Skip to main content

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Why don't you guys take the time to embed the video into your posts instead of just pasting in the URL. I did that for you, Dan. By saying that, I'm not picking on you, Dan. It seems that everyone is too lazy to bother with this simple yet better way to put videos into posts.

By the way, that is a very interesting clip. It's as realistic as it gets when it comes to what it's like in the cab of a fast-moving steam locomotive. I did that once...

Last edited by Rich Melvin
Rich Melvin posted:

Why don't you guys take the time to embed the video into your posts instead of just pasting in the URL. I did that for you, Dan. By saying that, I'm not picking on you, Dan. It seems that everyone is too lazy to bother with this simple yet better way to put videos into posts.

By the way, that is a very interesting clip. It's as realistic as it gets when it comes to what it's like in the cab of a fast-moving steam locomotive. I did that once...

Rich- no copyright violations to embed the videos? I've been posting links only since I thought it was a no-no to post other's content.

redjimmy1955 posted:

Dan, much thanks for sharing.  Two observations...the first being the fireman smoking a cigarette right behind a hot-as-heck fire, and the cigarette smoke he inhales already is pretty hot; the second being he could have used that heat to melt some s'mores...

The fire is INSIDE the firebox. The inside of a steam locomotive cab really isn't all that hot, unless it is summer time, and VERY hot & humid outside, and you are stopped.

John McEnerney posted:

In terms of links vs imbedding content …. The link uses much less internet bandwidth, so is preferable IMHO

There is absolutely no difference in bandwidth whether the video is played via a link or an embed within a post. It's the same video playing regardless of which method you use.

Same for a potential copyright issue. Whether it is a link or an embed makes no difference. The end result is the same...the video is played.

Rich Melvin posted:

Why don't you guys take the time to embed the video into your posts instead of just pasting in the URL. I did that for you, Dan. By saying that, I'm not picking on you, Dan. It seems that everyone is too lazy to bother with this simple yet better way to put videos into posts.

By the way, that is a very interesting clip. It's as realistic as it gets when it comes to what it's like in the cab of a fast-moving steam locomotive. I did that once...

How do we do that, Rich ?

Fascinating clip! Thank you. My goodness how exciting!

Btw, LIONELSKI, the dust, heated  smoke, and chain smoking would get to the point where the fireman could not be able to exert himself without severe shortness of breath, deoxygenation, and Heart work overloaded. 

People who have had this work/life style will succumb to COPD stage at a time until suffocated  with major organ failure. So, yeah 40 is not unheard of.

still there wasn't much global education about lung disease then and how to possibly prevent it, or rehab it.

 

juniata guy posted:

That clip raised a question in my mind.

Rich and Jack; when y’all were running steam, was using hand signals to communicate between engineer and fireman common? 

Curt

 

Absolutely! Plus, when I fired for Steve Lee on the UP, either 844 or 3985, out of the corner of my right eye, I could see when his had reached up to the throttle, he would pause for about 10 seconds, or so. That was an indication that he was about to make a throttle change, and the Fireman should react accordingly.

When firing the 4449, the Engineer, Doyle McCormack, would always tap the little brass air horn valve handle (it makes a 'pst-pst' air escaping sound), which indicated that a throttle change was coming. That process was developed on the Freedom Train, when the cab would be so full of "dignitaries", that the Fireman couldn't see the Engineer. However, we could see the top of the throttle quadrant, to see whether he was reducing or increasing the throttle.

Last edited by Rich Melvin
Dan Padova posted:
Rich Melvin posted:

Why don't you guys take the time to embed the video into your posts instead of just pasting in the URL. I did that for you, Dan. By saying that, I'm not picking on you, Dan. It seems that everyone is too lazy to bother with this simple yet better way to put videos into posts.

By the way, that is a very interesting clip. It's as realistic as it gets when it comes to what it's like in the cab of a fast-moving steam locomotive. I did that once...

How do we do that, Rich ?

I don't know how to do it either.

If you're on Utube and click the "share" under the video, a url pops up and a highlighted "copy". Click that copy. then come here to your post and click on the little movie clip icon in the bar above. In the box point to the empty source box and right click your mouse. choose paste from that list that pops up.

Pasting your share URL in that box and it will pop up in your post.

 

John McEnerney posted:

In terms of links vs imbedding content …. The link uses much less internet bandwidth, so is preferable IMHO

There is absolutely no difference in bandwidth whether the video is played via a link or an embed within a post. It's the same video playing regardless of which method you use.

Same for a potential copyright issue. Whether it is a link or an embed makes no difference. The end result is the same...the video is played.

Rich Melvin

If at first you don't succeed, don't try sky diving... 

==============================================================================

Rich

With respect, I disagree. If you send a link, the bandwidth consumed is just for the characters used for the link. You can ignore a link. If you embed an image, the bandwidth consumed is for the full image when sent for the first time and for all subsequent copies transmitted. The only time it comes out even is when you traverse the link to see the image.

John McEnerney

 

()
 

Add Reply

Post
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×