SEM dropped on the doormat this morning and something which caught my 
eye in the brief flick through before heading off to work, was a short 
article on an interesting little engine apparently used to provide 
electrical power on airships. I noted down the web address given for 
pics of more surviving examples and here it is:-
  http://www.bungartz.nl/siemmotor-m2_d.html
If the flat belt pullies in evidence are original, it must have been 
quite an unusual airborne installation!

Nick H

On 28 May, 13:11, Nick H  wrote:
> SEM dropped on the doormat this morning and something which caught my
> eye in the brief flick through before heading off to work, was a short
> article on an interesting little engine apparently used to provide
> electrical power on airships. I noted down the web address given for
> pics of more surviving examples and here it is:-
>  http://www.bungartz.nl/siemmotor-m2_d.html
> If the flat belt pullies in evidence are original, it must have been
> quite an unusual airborne installation!
>
> Nick H

This about the third go - bloody unreadable heiroglyphics need to be
ttranslated to reply. Will probably be the last time I ever use this
group at this rate.

Was it hydrogen or petrol ?
Steve

On Wed, 28 May 2008 13:40:17 -0700 (PDT), Steve 
wrote:

>On 28 May, 13:11, Nick H  wrote:
>> SEM dropped on the doormat this morning and something which caught my
>> eye in the brief flick through before heading off to work, was a short
>> article on an interesting little engine apparently used to provide
>> electrical power on airships. I noted down the web address given for
>> pics of more surviving examples and here it is:-
>>  http://www.bungartz.nl/siemmotor-m2_d.html
>> If the flat belt pullies in evidence are original, it must have been
>> quite an unusual airborne installation!
>>
>> Nick H
>
>This about the third go - bloody unreadable heiroglyphics need to be
>ttranslated to reply. Will probably be the last time I ever use this
>group at this rate.
>
>Was it hydrogen or petrol ?
>Steve

What???  Nick's post is quite readable and in plain text on my machine, or are
you talking about something else??

Peter
--
Peter & Rita Forbes
Email: diesel@easynet.co.uk
http://www.oldengine.org/members/diesel
http://www.stationary-engine.co.uk
http://www.oldengine.co.uk

Steve wrote:

> 
> This about the third go - bloody unreadable heiroglyphics need to be
> ttranslated to reply. Will probably be the last time I ever use this
> group at this rate.
> 
> Was it hydrogen or petrol ?
> Steve

The the engine in the video clip (owner Roland Servais) is the same one 
as in SEM and certainly appears to have a petrol carb. Is it likely that 
an airship would have used its own lifting gas as fuel?

Don't understand your comment re heiroglphics - I didn't use so much as 
an emoticon in the post!

Nick H

On 28 May, 13:11, Nick H  wrote:
> SEM dropped on the doormat this morning and something which caught my
> eye in the brief flick through before heading off to work, was a short
> article on an interesting little engine apparently used to provide
> electrical power on airships. I noted down the web address given for
> pics of more surviving examples and here it is:-
>  http://www.bungartz.nl/siemmotor-m2_d.html
> If the flat belt pullies in evidence are original, it must have been
> quite an unusual airborne installation!
>
> Nick H

When I try and reply it says "Validation : For verification purpose
please type the characters you see in the picture below". Then it
gives some screwed up unreadable garbage and you are supposed to try
and figure out what the letters are. Heaven help you if you mistake a
distorted zero for an 'o', or a capital 'I' for a '1'.

So here we go again - but this time I have copied the text so I can
paste it again and again until I finally guess what the random garbage
is.

Steve

On Fri, 30 May 2008 13:20:41 -0700 (PDT), Steve 
wrote:

>When I try and reply it says "Validation : For verification purpose
>please type the characters you see in the picture below". Then it
>gives some screwed up unreadable garbage and you are supposed to try
>and figure out what the letters are. Heaven help you if you mistake a
>distorted zero for an 'o', or a capital 'I' for a '1'.
>
>So here we go again - but this time I have copied the text so I can
>paste it again and again until I finally guess what the random garbage
>is.
>
>Steve

Steve:

That doesn't sound like Usenet at all!

Sounds like you have got tangled up with some web stuff there somewhere?

Usenet access, via something like Agent or even Outlook Express,  would not
require you to jump through hoops like that.

Peter
--
Peter & Rita Forbes
Email: diesel@easynet.co.uk
http://www.oldengine.org/members/diesel
http://www.stationary-engine.co.uk
http://www.oldengine.co.uk

Peter A Forbes wrote:
> On Fri, 30 May 2008 13:20:41 -0700 (PDT), Steve 
> wrote:
> 
>> When I try and reply it says "Validation : For verification purpose
>> please type the characters you see in the picture below". Then it
>> gives some screwed up unreadable garbage and you are supposed to try
>> and figure out what the letters are. Heaven help you if you mistake a
>> distorted zero for an 'o', or a capital 'I' for a '1'.
>>
>> So here we go again - but this time I have copied the text so I can
>> paste it again and again until I finally guess what the random garbage
>> is.
>>
>> Steve
> 
> Steve:
> 
> That doesn't sound like Usenet at all!
> 
> Sounds like you have got tangled up with some web stuff there somewhere?
> 
> Usenet access, via something like Agent or even Outlook Express,  would not
> require you to jump through hoops like that.
> 
> Peter

No, no validation thingies here, though I have seen them on other forums 
- ususally dissapear one you are registered.

Nick H

On 2 Jun, 10:10, Nick H  wrote:
> Peter A Forbes wrote:
> > On Fri, 30 May 2008 13:20:41 -0700 (PDT), Steve 
> > wrote:
>
> >> When I try and reply it says "Validation : For verification purpose
> >> please type the characters you see in the picture below". Then it
> >> gives some screwed up unreadable garbage and you are supposed to try
> >> and figure out what the letters are. Heaven help you if you mistake a
> >> distorted zero for an 'o', or a capital 'I' for a '1'.
>
> >> So here we go again - but this time I have copied the text so I can
> >> paste it again and again until I finally guess what the random garbage
> >> is.
>
> >> Steve
>
> > Steve:
>
> > That doesn't sound like Usenet at all!
>
> > Sounds like you have got tangled up with some web stuff there somewhere?
>
> > Usenet access, via something like Agent or even Outlook Express,  would not
> > require you to jump through hoops like that.
>
> > Peter
>
> No, no validation thingies here, though I have seen them on other forums
> - ususally dissapear one you are registered.
>
> Nick H

Now this is really weird - I am registered and logged in, and
accessing this via my Firefox browser. And beneath the text I am
typing is another one of those mangled words that you have to type in
to prevent automated posting. When this upset me was when it took 4 or
5 tries to enter the letters and each time failed. Yet a moment ago I
was replying to another post and thought - oh no ! the same thing
again, well forget it, and I hit post without typing the decoded
letters and the message was posted.

So it seems to be a spoof security feature, that keeps registered
users out if you attempt to follow the commands, but doesn't if you
ignore it. So I am just about to ignore it again, to test this
feature. So if you see this then the tip is - if you see it, then
ignore it.

Steve

Steve wrote:

> 
> Now this is really weird - I am registered and logged in, and
> accessing this via my Firefox browser. And beneath the text I am
> typing is another one of those mangled words that you have to type in
> to prevent automated posting. When this upset me was when it took 4 or
> 5 tries to enter the letters and each time failed. Yet a moment ago I
> was replying to another post and thought - oh no ! the same thing
> again, well forget it, and I hit post without typing the decoded
> letters and the message was posted.
> 
> So it seems to be a spoof security feature, that keeps registered
> users out if you attempt to follow the commands, but doesn't if you
> ignore it. So I am just about to ignore it again, to test this
> feature. So if you see this then the tip is - if you see it, then
> ignore it.
> 
> Steve
>

Are you posting through a web based portal (Eg Google Groups) or direct 
to a Usenet server (Eg news.individual.net)? The latter tends to be a 
deal more faff free once set up and if you are a Mozilla fan, 
Thunderbird has a usenet client.

Nick H

On 4 Jun, 09:17, Nick H  wrote:
> Steve wrote:
>
> > Now this is really weird - I am registered and logged in, and
> > accessing this via my Firefox browser. And beneath the text I am
> > typing is another one of those mangled words that you have to type in
> > to prevent automated posting. When this upset me was when it took 4 or
> > 5 tries to enter the letters and each time failed. Yet a moment ago I
> > was replying to another post and thought - oh no ! the same thing
> > again, well forget it, and I hit post without typing the decoded
> > letters and the message was posted.
>
> > So it seems to be a spoof security feature, that keeps registered
> > users out if you attempt to follow the commands, but doesn't if you
> > ignore it. So I am just about to ignore it again, to test this
> > feature. So if you see this then the tip is - if you see it, then
> > ignore it.
>
> > Steve
>
> Are you posting through a web based portal (Eg Google Groups) or direct
> to a Usenet server (Eg news.individual.net)? The latter tends to be a
> deal more faff free once set up and if you are a Mozilla fan,
> Thunderbird has a usenet client.
>
> Nick H

I am just using http://groups.google.com I don't know any other way. I
thought a portal was a window in a boat and Thunderbirds were wooden
puppets - do you have to go on a computer degree course to talk to
people using this stuff ? How much more complicated is it going to get
when the providers crawl out of the 1970s and realise people what to
post pictures too?

I have a full Office 2003 installation on Win 2000, if Outlook
supports a better form of access to these groups, then let me know.
However I only use web-based mail, so Outlook is unused (and Outlook
Express doesn't work, could be due to Outlook 2003 or my Zone Alarm
Firewall).

I am thinking of debunking to Linux as IMHO Microsoft have lost the
plot, I lost 10 hours last week trying to sort out a clash between a
Microsoft .NET2 update and Microsoft Visual Studio update - jees -
they come from the same firm and are SO incompatible. Over the years
they have completely corrupted the tight NT kernel ideal by trying to
screw Netscape, and then bringing in the .NET rubbish.

So it is Apple or Linux for me - Vista is a bloated Sumo wrestler in a
Walt Disney costume.

Of course that just my opinion tonight - maybe tomorrow I will not be
so kind to Microsoft - today I am in a good mood as my Marcos only
failed its MOT on two minor counts, and I thought it might be off the
road for the summer - wooppee !

And - very strangeley -at this point there is no sign that I have to
retype some bastardised character sequence to post this ... curious !

Steve

Steve wrote:
> 
> I am just using http://groups.google.com I don't know any other way. I
> thought a portal was a window in a boat and Thunderbirds were wooden
> puppets - do you have to go on a computer degree course to talk to
> people using this stuff ? How much more complicated is it going to get
> when the providers crawl out of the 1970s and realise people what to
> post pictures too?

I'm no computer whizz and perhaps 'portal' is the wrong word, but it is 
the equivalent of using webmail rather than linking direct to a 
conventional mail server with OE or whatever. I mentioned Thunderbird as 
  you are using Firefox so I thought you might be a Mozilla fan. BTW. 
Text only usenet groups such as this are great on handheld devices - 
battery hungry wireless on briefly to download messages, wireless off to 
read and compose replies, wireless on again for a few seconds to post 
replies!
> 
> I have a full Office 2003 installation on Win 2000, if Outlook
> supports a better form of access to these groups, then let me know.
> However I only use web-based mail, so Outlook is unused (and Outlook
> Express doesn't work, could be due to Outlook 2003 or my Zone Alarm
> Firewall).

We've just gone over to Outlook at work and if it has a usenet client I 
can't find it, hence my current use of Thunderbird. Works for me (apart 
from the spellcheck!), ask your ISP for details of their usenet server 
and try it.
> 
> I am thinking of debunking to Linux as IMHO Microsoft have lost the
> plot, I lost 10 hours last week trying to sort out a clash between a
> Microsoft .NET2 update and Microsoft Visual Studio update - jees -
> they come from the same firm and are SO incompatible. Over the years
> they have completely corrupted the tight NT kernel ideal by trying to
> screw Netscape, and then bringing in the .NET rubbish.

I don't understand Microsoft. I think all that the majority of users 
want is to plug stuff in and have it work properly straight out of the 
box - it seems that just as soon as we get anywhere near that point, 
Microsoft add a bunch of new 'features' and bugger it all up again
> 
> So it is Apple or Linux for me - Vista is a bloated Sumo wrestler in a
> Walt Disney costume.

Love the description of Vista, but my impression of Linux in its various 
forms is that it is really only for the computer geek community which 
delights in its obscurity and inpenetrability to 'ousiders'.
> 
> Of course that just my opinion tonight - maybe tomorrow I will not be
> so kind to Microsoft - today I am in a good mood as my Marcos only
> failed its MOT on two minor counts

No woodworm then?

>, and I thought it might be off the
> road for the summer - wooppee !
> 
> And - very strangeley -at this point there is no sign that I have to
> retype some bastardised character sequence to post this ... curious !
> 
> Steve

Cheers

Nick H

On Thu, 5 Jun 2008 13:53:45 -0700 (PDT), Steve  wrote:

>I am just using http://groups.google.com I don't know any other way. I
>thought a portal was a window in a boat and Thunderbirds were wooden
>puppets - do you have to go on a computer degree course to talk to
>people using this stuff ? How much more complicated is it going to get
>when the providers crawl out of the 1970s and realise people what to
>post pictures too?
>
>I have a full Office 2003 installation on Win 2000, if Outlook
>supports a better form of access to these groups, then let me know.
>However I only use web-based mail, so Outlook is unused (and Outlook
>Express doesn't work, could be due to Outlook 2003 or my Zone Alarm
>Firewall).
>
>I am thinking of debunking to Linux as IMHO Microsoft have lost the
>plot, I lost 10 hours last week trying to sort out a clash between a
>Microsoft .NET2 update and Microsoft Visual Studio update - jees -
>they come from the same firm and are SO incompatible. Over the years
>they have completely corrupted the tight NT kernel ideal by trying to
>screw Netscape, and then bringing in the .NET rubbish.
>
>So it is Apple or Linux for me - Vista is a bloated Sumo wrestler in a
>Walt Disney costume.
>
>Of course that just my opinion tonight - maybe tomorrow I will not be
>so kind to Microsoft - today I am in a good mood as my Marcos only
>failed its MOT on two minor counts, and I thought it might be off the
>road for the summer - wooppee !
>
>And - very strangeley -at this point there is no sign that I have to
>retype some bastardised character sequence to post this ... curious !
>
>Steve

I think you will find that there is Outlook, and Outlook Express, two entirely
different programmes.

Outlook is part of the Office suite of programmes, Outlook Express is a mail and
usenet client.

HTH

Peter
--
Peter A Forbes
Prepair Ltd, Rushden, UK
peterforbes@prepair.co.uk
http://www.prepair.co.uk
http://www.prepair.eu

Hello Nick and Steve,
Linux has been on the point of being widely adopted for too many years. 
What might tip it into the mainstream is the new generation of ultra 
portable reasonably priced laptops such as the Asus Eee. I've recently 
bought one of these and it's brilliant. It found my wireless router 
without any problems, the web browser (Firefox) set itself up with the 
minimum of intervention and web mail was a doddle. I've used OpenOffice 
for years in preference to the bloated and expensive MS Office, and this 
is easy to use on the Eee. There are still annoyances with the 
particular version of Linux used - changing the date format from US to 
UK format involves going into terminal mode and running in command line 
mode - but I suspect demand will result in a more easily tweakable OS.
Regards,
Richard
PS I have no trouble reading this newsgroup's messages using Firefox on 
my desktop PC running Windows XP.
Nick H wrote:
> Steve wrote:
>>
>> I am just using http://groups.google.com I don't know any other way. I
>> thought a portal was a window in a boat and Thunderbirds were wooden
>> puppets - do you have to go on a computer degree course to talk to
>> people using this stuff ? How much more complicated is it going to get
>> when the providers crawl out of the 1970s and realise people what to
>> post pictures too?
> 
> I'm no computer whizz and perhaps 'portal' is the wrong word, but it is 
> the equivalent of using webmail rather than linking direct to a 
> conventional mail server with OE or whatever. I mentioned Thunderbird as 
>  you are using Firefox so I thought you might be a Mozilla fan. BTW. 
> Text only usenet groups such as this are great on handheld devices - 
> battery hungry wireless on briefly to download messages, wireless off to 
> read and compose replies, wireless on again for a few seconds to post 
> replies!
>>
>> I have a full Office 2003 installation on Win 2000, if Outlook
>> supports a better form of access to these groups, then let me know.
>> However I only use web-based mail, so Outlook is unused (and Outlook
>> Express doesn't work, could be due to Outlook 2003 or my Zone Alarm
>> Firewall).
> 
> We've just gone over to Outlook at work and if it has a usenet client I 
> can't find it, hence my current use of Thunderbird. Works for me (apart 
> from the spellcheck!), ask your ISP for details of their usenet server 
> and try it.
>>
>> I am thinking of debunking to Linux as IMHO Microsoft have lost the
>> plot, I lost 10 hours last week trying to sort out a clash between a
>> Microsoft .NET2 update and Microsoft Visual Studio update - jees -
>> they come from the same firm and are SO incompatible. Over the years
>> they have completely corrupted the tight NT kernel ideal by trying to
>> screw Netscape, and then bringing in the .NET rubbish.
> 
> I don't understand Microsoft. I think all that the majority of users 
> want is to plug stuff in and have it work properly straight out of the 
> box - it seems that just as soon as we get anywhere near that point, 
> Microsoft add a bunch of new 'features' and bugger it all up again
>>
>> So it is Apple or Linux for me - Vista is a bloated Sumo wrestler in a
>> Walt Disney costume.
> 
> Love the description of Vista, but my impression of Linux in its various 
> forms is that it is really only for the computer geek community which 
> delights in its obscurity and inpenetrability to 'ousiders'.
>>
>> Of course that just my opinion tonight - maybe tomorrow I will not be
>> so kind to Microsoft - today I am in a good mood as my Marcos only
>> failed its MOT on two minor counts
> 
> No woodworm then?
> 
>> , and I thought it might be off the
>> road for the summer - wooppee !
>>
>> And - very strangeley -at this point there is no sign that I have to
>> retype some bastardised character sequence to post this ... curious !
>>
>> Steve
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Nick H

On 6 Jun, 17:55, Richard Green  wrote:
> Hello Nick and Steve,
> Linux has been on the point of being widely adopted for too many years.
> What might tip it into the mainstream is the new generation of ultra
> portable reasonably priced laptops such as the Asus Eee. I've recently
> bought one of these and it's brilliant. It found my wireless router
> without any problems, the web browser (Firefox) set itself up with the
> minimum of intervention and web mail was a doddle. I've used OpenOffice
> for years in preference to the bloated and expensive MS Office, and this
> is easy to use on the Eee. There are still annoyances with the
> particular version of Linux used - changing the date format from US to
> UK format involves going into terminal mode and running in command line
> mode - but I suspect demand will result in a more easily tweakable OS.
> Regards,
> Richard
> PS I have no trouble reading this newsgroup's messages using Firefox on
> my desktop PC running Windows XP.
>

Another totally hi-jacked thread and all my fault ! Sorry.

People say nice things about usability of Apple computers and I think
the Apple OS is Unix-based. However I think we need something newer.
Maybe IBM should resurrect OS/2 - that was killed by competition from
NT, not by any fundamental defect that I could spot.

I shall look into Thunderbird ... I am impressed with Firefox - except
that it keeps offering me updates to the US dictionary, when I don't
have US English installed.

Whatever caused the security code prompt to keep appearing, it has
gone. Maybe I was listed somewhere as a dodgy character and my slate
is now wiped clean.

Steve