costs. The incoming raw water is used to power a Gilkes water turbine, which generates 230 kW, around one-third of the power requirements of the plant. The new works can deliver 38 million imperial gallons (170 Ml) per day, and the total cost, which included the construction of over 4.5 miles (7 km) of twin 4-foot (1.2 m) diameter pipeline to link the works to the existing distribution network at Fairmilehead and Alnwickhill, was £130 million.[32] The work was completed in March 2012, and the plant was officially opened in June 2012.[33]

 

[Tazio]

29 minutes ago, Maple Leaf said:

 

Thanks.  So there are pumps somewhere?  Unless Alnwickhill is higher than Dunsapie.

 

PS.  As is obvious, I have no idea where Alnwickhill is. 

I know exactly where Alnwickhill is and could drive you there but couldn’t describe where it is as Edinburgh south of a Princes Street is a mystery to me despite living here all my life. 

[Maple Leaf]

1 hour ago, graygo said:

 

Don't think it's higher but gravity let it build up enough steam to get up to Dunsapie for years. A water turbine (powered by gravity fed water) has been added but still 2/3rds of it is gravity fed.

 

Info here. 

 

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edinburgh_Water_Company

 

By 2008, there were 13 service reservoirs supplying Edinburgh, at Fairmilehead, Alnwickhill, Marchbank, Firrhill, Humbie, Hillend, Torduff, Clermiston, Harlaw, Kinleith, Langloan, Dunsapie, and Craig Park,[30] which were supplied from four water treatment works, at Rosebery, Fairmilehead, Alnwickhill and Marchbank.[31] In 2006, Scottish Water considered ways to improve the city's water supply, and particularly the Alnwickhill works, dating from 1885, and that at Fairmilehead, dating from 1909. The solution adopted was to build a new treatment works at Glencorse, to replace both of them. One of the factors affecting the choice of site was that raw water could reach it from the main reservoirs at Talla, Fruid and Megget by gravity, using the existing Victorian pipeline, and it was at a sufficient elevation that the treated water could reach Edinburgh by gravity, removing the need for pumping, with its associated costs. The incoming raw water is used to power a Gilkes water turbine, which generates 230 kW, around one-third of the power requirements of the plant. The new works can deliver 38 million imperial gallons (170 Ml) per day, and the total cost, which included the construction of over 4.5 miles (7 km) of twin 4-foot (1.2 m) diameter pipeline to link the works to the existing distribution network at Fairmilehead and Alnwickhill, was £130 million.[32] The work was completed in March 2012, and the plant was officially opened in June 2012.[33]

 

 

Thanks again.  As a former Gilmerton lad I should have known where Alnwickhill is, but that was a long time ago so, hey ho!

 

I think we've done this to death so no need to spend any more time on it, but Alnwickhill is definitely lower in elevation than Dunsapie Loch (I checked!), so it's still not clear to me how the water gets up there.

 

Anyway, HHGH and FTH.

 

[¼½¾]

7 hours ago, Maple Leaf said:

 

Thanks again.  As a former Gilmerton lad I should have known where Alnwickhill is, but that was a long time ago so, hey ho!

 

I think we've done this to death so no need to spend any more time on it, but Alnwickhill is definitely lower in elevation than Dunsapie Loch (I checked!), so it's still not clear to me how the water gets up there.

 

Anyway, HHGH and FTH.

 

On the site I looked at ( https://www.freemaptools.com/elevation-finder.htm ) , Dunsapie Loch is around 6m lower than Alnwickhill. That's assuming the Anwickhill water place is the bit I'm think of, off Liberton Gardens. 

[Tazio]

Watching a contest thing on telly just now and it’s between regions of the US. East, West, South, and Midwest. 
Made me wonder why the Midwest is a thing but Mideast isn’t. 

[Norm]

8 minutes ago, Tazio said:

Watching a contest thing on telly just now and it’s between regions of the US. East, West, South, and Midwest. 
Made me wonder why the Midwest is a thing but Mideast isn’t. 

Because they might get the Mideast confused with the Middle East and invade themselves for oil. 

[Locky]

On 23/01/2021 at 02:36, Tazio said:

I know exactly where Alnwickhill is and could drive you there but couldn’t describe where it is as Edinburgh south of a Princes Street is a mystery to me despite living here all my life. 

Totally unrelated Tazio, but same here. Anywhere past Cameron Toll is like a foreign country to me. Even more so in the South West of the city. Kinda know Morningside a bit. I had to look up where Alnwickhill was and had no idea it was there. Same with Comiston. I know the North and East of Edinburgh like the back of my hand though.

[Locky]

1 hour ago, Norm said:

Because they might get the Mideast confused with the Middle East and invade themselves for oil. 

 

[A Boy Named Crow]

9 hours ago, Tazio said:

Watching a contest thing on telly just now and it’s between regions of the US. East, West, South, and Midwest. 
Made me wonder why the Midwest is a thing but Mideast isn’t. 

This is just pure conjecture on my part, but if I was going to bluff an answer to this, it'd be something like, the Europeans got to the east first and set up their settlements. So places were hought of in terms of how far they were from there   The west was far far away, the mid-west wasn't quite that far.

 

Go on, sounds plausible, no?

[¼½¾]

1 hour ago, A Boy Named Crow said:

This is just pure conjecture on my part, but if I was going to bluff an answer to this, it'd be something like, the Europeans got to the east first and set up their settlements. So places were hought of in terms of how far they were from there   The west was far far away, the mid-west wasn't quite that far.

 

Go on, sounds plausible, no?

I think you're spot on. The current mid-west was at one time just called the west, before folk settled further west.

[Samuel Camazzola]

Is the 'Setanta Girl' who turned up for the BT games a few years ago still involved with the frames? 

[tian447]

On 21/01/2021 at 23:39, Boof said:

Whether their geology permits it more easily or they just have a bit more impetus to get things done the Faroese tunnel network is something else.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-55195390

 

Shetland, meanwhile, has a grand total of none. Lots of hot air spouted over the decades and an ageing ferry fleet but nary a tunnel in sight.

 

Was pleasantly surprised when driving in Tromsø a couple of years ago to encounter a roundabout with 4 exits in their tunnel system  

 

Ouch, the prices for going through that tunnel are extortionate: http://local.fo/prices-for-driving-through-the-eysturoy-subsea-tunnel-revealed-and-people-are-not-happy/

 

"For a normal passenger car the price to drive through the tunnel between Tórshavn and Eysturoy is 75 DKK with a subscription (which costs 200 DKK per vehicle a year), and 175 DKK without. And unlike the Faroe Islands’ other subsea tunnels, this price is for one way only."

 

75DKK = ~£9

175DKK = ~£21

 

I'd do it once to see what it's like, then take the long route instead  

[Locky]

Here's a question that has long bugged me, but why is Rugby Park so ****ing big? Was there any specific reasoning behind it when it was redeveloped? I know they've played internationals and held concerts there, but it doesn't look very multi-purpose built, and Kilmarnock never get anywhere near capacity.

 

Also, why, despite coming from similar sized towns, do Ayr and Kilmarnock football clubs have such contrasting fortunes? Killie in my lifetime have always been a top flight club, where as Ayr have never been, so I can see why in recent years, but it doesn't look like Ayr have ever competed with Killie in any respect throughout history. 

[Tazio]

1 hour ago, Locky said:

Here's a question that has long bugged me, but why is Rugby Park so ****ing big? Was there any specific reasoning behind it when it was redeveloped? I know they've played internationals and held concerts there, but it doesn't look very multi-purpose built, and Kilmarnock never get anywhere near capacity.

 

Also, why, despite coming from similar sized towns, do Ayr and Kilmarnock football clubs have such contrasting fortunes? Killie in my lifetime have always been a top flight club, where as Ayr have never been, so I can see why in recent years, but it doesn't look like Ayr have ever competed with Killie in any respect throughout history. 

It was a poor result against Ayr that got us the first relegation in our history, they’ve not always been lower league. There were a lot of years where Killie weren’t in the top division though to be fair they’ve been pretty solid the last few years. 

[FWJ]

2 hours ago, Locky said:

Here's a question that has long bugged me, but why is Rugby Park so ****ing big? Was there any specific reasoning behind it when it was redeveloped? I know they've played internationals and held concerts there, but it doesn't look very multi-purpose built, and Kilmarnock never get anywhere near capacity.

 

Also, why, despite coming from similar sized towns, do Ayr and Kilmarnock football clubs have such contrasting fortunes? Killie in my lifetime have always been a top flight club, where as Ayr have never been, so I can see why in recent years, but it doesn't look like Ayr have ever competed with Killie in any respect throughout history. 

Yup, often wondered about the Ayr/Kilmarnock thing - also Stirling/Falkirk 

[Locky]

19 minutes ago, FWJ said:

Yup, often wondered about the Ayr/Kilmarnock thing - also Stirling/Falkirk 

Good point with that one too. Always wondered about Stirling Albion. From too big a town to be where they are. They haven't played top flight football since 1968 which is mental for a town of Stirling's size compared to plenty smaller towns.

[FWJ]

11 minutes ago, Locky said:

Good point with that one too. Always wondered about Stirling Albion. From too big a town to be where they are. They haven't played top flight football since 1968 which is mental for a town of Stirling's size compared to plenty smaller towns.

Maybe because in both cases they’re so close that good local footballers could play for either, they’ll go for the bigger one?

But then you don’t really get “local” footballers any more I suppose - so I don’t know 😄

[Locky]

22 minutes ago, FWJ said:

Maybe because in both cases they’re so close that good local footballers could play for either, they’ll go for the bigger one?

But then you don’t really get “local” footballers any more I suppose - so I don’t know 😄

My thinking with Killie/Ayr, was as Killie had a decent spell in the 60's maybe that's filtered through to people picking Killie over them. Have Falkirk ever had a glory spell though?

[3fingersreid]

Is the human species getting dafter? 

Got up this morning and as I usually do ( albeit more carefully and slower due to sore ribs) I cleared my neighbours paths , they’re either elderly or invalid . I then clear a path on the pavement , wide enough for two people and salted . 
Why then do people still walk on the snow and ice and not the cleared area 🤷🏻‍♂️🤷🏻‍♂️

[Boof]

14 minutes ago, 3fingersreid said:

Is the human species getting dafter? 

Got up this morning and as I usually do ( albeit more carefully and slower due to sore ribs) I cleared my neighbours paths , they’re either elderly or invalid . I then clear a path on the pavement , wide enough for two people and salted . 
Why then do people still walk on the snow and ice and not the cleared area 🤷🏻‍♂️🤷🏻‍♂️

 

Suspicion/fear of black ice?

[Taffin]

43 minutes ago, 3fingersreid said:

Is the human species getting dafter? 

Got up this morning and as I usually do ( albeit more carefully and slower due to sore ribs) I cleared my neighbours paths , they’re either elderly or invalid . I then clear a path on the pavement , wide enough for two people and salted . 
Why then do people still walk on the snow and ice and not the cleared area 🤷🏻‍♂️🤷🏻‍♂️

 

Walking on snow and ice is one of life's little pleasures, especially just now when there isn't much else to enjoy.

[3fingersreid]

1 hour ago, Boof said:

 

Suspicion/fear of black ice?

Very well salted / gritted thanks to the cec grit bucket down the road 😉

 

51 minutes ago, Taffin said:

 

Walking on snow and ice is one of life's little pleasures, especially just now when there isn't much else to enjoy.

Yes but when you’re walking down a street and there’s a safe path ????

 

anyway if it snows again I’ll clear it and be a grumpy old git again if no one uses it 😂😂

[Boof]

9 minutes ago, 3fingersreid said:

Very well salted / gritted thanks to the cec grit bucket down the road 😉

 

 

Not doubting you but there might be that back of the mind 'Oooh, could be black ice' thought.

 

Add that to the fact that 99% of the general public are witless arseholes anyway and you might have your answer.

[ri Alban]

On 24/01/2021 at 20:54, Tazio said:

Watching a contest thing on telly just now and it’s between regions of the US. East, West, South, and Midwest. 
Made me wonder why the Midwest is a thing but Mideast isn’t. 

Ink master? 

[Tazio]

3 hours ago, ri Alban said:

Ink master? 

Of course. 

[FWJ]

This is a bit of a grim / bleak one ...

 

Why are there so many plane crashes that have only one survivor (as opposed to 2/3/4 etc)?

 

Is it a statistical quirk - or even fallacy that one is more likely than any other number than everyone / no-one?

[Maple Leaf]

21 minutes ago, FWJ said:

This is a bit of a grim / bleak one ...

 

Why are there so many plane crashes that have only one survivor (as opposed to 2/3/4 etc)?

 

Is it a statistical quirk - or even fallacy that one is more likely than any other number than everyone / no-one?

 

In most cases, the number of survivors when a passenger jet crashes is zero.

[been here before]

4 hours ago, FWJ said:

This is a bit of a grim / bleak one ...

 

Why are there so many plane crashes that have only one survivor (as opposed to 2/3/4 etc)?

 

Is it a statistical quirk - or even fallacy that one is more likely than any other number than everyone / no-one?

 

Is there?

 

Ive never heard of or noticed that.

[hughesie27]

4 hours ago, FWJ said:

This is a bit of a grim / bleak one ...

 

Why are there so many plane crashes that have only one survivor (as opposed to 2/3/4 etc)?

 

Is it a statistical quirk - or even fallacy that one is more likely than any other number than everyone / no-one?

Since when? Also, the most likely number of survivors from a plane crash after 0 is 1. So that would be why 

[FWJ]

2 hours ago, been here before said:

 

Is there?

 

Ive never heard of or noticed that.

There seems to be. There’s even a wiki page listing some of them.

[FWJ]

1 hour ago, hughesie27 said:

Since when? Also, the most likely number of survivors from a plane crash after 0 is 1. So that would be why 

Why is the most likely number after zero, one?   I’m not being arsey - is this the statistical quirk thing?

 

 

[hughesie27]

1 hour ago, FWJ said:

Why is the most likely number after zero, one?   I’m not being arsey - is this the statistical quirk thing?

 

 

Because the most likely result of a plane crash I am guessing is 0 survivors. So by order of likelihood I'm going to assume that the odds go up as the number of survivors does. 1 is more likely than 2, 2 is more likely than 3 etc.

[Beni]

According to this report the chances of surviving a plane crash are pretty good.

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-45030345

 

 

This guy was in the Hudson River emergency landing, but that moment or two when he thought he was going to die changed his perspective on life.

 

 

[Maple Leaf]

The only plane crash I remember where there was a single survivor occurred in the mid-1980s.

 

A passenger jet took off from Detroit and the flight crew made a fatal mistake.  They took off with deploying any flaps.  Flaps are vital in providing a plane with lift, so the plane left the ground but couldn't get enough lift to climb beyond ground effect.  The flight staggered along at rooftop height for a minute or two, but inevitably crashed. The sole survivor was a young boy. 

[Taffin]

18 hours ago, Maple Leaf said:

 

In most cases, the number of survivors when a passenger jet crashes is zero.

 

13 hours ago, hughesie27 said:

Since when? Also, the most likely number of survivors from a plane crash after 0 is 1. So that would be why 

 

This isn't true.

 

The overwhelming majority of plane crashes have multiple survivors. Edit - the majority have no fatalities at all.

 

I've no idea about the single survivor thing. It could be that there are more crashes with 1 survivor than 0 but it's certainly not the most common number of survivor(s) in a plane crash.

Edited February 16, 2021 by Taffin

[graygo]

5 minutes ago, Taffin said:

 

 

This isn't true.

 

The overwhelming majority of plane crashes have multiple survivors.

 

I've no idea about the single survivor thing. It could be that there are more crashes with 1 survivor than 0 but it's certainly not the most common number of survivor(s) in a plane crash.

 

I read that and thought "nah, can't be right" so had a quick look and found that it was right.

 

"When the US National Transportation Safety Board did a review of national aviation accidents from 1983-1999 , it found that more than 95% of aircraft occupants survived accidents, including 55% in the most serious incidents."

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-45030345

 

[Taffin]

2 minutes ago, graygo said:

 

I read that and thought "nah, can't be right" so had a quick look and found that it was right.

 

"When the US National Transportation Safety Board did a review of national aviation accidents from 1983-1999 , it found that more than 95% of aircraft occupants survived accidents, including 55% in the most serious incidents."

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-45030345

 

 

I used to work in the aviation industry and my assumption prior to that was also that it couldn't be true. You have to remember though, a lot of the crashes aren't a plane falling from the sky and disintegrating like we imagine. 

 

Despite knowing this, I still hate flying and get sweaty palms, butterflies in the stomach and intense anxiety during some flights I go on.

[Boof]

Could it be there's a large number of plane crashes where the pilot is the sole occupant? And the crashes are of the not-falling-out-of-the-sky variety?

[Norm]

44 minutes ago, Boof said:

Could it be there's a large number of plane crashes where the pilot is the sole occupant? And the crashes are of the not-falling-out-of-the-sky variety?

Exactly what I was going to say. Think of all the wee cesnas. From watching all those 999 programmes and air ambulance shows, it seems more common for those kind of planes to have crashes that are survivable. As opposed to a big **** off jumbo slamming in to the ground.

Edited February 16, 2021 by Norm

[Norm]

2 minutes ago, Norm said:

 

 

Edited February 16, 2021 by Norm

[Taffin]

1 hour ago, Boof said:

Could it be there's a large number of plane crashes where the pilot is the sole occupant? And the crashes are of the not-falling-out-of-the-sky variety?

 

Quite possibly as simple as that. When coupled with the idea that sole survivors when everyone else has died make those stories more well known it adds an intrigue to the stat that probably isn't quite as interesting in reality.

 

Most sole survivors are probably the only person on board rather than defeating the odds. We hear about people like Juliane Koepcke as it's unusual and amazing. Most of them were John Smith in his Cessna who drove into a tree before takeoff. We also don't tend to hear about when a plane overshoots the runway and nobody is hurt as it's not very interesting news.

Edited February 16, 2021 by Taffin

[FWJ]

13 minutes ago, Taffin said:

 

Quite possibly as simple as that. When coupled with the idea that sole survivors when everyone else has died make those stories more well known it adds an intrigue to the stat that probably isn't quite as interesting in reality.

 

Most sole survivors are probably the only person on board rather than defeating the odds. We hear about people like Juliane Koepcke as it's unusual and amazing. Most of them were John Smith in his Cessna who drove into a tree before takeoff. We also don't tend to hear about when a plane overshoots the runway and nobody is hurt as it's not very interesting news.

This is maybe it - and why there’s a wiki page on sole survivors and not one on where there’s 4 or 7 or whatever.

[Maple Leaf]

4 hours ago, Boof said:

Could it be there's a large number of plane crashes where the pilot is the sole occupant? And the crashes are of the not-falling-out-of-the-sky variety?

Correct.  Pilots of small planes are trained to fly their aircraft to a safe landing, even with engine failure. It's called a forced approach.  If the statistic in question is all aircraft, then there will usually be survivors.

[Boof]

I suppose it's the definition or interpretation of 'crash' that makes things clear.

[Locky]

Question for American based JKB'ers. What's the script with income tax in America?

 

I work for HMRC and had someone on the phone a while back who had just moved from USA, and was asking if they need to do their own taxes here as well. It totally threw me, and it was only after, when I spoke to colleagues that they told me apparently even ordinary workers in the US have to do their own tax returns every month.

 

Just had a conversation about this with my girlfriend and looked it up a bit. According to some sites, that's not quite true. So, can anyone who's lived stateside shed light? Did you have to do your own taxes?