On 2007-07-05 08:48:11 +0100, "dennis@home"
said:


"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...

Probly needs a decoke and a shade of ignition advance..that keeps the
valves cooler. Set the gap correctly, and then loosen the distrubutoir and
rotate while idling until it start to slow down, then set it as far
advanced as possible without slowing..a shade of over-rich also helps keep
the valves cool.

Running rich helps the petrochemical smog too.
They all need scraping or at least banning from urban areas along with other
heavy polluters (not CO2) like buses.

I think that buses should be banned, period.

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On 2007-07-05 08:48:11 +0100, "dennis@home"
said:


"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...

Probly needs a decoke and a shade of ignition advance..that keeps the
valves cooler. Set the gap correctly, and then loosen the distrubutoir
and
rotate while idling until it start to slow down, then set it as far
advanced as possible without slowing..a shade of over-rich also helps
keep
the valves cool.

Running rich helps the petrochemical smog too.
They all need scraping or at least banning from urban areas along with
other
heavy polluters (not CO2) like buses.

I think that buses should be banned, period.

How about banning roads and working class as well.

On 2007-07-05 09:30:19 +0100, "Doctor Drivel" said:


"Andy Hall" wrote in message ...
On 2007-07-05 08:48:11 +0100, "dennis@home"
said:


"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...

Probly needs a decoke and a shade of ignition advance..that keeps the
valves cooler. Set the gap correctly, and then loosen the distrubutoir and
rotate while idling until it start to slow down, then set it as far
advanced as possible without slowing..a shade of over-rich also helps keep
the valves cool.

Running rich helps the petrochemical smog too.
They all need scraping or at least banning from urban areas along with other
heavy polluters (not CO2) like buses.

I think that buses should be banned, period.

How about banning roads and working class as well.

Converting railways into roads would make good sense, especially into
major towns and cities. There's no such thing as the working class.

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On 2007-07-05 09:30:19 +0100, "Doctor Drivel" said:


"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On 2007-07-05 08:48:11 +0100, "dennis@home"
said:


"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...

Probly needs a decoke and a shade of ignition advance..that keeps the
valves cooler. Set the gap correctly, and then loosen the distrubutoir
and
rotate while idling until it start to slow down, then set it as far
advanced as possible without slowing..a shade of over-rich also helps
keep
the valves cool.

Running rich helps the petrochemical smog too.
They all need scraping or at least banning from urban areas along with
other
heavy polluters (not CO2) like buses.

I think that buses should be banned, period.

How about banning roads and working class as well.

Converting railways into roads would make good sense, especially into
major towns and cities.

I suppose the working class could build them and get them out of cars.
Disgusting indeed, all these council house dwellers in cars.

There's no such thing as the working class.

Been down the local sink estate? Not many of them go to Eton.

In article ews.net,
Doctor Drivel wrote:
There's no such thing as the working class.

Been down the local sink estate? Not many of them go to Eton.

Or work.

--
*Happiness is seeing your mother-in-law on a milk carton

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ews.net,
Doctor Drivel wrote:
There's no such thing as the working class.

Been down the local sink estate? Not many of them go to Eton.

Or work.

Or have class.

In article ,
Andy Hall wrote:
Converting railways into roads would make good sense, especially into
major towns and cities.

Most railways are far too narrow to 'convert' into roads - the cost would
be horrendous. Would make decent cycle tracks, but I doubt that would
appeal to you. ;-)

--
*The fact that no one understands you doesn't mean you're an artist

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 2007-07-05 10:03:31 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
said:

In article ,
Andy Hall wrote:
Converting railways into roads would make good sense, especially into
major towns and cities.

Most railways are far too narrow to 'convert' into roads - the cost would
be horrendous. Would make decent cycle tracks, but I doubt that would
appeal to you. ;-)

Well I don't know.

I read somewhere that somebody had done the sums for the Paddington
main line (4 tracks essentially) and worked out that with train
occupancy and spacing between trains because of signalling, it would be
possible to substantially increase throughput of people by tarmacing
the route and having car use.

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On 2007-07-05 10:03:31 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
said:

In article ,
Andy Hall wrote:
Converting railways into roads would make good sense, especially into
major towns and cities.

Most railways are far too narrow to 'convert' into roads - the cost would
be horrendous. Would make decent cycle tracks, but I doubt that would
appeal to you. ;-)

Well I don't know.

I read somewhere that somebody had done the sums for the Paddington main
line (4 tracks essentially) and worked out that with train occupancy and
spacing between trains because of signalling, it would be possible to
substantially increase throughput of people by tarmacing the route and
having car use.

Who did that survey? The road transport lobby?

On 2007-07-05 10:24:54 +0100, "Doctor Drivel" said:


"Andy Hall" wrote in message ...
On 2007-07-05 10:03:31 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
said:

In article ,
Andy Hall wrote:
Converting railways into roads would make good sense, especially into
major towns and cities.

Most railways are far too narrow to 'convert' into roads - the cost would
be horrendous. Would make decent cycle tracks, but I doubt that would
appeal to you. ;-)

Well I don't know.

I read somewhere that somebody had done the sums for the Paddington
main line (4 tracks essentially) and worked out that with train
occupancy and spacing between trains because of signalling, it would be
possible to substantially increase throughput of people by tarmacing
the route and having car use.

Who did that survey? The road transport lobby?

Nope. One of the train users groups as part of a complaint to Notwork Rail.

In article ,
Andy Hall wrote:
On 2007-07-05 10:03:31 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
said:

In article ,
Andy Hall wrote:
Converting railways into roads would make good sense, especially into
major towns and cities.

Most railways are far too narrow to 'convert' into roads - the cost
would be horrendous. Would make decent cycle tracks, but I doubt that
would appeal to you. ;-)

Well I don't know.

I read somewhere that somebody had done the sums for the Paddington
main line (4 tracks essentially) and worked out that with train
occupancy and spacing between trains because of signalling, it would be
possible to substantially increase throughput of people by tarmacing
the route and having car use.

And just where do the cars go after Paddington? At least trains tend to go
back from whence they've come pretty promptly.

The problem with cars and cities isn't getting the cars into the city -
but getting them to their destination and parking them.

--
*When the chips are down, the buffalo is empty*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 2007-07-05 10:48:53 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
said:

In article ,
Andy Hall wrote:
On 2007-07-05 10:03:31 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
said:

In article ,
Andy Hall wrote:
Converting railways into roads would make good sense, especially into
major towns and cities.

Most railways are far too narrow to 'convert' into roads - the cost
would be horrendous. Would make decent cycle tracks, but I doubt that
would appeal to you. ;-)

Well I don't know.

I read somewhere that somebody had done the sums for the Paddington
main line (4 tracks essentially) and worked out that with train
occupancy and spacing between trains because of signalling, it would be
possible to substantially increase throughput of people by tarmacing
the route and having car use.

And just where do the cars go after Paddington?

Therein is the challenge

I was just somewhat surprised to read that the trains didn't have a
better throughput of people, not that I'm looking for there to be more
overcrowding. The issue appears to be number of trains per amount of
time able to use the track.


At least trains tend to go
back from whence they've come pretty promptly.

The problem with cars and cities isn't getting the cars into the city -
but getting them to their destination and parking them.

The message
from Andy Hall contains these words:

There's no such thing as the working class.

There is, but only in the sense of the sector of the population that
work for a living or have worked and now subsists on a pension. Below
them are the shirking classes. On the one hand those who get by largely
on benefits on on the other those who get by on inherited wealth. :-)

--
Roger Chapman

On 2007-07-05 10:16:53 +0100, Roger said:

The message
from Andy Hall contains these words:

There's no such thing as the working class.

There is, but only in the sense of the sector of the population that
work for a living or have worked and now subsists on a pension. Below
them are the shirking classes. On the one hand those who get by largely
on benefits on on the other those who get by on inherited wealth. :-)

Same thing - just different benefactors

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On 2007-07-05 10:16:53 +0100, Roger said:

The message
from Andy Hall contains these words:

There's no such thing as the working class.

There is, but only in the sense of the sector of the population that
work for a living or have worked and now subsists on a pension. Below
them are the shirking classes. On the one hand those who get by largely
on benefits on on the other those who get by on inherited wealth. :-)

Same thing - just different benefactors

Not quite. The inherited wealth bunch have connections in corridors of
power. That is why the land issue is suppressed.

On 2007-07-05 11:30:36 +0100, "Doctor Drivel" said:


"Andy Hall" wrote in message ...
On 2007-07-05 10:16:53 +0100, Roger said:

The message
from Andy Hall contains these words:

There's no such thing as the working class.

There is, but only in the sense of the sector of the population that
work for a living or have worked and now subsists on a pension. Below
them are the shirking classes. On the one hand those who get by largely
on benefits on on the other those who get by on inherited wealth. :-)

Same thing - just different benefactors

Not quite. The inherited wealth bunch have connections in corridors of power.

Great, isn't it....


That is why the land issue is suppressed.

That's because it's a non issue.