Miscellaneous desk
< December 28	<< Nov \| December \| Jan >>	December 30 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Miscellaneous Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

December 29[edit]

RAH-66 Comanche Locations Today?[edit]

The page for the Boeing-Sikorsky_RAH-66_Comanche states that "the prototypes have been placed on display." Unfortunately, there is no citation for this fact, and it doesn't say where they are. I tried searching the web and couldn't find either of the prototypes anywhere. Some sources indicated the American Helicopter Museum or the US Army Aviation Museum, but neither of these places list them as being on display. Can you help me locate these? Sorca1701 (talk) 04:23, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is partially answered on the article talk page.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 12:43, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

NYPD Pension Fund special license plate?[edit]

I heard a rumor that the New York Police Department has these special license plate holders that they give to you if you donate a certain large amount to their retirement pension fund. Cars with these special license plates will be treated more leniently by NYPD officers and will be less likely to be pulled over. Is this true? Acceptable (talk) 05:18, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tangentially related is The_Thin_Blue_Line_(emblem)#Controversy Hot Stop (Talk) 05:24, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

White House logos[edit]

We have two SVG logos of the White House immage:

Note that the only real difference is in the decorative shape above the window immediately to the right of the front door. In one it is triangular, and the other it is rounded. Does anyone know which is correct? Since this is a logo and not a coat of arms, I'm assuming there is a single definitive edition. 76.117.247.55 (talk) 06:23, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I presume that it's the one with the rounded shape above the window, as that is how it is in the building itself - that is also the emblem taken from the more recent publication. Mikenorton (talk) 12:33, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's hard to tell from whitehouse.gov, but the one with the rounded window top is more likely to be correct, as you say. It's also the more recently uploaded one. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:08, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

According to images of the north front of the White House [1], both portico window pediments are semicircular. The pediments on the wings alternate between triangular and semicircular (a classical motif). Acroterion (talk) 04:31, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In classical or neoclassical architecture, bet on symmetry. —Tamfang (talk) 21:38, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

English property law[edit]

I'm trying to find the definition of an "undersettle" in English property law, possibly relating to the operation of the manorial system of land holding. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.122.129.187 (talk) 18:43, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The OED has an entry for undersettle, which reads:

Obs. exc. Hist.
 One who occupies a house (or part of one) held by another; a subtenant.

It has example from 1232 to 1781. It does not say that the word is specifically legal, or give a legal definition. --ColinFine (talk) 23:02, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I couldn't find it in Coke upon Littleton. It may not be a legal term. Zoonoses (talk) 06:52, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe the term is related to "under occupation" - and the problems this causes with the supply of accommodation (see here) and the amount spent by local authorities on housing benefit. Astronaut (talk) 17:32, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

train network[edit]

trying to arrange some events across the UK, looking at the quickest and easiest places to get to in different areas, and I had some ideas, but looking over the train network, it seems travel by rail, which would be the most common choice for attendees, is awkward between some nearby towns and very cheap and easy over other routes, it seems a whole complex mess.

so, I am wondering, is there any way of finding out the places that would be easiest and cheapest to travel to on trains? ideally some sort of website that lets me see the time and cost of travel to a particular location from all surrounding areas, but anything that could make this task easer would be very helpful

thank you,

86.15.83.223 (talk) 18:54, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you want a venue that is easiest to get to from everywhere by train, some of us here will have knowledge/opinions. London is the easiest, that is for sure. Birmingham is probably next. Coventry is not bad. Manchester, Leeds and Sheffield are possibilities, especially if some people are coming from Scotland. Edinburgh and Glasgow are fine for the Scots, quite difficult for people from the South Coast. Cardiff is best for people from Wales, and Bristol also good from Wales and not too bad from various directions. Itsmejudith (talk) 19:07, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

well ok, what I'm finding the most tricky part is places north of london, in or around bedfordshire, buckinghamshire or essex, seeing as pretty much all train lines there go north to south and I don't know anyone living there personally. 86.15.83.223 (talk) 19:16, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

and if you're collecting, being from the south myself I've learnt that farnborough, hampshire and guildford, surrey are great for access all around, though they are only a short walk apart 86.15.83.223 (talk) 19:18, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Northampton or Milton Keynes for the Home Counties I think. --TammyMoet (talk) 22:50, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I thought that, but there's no train route there from most of hertfordshire or further east without going into london and back, which costs a lot and takes hours. 86.15.83.223 (talk) 00:57, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Have you tried www.nationalrail.co.uk ? Failing that, you can go to your nearest station and ask there. They will be happy to help. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 03:29, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(I don't think you will find the staff at a local station helpful at all for this sort of question.) As you have discovered, the major services radiate from London, the routes that cut across are generally not so good. As a general rule, the bigger the city, the better connected it will be. Try Googling "uk national rail map" and look at the nodes. Another city that is quite well connected is Leicester.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:18, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Look again at access to Milton Keynes or Northampton because neither should be bad from Hertfordshire or East Anglia.If some people do have to go into London and out again, it may not take them too long. Itsmejudith (talk) 20:56, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm looking at the train map on google earth, and checking against nationalrail.co.uk, to travel for example the nine miles from stevenage to luton, you would have to get a train into london, travel to another station there, and get a train back out, a round trip of two hours for at the cheapest I can find £28, I think it'd be best to draw a line down there and assume not many people are going to cross it. looking at oxford and cambridge now instead. 86.15.83.223 (talk) 21:20, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There are some weird artifacts in the transport system, many of which you are starting to notice. Another is that travel between Oxford and Cambridge is strangely awkward. 86.129.14.69 (talk) 00:59, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that most rail routes radiate out from London, and it's awkward to get from one route to another; to the north of London the nearest east-west route is Peterborough / Leicester / Nuneaton. For your example Stevenage to Luton journey, I'd suggest taking the bus - there are apparently 4 or 5 buses an hour which take about 50 minutes between the main bus stations in each town (see http://www.transportdirect.info/ ). -- Arwel Parry (talk) 22:30, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

that's true, but if someone was travelling a longer distance either side of those towns, the bus would be less convenient for them 86.15.83.223 (talk) 22:54, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I wouldn't worry too much about rail travel for your events since people are more likely to drive to them. Accordingly, have you looked at coach travel for your attendees? If people really want to attend, they will get there regardless of means. Rail travel is becoming increasingly too expensive for most people. (I speak as someone who has organised events around England for over 30 years. If you gave me some ideas as to the actual needs of the event on my talk page I'd be happy to bounce ideas around with you.) --TammyMoet (talk) 09:37, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's worth considering rail travel. After all, one doesn't have to shell out a four- or five-figure sum for a car, pass a test, or get special insurance in order to get on a train. Passenger numbers keep rising despite the apparently poor value for money offered by our current rail system. AlexTiefling (talk) 09:44, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The trick might be to think about previous events - I'm certain you aren't the first person to organise an event in the UK which expects people to arrive by train! Try thinking of similar organisations to your own and research where they held recent events. For example, off the top of my head I thought of the National Union of Students, who hold an annual conference - most recently in Sheffield. It's quite likely that a high proportion of the student attendees arrived by public transport. This might help you narrow down a shortlist, and once you have that you could try using an Excel spreadsheet and a 'goal seek' function to see which option gives the minimum cost (or travel time, or number of changes) for the highest number of your attendees. - Cucumber Mike (talk) 11:10, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]