Donate to Remove ads

Got a credit card? use our Credit Card & Finance Calculators

Thanks to ExFM,ErroneousBee,GSVsowhat,Shelford,Hypster, for Donating to support the site

Are we all going on holiday?

Holiday Ideas & Foreign Travel
vrdiver
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2471
Joined: November 5th, 2016, 2:22 am
Has thanked: 455 times
Been thanked: 864 times

Re: Are we all going on holiday?

#310167

Postby vrdiver » May 20th, 2020, 9:13 am

dealtn wrote:Current infection rates might be very low, perhaps lower than other parts of the world. By the time airports are "open" again that could be much lower still.

If R=0.1 in both England and France, but R=0.5 in Scotland would you think "logically" it would be ok to have an open border between England and Scotland, but not between England and France?

Similarly if R=0.05 in general communities in England but R=2 in care homes how would you decide what is appropriate movement between those 2 communities.

Now I am not trying to be controversial, nor seeking a "discussion" on Covid, there are other places for that, this is "Airport Lounge", but I am trying to establish why some think risks are different to others, and can get quite emotive about it (such as the original post), when making judgements about practical policy responses.

I think the answer lies in your own post. "might be", "perhaps", "if", "you would think", etc.

Given a vacuum of reliable data, people are having to envisage their own scenarios** as to what the likely state of affairs is / will be, and then they are making judgements based on those.

Until such time as we have meaningful facts* and a verified method of assessing the associated risks, speculation is about all that's left.

VRD

*By "meaningful", I don't include the current testing methodology in the UK, where subjects are either already showing symptoms or at least reporting that they have them. A large, randomised sample of the general population would be more helpful, with proper follow-up and analysis to understand the factors around who is at risk and who isn't, and why, and then the policy decisions to deal with reality, accompanied by appropriate actions (whatever they might be).

**I'm not implying that you think the scenarios you describe are the most likely; I assume they are just scenarios for the purpose of discussion.

JohnB
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1433
Joined: January 15th, 2017, 9:20 am
Has thanked: 136 times
Been thanked: 377 times

Re: Are we all going on holiday?

#310168

Postby JohnB » May 20th, 2020, 9:13 am

I wonder if the quarantine rules aim to be a boost to UK tourism. We send more tourist pounds abroad than we receive, so it would shore up one of the worst affected sectors, and there is always the hope that people who try Bognor again will enjoy it enough to forgo Marbella in future, which will help with climate change targets. They can't say this without the airline industry complaining of course.

dealtn
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2831
Joined: November 21st, 2016, 4:26 pm
Has thanked: 78 times
Been thanked: 943 times

Re: Are we all going on holiday?

#310177

Postby dealtn » May 20th, 2020, 9:31 am

vrdiver wrote:
dealtn wrote:Current infection rates might be very low, perhaps lower than other parts of the world. By the time airports are "open" again that could be much lower still.

If R=0.1 in both England and France, but R=0.5 in Scotland would you think "logically" it would be ok to have an open border between England and Scotland, but not between England and France?

Similarly if R=0.05 in general communities in England but R=2 in care homes how would you decide what is appropriate movement between those 2 communities.

Now I am not trying to be controversial, nor seeking a "discussion" on Covid, there are other places for that, this is "Airport Lounge", but I am trying to establish why some think risks are different to others, and can get quite emotive about it (such as the original post), when making judgements about practical policy responses.

I think the answer lies in your own post. "might be", "perhaps", "if", "you would think", etc.

Given a vacuum of reliable data, people are having to envisage their own scenarios** as to what the likely state of affairs is / will be, and then they are making judgements based on those.

Until such time as we have meaningful facts* and a verified method of assessing the associated risks, speculation is about all that's left.

VRD

*By "meaningful", I don't include the current testing methodology in the UK, where subjects are either already showing symptoms or at least reporting that they have them. A large, randomised sample of the general population would be more helpful, with proper follow-up and analysis to understand the factors around who is at risk and who isn't, and why, and then the policy decisions to deal with reality, accompanied by appropriate actions (whatever they might be).

**I'm not implying that you think the scenarios you describe are the most likely; I assume they are just scenarios for the purpose of discussion.


I agree. I was deliberately using "conditional" language as we don't "know" enough now, let alone in the future. Although we would hope we are moving in the right direction with respect to knowledge acquisition.

As a result I am very open for a range of outcomes, based on scientific analysis of the situation, and that appropriate policy will result. Further, whatever policy is introduced, that will not please everyone, but will allow for individuals to decide whether they wish to travel, or not.

What I find strange is that a number of individuals, generally, but on this site specifically, feel an emotive response is appropriate, which can't be based on anything representing better science than available to the decision makers. As such they can dismiss what are, after all only, proposals rather than discuss them.

As someone from a mathematical background, who spent a number of years involved in "tail risk" events and financial modelling, it is interesting to see the practical implementation of statistics/risks/maths in individual behaviour (how people assess risk and change their behaviour, and exhort others to believe they are "rational") when compared to macro-analysis.

Snorvey
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4221
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 12:51 pm
Has thanked: 1963 times
Been thanked: 2271 times

Re: Are we all going on holiday?

#310183

Postby Snorvey » May 20th, 2020, 9:43 am

Dod101 wrote:
Lootman is not behaving or at least he is telling us that he is not going to behave in a responsible way. He seems to be encouraging anarchy. Maybe he and Trump ought to get together.

Dod


It's because of the likes of him that the government has to impose rules that are designed for simpletons*.



*Lootman, whilst I don't agree with your 'screw 'em' statement, I really am just yanking your chain here.

Alaric
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4581
Joined: November 5th, 2016, 9:05 am
Has thanked: 13 times
Been thanked: 946 times

Re: Are we all going on holiday?

#310191

Postby Alaric » May 20th, 2020, 10:01 am

JohnB wrote:I wonder if the quarantine rules aim to be a boost to UK tourism.


They would be destructive to the recovery of those sections of the industry relying heavily on foreign visitors though.

I cannot help thinking that the attitude expressed in some of the more remote parts of Britain, namely go away, we're closed, isn't going to leave a hangover when their tourist boards again try to promote the area as a destination for visitors.

servodude
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2451
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 5:56 am
Has thanked: 701 times
Been thanked: 670 times

Re: Are we all going on holiday?

#310204

Postby servodude » May 20th, 2020, 10:28 am

dealtn wrote:
servodude wrote:R is a gradient
I thought we were talking about the size of the hill
Have fun
-sd


We are talking about transmission, and likely chance of getting the virus I would think.

If I were climbing a hill the chances of me tripping up on my next step are much more correlated with the gradient of my next step, not how high I am, or how far I have climbed. Why do you think differently?


Cute! I'll mix my own metaphors if you don't mind ;)

R is the number of people an in infected person is likely to infect (loosely the rate of change of the number of infected )
It is implied strongly by the ranking of the UK in the deaths per million data posted earlier that it has a relatively high number of infected people (assuming a proportion of those infected succumb)
- putting those two things together it does look like I would be more likely to catch COVID in the UK (where my parents are) than in Australia (where I am)
so i think that the poster who claimed the "UK is a high infection country" can't be far off the mark
- or the NHS is a lot worse than I remember it being

- sd

Dod101
Lemon Half
Posts: 7369
Joined: October 10th, 2017, 11:33 am
Has thanked: 1748 times
Been thanked: 3055 times

Re: Are we all going on holiday?

#310213

Postby Dod101 » May 20th, 2020, 10:52 am

Alaric wrote:
JohnB wrote:I wonder if the quarantine rules aim to be a boost to UK tourism.


They would be destructive to the recovery of those sections of the industry relying heavily on foreign visitors though.

I cannot help thinking that the attitude expressed in some of the more remote parts of Britain, namely go away, we're closed, isn't going to leave a hangover when their tourist boards again try to promote the area as a destination for visitors.


Well in the more remote parts of Scotland (although I do not see Skye as being particularly remote) there has been significant over tourism for the last several years and so it would not be a bad thing. Locals would agree with that viewpoint as well I am sure. So also would the residents of Venice. it is the same problem and lack of access to foreign parts may only make it worse in the UK.

Dod

dealtn
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2831
Joined: November 21st, 2016, 4:26 pm
Has thanked: 78 times
Been thanked: 943 times

Re: Are we all going on holiday?

#310233

Postby dealtn » May 20th, 2020, 12:08 pm

servodude wrote:
dealtn wrote:
servodude wrote:R is a gradient
I thought we were talking about the size of the hill
Have fun
-sd


We are talking about transmission, and likely chance of getting the virus I would think.

If I were climbing a hill the chances of me tripping up on my next step are much more correlated with the gradient of my next step, not how high I am, or how far I have climbed. Why do you think differently?


Cute! I'll mix my own metaphors if you don't mind ;)

R is the number of people an in infected person is likely to infect (loosely the rate of change of the number of infected )
It is implied strongly by the ranking of the UK in the deaths per million data posted earlier that it has a relatively high number of infected people (assuming a proportion of those infected succumb)
- putting those two things together it does look like I would be more likely to catch COVID in the UK (where my parents are) than in Australia (where I am)
so i think that the poster who claimed the "UK is a high infection country" can't be far off the mark
- or the NHS is a lot worse than I remember it being

- sd


Quite possibly.

But again it is looking forward that is important, not backwards, although the past might have some correlation with the future.

There are a lot more poisonous animals in Australia than the UK, but also awareness of them and knowledge of the consequence of mixing with them correspondingly higher too, so I imagine it's not as easy to just loosely make a statement such as wildlife is more dangerous to Australians than Brits, its more nuanced than that.

On the same lines I don't see why broadly similar countries such as UK, France, Italy, Spain... can't have broadly similar arrangements or "bridges" as practical policies at some point in the future. Or, at least I am not dismissive of them in the same emotive way as others using language such as "silly me, all these low infection countries will just open their doors..." for instance.

As it stands it is probably more dangerous for me to be going to North West England than it is to parts of mainland Europe, yet there is no restriction on the former, nor anyone clamouring for such (not that I think either is particularly dangerous given a modicum of common sense).

Lootman
Lemon Half
Posts: 8950
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:58 pm
Has thanked: 84 times
Been thanked: 1592 times

Re: Are we all going on holiday?

#310241

Postby Lootman » May 20th, 2020, 12:28 pm

servodude wrote:35K+ dead people so far in the UK and you need the govt to spell out for you why unfettered importing of viruses is a bad thing?

Unfettered importation of viruses, huh? I feel sure you have lots of evidence for that.

The UK numbers are worse than just about anywhere else. So wherever I go is at a lower risk of catching this bug than staying in the UK.

So by being overseas I actually reduce the probability of spreading the virus, absent any marginal increase in risk in airports and on planes, which I have to believe can be contained if airports are open and flights are happening, which has been the case throughout.

Now, I can understand someone not wanting to travel if they think that travel will be a hassle with lots of extra checks and delays. But I think people will become used to that, just like they became used to all the extra security at airports after 9/11.

We are supposed to be easing restrictions, not adding new ones. The 14 day isolation might have made sense in March. It makes none now, which is why diligent people should use their judgement in determining their degree of compliance.

jackdaww wrote:isnt flying simply a no no ? i understand aircraft air conditioning continuously re cycles the air through the cabin.

The air is recycled but it is also filtered. Adjustments can be made to reduce the amount of particulate matter that is recycled.

There are millions of people still flying worldwide every day. If there was a significant risk then cabin crew would be dropping like flies. I have seen no numbers to indicate that they are.

AF62
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1222
Joined: November 27th, 2016, 8:45 am
Has thanked: 22 times
Been thanked: 345 times

Re: Are we all going on holiday?

#310295

Postby AF62 » May 20th, 2020, 3:08 pm

Dod101 wrote:Well in the more remote parts of Scotland (although I do not see Skye as being particularly remote) there has been significant over tourism for the last several years and so it would not be a bad thing. Locals would agree with that viewpoint as well I am sure. So also would the residents of Venice.


Although their viewpoint likely will depend on whether their earnings comes from tourists. Also overlooked by the locals in their 'tourists bad' view will be the facilities which exist because of tourists but from which they also benefit.

Dod101
Lemon Half
Posts: 7369
Joined: October 10th, 2017, 11:33 am
Has thanked: 1748 times
Been thanked: 3055 times

Re: Are we all going on holiday?

#310315

Postby Dod101 » May 20th, 2020, 4:26 pm

AF62 wrote:
Dod101 wrote:Well in the more remote parts of Scotland (although I do not see Skye as being particularly remote) there has been significant over tourism for the last several years and so it would not be a bad thing. Locals would agree with that viewpoint as well I am sure. So also would the residents of Venice.


Although their viewpoint likely will depend on whether their earnings comes from tourists. Also overlooked by the locals in their 'tourists bad' view will be the facilities which exist because of tourists but from which they also benefit.


I understand that it is an emotive subject but if you have attempted to get say to Skye in the last few years you would know what I mean and I think would agree that there are often in the height of summer far too many tourists, just as I said there are in Venice except from about December to March. Tourists are not bad but too many of them certainly are.

Edinburgh is another example although not this year. I look forward to seeing Edinburgh as it used to be once our Scottish lockdown is over. I can be a tourist and hooray, no Festivals all summer. That is of course disastrous for all the hotels and restaurants but for somebody like me it is wonderful. My daughter was showing me some photos of last Saturday in central Edinburgh, Just like Aberdeen on a flag day as we say in Scotland.

Dod

AF62
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1222
Joined: November 27th, 2016, 8:45 am
Has thanked: 22 times
Been thanked: 345 times

Re: Are we all going on holiday?

#310318

Postby AF62 » May 20th, 2020, 4:38 pm

Dod101 wrote:
AF62 wrote:
Dod101 wrote:Well in the more remote parts of Scotland (although I do not see Skye as being particularly remote) there has been significant over tourism for the last several years and so it would not be a bad thing. Locals would agree with that viewpoint as well I am sure. So also would the residents of Venice.


Although their viewpoint likely will depend on whether their earnings comes from tourists. Also overlooked by the locals in their 'tourists bad' view will be the facilities which exist because of tourists but from which they also benefit.


I understand that it is an emotive subject but if you have attempted to get say to Skye in the last few years you would know what I mean and I think would agree that there are often in the height of summer far too many tourists, just as I said there are in Venice except from about December to March. Tourists are not bad but too many of them certainly are.

Edinburgh is another example although not this year. I look forward to seeing Edinburgh as it used to be once our Scottish lockdown is over. I can be a tourist and hooray, no Festivals all summer. That is of course disastrous for all the hotels and restaurants but for somebody like me it is wonderful. My daughter was showing me some photos of last Saturday in central Edinburgh, Just like Aberdeen on a flag day as we say in Scotland.


That is fair enough, provided those locals who are celebrating the absence of tourists also accept that their relatives and friends may become unemployed or put out of business because of the absence of tourists.

As for places like Venice, what proportion of residents do not receive the benefit of tourist money. I doubt there are many.

servodude
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2451
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 5:56 am
Has thanked: 701 times
Been thanked: 670 times

Re: Are we all going on holiday?

#310471

Postby servodude » May 21st, 2020, 3:59 am

Lootman wrote:So by being overseas I actually reduce the probability of spreading the virus, absent any marginal increase in risk in airports and on planes, which I have to believe can be contained if airports are open and flights are happening, which has been the case throughout.


yes indeed
- once you've been quarantined and confirmed as not infected you will, in places other than the UK be less likely to catch and subsequently re-transmit the disease

going anywhere nice?
It's getting a bit chilly in Australia - but you do get two weeks free accommodation at present
from https://www.health.gov.au/resources/pub ... travellers
What is happening when I arrive in Australia?
You will be transported from the air or sea port to designated accommodation in your city of arrival, where you will be required to isolate for 14 days. The designated accommodation for isolation will be free of charge for travellers. After this precautionary isolation period you can transit domestically and travel home.
You may be required to undergo enhanced health screening on arrival in Australia.


- sd

dspp
Lemon Half
Posts: 6557
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 10:53 am
Has thanked: 5448 times
Been thanked: 1932 times

Re: Are we all going on holiday?

#310478

Postby dspp » May 21st, 2020, 6:45 am

servodude wrote:
Lootman wrote:So by being overseas I actually reduce the probability of spreading the virus, absent any marginal increase in risk in airports and on planes, which I have to believe can be contained if airports are open and flights are happening, which has been the case throughout.


yes indeed
- once you've been quarantined and confirmed as not infected you will, in places other than the UK be less likely to catch and subsequently re-transmit the disease

going anywhere nice?
It's getting a bit chilly in Australia - but you do get two weeks free accommodation at present
from https://www.health.gov.au/resources/pub ... travellers
What is happening when I arrive in Australia?
You will be transported from the air or sea port to designated accommodation in your city of arrival, where you will be required to isolate for 14 days. The designated accommodation for isolation will be free of charge for travellers. After this precautionary isolation period you can transit domestically and travel home.
You may be required to undergo enhanced health screening on arrival in Australia.


- sd


There is nothing stopping anyone leaving the UK. Everywhere in the UK is within about 80-miles of the sea. Once at the sea they can exercise and start swimming. Once beyond the 12-mile limit they are outside UK territorial waters and can go on for as long as they like. Any risk in this mode of transport would be for the individual to evaluate.

regards, dspp

servodude
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2451
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 5:56 am
Has thanked: 701 times
Been thanked: 670 times

Re: Are we all going on holiday?

#310480

Postby servodude » May 21st, 2020, 6:52 am

dspp wrote:
servodude wrote:
Lootman wrote:So by being overseas I actually reduce the probability of spreading the virus, absent any marginal increase in risk in airports and on planes, which I have to believe can be contained if airports are open and flights are happening, which has been the case throughout.


yes indeed
- once you've been quarantined and confirmed as not infected you will, in places other than the UK be less likely to catch and subsequently re-transmit the disease

going anywhere nice?
It's getting a bit chilly in Australia - but you do get two weeks free accommodation at present
from https://www.health.gov.au/resources/pub ... travellers
What is happening when I arrive in Australia?
You will be transported from the air or sea port to designated accommodation in your city of arrival, where you will be required to isolate for 14 days. The designated accommodation for isolation will be free of charge for travellers. After this precautionary isolation period you can transit domestically and travel home.
You may be required to undergo enhanced health screening on arrival in Australia.


- sd


There is nothing stopping anyone leaving the UK. Everywhere in the UK is within about 80-miles of the sea. Once at the sea they can exercise and start swimming. Once beyond the 12-mile limit they are outside UK territorial waters and can go on for as long as they like. Any risk in this mode of transport would be for the individual to evaluate.

regards, dspp


sad to say that if you make it to Australia by that route the quarantine is likely to be longer than 14 days
- Nauru might nice this time of year though? ;)

- sd

Arborbridge
Lemon Half
Posts: 6250
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:33 am
Has thanked: 1447 times
Been thanked: 2288 times

Re: Are we all going on holiday?

#310484

Postby Arborbridge » May 21st, 2020, 7:13 am

Dod101 wrote:
AF62 wrote:
Dod101 wrote:Well in the more remote parts of Scotland (although I do not see Skye as being particularly remote) there has been significant over tourism for the last several years and so it would not be a bad thing. Locals would agree with that viewpoint as well I am sure. So also would the residents of Venice.


Although their viewpoint likely will depend on whether their earnings comes from tourists. Also overlooked by the locals in their 'tourists bad' view will be the facilities which exist because of tourists but from which they also benefit.


I understand that it is an emotive subject but if you have attempted to get say to Skye in the last few years you would know what I mean and I think would agree that there are often in the height of summer far too many tourists, just as I said there are in Venice except from about December to March. Tourists are not bad but too many of them certainly are.


Dod


A bit OT, but Dod, I thought like me, you might be interested in a program available on iPlayer. It's the coverage of a visit made by Richard Dimbleby to the Isle of Skye in 1954 - in black and white (remember that?)
1954 was only about seven years before I first went there, camping and climbing in the Cuillin. Since then, the roads and have been "improved" and tourism become far worse, I imagine. I doubt the midges have become less fierce - funny how they never mention those on the tourist posters ;)
Also a nice glimpse of the old Sligachan Hotel where the "tea room" round the back used to serve alcohol on a Sunday, which wasn't then allowed, and footage of Portree etc.

A treat for old timer who remember being there around that time.

Arb.

Dod101
Lemon Half
Posts: 7369
Joined: October 10th, 2017, 11:33 am
Has thanked: 1748 times
Been thanked: 3055 times

Re: Are we all going on holiday?

#310488

Postby Dod101 » May 21st, 2020, 7:38 am

Arborbridge wrote:
Dod101 wrote:
AF62 wrote:
Although their viewpoint likely will depend on whether their earnings comes from tourists. Also overlooked by the locals in their 'tourists bad' view will be the facilities which exist because of tourists but from which they also benefit.


I understand that it is an emotive subject but if you have attempted to get say to Skye in the last few years you would know what I mean and I think would agree that there are often in the height of summer far too many tourists, just as I said there are in Venice except from about December to March. Tourists are not bad but too many of them certainly are.


Dod


A bit OT, but Dod, I thought like me, you might be interested in a program available on iPlayer. It's the coverage of a visit made by Richard Dimbleby to the Isle of Skye in 1954 - in black and white (remember that?)
1954 was only about seven years before I first went there, camping and climbing in the Cuillin. Since then, the roads and have been "improved" and tourism become far worse, I imagine. I doubt the midges have become less fierce - funny how they never mention those on the tourist posters ;)
Also a nice glimpse of the old Sligachan Hotel where the "tea room" round the back used to serve alcohol on a Sunday, which wasn't then allowed, and footage of Portree etc.

A treat for old timer who remember being there around that time.

Arb.


I will be delighted to take a look at Richard Dimbleby thanks. Actually my comments are not OT (as in over the top) The police were stopping people attempting to cross the bridge at Kyle of Lochalsh when I drove past (in a long snake of cars and camper vans) a couple of years ago in June. There is not enough accommodation and no where to park at the hot spots. Camper vans, (they seem the transport of choice) add little to the economy as the occupants do not use many of the facilities anyway, even if they can find any that are available.

By 1958/9 I was walking in the Cairngorms and Torridon but never got to Skye for some reason.

Dod

Arborbridge
Lemon Half
Posts: 6250
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:33 am
Has thanked: 1447 times
Been thanked: 2288 times

Re: Are we all going on holiday?

#310514

Postby Arborbridge » May 21st, 2020, 8:39 am

Dod101 wrote:
I will be delighted to take a look at Richard Dimbleby thanks. Actually my comments are not OT (as in over the top) The police were stopping people attempting to cross the bridge at Kyle of Lochalsh when I drove past (in a long snake of cars and camper vans) a couple of years ago in June. There is not enough accommodation and no where to park at the hot spots. Camper vans, (they seem the transport of choice) add little to the economy as the occupants do not use many of the facilities anyway, even if they can find any that are available.

By 1958/9 I was walking in the Cairngorms and Torridon but never got to Skye for some reason.

Dod


Just to clarify, I thought my mention of the iPlayer program might be OT, not your previous post.

I've never seen the bridge which was so controversial at the time. I go back to when the ferries were the only means of crossing and it was said: "God owns the World and all that it contains, except the Western Isles, and they are all Macbraynes." The bridge must have been a massive hit to some.
Do people still get accosted, as I heard one young man challenged: "Ye nae a Campbell are ye?".

Haven't been to Scotland for years, and I rather miss it.

Arb.

Dod101
Lemon Half
Posts: 7369
Joined: October 10th, 2017, 11:33 am
Has thanked: 1748 times
Been thanked: 3055 times

Re: Are we all going on holiday?

#310526

Postby Dod101 » May 21st, 2020, 9:12 am

If it opens up then Scotland is likely to be very popular this year. No quarantine and just a few midges. I usually go to a wonderful place in Poolewe twice a year but obviously have not been this year so far. Would like to think I might be able to get there before the end of the year.

The Skye Bridge has been a mixed blessing I think most would agree. The ferries provided a natural restriction on numbers, and to revert to the earlier exchange, it is not that they do not want tourists, but like many other places just not too many of them. Camper vans are wonderful for places like Canada which has vast space but not so good in Scotland (at least I any number)

I have not heard the Campbell comment for many years.

Dod

PinkDalek
Lemon Half
Posts: 5931
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:12 pm
Has thanked: 1543 times
Been thanked: 1698 times

Re: Are we all going on holiday?

#310529

Postby PinkDalek » May 21st, 2020, 9:20 am

... and here it is:

In 1954 Richard Dimbleby and a BBC film crew visited Skye to record an episode About Britain, giving viewers across the United Kingdom an insight into life on the island. ...

17 days left to watch

46 minutes


https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01pkp6k

Chaidh am prògram seo a chraoladh an toiseach san t-Sultain 1954.

There's a part in colour introduction! ;-)


Return to “Airport Lounge”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests