This is my poky little corner of the Internet. Originally started in 1999 (my website that is, not the Internet) it took on many forms - until 2005, when I lost enthusiasm for my own Internet presence and simply stopped updating it.
This is my attempt at getting some of that enthusiasm back. Enjoy!
Hey there, readers! It's been almost a year since my last post on here, because I'm a complete and utter prat who keeps forgetting that this domain name even exists. Still, never mind, I'm here now, eh?
What's brought me back into the fold, you may ask? Well, it's the hotly anticipated release of Pac-Man Championship Edition 2 on the PC (and various other platforms, but I do 99% of my gaming on a PC, so the PC version is what we're talking about here.)
For those unaware, back in 2007 Namco released a new edition in their venerable Pac-Man franchise. The focus was more on high-scores and competition between friends rather than completing mazes, and the game was incredibly well received by many, myself included. The frenetic pace and the gameplay changes surrounding the concept of only eating half of the maze at a time and having optimal paths to do so made going for higher and higher scores very addictive.
In 2010 it was followed by Pac-Man Championship Edition DX (and a DX+ update on Steam) which improved on the formula some more by adding the concept of "collecting" ghosts in a train - ghosts would be sleeping at various parts of the maze and would wake up when Pac-Man flew by. You could then chomp on a power pellet and go straight on down to snack town. Take a look at this video of me playing it if you're not sure how that works in practice:
As you can see, very different to the original Pac-Man, but also much more fun.
So, the sequel then?
The sequel, imaginatively titled Pac-Man Championship Edition 2, was released at the start of September. It's basically more or less the same, but they have tweaked the concept a bit - contact with a ghost is no longer instant death as it was previously, now you can bump into a ghost a few times which will "anger" it and make it chase you around the maze, which can be used tactically if you're skilled enough (I'm not.)
The ghost "trains" that build up over the course of each round are now only munchable if you eat the head ghost, and Pac-Man will then automatically eat the rest of the ghosts, and as if that wasn't complicated enough, when you eat a power pellet the trains now speed up instead of slow down, but follow preset "escape routes" which are highlighted on the maze so you can "head them off at the pass."
There are a few other spanners in the works, too - sometimes you'll come across a "runaway" power pellet or fruit - these will actively try and get away from you as you approach, but with careful decision making and blazing your way around corners you can easily catch up.
Another new addition is boss battles. In these, you have a set amount of time to complete a set number of mazes, and each time a massive ghost behind the maze bumps his noggin on it which triggers the appearance of a couple of extra life power-ups and the fruit/power pellet that you need to get to the next maze.
There are also updates to the "bomb" system from the original game. In the original, you could press Space and (if you had some) a bomb would go off which would send all of the ghosts back to their house and you could carry on your merry way. This was excellent when things got a bit too hair-raising. Now, though, the bomb does the same thing but moves Pac-Man back to his start point. This adds a tactical element whereby you can instantly get to the "reset" fruit by using a bomb.
Is it any good?
It's fun enough, I suppose - but I have to admit I don't like it. Take a look at my video below, and I'll run you through some of the things that I really don't like.
The first thing that really winds me up about the sequel is that the fruit power-ups needed to reset the maze are "out of the way" and you have to move up or down into the space to eat it. Doing so resets the maze, and puts Pac-Man back in the place above the fruit ready to go again (see 0:14 in the video). This makes sense, of course, but I just can't gel with it - if you look at the original game up there, Pac-Man never changes direction or moves without your say so, which makes for a much more fluid experience.
In the sequel, his position gets reset whenever the maze resets, and also whenever you eat a ghost train (more on that in a second) and it completely screws with my forward planning.
My other major complaint with the game is the way everything goes a bit haywire when you eat a ghost train. Take a look at 0:40 onwards in the video. When you eat the head of a ghost, the view changes to a sort of "3D camera" and the player loses control of Pac-Man. Pac-Man will snake his way around corners with gay abandon munching on ghosts and then when he's finished, control is returned to you but suddenly you're not where you were and you completely lose your bearings.
To make matters worse, the other major problem I have with this new train system is that while Pac-Man is eating a train, if another train passes through the same area (see 0:44 in the video) Pac-Man completely ignores it rather than chowing down on that too. This seems really odd to me, and just adds to the feeling of disorientation that the game gives me.
That's nothing though compared to what happens when you eat the final train on the maze. Skip ahead to 0:51 on the video and you'll see what happens when you do this. The camera goes absolutely bonkers and you lose sight of the maze altogether as Pac-Man goes flying off seemingly into space.
When he returns, he's out back on the maze, directly above the fruit that you need to eat to reset the maze - you have to move down into it, which then triggers the same reset that normally occurs. However, if you don't do anything, Pac-Man literally just stays there waiting for your command.
In my opinion, which isn't worth much admittedly, these changes to the core gameplay are great on paper but the execution just flat out doesn't work - the game wrestles control of Pac-Man away from you far too many times and you just come away feeling like you don't know what's going on. Pac-Man should never come to a complete stop once you start him off unless you run him into a wall, it's fundamental. Interestingly, the game also includes a "brake" button which stops Pac-Man dead in his tracks and can be used to avoid a ghost encounter if you need to. This is probably useful in some of the later mazes, but I've not had to use it yet and again it seems like it's making the game more complex than it really needs to be.
Using the bombs in this game also destroys any flow, as it moves you back to your start point where you stay still waiting for instructions.
The boss battles (not featured in the video) aren't particularly well thought out, they're not so much boss battles as timed rounds with some "defeat a boss" animation frippery thrown on top.
Other than this laundry list of complaints, I can't really think of much else to criticise. The graphics, sound and control scheme are all excellent (although I may just be imagining it, but I'm sure in this game Pac-Man will move "back" a bit to make a turn if you're a bit late pressing the key, which again makes it very hard to control properly - I can see I've passed the turning, so I'm already holding the turn key for the next junction, don't move me back to the one I've missed!)
I'm still unconvinced that this game is an improvement on Championship Edition DX+, but I'll give it some more time - I may warm up to it after a while.
It's the last day of Septemblog, and I've failed to blog on three days out of the thirty. That's a 10% failure rate, which is higher than I would have liked, but on the other hand it does mean that - this entry included - I have blogged for 27 days out of the last 30, which is a far higher rate of posting than I've ever achieved before.
I doubt I'll keep it up, but if I can do two posts a month minimum that would be good.
On to the actual topic of this post - flying machines, and in particular, passenger airliners.
I've been interested in aviation right from the age of about 5 or 6 when I vividly remember congregating in the back garden of my house with my Mum, Dad, two of my brothers, my next door neighbours, and my visiting Aunt and Uncle (and their two children) to watch Concorde fly overhead.
The reason I vividly remember that event so well was because I was completely unprepared for the sound that Concorde would make when it broke the sound barrier directly over our house, and I literally wet my pants with fear. Not proud of it, but there you go.
It was a few years later at the age of 10 that I took a flight for the first time, and the intense feeling of acceleration when the plane started the take-off procedure was amazing - although somewhat muted by my adulthood and having been lucky enough to drive some ludicrously fast cars.
Look how far we have come
It amazes me that the human race has been able to develop powered flight, and not only that, but to such a degree that we can take an aircraft like the Boeing 747-400, which (at maximum take-off weight) clocks in at nearly 400,000 kilograms, and not only get that into the air but keep it there long enough to travel to the other side of the world. To put that into some kind of perspective, when Orville and Wilbur Wright developed the world's first powered, manned flying machine, the Wright Flyer I, it weighed only 274 kilograms and stayed in the air for under a minute for all of it's first few flights.
It is this amazement that fuels my morbid fascination with aircraft accidents and aviation disasters.
Flying is of course, statistically, the safest form of transport, with by far the lowest number of fatalities per passenger mile. But the flipside to this is that, when something goes wrong, it tends to go wrong big.
Bizarrely I always find myself reading about aviation disasters the night before I have to catch a plane myself, and the "worst" instance of this was shortly before the holiday I took to Tenerife in 2010. Up until that point I'd been blissfully unaware of the 1977 Tenerife airport disaster, which remains the single largest aviation disaster (by number of fatalities, and excluding deliberate action such as the September 11 attacks)
In this particular case, a catalogue of human errors compounded by bad weather conditions resulted in one aircraft attempting to take off while another aircraft was taxiing across the runway. They collided, and 583 people lost their lives. A lasting legacy of this incident is that the language used by air crew and air traffic controllers changed significantly in an attempt to prevent repeat incidents - part of the problem in Tenerife was that the air crew on one plane thought they'd received permission to take off from the tower when in actual fact they'd been told to hold - patchy radio communications meant they essentially just heard the words "take off" and assumed all was clear.
Nowadays, the words "take off" are only said to give clearance. At all other times, "take off" is referred to as "departure."
It's these little changes that occur that contribute to air travel's safety record. Sure, things go wrong, and as above they tend to go wrong in a big way, but we learn from our mistakes and push onwards, as humans are so good at doing.
Back to Concorde
Some news came out recently that a group of aviation enthusiasts (and Concorde fans) had clubbed together and raised $120 million (or £120 million, can't remember) in a bid to return Speedbird to the skies - all Concorde airframes were grounded in 2003, after a decidedly rocky start to the 21st Century with the 2000 Air France crash (the only crash Concorde ever had) and the "relaunch" flights taking place on the morning of September 11, 2001.
I personally can't see it happening (Airbus withdrew support and maintenance agreements for the type around 2003 and I can't see them being particularly keen to start it up again) but it would be nice to think that it could happen.
I was able to sit on board Concorde in 2008 on a holiday to Barbados - it wasn't flying, obviously, it was stationed at the air museum at Barbados' Grantley Adams International Airport.
My overriding impression of the plane was that it was much smaller inside than I'd imagined. There is only room for four-abreast seating (with the gangway down the middle) and headroom is much less than on other airliners, simply because the plane itself is so thin.
A truly incredible piece of engineering, and it's a shame that we're unlikely to see further developments in supersonic air travel any time soon - there's not an awful lot of money in it, there never was (Concorde never really turned a profit for the two operating airlines, although British Airways apparently managed to make it profitable towards the end of it's operational life) and from an airline's perspective, there are more money-making opportunities on longer flights with more people than on a supersonic flight that lasts half the time.
Yes, it's my second post this month with a direct quote from Jeff Wayne's War of the Worlds in the heading. But, you know what? I don't care. Today has been an odd day for me, with lots of apparently accidental yet strangely coincidental goings on.
Firstly, on my way into work this morning I realised that I was listening to Jeff Wayne's 2012 release of War of the Worlds, which I've previously derided on this very blog. I started it playing last night on my journey home, the goal being to finally listen to it all the way through and decide once and for all if it can hold a candle to the Richard Burton version.
I had to pick up Kit, my good friend, colleague and extreme BeEx lurker this morning as we often carpool into the office, me picking him up as my journey into work takes me past his house.
With Kit in the car, I told him about NASA's rumoured (and, it appears, actual) announcement today about them discovering evidence of actual liquid water on Mars, which is some pretty damned big news and presumably leads to all sorts of questions about whether there is actually life on Mars still (even at just a microbial level.)
I then asked Kit what he'd done over the weekend, and he informed me that he'd been to the cinema to watch a Cineworld Unlimited special screening of Matt Damon's new film, The Martian.
It was only at this point that I realised the connecting thread between all of these things, and it struck me as a little odd that we'd spoken about three things related to Mars without even picking up on it, all within the first 20 minutes of the day.
As if that wasn't enough, I was hit in the face by a chocolate bar wrapper flying up into the air while I was out walking on my lunch break. Yes, it was a Mars wrapper.
There also seemed to be a frankly ridiculous number of Bruno Mars and Olly Murs songs playing on the Spotify playlist at the office today. OK, so Olly Murs is a bit of a tenuous link, but still.
I've been mucking about with computers for the best part of 25 years now, and in that time I've spent a fair amount of hours playing computer and video games. In fact, as my earlier post about Steam will show, I've got quite a lot of games kicking around on my home PC - most of which I've never played, mind.
But, in that 25 years, I've come across a few games that have made such an impression on me that I can always go back and play them some more. For two of those games, I'd long moaned about how no-one had ever bothered to make a worthy sequel to them, but in recent years those two worthy sequels have materialised and I now have both the old and the new to play with, which spells bad news for my spare time.
Here's a bit of a write up about some of them, starting with...
Frontier: Elite 2 (and Elite: Dangerous)
I kind of missed the boat with the original Elite. It was released in 1984 when I was just a toddler, and until I took ownership of an Amiga A1200 I didn't really have any of the machines that it was available for, and by the time I'd got an A1200, it's sequel was released.
Right from the intro movie, I was hooked:
I loved the sense of freedom that the game provided, and even though strictly speaking there wasn't any "point" to the game (apart from gaining ELITE status, which could only be done by destroying a ridiculous number of AI ships, so I never bothered trying) I never got bored of just flying around soaking up the universe.
I still think that it was an incredible achievement - David Braben squeezed an entire universe into under 500 kilobytes of disk space. True, much of it was procedurally generated, but the core systems were all hand-built and there was of course graphics and audio to be included in that size as well. I imagine this web page probably doesn't fit into 500 kilobytes of disk space!
I always chose the "recommended start position" at Sirocco Station, on the surface of Merlin in the Ross 154 system. My first action would be to buy some hydrogen fuel and some animal meat, and then jet off into the big black (or rather, the big blue in Frontier's case) and hyperjump to Barnard's Star, where I would dock at Boston Base (an Orbis starport that orbited Birminghamworld, if I remember rightly) and sell the animal meat. I can never remember what I took back to Ross 154 - I want to say Robots or Computers, but I think they may have been too expensive to buy at this stage, so it might have been Farm Machinery.
Either way, I went back and forth between the two stations until I'd raised enough to move over to Sol (where Earth is, non-spacey people!) and do more trading around there before getting in with the Federal Military.
Eventually I'd get cash rich enough to upgrade my Eagle Long Range Fighter to a Viper Defence Craft and then I'd go and kick some space pirate arse. Although usually what happened was that I would get my non-pirate arse handed to me on a plate and I'd have to start over.
Over the years I've most likely spent thousands of hours playing this game, and it's one of the ones I always wanted a worthy sequel to. Frontier: First Encounters came out in 1996 but I never had it as I wasn't a PC owner at the time, and it was a buggy mess anyway.
Over time, rumours started that David Braben and his company Frontier Developments were working on a new sequel, the much vaunted Elite 4. Nothing ever came to fruition though, until a few years ago when Elite: Dangerous appeared on Kickstarter and made an absolute fortune. I put quite a bit of money into it myself, and the game came out last year to a mixed reception. I enjoy playing it, and still do occasionally, but at the moment it lacks some of the features that made Frontier so special - namely planetary landings and passenger transport missions, but the former is coming to the game very soon.
And it looks so, so pretty...
UFO: Enemy Unknown
The spiritual successor to Laser Squad by the Gollop Brothers, UFO: Enemy Unknown (or X-COM: UFO Defense as it was known in the States) was a turn-based strategy game centred around the story of an alien invasion of Earth.
I'd played turn based strategy games before (including Laser Squad, and the good-but-not-quite-as-good-as-UFO Sabre Team) but none of them really "gripped" me in the way that UFO did.
I think it was the combination of base and resource management and the actual turn based battles themselves, it made it feel like a deeper game (and it was only really in the mid 2000s, when I got involved with the UFOpaedia, that I became aware of just how deep the game actually was)
Here's the intro:
The best part about UFO was that it was completely and utterly unrelenting. In most games back then, and even more so today, you were punished for failure - but the difficulty level in UFO (even on the easiest setting) was such that you could expect to lose your soldiers constantly, and for the most part it didn't matter - in fact, in many cases you found yourself recruiting soldiers specifically to be used as cannon fodder.
In most games, the difficulty curve starts off very easy and, as you learn the ropes, the difficulty increases until you get to the Big Bad Boss. This was basically reversed in UFO - at the start of the game, you were outnumbered, outarmoured, outgunned and outclassed in pretty much every way. You are facing off against an unknown enemy force and you know literally nothing about them or their capabilities. As the game progresses, your research scientists discover more about the aliens and their weapons and you develop effective methods for fighting them.
At this point, the game normally throws harder aliens at you with new capabilities, but as time goes on and your scientists produce more and more kit, your job gets easier as you can fight back with alien weaponry. By the time you reach the "endgame", you should have almost no trouble at all taking on the aliens.
This is another game that I've logged a stupid number of hours on. Sure, it has a dated user interface and graphics (although I love the "manga" style, personally) but in terms of gameplay, atmosphere and sheer outright difficulty, nothing has ever come close for me.
And, as with Frontier, this game has been crying out for a decent sequel for a long time. Many, many game developers have tried and most have failed. It was only in 2012 when Firaxis Games announced that they were working on a new game - XCOM: Enemy Unknown - that I sat up and took notice.
The 2012 game (which has recently had a sequel announced, creatively titled XCOM 2) changed some elements of the original, which I remember being quite aggrieved about at the time, but those negative thoughts faded away as soon as I played the demo. It was near perfect, and a bang-on reimagining of the original game. I seem to remember writing a review of XCOM back when it was released, too.
This was a bit of a controversial game at the time. The original box-art featured a red poppy, which led to a hate campaign in various British newspapers, who vilified it as an insult to war veterans and people that had died in service of the country, claiming that it glorified war.
Of course, what every single one of those newspaper editors had failed to realise, and what would have become patently obvious if they'd bothered to play the damn thing, was that Cannon Fodder was very much anti-war. Through satire, the use of visual metaphors (like the "Boot Hill", which would slowly become filled with the headstones of soldiers that had died under your command) and other small touches (like all of your soldiers having names) the game went to pretty big lengths to point out that actually, war's a bit on the crap side and that we should do all we can to avoid it, it being a senseless waste of life.
Besides all of this controversy, the game was great to play and over the course of the game you became really quite attached to your little green helmeted guys.
I don't really get much chance to play this (and its sequel from a couple of years later) any more these days as I can only really play it on an Amiga emulator and I often can't be bothered to boot it up, but it's still as good today as it was then, and I would give my left nut for a phone/tablet conversion.
A Russian company was licensed to make a sequel in 2011. It was crap. It tried desperately to retain the charm of the previous two games, but the move to 3D really didn't work, and nor did the poor attempts at keeping the same atmosphere.
It also didn't help that there was clearly a dodgy translation somewhere as lots of parts of the game (right down to its Start Menu shortcut) referred to it as Connon Fodder 3.
Still, at least the first two games are still playable. There is a game in development from someone completely unrelated to the originals that looks promising (Jarheads, by the excellently named Gareth Williams) and, should the worst come to the worst, the first game gave the world possibly the greatest video game music video to have ever existed:
I screwed up and didn't blog yesterday, so that's two days out of the 30 that I've failed so far. Still, like the previous time, my excuse was simply that I didn't have an awful lot of time in which to blog, and my back being screwy is still causing me no end of grief.
So get off my case, mang.
Anyway, I now have to blog for today and - to be honest - I'm starting to run out of ideas. Never mind though, Jem has given me a great idea for a blog post and despite it going against one of my own pre-determined rules at the start ("No listicles") it'll do in a pinch.
"Enough already, what's the topic?" I hear you cry.
Yeah, basically, this is just going to be a list of things that I like and love about Jem, and how she's made a difference to my life in the 18 months or so that we've been seeing each other.
Jem did this for me once, in a private e-mail, telling me how awesome I was. She came up with over 200 different items (although some were basically duplicates) - I doubt I'll get anywhere near that, but let's see...
She does the same job I do, which means finally I can talk/rant to someone about things work related and they understand.
She possesses a decent amount of intelligence.
And knows how to use it.
She looks great in most dresses.
She knows her own mind (most of the time) and is as stubborn as I am.
She's a good cook.
She's a great driver, despite only having a licence for a few years.
She is interested in many of the same things I am.
She does not object to me doing things that I want to do, even when they don't involve her.
She doesn't mind me referring to her as "she."
She looks great out of most dresses.
She puts up with my car-changing habit.
And my other bad habits.
She's a fast typer, although not as fast as me - natch.
She makes an effort with my family and friends.
She has a varied taste in films and TV, despite not really watching that much of it prior to being with me.
She appreciates history.
And architecture, especially gothic.
She isn't afraid to tell me when I'm being unreasonable.
She doesn't mind having the mickey taken out of her.
And also doesn't have any problems taking the mickey out of me.
The way her hair sort of "curls" around her ears is dangerously cute.
She has a terrific smile.
Which, in the words of Semisonic, she reserves only for me.
She reads books.
She has more books than DVDs.
She has more Terry Pratchett books than DVDs (although, full disclosure - I've never read a Terry Pratchett book despite it being on my "to do" list for ever)
She has a sense of humour that is very similar to my own (although we do disagree on some things, notably Big Train)
She humours me when I tell bad jokes and Dad jokes.
And also when I'm trying to dazzle her with a new card trick that I've learned.
She's a great mother (although not to me, obv)
She's actually managing to turn me into someone who is happy to be around kids.
She has a childish streak to rival my own.
Sometimes she can be as mad as a box of frogs.
She is (for the most part) good with money, which is good as I'm bloody terrible with it.
She looks great in my shirts, even better than she does in dresses.
She works hard to keep herself in shape and keep fit, and is always looking to improve herself.
She loves her cats.
She had no concerns about me moving in with her and pushing my way into her life and home.
She doesn't think my Celica is silly or "chavvy."
She makes a damn good cup of coffee.
She is sympathetic to my plight when I'm suffering with my bad back.
She is very strong willed (again, for the most part) and once she sets her sight on something will strive to achieve it.
Her extroversion brings out a little bit of my extroversion when we're with other people.
She boycotts Nestlé products (I don't because I don't have scruples, but I don't particularly like the company or its business practices)
She managed to make a list like this that was 200+ strong and all about me.
She has overcome hardships that I can't even begin to comprehend and has managed to make something of her life and raise two well-rounded (so far, at least) small children.
She has a fantastic arse.
I'm going to stop there as it's a nice round number (kind of like the subject of point 50) but in theory I could have gone on - I don't think I'd get up to the lofty heights of 200, but nevertheless, there's a lot to like about her.
Over the past few months, I've begun noticing more and more adverts (or promoted posts, or whatever they want to call them) on Facebook trying to sell me products that the advertisers have deemed that I need, no doubt from analysing my browsing history, the status updates that I post to Facebook, my tweets and every other digital footprint that I leave on my hike through the information superhighway.
The thing that amazes me is how (quite frankly) utterly ridiculous many of these products appear to be. I've included a few examples below. In true "don't sue me" fashion, I feel I should write a disclaimer that states that I'm sure all of the products featured below have a valid use and aren't just shameless cash grabs for unsuspecting gadgetphiles, but that they're just not for me and my opinion counts more than anything else. Natch.
I used to have a MacBook Air, with a built in webcam. I have a laptop now, again with a built in webcam. I don't think I've ever been particularly bothered by the prospect of someone remotely switching my webcam on - let's face it, I'm just not that interesting, and out of the billion or so Internet users (probably more than that) why would someone pick little old me?
Clearly I'm something of an odd one out though, as nearly eight thousand people with more money than sense donated a grand total of just over $93,000 (NINETY THREE THOUSAND UNITED STATES DOLLARS) to "bring this project to life."
To be fair to the project creator, the lowest pledge tier was $5 and that at least got you a two-pack of Nopes.
However, as one Nope is basically just a small neodymium rare earth magnet, I can't work out why someone would buy Nope instead of just forking out a fraction of the price for a pack of 10 from Amazon.
This project is still in the funding stage but is somehow going to be fully funded.
Watches and other timepieces have remained largely unchanged since they were invented, for all intents and purposes. Sure, the invention of the digital watch meant that people didn't need to look at analogue clock faces any more, and there have always been novelty watches available, but this is something else.
Not only is the watch itself much harder to read "at a glance" than every other timepiece ever made, but it retails for a mere 349 euros. Actually, reading the campaign page, this price doesn't seem too high as the engineering involved to make this watch work as described must be quite involved, but 349 euros will buy you all manner of watches or smartwatches.
Reading the Kickstarter page, it becomes very apparent that they are targeting hipsters and other fashionistas who would probably buy a watch like this purely to make a statement rather than as an actual functional item.
(I'm hardly one to talk about this, incidentally, in that I own an Apple Watch. But at least I bought mine to use, damnit, and to look vaguely idiotic when paying for something at a supermarket.)
"Watches to travel through time", indeed. Get bent.
The BASICS Notebook
This is another one that continually pops up in my Facebook feed, usually with a suitable clickbaity headline like "You Won't Believe The Features That This Notebook Has! It's INSANE!"
They wanted $10,000 to get the manufacturing of this notebook off the ground. They ended up with just over $383,000.
For some bloomin' paper and faux leather - not even real bloody leather! The cheapskates! $27 for one notebook. $27 for a non-refillable notebook. $27 for a notebook that boasts such incredible (sorry, "INSANE!") features as having a gap at the top for putting a pen in, like people don't have pockets.
Amazing. Simply amazing.
A portable flask made out of titanium, that ships with it's own unique insulating coat, and is designed purely for the collection and bottling of snow for the express purpose of retailing to Inuit communities?
This is why I'm not an ideas man.
And, do you know what? On reflection, I take the heading of this post back. I'm glad I'm not.
By "range", I do of course mean "distance", not "shooting range" or "frying range" - although to be fair, I have experienced frying range anxiety from my first job working at a local chippie. That was more to do with the owner though, a large, hairy Greek man called Tony who insisted on calling me Gary no matter how many times I told him I was at best "Gaz" and at the very worst, "Gareth."
Distance anxiety, then
Oh yes, sorry - got a bit sidetracked. Which is sort of apt for the topic of this post.
A lot is said about electric vehicles and "range anxiety" - i.e. being worried that you will not have enough battery power left to reach your destination.
Because EVs are (currently, at least) far more limited in terms of their potential range, there's no denying that not being sure about your state of charge can be something of a concern.
However, the number of public charging points dotted around the place should make this more or less a thing of the past, and I had my first real taste of this today.
The day started with me doing the school run, with Jem. I've never done the school run before, so it was nice to get out and do so. However, it did mean using up about 10 miles of precious range before I'd even started my journey to work (18 miles.)
I then had an appointment after work in Newport to see an osteomyologist about my back problem (which is still giving me a ton of pain, annoyingly) so that took off another 16 miles.
Now, ordinarily at this point, I would have just gone home (about 13-15 miles from Newport I think) and all would have been fine, but on this occasion I had to pop back to Shrewsbury to do some shopping for my Mum, so that knocked another 16 miles off (for a total of approx. 60 miles) and still left me 18 miles from home.
In theory, it would have been fine - the range meter was showing 24 miles left, but I'm not that used to the car yet so I didn't want to risk running out of electrons on the way up Harley Bank near Much Wenlock (steep hills will kill the range of an EV, and Harley Bank has a 12% incline)
I therefore hatched a plan - I would do my Mum's shopping at ASDA instead of Morrisons, and take advantage of the fast charger they have on their car park to top up while I was shopping (and, to maximise charging time, Jem and I decided to nip further up the road to Nando's for a bite to eat)
I am the Chargemaster!
The public charger at ASDA Shrewsbury is operated by Chargemaster, and users can either register to receive an RFID card used to open the sockets, or they can pop in to the store and ask to borrow one of their cards for a £10 refundable deposit.
Unfortunately for me, this took a bit longer than planned as the woman behind the counter at ASDA had no idea what I was talking about and had to call a colleague to come and get the card for me, but all was well in the end and they even waived the £10 deposit as I only had a card on me rather than cash.
There are two charging posts, each with a 3kW and 7kW charger on board - fortunately I specified the 6.6kW charging option for the LEAF when I bought it, so could take advantage of the faster charge. I'd remembered to leave my Type 2 charging cable in the boot so I was able to hook it all up for an hour and a bit while we did the shopping and had our quickie-chickie.
Upon returning to the car (and having returned the RFID card back to the customer services desk in store) I switched the car on and found it had gone from 21% charged to 55% and that I now had an effective range of 52 miles - more than enough to get home!
I can understand why people get anxious about range with their EVs, although I didn't worry too much - even if the charger at ASDA had been out of service I would have risked it and probably just ended up getting a taxi back the rest of the way if I'd run out of juice.
I had to rearrange my plans for the evening slightly to fit in around using the charger, but it actually all worked out quite well in the end and very probably saved time - had I had the range to spare in the first place, I may have ended up spending ages driving around deciding on a place to eat!
Next time, I think I'll push the car a bit more and see if I can find out just how far I can push it before it stops.
Jem turns 30 next year, and thanks to me and my Big Mouth™ it now falls upon me to organise a birthday party for this age-related milestone.
I'm still not 100% sure how I volunteered myself for this task, but Jem assures me that I did, legitimately and without coercion.
The good news is that I have already organised a venue, thanks to Kirsty at work giving me some super ideas of places that I could enquire to about it. I've found a venue that is quite close to the train station and also relatively close to the Premier Inn in Shrewsbury, which will be handy not only for some of the partygoers but likely also for Jem and myself - I can't imagine we're going to be in a fit state to drive back to Broseley that evening.
So, what else do I need to organise? Well, my list currently stands at:
DJ or other musical entertainment
Room and table decorations
Hiring pole-dancing equipment (don't ask)
Fancy dress, or some sort of theme perhaps?
A marching band
Two turtle doves
Commissioning a special 30th birthday dress to be made especially for Jem
Production of 30 candles laced with vodka
Procurement of vodka
Hiring a skywriter to write directions to the venue from the train station in the air
A bouncy castle
A chocolate vodka fountain
and finally, some sort of cat-themed cabaret act
As you can see, I've got my work cut out for me! Good thing that I don't really need to keep it a surprise, I'm terrible at that sort of thing.
My Tuesday nights will now be taken up by my sport of choice - bell target shooting - so I thought I'd do a blog post tonight detailing what it is, how it works, why I find it so good and how you can get involved.
What is a bell target?
It's not, as the name suggests, a target in the shape of a bell.
It is essentially a circular steel plate with a hole in the middle. The exact diameter of the circle varies between targets I believe, but the important things are that the hole in the middle should be 3/8ths of an inch wide (9.525mm) and that the target rings radiating out from that hole are spaced at 1 inch intervals (counting from the centre) - like the picture on the right.
The plate is usually painted with a thick white oil-based paint that doesn't dry particularly quickly. This is so that, when hit, a mark is left in the paint by the impacting pellet.
Behind the plate is a mechanism that, when triggered, rings a bell inside the target box. The usual way of triggering this mechanism is to fire a pellet through the hole in the middle.
Resetting the bell position is either automatic (for posh new targets) or done by pulling a reset cord.
So, what do you need to do?
Basically, you just need to shoot a pellet through the hole, from a standing position, 6 yards away from the target. The sport is usually done with .177 calibre air rifles, which fire ,177 calibre pellets - 4.5mm. So there's not a lot of wiggle room!
Exact scoring is different depending on the rules being played, but as an example, in the league that I shoot in you score 5.5 if you shoot clean through the hole (i.e. you don't leave a mark on the plate) or 5.0 if you get the pellet through the hole but it leaves a small mark on the outer edge.
Scoring then goes to 4.5 if you leave enough of a mark that more than half of the pellet's diameter is showing but is still within the next ring - and then 4.0 and below for each ring after that.
In our league, each shooter has seven shots, making a maximum score of 38.5. If a shooter scores 5 or above for all seven shots (but doesn't score the maximum) he/she is said to have scored a "possible."
What do you use to shoot?
As mentioned above, we use .177 calibre air rifles. There are a huge variety of rifles in use, some shooters still use traditional spring-powered air rifles, some use pneumatic air rifles that require the shooter to "pump up" a charge of air prior to each shot, and some (including myself) use "pre-charged" air rifles, that have a cylinder of compressed air (usually up to around 200 bar!) attached.
This is my rifle, a Feinwerkbau Model 700. I've had this gun for a good 10 years now, and it's still just as accurate as it was the day I bought it:
Apart from the gun itself, there are also a lot of additional items of equipment that can be used.
The most obvious is a shooting jacket. Not all shooters use these, but most do as there are significant benefits to using them. A shooting jacket is a very rigid garment worn as a jacket (clue's in the name!) that helps keep your upper body still when aiming. They come in a huge range of colours and sizes, and can be eyewateringly expensive (much like the rifles and pretty much everything else associated with the sport, to be honest!)
I'm still using a second-hand jacket that I purchased from another member of my team back when I first started in 2005. Natty threads, eh?
You can also get dedicated shooting trousers (which again, are very rigid and help to keep the lower half of your body solid and still) and shooting boots - which are also rigid, but crucially have elongated and completely flat soles so that you are not able to wobble from side to side as much on your feet.
I don't use shooting trousers (although I do wear normal trousers, I don't shoot in my pants*) and although I don't have shooting boots, I do wear a pair of thick-soled "work boots" which I find achieve much the same effect.
Why do you enjoy it?
A number of reasons. Firstly, it's very challenging both physically and mentally. I'd like to think I'm pretty good at it, although my performance has been a bit lax the last couple of seasons, and you never really stop learning new techniques.
It is accessible to everyone, and inclusive too. Woman, man, pensioner, youngster, teenager or child, able-bodied or disabled - it doesn't matter, you can come and have a go and see if it's right for you.
There's a great sense of "community" too. Shooting on the whole has received a lot of flak and negative media attention in recent years, thanks to tragedies like Dunblane in 1996 and Hungerford in 1987, and of course the seemingly never-ending spate of mass shootings over in the US. Shooting as a sport, however, is very rarely well represented in the media, despite it's excellent (some would say impeccable) safety record. It's not a great spectator sport, and the general negative view of shooting means that we're all used to dealing with the stigma, yet shooters are, for the most part, some of the friendliest people I've ever had the pleasure to meet.
We're always eager to introduce new people to what is unfortunately something of a dying sport too.
My team mates, and those on the teams that we shoot against, are all a great laugh. My team, Telepost, has a long standing "rivalry" with another team, The Breidden - who, I'm sad to report, often completely trounce us in matches, yet there's never any ill feeling and we can all have a laugh together - even if sometimes we are a little jealous of their apparent ability - we're half-expecting them to have a go blindfolded one of these days.
Where can I find out more?
Information is a bit sketchy on the Internet, as it's not a hugely known sport. Nevertheless, there is a great resource for anyone interested in learning more about the sport - www.belltarget.com. It's even where I took the image of the target at the top of this page from.