Talk:Rutherford Appleton Laboratory

Hi,

I would like to know what is the color of RAL9016 & RAL7016.

thanks ram

Projects

I started to add some of the projects which RAL has things to do with, starting with the one I have connections with. Once there are a few more then they can be organised. SteveTraylen 21:20, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would dispute the fact that RAL was "controversially" chosen as a site for Diamond, i believe the superior road ,air, rail and sea connections were one thing that helped make it the best choice as well as the proximity to Harwell laboratory, Rutherford laboratory and companies such as Oxford instruments etc etc.

I agree, "controversially" implies that it the decision was some how unfair or biased. SteveTraylen 18:32, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. It is a matter of public record that the decision was controversial. Parliamentary records, both at the time and since testify to this fact. Even the minister who made the decision, Lord Sainsbury, is on record as later regretting the decision. Transport links were not cited as affecting the decision. Even if they were, they are superior at Daresbury which has closer proximity than Harwell to the motorway network, high speed rail, international airports and seaports.

An alternative reason for the decision was suggested by Lord Evans of Parkside in the House, "My Lords, will my noble friend confirm that the synchrotron project at Daresbury has operated highly successfully for more than 20 years? Is he aware that the Government's decision to resite the project at Oxford has been regarded in the North West as virtually a government vote of no confidence in the scientific future of the region? Can the Minister explain why the Government allowed themselves to be dictated to and virtually blackmailed by the Wellcome Trust? Seven of the eight trustees of that trust are professors at Oxford, Cambridge and London Universities and can hardly be regarded as independent, unbiased advisers. " —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.110.88.213 (talk) 19:44, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Where are the runways?

The article states the lab was built on a former airbase, but looking at the photo (which is excellent, BTW), I can't see any trace of them. Are they "behind" the camera? Also, does anyone know what the large berm in the lower right is for? Is the large donut at the top the Light Source? And is the linear area beside the road on the left ("below" the donut) some sort of linac? Maury 18:00, 14 September 2006 (UTC).[reply]

The road to the left of the Diamond Light Source (the large doughnut) is always refered to as the runway by people who work on site so I assume that is where it was but I don't know for sure. The large berm is known as the mound and is man made and is the sheilding above the target station for ISIS. I'm not quite sure which linear feature you are talking about but there is no visable linac at RAL that I am aware of. There did used be a linac at RAL but it was close in the 1970s I think and was underground. Long before my time.SteveTraylen 18:19, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! The linear feature is admitedly difficult to see. It appears to run along "the runway" on it's right hand side (as seen from the camera). One end is just to the left and down from the Diamond, starting in a single-story white building. The other end is about where the four roads meet in a larger green building. Admittedly it could just be a big parking lot. Maury 22:37, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The linear feature you describe is just a car park I'm afraid. I park my car there every day, or rather I did until I left RAL last week to go and work at CERN. SteveTraylen 22:37, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I know I'm reviving a conversation that's nearly two years old, but... to correct SteveTraylen's mistake, the 'mound' is just that, a mound. The small grassy circular mound, nearly directly in line with Diamond, is ISIS' synchrotron, and the target (TS1) is housed in the large building in front of that. TS2 isn't shown in that picture, which was taken before it was built. _Talk Islander 19:35, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rutherford High Energy Laboratory

The linac transferred from AERE was 50 MeV (not 600 as stated) and was used as the injector for the 7 GeV Nimrod synchrotron. The 600 MeV linac that reference [2] refers to was a proposal but was never built.The 50 MeV linac was subsequently upgraded to 70 MeV and became the injector for the ISIS synchrotron. 80.189.114.221 (talk) 18:42, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Programmes" section seems outdated.

The section on programmes RAL provides stuff for no longer looks up-to-date. MINOS has finished (although MINOS+ is still collecting data). T2K is also extant, but the bulk of the RAL work seems to be complete (RAL has major responsibilities on the near detector DAQ, and has a strong presence in the oscillation results, but it's no longer a major RAL project in the same way it once was). I think there should be a mention of RAL contributions to near and mid-future facilities like LBNF/DUNE and Hyper-K (and SBN if there's a lot of that going on at RAL - I'd assume so but I'm not sure). I imagine there are similar issues with the space science section, but I know nothing at all about this.

On a slightly different note, I don't like the phrasing (eg "the T2K") - the article should probably say "T2K" or "The T2K experiment". 92.28.72.174 (talk) 20:59, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Rutherford Appleton Laboratory. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:49, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Rutherford Appleton Laboratory. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081219072104/http://hepwww.rl.ac.uk/ to http://hepwww.rl.ac.uk/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:25, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]