Archie's Archery Depot

More Info On Nock Red:

There is a reason why I don't read gay literature, It's the same reason I don't watch gay cinema or "Queer as Folk". The message is all the same: You can only find true love, happiness and sex, if you're young, extremely good-looking and have a great body. If you are older (i.e., over 35), you are to be pitied. The only way you will get someone to share your life is with money and LOTS of it. But Robert Rodi's "Kept Boy" looked like it might be different, so I decided give it the benefit of the doubt. I was SO wrong.

The only twist in this story is that the pretty boys start out as rivals, vying for the attentions (i.e., money, money, and money) of a wealthy, over-fifty, theatrical producer Farleigh Nock in Chicago. Dennis is his 'kept boy'. When Nock hires a new pool boy, the much younger Jasper, Dennis goes on a narcissistic warpath spending copious amounts of Nock's cash to keep his good standing.

Rodi makes it very clear that the only reason the novel's sugar-daddy is being fought over by two young men is because he is loaded. I lived most of my adult life in Dallas and came out there in 1991. I have seen first hand how wealth can cover many flaws but when it comes to age, there is only so much happiness that money can buy.

In the final pages, Dennis realizes that his love for Farleigh is only "companionly" and "pitying". Dennis and Jasper finally fall in love with each other. When they break the news to Farleigh, he expresses his happiness for them, then promptly drops dead. Dennis is the sole heir of Farliegh's vast wealth. As SNL's Church Lady would say, "How conv-E-nient!"

The book does have its funny moments, though. For example, the houseboy Christos is a former boy-toy of Farleigh and, although a very reminiscent of the houseboy from "La Cage aux Folles, delivers some of the best lines in the book. Another instance, a trip to visit a 100 year-old grandmother ends in hysterical violence. The old woman herself is hilarious. Other than this, humor comes only in the form of snarky, bitchy comments.

The point of Rodi's book is if you're young and beautiful, find yourself a much older sugar-daddy and use your sexiness to worm your way into his bed and his will. You won't have to endure it long, because if your sugar-daddy has any sense, he will die before he gets any older and leave you all of his money.

SR Leader class - 12PSB Test Bench - CP-60 Current Probe manufacturer

Background The basis of the Leader originated from a 1944 review of the Southern Railway's steam locomotive fleet, resulting in a Southern Railway design brief which called for a high-powered locomotive requiring little maintenance to replace the ageing fleet of M7 class tank engines.

The brief also stipulated that the locomotive would be used on both passenger and freight trains, requiring high route availability. Bulleid proposed an initial design based on his SR Q1 class locomotive, which had proved easy to maintain in service. As the proposal progressed, Bulleid saw that certain tasks required with conventional steam locomotives could be eliminated by adopting some of the features of the contemporary Southern electric locomotives. However, one of the subsequent designs of a 0-4-4-0 wheel arrangement had an unacceptably high axle-loading of 20 tons (20.4 tonnes), which increased the risk of damaging the Southern Railway's track. By developing the proposal further, Bulleid settled for a 0-6-6-0 design of bogied locomotive, which spread the weight more evenly over the rails and reduced the axle-loading. Design Works diagram of the Leader A series of initial ideas were presented to the Southern Railway management by Bulleid that incorporated double-ended running, giving the locomotive driver maximum visibility in either direction without a boiler or tender obscuring his view.

The need for a turntable to turn the locomotive around was therefore eliminated, although the initial designs were rejected by the operating department because of problems with welding technique. The accepted design included two 0-6-0 steam bogies with weight-saving sleeve valves and chains to couple the driving axles, as used on Bulleid's Pacifics. The boiler was offset to provide space for a communication corridor, allowing the driver to access both cabs without leaving the locomotive, an arrangement which led to later problems. The firebox, near the centre of the locomotive, was fed by the fireman from a third cab, linked to both driving cabs by the communication corridor. The entire ensemble was placed on a common frame, and thus often referred to as an 0-6-6-0 tank engine). The Leader prototype was constructed at Brighton railway works, and work began in 1946. An initial order of five locomotives was placed straight from the drawing board in 1946, and a further 31 were ordered in 1947, although with nationalisation looming this was merely a gesture. The latter order was cancelled after Southern Railway was taken into public ownership, to allow trials to be carried out on the prototype. Bogie and cylinder design Each of the two bogies had three cylinders, with the driving wheels connected by chains enclosed in an oil-bath, based upon Bulleid's chain-driven valve gear on his Pacific locomotives. The valve gear used the unusual sleeve valve arrangement that was also tested on the ex-LB&SCR H1 class Hartland Point in parallel with the construction of the first Leader locomotive.

The Leader was the first steam locomotive to use a form of sleeve valve since Cecil Paget's locomotive of 1908, and the concurrent testing of the principle on Hartland Point hints at the rushed nature of the locomotive's conception. The locomotive sat on the unusual Bulleid-Firth-Brown wheels, which were lighter, yet stronger, than the spoked equivalent. The use of sleeve valves and oil baths to lubricate the moving parts of the engine units was inspired by contemporary internal combustion engine practice. This included oscillating gear that gave a 25-degree axial movement to the sleeves, allowing even lubrication of the moving parts. However, this resulted in an over-complicated mechanism that was difficult to maintain, perpetuating the seizures it was meant to eradicate. This feature was removed from both bogies of the prototype as the trials progressed. Another innovative feature of the steam bogie assembly was the ability to interchange them when faults occurred, an easy operation for maintenance staff when compared to the complexities of overhauling a regular steam locomotive's motion. The three cylinders of each bogie were cast in mono-block format, each surrounded by two annular inlet steam chests and a single large outlet steam chest. These had the added function of keeping the cylinder heated by hot steam to maintain the temperature and pressure of steam entering the cylinders. However, these castings were difficult to machine accurately. The steam-sealing arrangements needed for this system were also complex, with each of the six cylinders and valve sleeves requiring 24 sealing rings. Boiler, firebox, smokebox and casing design The Leader boiler and firebox, showing the offset firehole door position (dotted). Also visible are two of the four thermic siphons The boiler was the culmination of lessons learned with the Pacifics, and was a prolific steam-raiser. All Leader boilers were constructed at Eastleigh, and proved to be the least problematic area of the entire design.

The boiler pressure was set at (280 psi (1.93 MPa)), and each was fitted with four thermic siphons from beneath the firebox to pre-heat water entering the boiler, used to great effect on Bulleid's Merchant Navy, West Country and Battle of Britain classes. The Leader had a "dry lining" firebox; it was not surrounded on top and sides by a "jacket" of water as in normal practice. It was constructed of welded steel, and used firebricks instead of water for insulation, which was a novel but troublesome solution to dry-lining the firebox. These had the effect of reducing the grate area from 47 square feet (4.4 m2) to 25.5 square feet (2.37 m2), and concentrated the fire in a small area. The firehole door was offset to the left of the boiler backhead, and was to provide difficulty for the fireman to add coal to the fire. The firebox was not initially equipped with a firebrick arch, although one was retro-fitted during the summer of 1950. The arch was problematic as it promoted the tendency for flames to enter the cab at high outputs, a situation made worse by the narrowing of the firebox area. The smokebox had an inherent problem in maintaining a constant vacuum. This was a result of another Bulleid labour-saving innovation, a sliding hatch controlled from the front cab that enabled ash to be cleaned out through a chute onto the track when on the move. The problem lay with ash manifesting itself around the edges of the slide, allowing air to leak into the smokebox, therefore reducing the overall efficiency of the locomotive. The fierce blast from the exhaust also meant that ash and embers were ejected into the atmosphere, creating a potential lineside fire hazard.

For ease of maintenance the boiler, firebox, smokebox and tender were encased in steel sheeting that resembled a modern diesel locomotive, a major departure from traditional steam locomotive design, allowing the engine to be cleaned using a carriage-washing plant. The tender was designed to carry 4 tons (4.06 tonnes) of coal and 4,000 imperial gallons (18,000 l; 4,800 US gal) of water, and was covered by a tarpaulin to prevent water ingress into the fireman's cab. Entry into the locomotive was by way of ladders leading up to sliding doors, although due to the bogie design, the climb into the fireman's cab necessitated clambering over the oilbath casing. Construction Construction of the first five Leader locomotives began at the Southern Railway's Brighton railway works in July 1947. British Railways inherited the Leader project upon nationalisation in 1948, which was far enough advanced to continue constructing the prototype, as Bulleid was still Chief Mechanical Engineer of the newly formed Southern Region of British Railways. Although work on the other four locomotives stalled, the prototype Leader emerged from Brighton as locomotive No. 36001 in June 1949. The other four members of the initial order made by the Southern Railway, Nos. 360025, were at varying stages of construction by the end of the development period. No. 36002 was almost complete, No. 36003 was without its outer casing, and Nos. 360045 were little more than sets of frames, although most of their major components had been constructed at Eastleigh and Brighton and were stored ready for fitting. With no prospect of further money being allocated by the Railway Executive for their completion, the unfinished locomotives were put into store at various depots around the former Southern Railway network pending a decision on their future. Operational details No. 36001 was immediately put into service trials using empty passenger carriage stock in the south-east of England. The official trial records kept at Brighton works reported varying degrees of success and failure on the runs undertaken. However, the results of the trials as reported to British Railways headquarters at Marylebone were "conspicuous by the absence of praise" for the strengths of the Leader, namely the boiler, braking system and total adhesion provided by the two bogies. Several theories have been put forward regarding this state of affairs, the most plausible being that the more conservative members of the railway workforce at Brighton and the Railway Executive felt that the Leader was too revolutionary, and were keen to maintain the status quo. Performance of No. 36001 The Leader being lifted onto its power bogies at Brighton, May 1949. The casing allowed the locomotive to be put through a carriage-washing plant Following trials that lasted over a year, No. 36001 was shown to have several flaws, including heavy coal and water consumption, mechanical unreliability, untenable working conditions for both fireman and driver, loss of steam through the cylinder rings and uneven weight distribution on the bogies.

After renewing the cylinder assembly, it was tested around Brighton and Eastleigh using an LNER Dynamometer car, where good running was experienced at high costs in fuel and effort on the part of the fireman. The Leader was tested against the performance of a U class control locomotive, and indicated that the brake release was too slow in service for use on tight schedules despite the brake application being noted as the best used on a Bulleid design. Throughout No. 36001's trials the firebrick lining provided a constant problem by continually collapsing into the fire. The firebricks were then replaced with cast iron substitutes that melted in the intense heat of the firebox, which were in turn replaced by thicker 9 inches (23 cm) firebricks. Some of the firemen allotted to the Leader complained about cramped conditions in the centre cab of the locomotive, a situation made worse by flames entering the cab from the firebox at high outputs. It was an enclosed space that was constantly hot, and the single fireman's entrance door on the side of the locomotive was left open during travel to promote ventilation. The door into the fireman's cab also attracted criticism, as it would have been blocked in the event of the locomotive overturning on that side, preventing the fireman's escape, so that members of the railway trade union ASLEF threatened to stop their crews from operating the Leader. The offset boiler and tender caused the locomotive's centre of gravity to be shifted to one side. Experiments had to be undertaken to balance the locomotive by filling the linking corridor with large quantities of scrap metal, replaced in a re-design by a raised floor covering weighted material. These modifications resulted in the engine exceeding the total weight limit of 150 tons (151 tonnes), severely limiting the design's route availability during testing. A related problem was that despite being a tall locomotive, at 12 feet 11 inches (3.94 m), the cab ceilings were relatively low.

The cab at the smokebox end of the locomotive suffered from the same excessive heat as did the fireman's cab. To circumvent this problem the locomotive was used in reverse, as the rear cab was next to the water tank and coal chute, and therefore away from the hot gases circulating inside the smokebox. Despite its problems the locomotive displayed outstanding steaming characteristics and total traction from the two power bogies on its trial runs. When properly fired the Leader was capable of keeping up with the schedules, even running ahead on occasions. However, operational difficulties when stopping for water tended to lose any time advantages gained, and affected the published performance figures. Despite hauling test trains over the Central Section of the former Southern Railway, the Leader prototype was never used on a revenue-earning service because of the risk of failure of the valve gear, and the adverse publicity this would cause for British Railways. Livery and numbering Southern Railway When the project was under the auspices of the Southern Railway, No. 36001 would have been numbered CC101. Bulleid advocated a continental style of locomotive nomenclature, based upon his experiences at the French branch of Westinghouse Electric before the First World War, and those of his tenure in the rail operating department during that conflict. The Southern Railway number followed an adaptation of the UIC classification system where "C" refers to the number of driving axles in this case three on each bogie. Since the design has six driving axles, the numbering would have been CC101C105 with the initial batch, the final number being the locomotive identifier. British Railways Operational livery was ex-works photographic grey with red and white lining. The British Railways "Cycling Lion" crest was also used, though after the works photograph this was painted over without explanation. Numbering was the British Railways standard system, in the 36001 series. If the class had gone into full production, the locomotives would have been painted in British Railways mixed traffic/freight black livery with red, grey and cream lining. 36001 was initially painted in this livery, but this preceded the official works photograph and was subsequently repainted in photographic grey livery. Operational assessment Despite the high expectations attached to the Leader, it was not the motive power revolution that Bulleid intended it to be. No part of the Leader design was perpetuated on the British Railways Standard class locomotives by Robert Riddles, nor did it find favour internationally, with the Garratt articulated locomotives providing a similar function for less maintenance.

The whole concept was quietly dropped in 1951 after Bulleid left British Railways to become Chief Mechanical Engineer of Cras Iompair ireann (where he produced CI No. CC1, a peat-burning locomotive to a similar design), and all five were scrapped. The culmination of the project was a 178,865 5s 0d (4,074,550.40 in today's money, converted at the 1950 rate) bill for the taxpayer, though when the press reported the story as late as 1953, 500,000 (11,390,000.00) was claimed to have been wasted on the project. R. G. Jarvis, who was placed in charge of the project after Bulleid's departure, insisted that the locomotive required an entire re-design to solve the problems of the original concept. No members of the Leader class survived the 1950s, and only the numberplates of No. 36001 and No. 36002 are known to exist. The numberplate for No. 36001 is located in the National Railway Museum, although a locomotive builder's plate intended for the locomotive, but never fitted in service, was sold at auction in 2008. The Leader was a bold attempt at pushing back the boundaries of contemporary steam locomotive design, and if successful, would have prolonged the life of steam on Britain's Railways. References Notes ^ a b c Bulleid (1977), p. 143 ^ a b c Bulleid (1977), p. 135 ^ a b c d e Day-Lewis (1964), The Leader locomotive ^ a b Bulleid (1977), p. 129 ^ Bulleid (1977), p. 136 ^ a b c d e f g h i j Haresnape (1979), Section 4 ^ Robertson (2007), p. 116 ^ a b c Harris (1994), p. 115 ^ Robertson (2007), p. 42 ^ a b Robertson (2007), p. 46 ^ a b c Tuplin (1965), p. 413 ^ a b Robertson (2007), p. 47 ^ a b c Tuplin, p. 414 ^ Robertson (2007), p. 77 ^ Robertson (2007), p. 25 ^ a b c d e Harris (1994), p. 116 ^ Bulleid (1977), p. 145 ^ a b Harris (1994), p. 117 ^ Tuplin (1965), p. 415 ^ a b Robertson (2007), p. 95 ^ Bulleid (1977), p. 125 ^ Bulleid (1977), p. 140 ^ Bulleid (1977), p. 141 ^ Cox (1966), p. 18 ^ Cox (1966), p. 19 ^ Robertson (2007), p. 151 ^ Bulleid (1977), p. 151 ^ Cox (1966), p. 16 ^ Robertson (2007), p. 87 ^ Robertson (2007), p. 158 ^ Robertson (2007), p. 156 ^ Robertson (2007), p. 150 ^ Burridge (1975), p. 60 ^ Robertson (2007), p. 37 ^ Sunday Dispatch, 18 January 1953 ^ Robertson (2007), p. 110 ^ Great Central Railwayana Auctions (2007) Auction Catalogue: Great Central Railwayana, 6 October 2007, Retrieved February 17, 2009. Sold for 1050, see Lot 24. Bibliography Bulleid, H. A. V.: Bulleid of the Southern (Hinckley: Ian Allan Publishing, 1977) ISBN 071100689X Burridge, Frank: Nameplates of the Big Four (Oxford Publishing Company: Oxford, 1975) ISBN 0902888439 Cox, E. S.: Locomotive Panorama (London: Ian Allan, 196566), Vol. 2 Day-Lewis, S.: Bulleid, Last Giant of Steam (London: George Allen & Unwin, 1964) Haresnape, Brian: Bulleid Locomotives: A Pictorial History (London: Ian Allan, 1979) Harris, Michael: "Firing Bulleid's 'Leader'" (Steam Days: 66, 1994) Robertson, Kevin: The Leader Project: Fiasco or Triumph? (Oxford: Oxford Publishing Company, 2007) ISBN 0860936066 Sunday Dispatch, 18 January 1953 Tuplin, W.A.: "The ill-fated 'Leader'" (Railway World: 26, 1965) Further reading Ian Allan ABC of British Railways Locomotives, 1950 edition Carter, Ernest F.: Unusual Locomotives (Frederick Muller Ltd., 1960) Nock, O.S.: Southern Steam (Newton Abbot: David and Charles, 1972) Robertson, Kevin: Leader and Southern Experimental Steam (Stroud: Alan Sutton Publishing, 1990) Tufnell, Robert: Prototype Locomotives (Newton Abbot: David and Charles, 1985) External links Trains portal "Leader" class locomotive v  d  e Principal Locomotives of the Southern Railway Urie: H15 class  N15 class  S15 class Maunsell: K and K1 classes  L1 class  Lord Nelson class  N class  N1 class  N15 (King Arthur) class  N15X class  Q class  U class  U1 class  V "Schools" class  W class  Z class Bulleid: Leader class  Merchant Navy class  Q1 class  USA class  West Country and Battle of Britain classes Non-steam locomotives: Diesel shunters 1 to 3  Diesel shunters 15211 to 15236  Mainline diesels 10201 to 10203  Electrics CC1 to CC3 British Railways steam locomotives  GWR locomotives  LMS locomotives  LNER locomotives  Southern Railway locomotives Categories: Southern Railway locomotives | 0-6-6-0 locomotives | Articulated locomotives | Experimental locomotives | Railway locomotives introduced in 1949Hidden categories: Unusual parameters of Infobox locomotive template | Featured articles

About the Author

I am an expert from repairtestequipments.com, while we provides the quality product, such as 12PSB Test Bench , CP-60 Current Probe manufacturer, rail repair tools,and more.

fight or not fight?

Ok today this dude hit me in the eye to see if i can cry lol... hes totaly week as hell and all he did was make it red round my eye...Im pissed as hell but i didnt want to hurt th kid... hes like only 13.. and im 15... im so close to just beating the crap out of him...LITERALY but i got a lot of tests to do and i havnt finished them... i was thinking that tomrow im going to taunt him and right befor he tries to hit me im going to nock the air out of him and beat his face in to show him how it realy feals. and as whene he gets up ill just repeat it.
I dont realy like to fight but whene he hit me i had so much anger in me i felt like if i started hiting him to hard i wouldnt stop, and im sure i could realy realy hurt him.. like perminent pain.

He just hit you for nothing? Out of the blue? You didn't provoke him? You're older and bigger than him for a start and it sounds like he has a bruised ego anyway. Try talking to him instead of making fun of him. He sounds like a very angry little boy and there could be underlying issues why he's like this.

Two Fires Destroy Homes Early Friday
Fire tore through a Caldwell home early Friday morning, spreading so fast two people were lucky to get out alive.

Thanks for visiting!