IsaanT

I bought a Dunlopillo latex mattress here one year ago. It even had a Union Jack on it.

I agree - I have an alarm on my watch to remind me to eat a banana at 9pm every night. I follow most of the other advice and am usually asleep in 1-2 minutes.

My point was that expats are guests in Thailand. Thais may choose to flout their own rules, as nationals do in many countries. Expats are not nationals. Nationals are exempt from domestic visa issues, for example.

Why would you intentionally wish to flout the rules in your host country?

The process is simple and works on the FIFO (First In, First Out) principle. For example, if you had £20,000 in your savings account on 31 December 2023 and remitted £10,000 from it to Thailand in 2024, you would have £10,000 of your original 2023 funds left. Even if you added £5,000 to your savings in 2024, e.g. pension, accrued interest, etc., giving you a year-end balance of £15,000 at 31 December 2024, you still only have £10,000 of your original non-assessable 2023 savings.

You are absolutely right but I'm unclear what point you are making. Dick Van Dyke wasn't exactly Nureyev, was he?

Side? On back. Problem solved.

If my arithmetic is correct, he would have been 42 when he filmed this. Whilst commendable, this isn't exceptional for a fit 42-year old.

Just wanted to say how much I like this shot. The composition is dramatic, the focus on the head, legs and left wing has been executed well, the lighting is good and the black background is perfect to contrast against the details of the wings. Well done!

Thanks for the clarification! 🙂

Inspired by all this photography mullarkey, I just wandered into the garden to see if I could find anyting of interest. This was taken on 8x zoom again, and I was at the closest focus (I was literally pulling the phone back and forth until the focus looked right). It's not perfect but it's representative of what is possible.

Great film. They actually flew the plane in the film that they constructed but sadly the professional pilot was killed because it didn't do landings very well. The pilot was Paul Mantz. The story goes that while performing a low-level take-off (aren't all take-offs low-level?) in the Arizona desert, the aircraft struck a small sand dune, breaking apart on impact. The impact was fatal for Paul Mantz. His co-pilot , Bobby Rose, survived but suffered serious injuries. Frank Tallman, Mantz's longtime business partner, completed the remaining flying sequences for the film.

How big is this spider, exactly? 🙂

This is from Norman Parkinson's archive. There are many great photos there but I liked the composition of this one...

Indeed I am. Slightly off topic but I also had a nice 35mm film camera once (I still have it in a box somewhere). It was a Pentax MX. At the time the Pentax ME Super was very popular but I wanted a fully-manual camera. It had a good light meter with half-stop over/under lights and full-stop over/under lights. Naturally, one twizzled the aperture and shutter speeds until the green aperture light lit. This was about 45 years ago and I remember at the time being very aware that the cost of film and developing meant that each shot cost me about 40p. It made me very selective about pressing the shutter. This was great training for composition, focus, light, subject matter, etc., etc., because nobody wants to see duds when they come back from the developers. So, I don't take snaps - I take photos. I'm British, and we used to have a great fashion photographer called Norman Parkinson (1913-1990). He would sometimes be commissioned to do royal portraits, for which he used a plate camera. I remember in an interview he stated that he took two plates to each assignment, just in case something went wrong with the first one. That's the way to do it. p.s. If you're interested (and you obviously are), have a look at NP's archive at https://www.normanparkinson.com/ Very inspiring.

I should point out that my shots are all hand-held - no tripod used. The shutter speed on the most recent one was 1/100th of a second. Here's a photo I took last year when I really wanted to get close in on the detail, which I think is a good representation of what is possible with a standard phone camera. I do like the really narrow depth of field that is possible. Regarding tripods, I seem to recall I was holding the spark plug in one hand, the phone in the other, and had to use the self-timer because I'd run out of hands. Apologies that the subject matter isn't more interesting - no convenient spiders here at this time...

Broadly correct but, strictly speaking, it's six flights because three come in (scheduled times 08:25, 13:15, 19:20) and each one departs half an hour later (08:55, 13:45. 19:50). So, with approximately five hours between each in-and-out flight, they appear to have plenty of time in the day to accommodate other traffic if needed. As for extending the runway, all the flights are internal flights to and from Bangkok so only use small airliners (Airbus A320's currently). These type of aircraft only need 1,500-1,800 metres under normal conditions. I'm sure they could find a better use for the money.

I tried again with my manual app but, unsurprisingly, the minimum focus distance is the same at about 10cm. To achieve this image I used 8x digital zoom. Manual camera apps are still worth investigating for better camera control (ASA, shutter speed, etc.)

I'll have a go with my manual camera app in the morning in natural light. I know I've had good results in the past.

Mobile phones can take close-up photos. This is a plastic cap on a 600ml water bottle, chosen as something we're all familiar with. I concur with what someone else has said that manual camera apps can give a degree of control that the standard manufacturer-supplied app doesn't (because that's not their target audience). However, for this shot indoors under artificial light I used the standard phone app (Pixel 7a, 2x zoom).

It's worth using a built-in charge limiting function. This obviously allows you to leave it on charge overnight without overcharging. All my batteries last at least five years but the strength of a full charge diminishes slowly over time. My current phone is a bit more than two years old and now has 94% of its original capacity.

I support this approach. All rechargeable batteries have a finite number of full charges before they expire. Charging from zero to 100% is one full cycle. On my phone, charging from 30% to 75% uses 0.11 of a cycle - 11% of a full cycle. I use an app called Accubattery which tells me when the battery charge reaches 75% (and repeats on my watch). My phone batteries last a long time.

The global stock markets move in cycles. Cycles are measured over time. It has been a long time since the last significant correction. One is due very soon. Past patterns also tell us that the next correction will be big, and last many years. What will be the catalyst? Time.

Airliners typically have four fuel tanks - one each in the wings, a central tank in the fuselage and perhaps an auxiliary tank. Fuel can be pumped between each tank to help the weight and balance throughout the flight. Unsurprisingly, aircraft have accurate fuel gauges so running out of fuel would be gross negligence. An airliner low on fuel will declare a fuel emergency to its inbound airport, giving it priority over all other inbound traffic. Some airlines have been banned from British airspace because they routinely loaded a marginal amount of fuel on their planes to be able to save money but declared too many low fuel emergencies. Ryanair and Wizz Air have both been investigated for this.

Complete twaddle. The aircraft is compromised, and its fall-back options have been reduced to zero, so how could it be safer? Also, the pilots are trained for all contingencies - and practice them regularly on simulators - so the word 'impossible' here is both irresponsible and disrespectful of their skills.