The latest Investing Matters Podcast with Jean Roche, Co-Manager of Schroder UK Mid Cap Investment Trust has just been released. Listen here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
https://www.instagram.com/p/B1YxWzNhu5i/
sorry if posted already
hope they put a lift in soon ,that's a hell climb to get out
I count 45 then my eyes pop out Myo, but I don't think the pic is from the very bottom of the shaft.
Just a blur after 32 for me Myo , doubled i in size but I can only guess after that ... 40????
I count at least 58
If you take the cylindrical looking bag things in the centre of the picture (forgive my ignorance), It's roughly 6 rings to one of those. Possibly 7? So somewhere in the vicinity of 58 to 65 (Plus any below the picture).
Sorry, that should be 58-67 (Plus any below the picture).
With a light every 5 rings I count 53 - plus the ones you can't see
Verde
So Myo ,how many rings did you make it ???
I made it a bit short of where it needs to be!
Ah scotman I'm glad you found it difficult too.
Scot, surely is too high from where it should be :o)
Waiting for ST2 is clearly taking its toll. I think AIM is a good name for this sector of the FTSE.
Get set, AIM , and that's as far it goes? We need some smoke? Because there is no smoke without ...... a wait!
I know we are FTSE250, but in name only?
Hi Myo Ffc and others β
I went for a different approach β using trigonometry. We have known variables and unknown variables. We know the true measurement of the shaft diameter and by my picture on the screen the scaled version at 18mm. We can assume the photograph was taken from the centre and therefore the radius is 9mm and the perpendicular angle is 90 degrees. We also know that each ring is 1m tall which we may use to see if our answer is feasible. After several attempts at modelling, I have come out with a β headache. Are there any mathematicians out there who can estimate the missing angle to answer the question? Is it in fact possible to do it with mathematics?
Hi molly's.
The angle depends upon the height,which is the variable that we needed in the first place. So it seems we are back to square one.
Sorry molkys.
Predictive text
Myo,
As the SBR parts are arriving in earnest would one not assume the service shaft pre SBR launch depth is complete and ready to take the SBR? That would make sense considering it looks like a rather deep hole now..
Oracle
Hi Christabirdies - Molly here!
Aye, that predictive text is a nuisance. Yes, that is where my head started hurting trying to estimate an angle and reverse the formula to calculate the length but the mind is willing but the brain is weak!
You either need two sides, or two angles, or an angle and one adjacent side to be able to calculate it.
Unfortunately with the image we can't meet any of those criteria
Chrisatbirdies sorry not predictive text - stupidity, re my previous message
That would be a very appropriate assumption OraclePoly4.
I would still however refer you to my post aimed at you a few days ago.
Tread carefully. The walls have ears!
Scotman,
Absolutely and I appreciate your comment and that post from a few days ago. I am but making an assumption and engaging in the conversation.
One things for certain, itβs an impressive looking hole in that picture. Long way down to go yet!
Oracle
DGR clearly a boyscout! I had the same thought. 1st or 2nd class? , measure the height of a tree :O)
Similar triangles.
Brad, patrol leader, Seagull patrol.
Its possible to estimate the height...
-If you take the lowest visible concentric ring in the hole and compare that to the ring at the very top of the whole you can get an idea for the opening angle of the lens used to take the picture. Low ring is 18m - at 1466 pix (using my screens resolution), high ring is 18m - at 184 pix. Therefore the cameras field of view at the top is approximately 143m wide.
- Now half the values to we can use basic trig and you can see that it all depends on how high above the ground the bottom ring in the image is. If the lowest complete ring that we see in the image is 5m above the ground then the tunnel is 39.9m deep..... but if the lowest ring is 10m above the ground then the hole is 79m deep.
Sorry still not helping with the accuracy
"Sorry still not helping with the accuracy".............!
ermm......... lol :)
All the best (blew my mind mate :()
PQ2079
But it did sound like a good idea.........
Verde
Hi PQ.
Yes I thought of trying that method....until I realised they were using a fisheye lens on this camera. These lens's image scales are always radialy nonlinear (eg like Google Streetview shots) and there is severe image scale distortion as you move towards the edge of the shot. This gives the apparent size of the lowest tear ring being some 40% larger than the one above. But from simple trig it is not possible that that ring is that ratio nearer if we assume the camera is at the centre of the shaft (3.875m) from the wall!!
So I went back to keeping it simple. The vent pipe is strapped every 5 segments and there are nine lengths between the straps. covers 45 of the segments, 5 more fully visible below, a 6th part visible. With the wall ~4m away from the camera and the lens fisheye there would be at most 2 more rings below to get to eye level horizontal with the height of the camera. That camera can be assumed to be 2m above te shaft floor.
Total rings comes to 54 in that analysis.....and everyone has now nodded off. Unsurprising, in depth analysis IS usually dull.................but here very necessary at times.
Meanwhile we wait....not long.
GK.