In what way did they have Roy Jenkins and Shirley Williams in 1981, before the Limehouse Declaration? Neither was an MP at the time. A new SDP might easily attract the likes of Mandelson, (who was nearly attracted by the original one), and other big beasts of the Blair-Brown era.
if there were a new Labour split, the Lib Dems would be mad not to come to some arrangement with SDP2, which otherwise might well pull support from Farron's party.
I can see four differences with 1980, all of which combine to make the prospect of political realignment far easier than then: 1. Almost all Labour MPs are looking on aghast at the prospect of Labour turning into the SWP/Socialist Party/Left Unity in all but name, whereas the SDP was in essence a split by a smallish core of MPs who did so out of choice when the future direction of the Labour Party was still uncertain. This time MPs who are not willing to nail their future to Corbyn's mast have no option but to jump. So many more will jump this time. 2. Because the split will initially be in the form of a distancing of the PLP from the rest of the Labour Party, the initial separation will be en-masse by default rather than through a deliberate act of defection. It will become a defection only in due course when matters escalate and a nascent party structure starts to form around. MPs will find they have jumped without realising it and will have no choice but to continue when the retribution starts. 3. The Lib Dems are in an even weaker position now than they were in 1980, with the number of MPs and their polling now in single figures with the possibility too of losing some support to a progressive party of the centre-left. 4. The electorate are much more volatile with old allegiances waning and there is despair amongst almost all to the political (non-far) left of the Conservatives as to how that party could ever be challenged in the foreseeable future. As soon as a viable centre-left grouping appears to have a renewed prospect of challenging the Conservatives, its support will mushroom.
Fun predictor tool on here for the projected 600 seat boundaries. however, getting the Tories beyond 2 in Scotland is nigh on impossible - which shows the weakness of models based on just uniform swing operating.
The three borders, and Murphy's old seat would be my guess for the 3 next potential Tory gains.
With possibly one more in the Grampian/Aberdeenshire zone where they took one in the Assembly? A lot depends on the Slab vote collapsing even more with switches to the Tories - not entirely unlikely in the areas you mentioned.
Edit - Remember they already have one border seat - just.
@mrjohnofarrell: Suggested NEC compromise; new Labour members CAN vote in leadership but are banned from voting for Ed Balls on Strictly Come Dancing.
Do you get paid to appear on Strictly? Or is it just a very public way of simultaneously becoming fit and making a fool of yourself?
Quite a few contestants have got very friendly with their dance partners. Keep an eye on him, Yvette!
The choice of Eds partner will be very "interesting"!!
Joking aside I think it is a good move for him. It is all part of the detoxing of the Ed Balls brand. PLP leader in 2020??
So Ed Balls would rather do Dad-dancing on the telly, rather than make himself available to the Labour Party in its time of greatest crisis? And you think he still has a political future? Yeah, right.....
You know as well as i do that that when the next Leader is chosen there will be the inevitable Head To Head polls as per the previous thread. Name recognition counts and Ed ex Strictly will have plenty of name recognition outside of Westminster.
On the subject of flying, I read this morning that Qantas is thinking of introducing a London-Perth non-stop service using the new 787. It would take somewhere between 17 and 18 hours.
Are there enough people who would want to be stuck in a small metal tube for that length of time, and pay for the privilege? I'd be going off my rocker, especially with all these new booze restrictions that people are talking about. And what about the crew? OK, they will be Australians, but even so it would hardly be fair on them.
In my younger days, I used to swim at a national level / in a training group with a number of people who made the Olympics. I was banned from my local outdoor pool after being bet by my friends how long I could sit on the bottom of the pool.
Despite protests from my friends that I was ok and knew what I was doing, a lifeguard thought I had drowned, dived in to save me and I was subsequently banned by the management for wasting their time.
So is this US airline really grounding all it's flights due to a computer failure or is that just a line fed by the spooks?
Computer system failures have grounded many airlines in the past, so it's not inconcievable.
A lot of the airlines are moving off proprietary stems these days, and moving onto standard ones built by Amadeus in Spain. I think delta is still running their own...
There's still an awful lot of old systems around, and lots big companies very scared to move away from them - some have been running for decades on very old mainframes, with loads of custom code that's evolved to meet the business requirements over time. The worst offenders are those who embraced early computing, so airlines, banks etc. There's also a load of systems installed leading up to Y2K that are now becoming obsolete.
This one looks like a data centre power failure - why they don't have backup gennies (or a backup data centre!) God only knows.
I can see four differences with 1980, all of which combine to make the prospect of political realignment far easier than then:
[snip]
Perhaps (although some of your reasons may be wishful thinking), but there's a very strong argument on the other side, which is that the painful memory of the SDP saga is a strong disincentive to splitting.
I can see four differences with 1980: 1. Almost all Labour MPs are looking on aghast at the prospect of Labour turning into the SWP/Socialist Party/Left Unity in all but name, whereas the SDP was in essence a split by a smallish core of MPs who did so out of choice when the future direction of the Labour Party was still uncertain. This time MPs who are not willing to nail their future to Corbyn's mast have no option but to jump. So many more will jump this time. 2. Because the split will initially be in the form of a distancing of the PLP from the rest of the Labour Party, the initial separation will be en-masse by default rather than through a deliberate act of defection. It will become a defection only in due course when matters escalate and a nascent party structure starts to form around. MPs will find they have jumped without realising it and will have no choice but to continue when the retribution starts. 3. The Lib Dems are in an even weaker position now than they were in 1980, with the number of MPs and their polling now in single figures with the possibility too of losing some support to a progressive party of the centre-left. 4. The electorate are much more volatile with old allegiances waning and there is despair amongst almost all to the political (non-far) left of the Conservatives as to how that party could ever be challenged in the foreseeable future. As soon as a viable centre-left grouping appears to have a renewed prospect of challenging the Conservatives, its support will mushroom.
Wulfrun Phil interesting as ever on this subject. Point 4 in particular is one that I had not considered and which remains a great unknown. I despair of the current crop of Labour MPs having the spine to leave - politically, it's a no-brainer, but in terms of personal relationships with former colleagues, it would be a hard decsoin to take. There is also the not-inconsiderable factor of the level of abuse and threats that they would get from Momentum etc. Still, it could still be a great opportunity to launch a de-toxified left-of-centre pary, untainted with the voter-repellent hard left. It could attract a lot of support (as the SDP did, initially, in the early 80s - not that that necessarily provides a happy precedent. But as Wulfrun Phil says, a new set of splitters should be in a much better position). I wonder how much of the Labour vote an SDP 2 could take? Certainly there appears to be no great alignment between current Labour voters and Corbynite Labour. But there is probably not much more alignment between Corbynite Labour and Chuka Umunna-ite Labour. The danger is that yet another party of the Metropolitan Middle Class is formed, leaving the Leave voters of Barnsley and Hartlepool to be chipped away by UKIP, if such a party still exists in 2020.
On the subject of flying, I read this morning that Qantas is thinking of introducing a London-Perth non-stop service using the new 787. It would take somewhere between 17 and 18 hours.
Are there enough people who would want to be stuck in a small metal tube for that length of time, and pay for the privilege? I'd be going off my rocker, especially with all these new booze restrictions that people are talking about. And what about the crew? OK, they will be Australians, but even so it would hardly be fair on them.
I'd rather do a single 18-hour flight than say a 12-hour flight, then hang around at an airport for a few hours, then a 10 hour flight. Modern technology makes these long flights a lot more bearable, particularly the invention of Game of Thrones.
@mrjohnofarrell: Suggested NEC compromise; new Labour members CAN vote in leadership but are banned from voting for Ed Balls on Strictly Come Dancing.
Do you get paid to appear on Strictly? Or is it just a very public way of simultaneously becoming fit and making a fool of yourself?
Quite a few contestants have got very friendly with their dance partners. Keep an eye on him, Yvette!
The choice of Eds partner will be very "interesting"!!
Joking aside I think it is a good move for him. It is all part of the detoxing of the Ed Balls brand. PLP leader in 2020??
So Ed Balls would rather do Dad-dancing on the telly, rather than make himself available to the Labour Party in its time of greatest crisis? And you think he still has a political future? Yeah, right.....
You know as well as i do that that when the next Leader is chosen there will be the inevitable Head To Head polls as per the previous thread. Name recognition counts and Ed ex Strictly will have plenty of name recognition outside of Westminster.
Just think of all that extra money going to charity, there will be millions of people trying to vote Ed Balls off at the first time of asking!
On the subject of flying, I read this morning that Qantas is thinking of introducing a London-Perth non-stop service using the new 787. It would take somewhere between 17 and 18 hours.
Are there enough people who would want to be stuck in a small metal tube for that length of time, and pay for the privilege? I'd be going off my rocker, especially with all these new booze restrictions that people are talking about. And what about the crew? OK, they will be Australians, but even so it would hardly be fair on them.
I can see four differences with 1980, all of which combine to make the prospect of political realignment far easier than then:
[snip]
Perhaps (although some of your reasons may be wishful thinking), but there's a very strong argument on the other side, which is that the painful memory of the SDP saga is a strong disincentive to splitting.
Listening to local Labour, they will live with parliamentary angst. Splitting locally will do no good and hard left can't be bothered to canvass. If there is a split, standar d Labour will win, hate Corbyn, but still back him
But it's moronic. Either support Corbyn, or oppose him. Voting for someone you loathe, canvassing for something to which you're actively opposed are the actions of madness.
May must call Fox into her office now and order him to explain himself. If he fails to provide an adequate explanation then he must be dismissed. I'm worried. This could be the first disaster of May's premiership. If these allegations are true then the credibility of May's judgement will be in tatters. Moreover, Fox is Brexit's leading poster boy. It will look terrible for that particular cause if one of their leaders is exposed as an anti-democratic stooge. The Brexiteers have already embraced Trump and Putin; they can't afford to add another nasty to the list. Fox has already turned himself into a laughing stock with his ludicrous notion about striking unilateral trade deals with EU member states. It's clear that May only appointed him to appease the Tory hard-right. This is starting to look like a misguided appointment that will only do May harm.
So is this US airline really grounding all it's flights due to a computer failure or is that just a line fed by the spooks?
Computer system failures have grounded many airlines in the past, so it's not inconcievable.
A lot of the airlines are moving off proprietary stems these days, and moving onto standard ones built by Amadeus in Spain. I think delta is still running their own...
There's still an awful lot of old systems around, and lots big companies very scared to move away from them - some have been running for decades on very old mainframes, with loads of custom code that's evolved to meet the business requirements over time. The worst offenders are those who embraced early computing, so airlines, banks etc. There's also a load of systems installed leading up to Y2K that are now becoming obsolete.
This one looks like a data centre power failure - why they don't have backup gennies (or a backup data centre!) God only knows.
Money, I suspect, Mr. Pit. Companies don't like investing in critical incident planning, facilities or training. "It will never happen to us", "the chances of a critical incident happening are so small it's not worth it", "I have got more important things to worry about" are the common things I have heard from senior executives, when the subject has been raised.
Most companies that experience a critical incident are out of business within 18 months. I'd sell any shares I had in Delta today for whatever I could get.
@mrjohnofarrell: Suggested NEC compromise; new Labour members CAN vote in leadership but are banned from voting for Ed Balls on Strictly Come Dancing.
Do you get paid to appear on Strictly? Or is it just a very public way of simultaneously becoming fit and making a fool of yourself?
Quite a few contestants have got very friendly with their dance partners. Keep an eye on him, Yvette!
The choice of Eds partner will be very "interesting"!!
Joking aside I think it is a good move for him. It is all part of the detoxing of the Ed Balls brand. PLP leader in 2020??
So Ed Balls would rather do Dad-dancing on the telly, rather than make himself available to the Labour Party in its time of greatest crisis? And you think he still has a political future? Yeah, right.....
You know as well as i do that that when the next Leader is chosen there will be the inevitable Head To Head polls as per the previous thread. Name recognition counts and Ed ex Strictly will have plenty of name recognition outside of Westminster.
Just think of all that extra money going to charity, there will be millions of people trying to vote Ed Balls off at the first time of asking!
I'm surprised the NEC haven't had a meeting to decide whether or not to let him participate.
I can see four differences with 1980, all of which combine to make the prospect of political realignment far easier than then:
[snip]
Perhaps (although some of your reasons may be wishful thinking), but there's a very strong argument on the other side, which is that the painful memory of the SDP saga is a strong disincentive to splitting.
At the start of 1981, Labour were polling as high as 50%. By the end of the year the party was polling sub 30%. That is why the SDP rankles - the split let Thatcher off the hook, rescuing her from what looked like a losing position. This time we are looking at the prospect of decades of Conservative government, without a split. Only a nailed on Corbyn cultist would argue that Labour is in a potentially winning position now.
Certainly since they brought in minimum standards, Eric the Eel did nearly drown in 2000.
A serious point: Go to a pool. See how long it takes you to swim 100 m freestyle.
He's still likely to be faster than you.
I'm a regular swimmer, admittedly not the fastest but I can do a good few miles, and he'd probably have me at the turns -_-
If I remember rightly, he was at world record pace for the first 50m but then really struggled in the final 25m.
I've never swum in a 50m pool, I'd like to do so one day.
Nor have I, but I'm told it's like transferring from a pub pool table to a snooker one.
Good analogy. Remember the first time I stood at a snooker table. It's HOW big..? (Yes, I know it's 12' x 5'6")
The pocket size / much tighter lip is the thing that always strikes me. In comparison, going back to potting balls on a pool table feels like the pockets are the size of a dustbin.
On the subject of flying, I read this morning that Qantas is thinking of introducing a London-Perth non-stop service using the new 787. It would take somewhere between 17 and 18 hours.
Are there enough people who would want to be stuck in a small metal tube for that length of time, and pay for the privilege? I'd be going off my rocker, especially with all these new booze restrictions that people are talking about. And what about the crew? OK, they will be Australians, but even so it would hardly be fair on them.
The Airbus A350 is capable of Sydney to London non stop for most of the year.
On the subject of flying, I read this morning that Qantas is thinking of introducing a London-Perth non-stop service using the new 787. It would take somewhere between 17 and 18 hours.
Are there enough people who would want to be stuck in a small metal tube for that length of time, and pay for the privilege? I'd be going off my rocker, especially with all these new booze restrictions that people are talking about. And what about the crew? OK, they will be Australians, but even so it would hardly be fair on them.
It would be okay in business class, but who goes from London to Perth (rather than Sydney, Melbourne or Canebrra) on business? Also, it wouldn't have the range for the return leg against the jet stream, so would still have to stop somewhere on the way home.
Non-business pax would still like to stretch their legs somewhere en route. HK, Singapore, Bangkok and Dubai are all good places to break the trip, whether for a couple of hours or a couple of days.
This one looks like a data centre power failure - why they don't have backup gennies (or a backup data centre!) God only knows.
Money, I suspect, Mr. Pit. Companies don't like investing in critical incident planning, facilities or training. "It will never happen to us", "the chances of a critical incident happening are so small it's not worth it", "I have got more important things to worry about" are the common things I have heard from senior executives, when the subject has been raised.
Also the nastier the system is the harder it is to make failover systems work well. Or test them to make sure they do work. Or migrate to a new system, for that matter. Everything you touch risks setting off the explosion that you're trying to plan for.
May must call Fox into her office now and order him to explain himself. If he fails to provide an adequate explanation then he must be dismissed. I'm worried. This could be the first disaster of May's premiership. If these allegations are true then the credibility of May's judgement will be in tatters. Moreover, Fox is Brexit's leading poster boy. It will look terrible for that particular cause if one of their leaders is exposed as an anti-democratic stooge. The Brexiteers have already embraced Trump and Putin; they can't afford to add another nasty to the list. Fox has already turned himself into a laughing stock with his ludicrous notion about striking unilateral trade deals with EU member states. It's clear that May only appointed him to appease the Tory hard-right. This is starting to look like a misguided appointment that will only do May harm.
Is it really that worrying?
It is a pretty weak piece of 'investigative' journalism with a lot of speculation and no evidence other than a bizarre publishing deal.
That is hardly damning evidence of any wrong-doing.
On the subject of flying, I read this morning that Qantas is thinking of introducing a London-Perth non-stop service using the new 787. It would take somewhere between 17 and 18 hours.
Are there enough people who would want to be stuck in a small metal tube for that length of time, and pay for the privilege? I'd be going off my rocker, especially with all these new booze restrictions that people are talking about. And what about the crew? OK, they will be Australians, but even so it would hardly be fair on them.
The Airbus A350 is capable of Sydney to London non stop for most of the year.
Sometimes you have to stop and think whether you should do something rather than whether you could do something. A non-stop flight to Sydney would be 22 hours. I don't know about you but that is my idea of hell, club class or not.
May must call Fox into her office now and order him to explain himself. If he fails to provide an adequate explanation then he must be dismissed. I'm worried. This could be the first disaster of May's premiership. If these allegations are true then the credibility of May's judgement will be in tatters. Moreover, Fox is Brexit's leading poster boy. It will look terrible for that particular cause if one of their leaders is exposed as an anti-democratic stooge. The Brexiteers have already embraced Trump and Putin; they can't afford to add another nasty to the list. Fox has already turned himself into a laughing stock with his ludicrous notion about striking unilateral trade deals with EU member states. It's clear that May only appointed him to appease the Tory hard-right. This is starting to look like a misguided appointment that will only do May harm.
Is it really that worrying?
It is a pretty weak piece of 'investigative' journalism with a lot of speculation and no evidence other than a bizarre publishing deal.
That is hardly damning evidence of any wrong-doing.
It's August, isn't it? when newspapers fill their pages with cr*p.
For some PB posters, that is a year-round occupation of course.
May must call Fox into her office now and order him to explain himself. If he fails to provide an adequate explanation then he must be dismissed. I'm worried. This could be the first disaster of May's premiership. If these allegations are true then the credibility of May's judgement will be in tatters. Moreover, Fox is Brexit's leading poster boy. It will look terrible for that particular cause if one of their leaders is exposed as an anti-democratic stooge. The Brexiteers have already embraced Trump and Putin; they can't afford to add another nasty to the list. Fox has already turned himself into a laughing stock with his ludicrous notion about striking unilateral trade deals with EU member states. It's clear that May only appointed him to appease the Tory hard-right. This is starting to look like a misguided appointment that will only do May harm.
Is it really that worrying?
It is a pretty weak piece of 'investigative' journalism with a lot of speculation and no evidence other than a bizarre publishing deal.
That is hardly damning evidence of any wrong-doing.
It's August, isn't it? when newspapers fill their pages with cr*p.
For some PB posters, that is a year-round occupation of course.
With the meltdown in Labour and UKIP, you would think they had enough muck to be spreading...
May must call Fox into her office now and order him to explain himself. If he fails to provide an adequate explanation then he must be dismissed. I'm worried. This could be the first disaster of May's premiership. If these allegations are true then the credibility of May's judgement will be in tatters. Moreover, Fox is Brexit's leading poster boy. It will look terrible for that particular cause if one of their leaders is exposed as an anti-democratic stooge. The Brexiteers have already embraced Trump and Putin; they can't afford to add another nasty to the list. Fox has already turned himself into a laughing stock with his ludicrous notion about striking unilateral trade deals with EU member states. It's clear that May only appointed him to appease the Tory hard-right. This is starting to look like a misguided appointment that will only do May harm.
Is it really that worrying?
It is a pretty weak piece of 'investigative' journalism with a lot of speculation and no evidence other than a bizarre publishing deal.
That is hardly damning evidence of any wrong-doing.
It's August, isn't it? when newspapers fill their pages with cr*p.
For some PB posters, that is a year-round occupation of course.
With the meltdown in Labour and UKIP, you would think they had enough muck to be spreading...
Perhaps they have hopes of getting a Legion d'Honneur for their keyboard efforts, like dearest Lionel.
So is this US airline really grounding all it's flights due to a computer failure or is that just a line fed by the spooks?
Computer system failures have grounded many airlines in the past, so it's not inconcievable.
A lot of the airlines are moving off proprietary stems these days, and moving onto standard ones built by Amadeus in Spain. I think delta is still running their own...
There's still an awful lot of old systems around, and lots big companies very scared to move away from them - some have been running for decades on very old mainframes, with loads of custom code that's evolved to meet the business requirements over time. The worst offenders are those who embraced early computing, so airlines, banks etc. There's also a load of systems installed leading up to Y2K that are now becoming obsolete.
This one looks like a data centre power failure - why they don't have backup gennies (or a backup data centre!) God only knows.
Money, I suspect, Mr. Pit. Companies don't like investing in critical incident planning, facilities or training. "It will never happen to us", "the chances of a critical incident happening are so small it's not worth it", "I have got more important things to worry about" are the common things I have heard from senior executives, when the subject has been raised.
Most companies that experience a critical incident are out of business within 18 months. I'd sell any shares I had in Delta today for whatever I could get.
It's certainly true that most large companies see technology as a cost centre to be trimmed, until an incident like this happens where the loss can be quantified. Delta's CIO has probably being talking about their old system needing replacing for ages now, but those above him only see the cost and disruption involved in replacing it. If he has any sense he'll be dusting off his project plan for the next board meeting - either that or handing in his resignation!
On the subject of flying, I read this morning that Qantas is thinking of introducing a London-Perth non-stop service using the new 787. It would take somewhere between 17 and 18 hours.
Are there enough people who would want to be stuck in a small metal tube for that length of time, and pay for the privilege? I'd be going off my rocker, especially with all these new booze restrictions that people are talking about. And what about the crew? OK, they will be Australians, but even so it would hardly be fair on them.
The Airbus A350 is capable of Sydney to London non stop for most of the year.
Sometimes you have to stop and think whether you should do something rather than whether you could do something. A non-stop flight to Sydney would be 22 hours. I don't know about you but that is my idea of hell, club class or not.
And no-one in their right mind would want to do that in coach!
As an aside, have you been on the BA001 LCY>SNN>JFK? That's supposed to be very good, some great outside-the-box thinking from BA.
On the subject of flying, I read this morning that Qantas is thinking of introducing a London-Perth non-stop service using the new 787. It would take somewhere between 17 and 18 hours.
Are there enough people who would want to be stuck in a small metal tube for that length of time, and pay for the privilege? I'd be going off my rocker, especially with all these new booze restrictions that people are talking about. And what about the crew? OK, they will be Australians, but even so it would hardly be fair on them.
The Airbus A350 is capable of Sydney to London non stop for most of the year.
Sometimes you have to stop and think whether you should do something rather than whether you could do something. A non-stop flight to Sydney would be 22 hours. I don't know about you but that is my idea of hell, club class or not.
I've done 17 hours non-stop. It is soul-breaking to realize that you've already done 8 hours and it's not even halfway.
On the subject of flying, I read this morning that Qantas is thinking of introducing a London-Perth non-stop service using the new 787. It would take somewhere between 17 and 18 hours.
Are there enough people who would want to be stuck in a small metal tube for that length of time, and pay for the privilege? I'd be going off my rocker, especially with all these new booze restrictions that people are talking about. And what about the crew? OK, they will be Australians, but even so it would hardly be fair on them.
The Airbus A350 is capable of Sydney to London non stop for most of the year.
Sometimes you have to stop and think whether you should do something rather than whether you could do something. A non-stop flight to Sydney would be 22 hours. I don't know about you but that is my idea of hell, club class or not.
And no-one in their right mind would want to do that in coach!
As an aside, have you been on the BA001 LCY>SNN>JFK? That's supposed to be very good, some great outside-the-box thinking from BA.
Yes, it is an amazing flight. Well worth it if you are going to NYC and have Avois saved up for the premium economy to club upgrade.
High oil prices eventually killed that service off, but it will be reinstated with a more fuel efficient A350 aircraft. The issue is that fuel burn is a factor of weight. As you fly further, your fuel burn per mile goes up as you are burning fuel to carry fuel.
1. Materially this makes not the slightest difference. An electorate that was pro-Corbyn in Sept 2015 had tens of thousands of pro-Corbyn members added to it in the autumn as many registered supporters converted to full membership. He would have won anyway. 2. If the party has to hand the bulk of its £4.5m back then all the more reason for her Theresaness to call an early election - we simply can't afford to fight one even if we had policies to sell on teh doorstep (and we don't) 3. An alliance with the LibDems is doable - people didn't like their decision to ditch their morality and lie with the Tories but have already punished them for it. As their current leader had nothing to do with the coalition it gives them some clear yellow water (ewww) between their position now and the floating pyre of Orange Book Cleggery 4. A discussion at the weekend was a lively argument about whether or not we want to keep the Labour name when the split happens (but not "would a split happen" - its a given). The assumption is that most of the MPs, MEPs, Councillors, the officials the NEC the regional staff, most members who were in last May and most CLP execs will be on board which means jettisoning a small rump of MPs and 250k new members who spend most of their time deriding anyone and anything who has ever donned a red rosette and instead posting idiotic memes because actually they reach more people that The Sun actually (gosh).
Its not the creation of a new party away from Labour. Its partitioning the existing party and keeping legal continuity - a bit like that after their High Court battles over band name subsequent albums were published by a new business "Pink Floyd (1987) Ltd" but still known as "Pink Floyd".
The Labour Party will continue. Cleansed of its current bout of fuckwittery. It won't be Momentum able to forge progressive alliances with the LibDems or Greens because they aren't progressive - they are absolutists always on the lookout for scabs and traitors. It will be The Labour Party (2016).
On the subject of flying, I read this morning that Qantas is thinking of introducing a London-Perth non-stop service using the new 787. It would take somewhere between 17 and 18 hours.
Are there enough people who would want to be stuck in a small metal tube for that length of time, and pay for the privilege? I'd be going off my rocker, especially with all these new booze restrictions that people are talking about. And what about the crew? OK, they will be Australians, but even so it would hardly be fair on them.
It would be okay in business class, but who goes from London to Perth (rather than Sydney, Melbourne or Canebrra) on business? Also, it wouldn't have the range for the return leg against the jet stream, so would still have to stop somewhere on the way home.
Non-business pax would still like to stretch their legs somewhere en route. HK, Singapore, Bangkok and Dubai are all good places to break the trip, whether for a couple of hours or a couple of days.
I am sure business class has improved since my travelling days when I regularly did business/first class to to the USA/Middle East (flat beds, pods etc.) but even so the passenger is still couped up in what has to be the most unhealthy environment that people are allowed to pay for.
Would someone earning serious money decide to sleep in a Youth Hostel? No? Then why the feck would he/she decide that sleeping in the same conditions but with less oxygen and more toxins in the air would be a good idea? It beats me.
"The Tories are on course to win a 90-seat majority at the next general election, aided by boundary changes that favour the party.
Research conducted by the political website Electoral Calculus found that planned alterations to the size and make-up of constituencies would increase the Conservative majority from the current 12 seats to a comfortable 48-seat lead. Coupled with recent changes in the public’s voting intentions as support for Labour and Ukip slips, the net effect would give the Conservatives a majority of 90 seats in a smaller House of Commons."
On the subject of flying, I read this morning that Qantas is thinking of introducing a London-Perth non-stop service using the new 787. It would take somewhere between 17 and 18 hours.
Are there enough people who would want to be stuck in a small metal tube for that length of time, and pay for the privilege? I'd be going off my rocker, especially with all these new booze restrictions that people are talking about. And what about the crew? OK, they will be Australians, but even so it would hardly be fair on them.
The Airbus A350 is capable of Sydney to London non stop for most of the year.
Sometimes you have to stop and think whether you should do something rather than whether you could do something. A non-stop flight to Sydney would be 22 hours. I don't know about you but that is my idea of hell, club class or not.
And no-one in their right mind would want to do that in coach!
As an aside, have you been on the BA001 LCY>SNN>JFK? That's supposed to be very good, some great outside-the-box thinking from BA.
... Only a nailed on Corbyn cultist would argue that Labour is in a potentially winning position now.
Yes, of course, but that isn't the question. The question is whether the quicker route to getting back to a vaguely-electable party of the left is to split off (with all the attendant risks of splitting the left-of-centre vote), or to hang on in there in the hope that Corbyn and his gang will eventually disappear.
Neither option is palatable, of course, and neither looks likely to rectify the problem any time soon.
May must call Fox into her office now and order him to explain himself. If he fails to provide an adequate explanation then he must be dismissed. I'm worried. This could be the first disaster of May's premiership. If these allegations are true then the credibility of May's judgement will be in tatters. Moreover, Fox is Brexit's leading poster boy. It will look terrible for that particular cause if one of their leaders is exposed as an anti-democratic stooge. The Brexiteers have already embraced Trump and Putin; they can't afford to add another nasty to the list. Fox has already turned himself into a laughing stock with his ludicrous notion about striking unilateral trade deals with EU member states. It's clear that May only appointed him to appease the Tory hard-right. This is starting to look like a misguided appointment that will only do May harm.
I've no knowledge of Dr Fox's case, but I do recall that I was approached by an Azerbaijani group in around 2009 and offered a substantial (though unspecified) contribution to campaign funds; they hoped that in return I would take a 'friendly interest' in Azerbaijani affairs. (I said that I thought such a donation might be viewed as dodgy and I'd rather not.) This was unusual enough to stand out in my memory, and I wonder how much of this effort has been going on.
May must call Fox into her office now and order him to explain himself. If he fails to provide an adequate explanation then he must be dismissed. I'm worried. This could be the first disaster of May's premiership. If these allegations are true then the credibility of May's judgement will be in tatters. Moreover, Fox is Brexit's leading poster boy. It will look terrible for that particular cause if one of their leaders is exposed as an anti-democratic stooge. The Brexiteers have already embraced Trump and Putin; they can't afford to add another nasty to the list. Fox has already turned himself into a laughing stock with his ludicrous notion about striking unilateral trade deals with EU member states. It's clear that May only appointed him to appease the Tory hard-right. This is starting to look like a misguided appointment that will only do May harm.
Is it really that worrying?
It is a pretty weak piece of 'investigative' journalism with a lot of speculation and no evidence other than a bizarre publishing deal.
That is hardly damning evidence of any wrong-doing.
It's August, isn't it? when newspapers fill their pages with cr*p.
For some PB posters, that is a year-round occupation of course.
It always amuses me where some supposedly ghastly but really rather boring revelation is excitedly followed by 'so or so must do this or that'.
Which of course if they did actually take this solemn advice would result in a golden opportunity for the libdems to attack in a particularly sanctmonious way.
... Only a nailed on Corbyn cultist would argue that Labour is in a potentially winning position now.
Yes, of course, but that isn't the question. The question is whether the quicker route to getting back to a vaguely-electable party of the left is to split off (with all the attendant risks of splitting the left-of-centre vote), or to hang on in there in the hope that Corbyn and his gang will eventually disappear.
Neither option is palatable, of course, and neither looks likely to rectify the problem any time soon.
There seems to be a third option nobody's considering. Have Corbyn done in.
Surely the PLP could have a whip-round, hire a professional unpersoning agent.
Board, drink, dinner, film, sleep - all with no rush and a decent sleep.
My approach for such flights is always to stay up for 24hrs beforehand, then after the initial bits / pieces I zonk out for the remainder of the flight .
On the subject of flying, I read this morning that Qantas is thinking of introducing a London-Perth non-stop service using the new 787. It would take somewhere between 17 and 18 hours.
Are there enough people who would want to be stuck in a small metal tube for that length of time, and pay for the privilege? I'd be going off my rocker, especially with all these new booze restrictions that people are talking about. And what about the crew? OK, they will be Australians, but even so it would hardly be fair on them.
The Airbus A350 is capable of Sydney to London non stop for most of the year.
Sometimes you have to stop and think whether you should do something rather than whether you could do something. A non-stop flight to Sydney would be 22 hours. I don't know about you but that is my idea of hell, club class or not.
And no-one in their right mind would want to do that in coach!
As an aside, have you been on the BA001 LCY>SNN>JFK? That's supposed to be very good, some great outside-the-box thinking from BA.
On the subject of flying, I read this morning that Qantas is thinking of introducing a London-Perth non-stop service using the new 787. It would take somewhere between 17 and 18 hours.
Are there enough people who would want to be stuck in a small metal tube for that length of time, and pay for the privilege? I'd be going off my rocker, especially with all these new booze restrictions that people are talking about. And what about the crew? OK, they will be Australians, but even so it would hardly be fair on them.
The Airbus A350 is capable of Sydney to London non stop for most of the year.
Sometimes you have to stop and think whether you should do something rather than whether you could do something. A non-stop flight to Sydney would be 22 hours. I don't know about you but that is my idea of hell, club class or not.
And no-one in their right mind would want to do that in coach!
As an aside, have you been on the BA001 LCY>SNN>JFK? That's supposed to be very good, some great outside-the-box thinking from BA.
... Only a nailed on Corbyn cultist would argue that Labour is in a potentially winning position now.
Yes, of course, but that isn't the question. The question is whether the quicker route to getting back to a vaguely-electable party of the left is to split off (with all the attendant risks of splitting the left-of-centre vote), or to hang on in there in the hope that Corbyn and his gang will eventually disappear.
Neither option is palatable, of course, and neither looks likely to rectify the problem any time soon.
There seems to be a third option nobody's considering. Have Corbyn done in.
Surely the PLP could have a whip-round, hire a professional unpersoning agent.
They'd have him elected as leader post-mortem.
Mind you, I did have a dream a few weeks back during the abortive union mediation attempt. In my dream a Unite-organised seance was able to summon the ghost of Robin Cook who was then elected as leader at a special conference.
On the subject of flying, I read this morning that Qantas is thinking of introducing a London-Perth non-stop service using the new 787. It would take somewhere between 17 and 18 hours.
Are there enough people who would want to be stuck in a small metal tube for that length of time, and pay for the privilege? I'd be going off my rocker, especially with all these new booze restrictions that people are talking about. And what about the crew? OK, they will be Australians, but even so it would hardly be fair on them.
The Airbus A350 is capable of Sydney to London non stop for most of the year.
Sometimes you have to stop and think whether you should do something rather than whether you could do something. A non-stop flight to Sydney would be 22 hours. I don't know about you but that is my idea of hell, club class or not.
I've done 17 hours non-stop. It is soul-breaking to realize that you've already done 8 hours and it's not even halfway.
That was economy plus.
I once did London to Hong Kong, Kai Tak, trying to land ahead of a typhoon. We got to the interesting bit of the descent, looking into people's flats, when the pilot aborted the landing and took us to Taiwan to sit it out. We weren't allowed to disembark, so by the time the typhoon had blown through and we got to Hong Kong, we'd been stuck in the same plane for over 30 hours. Grim....
On the subject of flying, I read this morning that Qantas is thinking of introducing a London-Perth non-stop service using the new 787. It would take somewhere between 17 and 18 hours.
Are there enough people who would want to be stuck in a small metal tube for that length of time, and pay for the privilege? I'd be going off my rocker, especially with all these new booze restrictions that people are talking about. And what about the crew? OK, they will be Australians, but even so it would hardly be fair on them.
The Airbus A350 is capable of Sydney to London non stop for most of the year.
Sometimes you have to stop and think whether you should do something rather than whether you could do something. A non-stop flight to Sydney would be 22 hours. I don't know about you but that is my idea of hell, club class or not.
And no-one in their right mind would want to do that in coach!
As an aside, have you been on the BA001 LCY>SNN>JFK? That's supposed to be very good, some great outside-the-box thinking from BA.
There really is a review for everything out there...
That's the one. Pretty much close as you'll get to a private jet while flying commercial. Very innovative.
Hmm, I flew on the executive jet with the then CEO of the company from London to Tokyo, it's a really different experience to the BA1. I'd still highly recommend doing it, find an excuse for your company to send you there via London and book yourself onto it if you have a relationship with whoever proceeds the flights for your company.
Advice to SeanT, you should also try the BA1, it's an experience unlike any other Lon-NYC flight.
The Labour Party will continue. Cleansed of its current bout of fuckwittery. It won't be Momentum able to forge progressive alliances with the LibDems or Greens because they aren't progressive - they are absolutists always on the lookout for scabs and traitors. It will be The Labour Party (2016).
Ah the old Peoples Front of Judea and Judean People's Front.
Time to test to destruction how fundamental the 'labour' brand is.
Even in business or first, there is no way you are getting me doing an 18+ hr flight.
In Biz or First it is just about tolerable, if you have enough booze and sleeping pills. LOTS of sleeping pills.
Two diazepam, two codeine, half a bottle vodka, job's a goodun.
I do: two glasses bubbly, one bottle of red, along with one Rohypnol and one Xanax 1mg (or Valium 10mg). Sleep for six-seven hours. Do it all twice on a non-stop to Sydney.
Sorry to be a bore, but this combination of alcohol and two forms of benzo (Rohypnol is a benzo) seems highly inadvisable.
Even in business or first, there is no way you are getting me doing an 18+ hr flight.
In Biz or First it is just about tolerable, if you have enough booze and sleeping pills. LOTS of sleeping pills.
Two diazepam, two codeine, half a bottle vodka, job's a goodun.
I do: two glasses bubbly, one bottle of red, along with one Rohypnol and one Xanax 1mg (or Valium 10mg). Sleep for six-seven hours. Do it all twice on a non-stop to Sydney.
Sorry to be a bore, but this combination of alcohol and two forms of benzo (Rohypnol is a benzo) seems highly inadvisable.
But then so is heroin, and he seems to have come out the other side of that...
On the subject of flying, I read this morning that Qantas is thinking of introducing a London-Perth non-stop service using the new 787. It would take somewhere between 17 and 18 hours.
Are there enough people who would want to be stuck in a small metal tube for that length of time, and pay for the privilege? I'd be going off my rocker, especially with all these new booze restrictions that people are talking about. And what about the crew? OK, they will be Australians, but even so it would hardly be fair on them.
The Airbus A350 is capable of Sydney to London non stop for most of the year.
Sometimes you have to stop and think whether you should do something rather than whether you could do something. A non-stop flight to Sydney would be 22 hours. I don't know about you but that is my idea of hell, club class or not.
And no-one in their right mind would want to do that in coach!
As an aside, have you been on the BA001 LCY>SNN>JFK? That's supposed to be very good, some great outside-the-box thinking from BA.
There really is a review for everything out there...
That's the one. Pretty much close as you'll get to a private jet while flying commercial. Very innovative.
Hmm, I flew on the executive jet with the then CEO of the company from London to Tokyo, it's a really different experience to the BA1. I'd still highly recommend doing it, find an excuse for your company to send you there via London and book yourself onto it if you have a relationship with whoever proceeds the flights for your company.
Advice to SeanT, you should also try the BA1, it's an experience unlike any other Lon-NYC flight.
Lucky you, yes the actual private jet is going to be way more fun - and way, way more expensive!
BA001 is on the bucket list, if I can find a way to arrange it. Shame it's not Concorde any more though, that I really wished I'd done!
So is this US airline really grounding all it's flights due to a computer failure or is that just a line fed by the spooks?
Computer system failures have grounded many airlines in the past, so it's not inconcievable.
A lot of the airlines are moving off proprietary stems these days, and moving onto standard ones built by Amadeus in Spain. I think delta is still running their own...
There's still an awful lot of old systems around, and lots big companies very scared to move away from them - some have been running for decades on very old mainframes, with loads of custom code that's evolved to meet the business requirements over time. The worst offenders are those who embraced early computing, so airlines, banks etc. There's also a load of systems installed leading up to Y2K that are now becoming obsolete.
This one looks like a data centre power failure - why they don't have backup gennies (or a backup data centre!) God only knows.
Money, I suspect, Mr. Pit. Companies don't like investing in critical incident planning, facilities or training. "It will never happen to us", "the chances of a critical incident happening are so small it's not worth it", "I have got more important things to worry about" are the common things I have heard from senior executives, when the subject has been raised.
Most companies that experience a critical incident are out of business within 18 months. I'd sell any shares I had in Delta today for whatever I could get.
It's certainly true that most large companies see technology as a cost centre to be trimmed, until an incident like this happens where the loss can be quantified. Delta's CIO has probably being talking about their old system needing replacing for ages now, but those above him only see the cost and disruption involved in replacing it. If he has any sense he'll be dusting off his project plan for the next board meeting - either that or handing in his resignation!
This just brings me back to the value shareholders get from the, sometimes huge, salaries, bonuses, allowances, payoffs, some board members are paid.
I read that the Chief executive of Dela had a package last year of $17.6 million dollars, but he didn't have in place a contingency plan for a critical incident that would see the business out of action. Excuse me, but my cat could have done a better job.
Some of the UK’s biggest law firms have been registering solicitors in Ireland so they can continue to practise in European law after Brexit
Freshfields, Hogan Lovells, Slaughter and May and Allen & Overy are among the firms that have put forward applicants to join the roll of solicitors in the Republic of Ireland.
Some firms began the process a few weeks before the EU referendum on June 23.
On the subject of flying, I read this morning that Qantas is thinking of introducing a London-Perth non-stop service using the new 787. It would take somewhere between 17 and 18 hours.
Are there enough people who would want to be stuck in a small metal tube for that length of time, and pay for the privilege? I'd be going off my rocker, especially with all these new booze restrictions that people are talking about. And what about the crew? OK, they will be Australians, but even so it would hardly be fair on them.
The Airbus A350 is capable of Sydney to London non stop for most of the year.
Sometimes you have to stop and think whether you should do something rather than whether you could do something. A non-stop flight to Sydney would be 22 hours. I don't know about you but that is my idea of hell, club class or not.
And no-one in their right mind would want to do that in coach!
As an aside, have you been on the BA001 LCY>SNN>JFK? That's supposed to be very good, some great outside-the-box thinking from BA.
There really is a review for everything out there...
That's the one. Pretty much close as you'll get to a private jet while flying commercial. Very innovative.
Hmm, I flew on the executive jet with the then CEO of the company from London to Tokyo, it's a really different experience to the BA1. I'd still highly recommend doing it, find an excuse for your company to send you there via London and book yourself onto it if you have a relationship with whoever proceeds the flights for your company.
Advice to SeanT, you should also try the BA1, it's an experience unlike any other Lon-NYC flight.
Agreed: LYC-JFK is the only way to go.
In the very early days, I was one of only four passengers on the plane! It genuinely was a private jet experience then.
Sadly, now everyone knows about it, and it's always full. I'll always choose it in preference to LHR-JFK.
Even in business or first, there is no way you are getting me doing an 18+ hr flight.
In Biz or First it is just about tolerable, if you have enough booze and sleeping pills. LOTS of sleeping pills.
Two diazepam, two codeine, half a bottle vodka, job's a goodun.
I do: two glasses bubbly, one bottle of red, along with one Rohypnol and one Xanax 1mg (or Valium 10mg). Sleep for six-seven hours. Do it all twice on a non-stop to Sydney.
Sorry to be a bore, but this combination of alcohol and two forms of benzo (Rohypnol is a benzo) seems highly inadvisable.
I'm also concerned that SeanT seems to have such a ready supply of Roofies.
On the subject of flying, I read this morning that Qantas is thinking of introducing a London-Perth non-stop service using the new 787. It would take somewhere between 17 and 18 hours.
Are there enough people who would want to be stuck in a small metal tube for that length of time, and pay for the privilege? I'd be going off my rocker, especially with all these new booze restrictions that people are talking about. And what about the crew? OK, they will be Australians, but even so it would hardly be fair on them.
The Airbus A350 is capable of Sydney to London non stop for most of the year.
Sometimes you have to stop and think whether you should do something rather than whether you could do something. A non-stop flight to Sydney would be 22 hours. I don't know about you but that is my idea of hell, club class or not.
I think it would be more like 20 than 22, as the London -> Doha -> Melbourne only takes 22, and there's 90 minutes on the ground in Doha.
... Only a nailed on Corbyn cultist would argue that Labour is in a potentially winning position now.
Yes, of course, but that isn't the question. The question is whether the quicker route to getting back to a vaguely-electable party of the left is to split off (with all the attendant risks of splitting the left-of-centre vote), or to hang on in there in the hope that Corbyn and his gang will eventually disappear.
Neither option is palatable, of course, and neither looks likely to rectify the problem any time soon.
There seems to be a third option nobody's considering. Have Corbyn done in.
Surely the PLP could have a whip-round, hire a professional unpersoning agent.
Even in business or first, there is no way you are getting me doing an 18+ hr flight.
In Biz or First it is just about tolerable, if you have enough booze and sleeping pills. LOTS of sleeping pills.
Or 2012 Ch. Cissac. Bit young but gets you to sleep.
That is infantide - Unfortunately I have finished my 2000 and am now on the 2005 - just ordered the 2015 from the Wine Society (£90 a dozen in bond)
It was very drinkable on my recent Virgin flight, I was happily surprised to find..
Plus it was the perfect accompaniment to the film Grimsby, a flight being about the only time/place I could justify watching it. Laughed like a drain throughout (2x win for the Cissac..)
... Only a nailed on Corbyn cultist would argue that Labour is in a potentially winning position now.
Yes, of course, but that isn't the question. The question is whether the quicker route to getting back to a vaguely-electable party of the left is to split off (with all the attendant risks of splitting the left-of-centre vote), or to hang on in there in the hope that Corbyn and his gang will eventually disappear.
Neither option is palatable, of course, and neither looks likely to rectify the problem any time soon.
There seems to be a third option nobody's considering. Have Corbyn done in.
Surely the PLP could have a whip-round, hire a professional unpersoning agent.
Even in business or first, there is no way you are getting me doing an 18+ hr flight.
In Biz or First it is just about tolerable, if you have enough booze and sleeping pills. LOTS of sleeping pills.
Two diazepam, two codeine, half a bottle vodka, job's a goodun.
I do: two glasses bubbly, one bottle of red, along with one Rohypnol and one Xanax 1mg (or Valium 10mg). Sleep for six-seven hours. Do it all twice on a non-stop to Sydney.
Sorry to be a bore, but this combination of alcohol and two forms of benzo (Rohypnol is a benzo) seems highly inadvisable.
But then so is heroin, and he seems to have come out the other side of that...
Heroin is absolutely fucking brilliant for long flights. Hell, day long BUS trips are tolerable on heroin. It is the sovereign remedy for boredom and discomfort.
Presumably it is wise to partake before you actually go through customs....?
Even in business or first, there is no way you are getting me doing an 18+ hr flight.
In Biz or First it is just about tolerable, if you have enough booze and sleeping pills. LOTS of sleeping pills.
Two diazepam, two codeine, half a bottle vodka, job's a goodun.
I do: two glasses bubbly, one bottle of red, along with one Rohypnol and one Xanax 1mg (or Valium 10mg). Sleep for six-seven hours. Do it all twice on a non-stop to Sydney.
Sorry to be a bore, but this combination of alcohol and two forms of benzo (Rohypnol is a benzo) seems highly inadvisable.
But then so is heroin, and he seems to have come out the other side of that...
Heroin is absolutely fucking brilliant for long flights. Hell, day long BUS trips are tolerable on heroin. It is the sovereign remedy for boredom and discomfort.
Blimey, for long haul flights I take a packet of Werther’s Originals and a book to read...
The extra 200 miles can't add more than 20 minutes or so to the flight.
"In June last year Boeing flew the 777-200LR variant 21,601km in 22h 42mins without refuelling from Hong Kong to London, setting a new record for a commercial airliner."
The extra 200 miles can't add more than 20 minutes or so to the flight.
Lol, had forgotten about that. How much did it cost the taxpayer I wonder?
They could only do that flight because the plane was a half empty charter, would have been too heavy to do it full of people as well as the very full fuel tanks (144,000kg I think).
On the subject of flying, I read this morning that Qantas is thinking of introducing a London-Perth non-stop service using the new 787. It would take somewhere between 17 and 18 hours.
Are there enough people who would want to be stuck in a small metal tube for that length of time, and pay for the privilege? I'd be going off my rocker, especially with all these new booze restrictions that people are talking about. And what about the crew? OK, they will be Australians, but even so it would hardly be fair on them.
The Airbus A350 is capable of Sydney to London non stop for most of the year.
Sometimes you have to stop and think whether you should do something rather than whether you could do something. A non-stop flight to Sydney would be 22 hours. I don't know about you but that is my idea of hell, club class or not.
I've done 17 hours non-stop. It is soul-breaking to realize that you've already done 8 hours and it's not even halfway.
That was economy plus.
I once did London to Hong Kong, Kai Tak, trying to land ahead of a typhoon. We got to the interesting bit of the descent, looking into people's flats, when the pilot aborted the landing and took us to Taiwan to sit it out. We weren't allowed to disembark, so by the time the typhoon had blown through and we got to Hong Kong, we'd been stuck in the same plane for over 30 hours. Grim....
Bahrain to New York, landed in Montreal due to blizzard. 3 hours on ground in plane until we alit in the middle of the night into unheated busses taking us to hotels for the night. I was in linens, short sleeves for the 90 minutes or so on the bus. At least we got off the plane ...
The extra 200 miles can't add more than 20 minutes or so to the flight.
"In June last year Boeing flew the 777-200LR variant 21,601km in 22h 42mins without refuelling from Hong Kong to London, setting a new record for a commercial airliner."
They must have gone the long way round...
No kidding. Hong Kong -> JFK is the longest scheduled flight in the world, coming in at 16 hours. Add another six or so to London.
The extra 200 miles can't add more than 20 minutes or so to the flight.
"In June last year Boeing flew the 777-200LR variant 21,601km in 22h 42mins without refuelling from Hong Kong to London, setting a new record for a commercial airliner."
They must have gone the long way round...
Yes, they went the long way around. Was a demonstration flight with only a few journalists on board, and six pilots working shifts.
On the subject of flying, I read this morning that Qantas is thinking of introducing a London-Perth non-stop service using the new 787. It would take somewhere between 17 and 18 hours.
Are there enough people who would want to be stuck in a small metal tube for that length of time, and pay for the privilege? I'd be going off my rocker, especially with all these new booze restrictions that people are talking about. And what about the crew? OK, they will be Australians, but even so it would hardly be fair on them.
The Airbus A350 is capable of Sydney to London non stop for most of the year.
Sometimes you have to stop and think whether you should do something rather than whether you could do something. A non-stop flight to Sydney would be 22 hours. I don't know about you but that is my idea of hell, club class or not.
I've done 17 hours non-stop. It is soul-breaking to realize that you've already done 8 hours and it's not even halfway.
That was economy plus.
I once did London to Hong Kong, Kai Tak, trying to land ahead of a typhoon. We got to the interesting bit of the descent, looking into people's flats, when the pilot aborted the landing and took us to Taiwan to sit it out. We weren't allowed to disembark, so by the time the typhoon had blown through and we got to Hong Kong, we'd been stuck in the same plane for over 30 hours. Grim....
Bahrain to New York, landed in Montreal due to blizzard. 3 hours on ground in plane until we alit in the middle of the night into unheated busses taking us to hotels for the night. I was in linens, short sleeves for the 90 minutes or so on the bus. At least we got off the plane ...
Telegraph journos (and by extension, their readers) are so astonishingly cretinous they actually believe that "TV detector vans" not only exist, but can tell if you're watching iPlayer over a secure Wifi connection.
Even in business or first, there is no way you are getting me doing an 18+ hr flight.
In Biz or First it is just about tolerable, if you have enough booze and sleeping pills. LOTS of sleeping pills.
Two diazepam, two codeine, half a bottle vodka, job's a goodun.
I do: two glasses bubbly, one bottle of red, along with one Rohypnol and one Xanax 1mg (or Valium 10mg). Sleep for six-seven hours. Do it all twice on a non-stop to Sydney.
Sorry to be a bore, but this combination of alcohol and two forms of benzo (Rohypnol is a benzo) seems highly inadvisable.
But then so is heroin, and he seems to have come out the other side of that...
Heroin is absolutely fucking brilliant for long flights. Hell, day long BUS trips are tolerable on heroin. It is the sovereign remedy for boredom and discomfort.
Blimey, for long haul flights I take a packet of Werther’s Originals and a book to read...
There is a funny tory about Monty python staying in a hotel legendary for rock stars trashing the rooms, so much so that the management actually encouraged famous guests to misbehave in order to gain publicity.
Michael Palin when asked what he had done to his room...he said well I'm not into trashing rooms so I snapped the complimentary toothbrush.
... Only a nailed on Corbyn cultist would argue that Labour is in a potentially winning position now.
Yes, of course, but that isn't the question. The question is whether the quicker route to getting back to a vaguely-electable party of the left is to split off (with all the attendant risks of splitting the left-of-centre vote), or to hang on in there in the hope that Corbyn and his gang will eventually disappear.
Neither option is palatable, of course, and neither looks likely to rectify the problem any time soon.
There seems to be a third option nobody's considering. Have Corbyn done in.
Surely the PLP could have a whip-round, hire a professional unpersoning agent.
Your post is really fucked up.
Did anyone take it seriously?
Oh for goodness sake. He doesn't have to suffer, he could be put down humanely (budget permitting).
No kidding. Hong Kong -> JFK is the longest scheduled flight in the world, coming in at 16 hours. Add another six or so to London.
Not sure it is, Robert. I think there's an Emirates flight from Dubai to Panama City which scoops the prize. I believe there is talk of a direct flight from Dubai to Auckland which would be well up there as well.
The extra 200 miles can't add more than 20 minutes or so to the flight.
Lol, had forgotten about that. How much did it cost the taxpayer I wonder?
They could only do that flight because the plane was a half empty charter, would have been too heavy to do it full of people as well as the very full fuel tanks (144,000kg I think).
Yes, but the next gen of planes (787, A350) are significantly more efficient - both in terms of more modern engines, and being generally much lighter. (And having somewhat better aerodynamics.)
I wouldn't be surprised at all if Qantas and BA started non-stop London -> Sydney & Melbourne. If the flight took off at 10am UK time, it would land at 2pm the next day in Oz, which would be as good as it got for avoiding jet lag. Much better than the way most current flights work which involve you spending two nights on the plane, and then being deposited into the taxi rank blinking and startled at 6:30am.
Glancing at the headline, so vaguely on topic, I would put PB contributors at amongst the most informed about politics (if not all always right) and we usually have no idea in advance, how any political event will turn out.
Why therefore do we think that participants on the betting exchanges are so well informed (I appreciate there is a non-zero union set of the two groups of people)?
No kidding. Hong Kong -> JFK is the longest scheduled flight in the world, coming in at 16 hours. Add another six or so to London.
Not sure it is, Robert. I think there's an Emirates flight from Dubai to Panama City which scoops the prize. I believe there is talk of a direct flight from Dubai to Auckland which would be well up there as well.
Even in business or first, there is no way you are getting me doing an 18+ hr flight.
In Biz or First it is just about tolerable, if you have enough booze and sleeping pills. LOTS of sleeping pills.
Two diazepam, two codeine, half a bottle vodka, job's a goodun.
I do: two glasses bubbly, one bottle of red, along with one Rohypnol and one Xanax 1mg (or Valium 10mg). Sleep for six-seven hours. Do it all twice on a non-stop to Sydney.
Sorry to be a bore, but this combination of alcohol and two forms of benzo (Rohypnol is a benzo) seems highly inadvisable.
But then so is heroin, and he seems to have come out the other side of that...
Heroin is absolutely fucking brilliant for long flights. Hell, day long BUS trips are tolerable on heroin. It is the sovereign remedy for boredom and discomfort.
Blimey, for long haul flights I take a packet of Werther’s Originals and a book to read...
There is a funny tory about Monty python staying in a hotel legendary for rock stars trashing the rooms, so much so that the management actually encouraged famous guests to misbehave in order to gain publicity.
Michael Palin when asked what he had done to his room...he said well I'm not into trashing rooms so I snapped the complimentary toothbrush.
... Only a nailed on Corbyn cultist would argue that Labour is in a potentially winning position now.
Yes, of course, but that isn't the question. .
I was addressing the parallel you drew with the context when the SDP was formed. It is relevant to that to bear in mind that rather than polling circa 50% Labour as of this point is heading for its worst defeat in over 90 years. Charges of betrayal won't wash in these different circumstances.
To address your new, subsequent question, if as seems certain now we see a big win for Corbyn, I won't be prepared to wait until after 2020 and then no doubt 2025 to test the view that this huge influx of people with views on the far left will change their view of him. I'm pretty sure that they won't and we'll just see another bout of sectarian infighting with the target those who "betrayed" Corbyn who would otherwise have prevailed, pretty well the same response as we're seeing now to that disasterous polling. After Corbyn wins this leadership election, the party will be irredeemably lost with the far left continuing to dominate the shell that the party will eventually become. So of course the route of a split is the quicker way to being able to put together some sort of future challenge to the Conservatives, because it's the only credible electoral route that exists.
My 'longest' trip was London to Las Vegas. Due to the company being in dire financial straits it involved a seven hour layover in Chicago, a three hour layover in L.A. and me not knowing my arse from my elbow for about 48 hours afterwards.
Worst trip was an unscheduled secret squirrel trip to Christchurch in 2007. Flew London-Brisbane-Auckland-Christchurch, spent the the day with the Kiwis and flew back. As the poet says, fuck that for a game of soldiers.
My passport is now expired, my only mobile phone is in the glovebox, my boots are firmly hung up, thank goodness.
No kidding. Hong Kong -> JFK is the longest scheduled flight in the world, coming in at 16 hours. Add another six or so to London.
Not sure it is, Robert. I think there's an Emirates flight from Dubai to Panama City which scoops the prize. I believe there is talk of a direct flight from Dubai to Auckland which would be well up there as well.
You could be right...
Hong Kong to O'Hare is 17 hours. I know, I've done it.
Heroin is absolutely fucking brilliant for long flights. Hell, day long BUS trips are tolerable on heroin. It is the sovereign remedy for boredom and discomfort.
Blimey, for long haul flights I take a packet of Werther’s Originals and a book to read...
I take a laptop and translate etc. - just did 6 hours on a flight back from the States. TBH the difference from a day's work at home is small, even in tourist class. Just ignore the surroundings and get on with whatever you do.
Have you not considered that your PB thread was the cause rather than new polling? The one that specifically ends by saying his odds are understated...
Telegraph journos (and by extension, their readers) are so astonishingly cretinous they actually believe that "TV detector vans" not only exist, but can tell if you're watching iPlayer over a secure Wifi connection.
"Oh, don't worry about it. It's another round of mysterious inexplicable technology to terrify you into paying. Which you should, by the way – it costs money, lots of money, to pay actors, writers, producers, directors, crews, lawyers and executives to make things that people enjoy.
Only partly. The Dubai-Auckland 17 hour non stop flight started in March on 777s but will switch to A380s from the end of October. Won't be as quick as flying UK-NZ via Los Angeles but a viable alternative certainly.
I think the new longest flight however might be Air India from Delhi to San Francisco.
My 'longest' trip was London to Las Vegas. Due to the company being in dire financial straits it involved a seven hour layover in Chicago, a three hour layover in L.A. and me not knowing my arse from my elbow for about 48 hours afterwards.
Worst trip was an unscheduled secret squirrel trip to Christchurch in 2007. Flew London-Brisbane-Auckland-Christchurch, spent the the day with the Kiwis and flew back. As the poet says, fuck that for a game of soldiers.
I remember sitting next to this very angry Irish man on a flight back from Miami a few year back...after a few hours he appeared to have calmed down a bit & I engaged with him. His anger related to the fact he had done back to back over 4 days... Dublin -> London (meeting) -> miami (meeting) -> la (meeting) -> Miami (meeting) -> heading home ... And had been told he would now be expected to do this once a month.
Telegraph journos (and by extension, their readers) are so astonishingly cretinous they actually believe that "TV detector vans" not only exist, but can tell if you're watching iPlayer over a secure Wifi connection.
"Oh, don't worry about it. It's another round of mysterious inexplicable technology to terrify you into paying. Which you should, by the way – it costs money, lots of money, to pay actors, writers, producers, directors, crews, lawyers and executives to make things that people enjoy.
Telegraph journos (and by extension, their readers) are so astonishingly cretinous they actually believe that "TV detector vans" not only exist, but can tell if you're watching iPlayer over a secure Wifi connection.
"Oh, don't worry about it. It's another round of mysterious inexplicable technology to terrify you into paying. Which you should, by the way – it costs money, lots of money, to pay actors, writers, producers, directors, crews, lawyers and executives to make things that people enjoy.
Isn't the technology for this variant of detector vans proven though? I always wondered about how the old ones worked, something to do with detecting the EM signature of the electrons fired by the cathode ray tube.
Telegraph journos (and by extension, their readers) are so astonishingly cretinous they actually believe that "TV detector vans" not only exist, but can tell if you're watching iPlayer over a secure Wifi connection.
The old fashioned vans were only finally busted when someone went over the BBC accounts (which are public) and noted there was no funding set aside for them...
Or looking at it from the opposite side of the coin, Corbyn has a 1% less chance than he did a few hours ago, according to Betfair. Could be a new poll coming out, but even if it shows Smith making a little progress that is likely to be counter-balanced by the addition of the 130k re-enfranchised members following this morning court ruling.
Smiths movement is more likely to be related to people locking in a profit and an all green book.
Telegraph journos (and by extension, their readers) are so astonishingly cretinous they actually believe that "TV detector vans" not only exist, but can tell if you're watching iPlayer over a secure Wifi connection.
"Oh, don't worry about it. It's another round of mysterious inexplicable technology to terrify you into paying. Which you should, by the way – it costs money, lots of money, to pay actors, writers, producers, directors, crews, lawyers and executives to make things that people enjoy.
No kidding. Hong Kong -> JFK is the longest scheduled flight in the world, coming in at 16 hours. Add another six or so to London.
Not sure it is, Robert. I think there's an Emirates flight from Dubai to Panama City which scoops the prize. I believe there is talk of a direct flight from Dubai to Auckland which would be well up there as well.
The Panama flight hasn't launched yet, was supposed to be earlier this year but they postponed it until next year because of operational problems with their partners in Panama
Comments
1. Almost all Labour MPs are looking on aghast at the prospect of Labour turning into the SWP/Socialist Party/Left Unity in all but name, whereas the SDP was in essence a split by a smallish core of MPs who did so out of choice when the future direction of the Labour Party was still uncertain. This time MPs who are not willing to nail their future to Corbyn's mast have no option but to jump. So many more will jump this time.
2. Because the split will initially be in the form of a distancing of the PLP from the rest of the Labour Party, the initial separation will be en-masse by default rather than through a deliberate act of defection. It will become a defection only in due course when matters escalate and a nascent party structure starts to form around. MPs will find they have jumped without realising it and will have no choice but to continue when the retribution starts.
3. The Lib Dems are in an even weaker position now than they were in 1980, with the number of MPs and their polling now in single figures with the possibility too of losing some support to a progressive party of the centre-left.
4. The electorate are much more volatile with old allegiances waning and there is despair amongst almost all to the political (non-far) left of the Conservatives as to how that party could ever be challenged in the foreseeable future. As soon as a viable centre-left grouping appears to have a renewed prospect of challenging the Conservatives, its support will mushroom.
Edit - Remember they already have one border seat - just.
Are there enough people who would want to be stuck in a small metal tube for that length of time, and pay for the privilege? I'd be going off my rocker, especially with all these new booze restrictions that people are talking about. And what about the crew? OK, they will be Australians, but even so it would hardly be fair on them.
Despite protests from my friends that I was ok and knew what I was doing, a lifeguard thought I had drowned, dived in to save me and I was subsequently banned by the management for wasting their time.
This one looks like a data centre power failure - why they don't have backup gennies (or a backup data centre!) God only knows.
F1: Raikkonen has gotten married:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/37008344
Unconfirmed rumours of unorthodox marriage vows.
"You may kiss the bride."
"Leave me alone, I know what I'm doing."
I despair of the current crop of Labour MPs having the spine to leave - politically, it's a no-brainer, but in terms of personal relationships with former colleagues, it would be a hard decsoin to take. There is also the not-inconsiderable factor of the level of abuse and threats that they would get from Momentum etc.
Still, it could still be a great opportunity to launch a de-toxified left-of-centre pary, untainted with the voter-repellent hard left. It could attract a lot of support (as the SDP did, initially, in the early 80s - not that that necessarily provides a happy precedent. But as Wulfrun Phil says, a new set of splitters should be in a much better position).
I wonder how much of the Labour vote an SDP 2 could take? Certainly there appears to be no great alignment between current Labour voters and Corbynite Labour. But there is probably not much more alignment between Corbynite Labour and Chuka Umunna-ite Labour. The danger is that yet another party of the Metropolitan Middle Class is formed, leaving the Leave voters of Barnsley and Hartlepool to be chipped away by UKIP, if such a party still exists in 2020.
But it's moronic. Either support Corbyn, or oppose him. Voting for someone you loathe, canvassing for something to which you're actively opposed are the actions of madness.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/aug/07/liam-fox-azerbaijan-relationship-book-publishing
May must call Fox into her office now and order him to explain himself. If he fails to provide an adequate explanation then he must be dismissed. I'm worried. This could be the first disaster of May's premiership. If these allegations are true then the credibility of May's judgement will be in tatters. Moreover, Fox is Brexit's leading poster boy. It will look terrible for that particular cause if one of their leaders is exposed as an anti-democratic stooge. The Brexiteers have already embraced Trump and Putin; they can't afford to add another nasty to the list. Fox has already turned himself into a laughing stock with his ludicrous notion about striking unilateral trade deals with EU member states. It's clear that May only appointed him to appease the Tory hard-right. This is starting to look like a misguided appointment that will only do May harm.
Most companies that experience a critical incident are out of business within 18 months. I'd sell any shares I had in Delta today for whatever I could get.
(Yes, I know it's 12' x 5'6")
Non-business pax would still like to stretch their legs somewhere en route. HK, Singapore, Bangkok and Dubai are all good places to break the trip, whether for a couple of hours or a couple of days.
It is a pretty weak piece of 'investigative' journalism with a lot of speculation and no evidence other than a bizarre publishing deal.
That is hardly damning evidence of any wrong-doing.
For some PB posters, that is a year-round occupation of course.
As an aside, have you been on the BA001 LCY>SNN>JFK? That's supposed to be very good, some great outside-the-box thinking from BA.
That was economy plus.
High oil prices eventually killed that service off, but it will be reinstated with a more fuel efficient A350 aircraft. The issue is that fuel burn is a factor of weight. As you fly further, your fuel burn per mile goes up as you are burning fuel to carry fuel.
1. Materially this makes not the slightest difference. An electorate that was pro-Corbyn in Sept 2015 had tens of thousands of pro-Corbyn members added to it in the autumn as many registered supporters converted to full membership. He would have won anyway.
2. If the party has to hand the bulk of its £4.5m back then all the more reason for her Theresaness to call an early election - we simply can't afford to fight one even if we had policies to sell on teh doorstep (and we don't)
3. An alliance with the LibDems is doable - people didn't like their decision to ditch their morality and lie with the Tories but have already punished them for it. As their current leader had nothing to do with the coalition it gives them some clear yellow water (ewww) between their position now and the floating pyre of Orange Book Cleggery
4. A discussion at the weekend was a lively argument about whether or not we want to keep the Labour name when the split happens (but not "would a split happen" - its a given). The assumption is that most of the MPs, MEPs, Councillors, the officials the NEC the regional staff, most members who were in last May and most CLP execs will be on board which means jettisoning a small rump of MPs and 250k new members who spend most of their time deriding anyone and anything who has ever donned a red rosette and instead posting idiotic memes because actually they reach more people that The Sun actually (gosh).
Its not the creation of a new party away from Labour. Its partitioning the existing party and keeping legal continuity - a bit like that after their High Court battles over band name subsequent albums were published by a new business "Pink Floyd (1987) Ltd" but still known as "Pink Floyd".
The Labour Party will continue. Cleansed of its current bout of fuckwittery. It won't be Momentum able to forge progressive alliances with the LibDems or Greens because they aren't progressive - they are absolutists always on the lookout for scabs and traitors. It will be The Labour Party (2016).
Would someone earning serious money decide to sleep in a Youth Hostel? No? Then why the feck would he/she decide that sleeping in the same conditions but with less oxygen and more toxins in the air would be a good idea? It beats me.
There really is a review for everything out there...
Neither option is palatable, of course, and neither looks likely to rectify the problem any time soon.
Board, drink, dinner, film, sleep - all with no rush and a decent sleep.
Which of course if they did actually take this solemn advice would result in a golden opportunity for the libdems to attack in a particularly sanctmonious way.
Surely the PLP could have a whip-round, hire a professional unpersoning agent.
Mind you, I did have a dream a few weeks back during the abortive union mediation attempt. In my dream a Unite-organised seance was able to summon the ghost of Robin Cook who was then elected as leader at a special conference.
Advice to SeanT, you should also try the BA1, it's an experience unlike any other Lon-NYC flight.
Time to test to destruction how fundamental the 'labour' brand is.
BA001 is on the bucket list, if I can find a way to arrange it. Shame it's not Concorde any more though, that I really wished I'd done!
I read that the Chief executive of Dela had a package last year of $17.6 million dollars, but he didn't have in place a contingency plan for a critical incident that would see the business out of action. Excuse me, but my cat could have done a better job.
Freshfields, Hogan Lovells, Slaughter and May and Allen & Overy are among the firms that have put forward applicants to join the roll of solicitors in the Republic of Ireland.
Some firms began the process a few weeks before the EU referendum on June 23.
https://www.ft.com/content/ee90a46c-500a-11e6-88c5-db83e98a590a
In the very early days, I was one of only four passengers on the plane! It genuinely was a private jet experience then.
Sadly, now everyone knows about it, and it's always full. I'll always choose it in preference to LHR-JFK.
Plus it was the perfect accompaniment to the film Grimsby, a flight being about the only time/place I could justify watching it. Laughed like a drain throughout (2x win for the Cissac..)
The extra 200 miles can't add more than 20 minutes or so to the flight.
They must have gone the long way round...
They could only do that flight because the plane was a half empty charter, would have been too heavy to do it full of people as well as the very full fuel tanks (144,000kg I think).
Isn't the bigger question why the government doesn't own the building it uses on a regular basis?
Telegraph journos (and by extension, their readers) are so astonishingly cretinous they actually believe that "TV detector vans" not only exist, but can tell if you're watching iPlayer over a secure Wifi connection.
http://arstechnica.co.uk/tech-policy/2016/08/bbc-tv-licence-vans-wi-fi-snooping-analysis/
Michael Palin when asked what he had done to his room...he said well I'm not into trashing rooms so I snapped the complimentary toothbrush.
I wouldn't be surprised at all if Qantas and BA started non-stop London -> Sydney & Melbourne. If the flight took off at 10am UK time, it would land at 2pm the next day in Oz, which would be as good as it got for avoiding jet lag. Much better than the way most current flights work which involve you spending two nights on the plane, and then being deposited into the taxi rank blinking and startled at 6:30am.
Why therefore do we think that participants on the betting exchanges are so well informed (I appreciate there is a non-zero union set of the two groups of people)?
To address your new, subsequent question, if as seems certain now we see a big win for Corbyn, I won't be prepared to wait until after 2020 and then no doubt 2025 to test the view that this huge influx of people with views on the far left will change their view of him. I'm pretty sure that they won't and we'll just see another bout of sectarian infighting with the target those who "betrayed" Corbyn who would otherwise have prevailed, pretty well the same response as we're seeing now to that disasterous polling. After Corbyn wins this leadership election, the party will be irredeemably lost with the far left continuing to dominate the shell that the party will eventually become. So of course the route of a split is the quicker way to being able to put together some sort of future challenge to the Conservatives, because it's the only credible electoral route that exists.
Worst trip was an unscheduled secret squirrel trip to Christchurch in 2007. Flew London-Brisbane-Auckland-Christchurch, spent the the day with the Kiwis and flew back. As the poet says, fuck that for a game of soldiers.
My passport is now expired, my only mobile phone is in the glovebox, my boots are firmly hung up, thank goodness.
Just spare us the scare tactics and the hocus pocus"
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/08/06/bbc_detector_van_wi_fi_iplayer/
But Smith's campaign is dead anyway.
I think the new longest flight however might be Air India from Delhi to San Francisco.
We used to do a demo of this as part of house training briefing incoming security ministers.
Smiths movement is more likely to be related to people locking in a profit and an all green book.
Longest non-stop flight at the moment is the recently launched Dubai to Auckland. List at link below.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/news/qantas-plots-first-ever-non-stop-flight-from-uk-to-australia/