Fleetie wrote:

Indeed. I read it in an anthology of his short stories in my early teens
(growing up in Rochester, Medway Handyman!).

In the last year or so, I looked it up in Wikipedia, and IIRC, it said
that actually, Asimov ended up doing a series of Thiotimoline stories,
not just the original, most famous one.

Also, related, remember the "Time Pussies"? ISTR one end of them was
now, and the other some time next week. They tried to freeze them
as quickly as possible after they died (they kept doing that for some
reason I forget; I read these stories over 25 years ago), and it ended
up saying something like they froze the last remaining one so rapidly,
that it was still warm!

reaches for bookshelf... decides a little quote is "fair use" ... and
you've already given away the punchline...

"That's just it, leetle feller", he said heavily. "We did it /too/
doggoned fast. The time pussy didn't keep because we froze the hot
water so darned fast that /the ice was still warm/!"

Published under the name "George E Dale", and written the morning before
Pearl Harbor. So it says in the notes in "The Early Asimov" I have on
my lap.

Andy

John Rumm may or may not have intoned:
Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 15:23:53 +0100, Cynic wrote:

At night I find the on/off flickering of LED brake lights
particularly
annoying
I have never noticed such an effect. Are you sure it is not that the
driver has a light pressure on the brake pedal? Any brake light will
flicker under that condition.

The flicker annoys me as well along with the abrupt on/off edge as
well. A filament lamp takes time to heat up and cool down, which is
easier on the eye at night. It can't be beyond the wit of man to
build such a fade up/down into the LED PSU.

While this would be nice for indicators, the "instant on" is actually
one of the safety benefits of LED break lights... at 30mph, you can
easily gain over a cars length in extra breaking distance as a result of
the faster response.

At 30mph, a car will travel approximately 5ft in the time it takes for
an incandescent bulb to reach near-as-damnit full working output (90%).

Unfortunately, my attempts to determine how quickly an LED attains
decent brightness (I know it's very swift) ended when google threw this
page at me:

http://www.thefrisky.com/post/246-fl...ght-up-merkin/

--
Cheers!
Ade.

Andy Champ wrote:
Fleetie wrote:

Indeed. I read it in an anthology of his short stories in my early teens
(growing up in Rochester, Medway Handyman!).

In the last year or so, I looked it up in Wikipedia, and IIRC, it said
that actually, Asimov ended up doing a series of Thiotimoline stories,
not just the original, most famous one.

Also, related, remember the "Time Pussies"? ISTR one end of them was
now, and the other some time next week. They tried to freeze them
as quickly as possible after they died (they kept doing that for some
reason I forget; I read these stories over 25 years ago), and it ended
up saying something like they froze the last remaining one so rapidly,
that it was still warm!

reaches for bookshelf... decides a little quote is "fair use" ... and
you've already given away the punchline...

"That's just it, leetle feller", he said heavily. "We did it /too/
doggoned fast. The time pussy didn't keep because we froze the hot
water so darned fast that /the ice was still warm/!"

Published under the name "George E Dale", and written the morning before
Pearl Harbor. So it says in the notes in "The Early Asimov" I have on
my lap.

Andy
-+

Nice one, Andy.

Jeez, not read those words for must be just over 25 years!

I am sure that is the anthology my Dad had, that I read. It had some
text before each story. ISTR a major figure in the early years, who
was mentioned a lot in those introductory pieces, was someone called
L. Sprague De Camp? His agent or something? Or an editor?


Martin

The Medway Handyman wrote:
Fleetie wrote:
The Medway Handyman wrote:
Pedt" "\"@ @\" wrote:
In message , at
20:10:36 on Tue, 1 Sep 2009, The Medway Handyman
wibbled
PeterC wrote:
On Mon, 31 Aug 2009 14:24:36 +0100, Tim Jackson wrote:
Can you not get fold-up suitcases?
Oh yes, same place as dehydrated water.
What was that fictional substance Issac Asimov described in a short
story that was so soluable it started to dissolve before water was
added?
Thiotimoline.

It was published in Astounding Science Fiction in 1948 with the
title "The Endochronic Properties of Resublimated Thiotimoline"
Thank you.
Indeed. I read it in an anthology of his short stories in my early
teens (growing up in Rochester, Medway Handyman!).

And you escaped?

Yeah, in 1989, for uni in Salford, but my Mum still lives in the house I
was born in and grew up in for my first 18 years.


Martin

Fleetie wrote:
Andy Champ wrote:
Fleetie wrote:

Indeed. I read it in an anthology of his short stories in my early
teens (growing up in Rochester, Medway Handyman!).

In the last year or so, I looked it up in Wikipedia, and IIRC, it
said that actually, Asimov ended up doing a series of Thiotimoline
stories, not just the original, most famous one.

Also, related, remember the "Time Pussies"? ISTR one end of them was
now, and the other some time next week. They tried to freeze them
as quickly as possible after they died (they kept doing that for
some reason I forget; I read these stories over 25 years ago), and
it ended up saying something like they froze the last remaining one
so rapidly, that it was still warm!

reaches for bookshelf... decides a little quote is "fair use" ... and
you've already given away the punchline...

"That's just it, leetle feller", he said heavily. "We did it /too/
doggoned fast. The time pussy didn't keep because we froze the hot
water so darned fast that /the ice was still warm/!"

Published under the name "George E Dale", and written the morning
before Pearl Harbor. So it says in the notes in "The Early Asimov"
I have on my lap.

Andy
-+

Nice one, Andy.

Jeez, not read those words for must be just over 25 years!

I am sure that is the anthology my Dad had, that I read. It had some
text before each story. ISTR a major figure in the early years, who
was mentioned a lot in those introductory pieces, was someone called
L. Sprague De Camp? His agent or something? Or an editor?


Martin

An author and associate of Asimov:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L._Sprague_de_Camp

Jeff wrote:
"Fleetie" wrote in message
...
I read in a newspaper on Sunday or Monday that sale of the above would
be illegal in the UK after the coming Tuesday.

So I stocked up on some 40W SES bulbs for my lava lamp in Sainsbury's
last night.

But is this true? There are plenty of applications for incandescent
bulbs that are not simply designed for being the main light sources in
rooms.


I believe that it is only 100W bulbs and frosted pearl bulbs of other
wattages that will be banned.

Jeff



:-(

I like my 100W lightbulb. My eyes strain with anything less, need a
really bright light I do, and fluorescent lights give me headaches.

In message , Simon Dean
writes

I like my 100W lightbulb. My eyes strain with anything less,

There's no such thing as eyestrain.

--
James Follett.
Http://www.pbase.com/jamesfollett
updated to include 'Wings' air and vehicle show pictures at
Dunsfold.
http://www.jamesfollett.dswilliams.co.uk

On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 14:28:45 +0100, Cynic wrote:

On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 09:31:47 +0000 (UTC),
(Andrew Gabriel) wrote:

By Sep 2012 new technology LED lamps should be in full production

that's just 3 years but I'd like your optimism to be true!

It's a promise the LED lighting industry has broken for every
one of the last 20 years!

We now have some very viable units in mass production at reasonable
prices. I understand your scepticism, but I do not see 3 years as
being overly optimistic. Right now it would be quite possible to
illuminate your entire house (including garden floodlights) with
commercially available LED lighting.

Personally I would fit about 20 or so small flush-fitting 5W LED units
into the ceiling of a medium size room.

Or as many have already found, a single 100W incandescent lamp!

SteveW

"John Rumm" wrote in message
o.uk...
Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 15:23:53 +0100, Cynic wrote:

At night I find the on/off flickering of LED brake lights
particularly annoying

I have never noticed such an effect. Are you sure it is not that the
driver has a light pressure on the brake pedal? Any brake light will
flicker under that condition.

The flicker annoys me as well along with the abrupt on/off edge as
well. A filament lamp takes time to heat up and cool down, which is
easier on the eye at night. It can't be beyond the wit of man to
build such a fade up/down into the LED PSU.

While this would be nice for indicators, the "instant on" is actually one
of the safety benefits of LED break lights... at 30mph, you can easily
gain over a cars length in extra breaking distance as a result of the
faster response.


Slow fade should be easy to do by putting an electrolytic capacitor in
parallel with the LED's, and isolating it from the preceding circuitry
with a diode in series with the supply.

Steve Terry

"james" wrote in message
...
In message , Simon Dean
writes

I like my 100W lightbulb. My eyes strain with anything less,

There's no such thing as eyestrain.

--
James Follett.

Of course there is. It's when your eyes get tired from reading under a dim
light.

Bill

On Thu, 3 Sep 2009 00:09:25 +0100, Steve Walker
wrote:

On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 14:28:45 +0100, Cynic wrote:

On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 09:31:47 +0000 (UTC),
(Andrew Gabriel) wrote:

By Sep 2012 new technology LED lamps should be in full production

that's just 3 years but I'd like your optimism to be true!

It's a promise the LED lighting industry has broken for every
one of the last 20 years!

We now have some very viable units in mass production at reasonable
prices. I understand your scepticism, but I do not see 3 years as
being overly optimistic. Right now it would be quite possible to
illuminate your entire house (including garden floodlights) with
commercially available LED lighting.

Personally I would fit about 20 or so small flush-fitting 5W LED units
into the ceiling of a medium size room.

Or as many have already found, a single 100W incandescent lamp!

I find two CFLs more than adequate and only use about 20W

On 3 Sep 2009 07:26:07 GMT, Huge wrote:

On 2009-09-02, John Rumm wrote:

While this would be nice for indicators, the "instant on" is actually
one of the safety benefits of LED break lights...

What's a "break light"?

It's the one that slowly comes on after the hoot - hit - brake sequence.
--
Peter.
The head of a pin will hold more angels if
it's been flattened with an angel-grinder.

On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 18:03:34 +0100, Cynic wrote:

On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 16:24:55 +0100, bof
wrote:

At night I find the on/off flickering of LED brake lights particularly
annoying

I have never noticed such an effect.

At night move you sight from left to right and you should see the effect
quite clearly, same for the new(ish) flashing orange 'road works' lamps
on motorways, when they're on they are actually flashing.

I'll try it. It may well be an effect that only a low percentage of
people can see. A similar effect is known about DLP projectors. A
small proportion of people see a very annoying fringing effect when
moving their eyes across the screen, whilst the majority of people are
completely unaffected. Putting more sectors on the spinning
colour-wheel increases the colour frame frequency and seems to have
stopped the effect in succeptible people.

I find the same thing when driving over the newer pedestrian crossings
(Puffins) as the red man flickers madly when caught out of the corner of my
eye - personally I think it is okay on a straight road with a simple
crossing, but dangerously distracting when the crossings are on a signal
controlled junction, as the natural reaction is to turn your view towards
the flickering light that has suddenly grabbed your attention. The question
I have is why on earth have they not been designed to be switched at a rate
that is impossible for the human eye to perceive.

SteveW

In message , Steve Walker
writes

I find the same thing when driving over the newer pedestrian crossings
(Puffins) as the red man flickers madly when caught out of the corner of my
eye - personally I think it is okay on a straight road with a simple
crossing, but dangerously distracting when the crossings are on a signal
controlled junction, as the natural reaction is to turn your view towards
the flickering light that has suddenly grabbed your attention.

I notice those flickering too, only noticed it as a pedestrian though,
never as a driver.

--
bof at bof dot me dot uk

On Wed, 02 Sep 2009 10:59:42 +0100, Peter Parry wrote:

On Tue, 1 Sep 2009 23:47:32 +0100, "Roger R"
wrote:


"Peter Parry" wrote in message
. ..
The present legislation is largely as a result of years of enormous
"lobbying" (cf bribery) of EU functionaries by Osram.

As much of our legislation is the result of commercial (and lunatic fringe)
lobbying I quite believe your statement but do you have any actual
references?

It was quite extensively reported in lighting trade magazines a few
years ago and coincided with the development of the "halogen in a
bulb" lamp. Unfortunately my copies of the magazines are about at the
Paleolithic strata of the various magazines stacked in the attic
awaiting time to be read so may be difficult to find. Siemens/Osram
"contributed" extensively to the Ecodesign Directive (2005/32/EC).
http://www.eup4light.net/default.asp?WebpageId=33 has links to a
number of reports looking forward to 2016 when halogen lights are
likely to start being phased out

A similar thing is going on with tyre manufacturer's trying to push the EU
into mandating the use of separate summer and winter tyres when many areas
of the EU don't have enough serious winter weather to warrant this. Where I
would store 15 extra wheels and tyres (18 if it applies to trailers too) is
another matter! Of course once this comes in, expect to have legislation
requiring tyres of more than a couple of years old to be replaced as well
and many people will end up replacing partly worn tyres on a regular basis.

SteveW

In article ,
AlanG writes:
On Thu, 3 Sep 2009 00:09:25 +0100, Steve Walker
wrote:

On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 14:28:45 +0100, Cynic wrote:

On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 09:31:47 +0000 (UTC),
(Andrew Gabriel) wrote:

By Sep 2012 new technology LED lamps should be in full production

that's just 3 years but I'd like your optimism to be true!

It's a promise the LED lighting industry has broken for every
one of the last 20 years!

We now have some very viable units in mass production at reasonable
prices. I understand your scepticism, but I do not see 3 years as
being overly optimistic. Right now it would be quite possible to
illuminate your entire house (including garden floodlights) with
commercially available LED lighting.

Personally I would fit about 20 or so small flush-fitting 5W LED units
into the ceiling of a medium size room.

Or as many have already found, a single 100W incandescent lamp!

I find two CFLs more than adequate and only use about 20W

For those who haven't seen it before, check out
http://www.bigclive.com/hamster.htm

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

Steve Walker posted
A similar thing is going on with tyre manufacturer's trying to push the
EU into mandating the use of separate summer and winter tyres when many
areas of the EU don't have enough serious winter weather to warrant
this. Where I would store 15 extra wheels and tyres (18 if it applies
to trailers too) is another matter! Of course once this comes in,
expect to have legislation requiring tyres of more than a couple of
years old to be replaced as well and many people will end up replacing
partly worn tyres on a regular basis.


And then there's the French with their five yellow jackets per car. It
won't be many years before they're campaigning to have them inflicted on
us too. In revenge I suppose we can insist that they have annual instead
of bi-annual MOTs.

--
Les

On Wed, 02 Sep 2009 17:17:36 +0100, John Rumm wrote:

While this would be nice for indicators, the "instant on" is actually
one of the safety benefits of LED break lights...

Break? I want brake lights to work not break.

at 30mph, you can easily gain over a cars length in extra breaking
distance as a result of the faster response.

I doubt that, the thinking time will still be much longer than the
rise time of a brake lamp. Thinking time that may well be longer due
to the sharp edge causing dazzle, particularly at night. The abrupt
switch is not pleasant and is distracting.

--
Cheers
Dave.

On Thu, 03 Sep 2009 17:05:22 +0100, I waved a wand and this message
magically appears in front of August West:

Frnace

Furnance? teehee, good 'un!

Jaf wrote:
On Thu, 3 Sep 2009 03:57:02 +0100, "Bill Wright"
wrote:

"james" wrote in message
...
In message , Simon Dean
writes
I like my 100W lightbulb. My eyes strain with anything less,
There's no such thing as eyestrain.

--
James Follett.
Of course there is. It's when your eyes get tired from reading under a dim
light.

Bill

This is rare so savour it, but I'm definitely with James on this one,
There is no such thing as eye-strain.

Then what is it that feels like eye strain?

This health related website would suggest that there is eyestrain.

http://www.healthguidance.org/entry/...Eyestrain.html
http://www.ccohs.ca/oshanswers/ergon...g_flicker.html

Why do you think there there is no such thing as eye strain?

In article ,
August West writes:

The entity calling itself Big Les Wade wrote:

And then there's the French with their five yellow jackets per car.

What? I hired a car in Frnace just last month, and there was no such
requirement.

There is such a requirement (IIRC since beginning of this year).
However, I know several french drivers, and given the national
pasttime for ignoring regulations, non have one.

I've actually kept one in my car for last 20 years or so, and
I've put it on when helping out at a couple of accidents in that
period. It's not unknown for someone giving first aid at the
roadside to be hit by passers-by not concentrating on what
they're doing, and a hi-vis reduces that risk.

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

In uk.d-i-y Andrew Gabriel wrote:
In article ,
August West writes:

The entity calling itself Big Les Wade wrote:

And then there's the French with their five yellow jackets per car.

What? I hired a car in Frnace just last month, and there was no such
requirement.

There is such a requirement (IIRC since beginning of this year).
However, I know several french drivers, and given the national
pasttime for ignoring regulations, non have one.

I think the requirement for *a* high-visibility vest has been in force
for quite some time hasn't it? The change this year is a requirement
for more than one of them. .... or have I lost the plot completely?

I've actually kept one in my car for last 20 years or so, and
I've put it on when helping out at a couple of accidents in that
period. It's not unknown for someone giving first aid at the
roadside to be hit by passers-by not concentrating on what
they're doing, and a hi-vis reduces that risk.

Does it?

I'm not trying to say it's not sometimes a good idea but research in
some cases indicates that high visibility clothing doesn't always make
any actual difference.

--
Chris Green

On Wed, 2 Sep 2009 16:25:33 UTC, "Fevric J. Glandules"
wrote:

John Rumm wrote:

While this would be nice for indicators, the "instant on" is actually
one of the safety benefits of LED break lights... at 30mph, you can
easily gain over a cars length in extra breaking distance as a result of
the faster response.

Ah, but you see, *I* am an expert driver whereas *you* are an
incompetent idiot that clearly shouldn't be on the roads.

Don't take it personally, I just thought we could cut out the usual
tedious guff that arises whenever somebody mentions driving on Usenet
and get straight down to the name-calling.

Sorry, you didn't get it quite right. You have to sign yourself
'dennis'.
--
The information contained in this post is copyright the
poster, and specifically may not be published in, or used by
http://www.diybanter.com

Dave Liquorice wrote:

On Wed, 02 Sep 2009 17:17:36 +0100, John Rumm wrote:

at 30mph, you can easily gain over a cars length in extra breaking
distance as a result of the faster response.

I doubt that, the thinking time will still be much longer than the
rise time of a brake lamp.

Thinking time starts *after* the rise time. FWIW, 30 mph is 44 feet per
second. Incandescent rise times are of the order of a tenth of a
second. So your potential stopping distance is of the order of a
cars length. But instead of just guessing, we could do some research.
Oh, no need, somebody already has.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8026456:
"reaction times to the alternative brake lamps were faster than to
the standard incandescent lamp, with the advantage averaging 166 ms
for the LED"

which gives us seven and a bit feet @ 30mph. So "easily a
car's length" applies if the car in question is a Peel P50.

Thinking time that may well be longer due
to the sharp edge causing dazzle, particularly at night.

Fortunately we have research rather than idle speculation
to guide us here. The decrease in reaction time matches
the decrease in rise time of the lamp.

The abrupt switch is not pleasant and is distracting.

Quite right, what you need is some sort of system that makes
a mellow bong sound, coughs slightly and murmurs gently
"excuse me Sir, but the car ahead appears to be slowing down".

FOR ****'S SAKE MAN, IT'S A BRAKE LIGHT, IT'S MEANT TO BE DISTRACTING!

On Thu, 03 Sep 2009 17:43:12 +0100 (BST), Dave Liquorice wrote:

On Wed, 02 Sep 2009 17:17:36 +0100, John Rumm wrote:

While this would be nice for indicators, the "instant on" is actually
one of the safety benefits of LED break lights...

Break? I want brake lights to work not break.

at 30mph, you can easily gain over a cars length in extra breaking
distance as a result of the faster response.

I doubt that, the thinking time will still be much longer than the
rise time of a brake lamp. Thinking time that may well be longer due
to the sharp edge causing dazzle, particularly at night. The abrupt
switch is not pleasant and is distracting.

I thought that the idea was that the thinking time was shorter with LED, as
the sudden off/on transition is more immediately noticeable than the slower
change of an incandescent lamp? But I could be wrong.

SteveW

On Thu, 03 Sep 2009 17:05:22 +0100, August West wrote:

The entity calling itself Big Les Wade wrote:

And then there's the French with their five yellow jackets per car.

What? I hired a car in Frnace just last month, and there was no such
requirement.

The hire companies don't necessarily include them. When I checked a couple
of weeks ago there was a requirement in France for a vest for the driver,
but not for the passengers (just checked again and this is correct from
June 2008, but only enforced from October 2008), but some EU countries
require one each. The French police apparently have a habit of stopping
British cars and fining the drivers if they get out without putting the
vest on first.

I've not quite worked out the point of this, as there is no requirement for
motorcyclists, cyclists or pedestrians to wear such a vest and on a country
road, they are much more vulnerable than a driver at a broken down car with
it's hazard lights flashing and warning triangle out!

SteveW

In article ,
writes:
In uk.d-i-y Andrew Gabriel wrote:
In article ,
August West writes:

The entity calling itself Big Les Wade wrote:

And then there's the French with their five yellow jackets per car.

What? I hired a car in Frnace just last month, and there was no such
requirement.

There is such a requirement (IIRC since beginning of this year).
However, I know several french drivers, and given the national
pasttime for ignoring regulations, non have one.

I think the requirement for *a* high-visibility vest has been in force
for quite some time hasn't it? The change this year is a requirement
for more than one of them. .... or have I lost the plot completely?

Sounds right from what I recall, and some rule about you must put
them on before getting out of the car (so you can't keep them in
the boot, unless you can retrieve them from inside the car).

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

On Thu, 03 Sep 2009 22:34:46 +0100, August West wrote:

The entity calling itself Steve Walker wrote:

On Thu, 03 Sep 2009 17:05:22 +0100, August West wrote:

The entity calling itself Big Les Wade wrote:

And then there's the French with their five yellow jackets per car.

What? I hired a car in Frnace just last month, and there was no such
requirement.

The hire companies don't necessarily include them.

They usually include stuff to ensure that their customers don't break
the law.

It is apparently very common in France to not include them.

Elsewhere hire companies also do not help their customers to stay within
the law, for instance when travelling to Northern Ireland (travelling on
into the Republic) and using a Hertz hire car, we found that they cannot
provide rear facing child seats, only those suitable for older children -
and as the airlines will not allow your own child seat to be carried in the
cabin and recommend that they should not be carried in the hold either (due
to straps and handles being vulnerable, they will not accept any
responsibity for damage), this makes life a little difficult. Maybe other
hire companies are better in this respect, but research was impossible at
the time, as we only had a few hours between finding that a relative had
died, making the bookings and getting on a plane. In the end we chanced the
hold.

SteveW

Andrew Gabriel wrote:
In article ,
August West writes:

The entity calling itself Big Les Wade wrote:

And then there's the French with their five yellow jackets per car.

What? I hired a car in Frnace just last month, and there was no such
requirement.

There is such a requirement (IIRC since beginning of this year).
However, I know several french drivers, and given the national
pasttime for ignoring regulations, non have one.

I've actually kept one in my car for last 20 years or so, and
I've put it on when helping out at a couple of accidents in that
period. It's not unknown for someone giving first aid at the
roadside to be hit by passers-by not concentrating on what
they're doing, and a hi-vis reduces that risk.

Snap. I also keep one in the driver's door pocket for the same reason and
has been used in the same context..

Bob Eager wrote:
On Wed, 2 Sep 2009 16:25:33 UTC, "Fevric J. Glandules"
wrote:

John Rumm wrote:

While this would be nice for indicators, the "instant on" is
actually one of the safety benefits of LED break lights... at
30mph, you can easily gain over a cars length in extra breaking
distance as a result of the faster response.

Ah, but you see, *I* am an expert driver whereas *you* are an
incompetent idiot that clearly shouldn't be on the roads.

Don't take it personally, I just thought we could cut out the usual
tedious guff that arises whenever somebody mentions driving on Usenet
and get straight down to the name-calling.

Sorry, you didn't get it quite right. You have to sign yourself
'dennis'.

Steve Walker wrote:

Elsewhere hire companies also do not help their customers to stay within
the law, for instance when travelling to Northern Ireland (travelling on
into the Republic) and using a Hertz hire car, we found that they cannot
provide rear facing child seats, only those suitable for older children -
and as the airlines will not allow your own child seat to be carried in the
cabin and recommend that they should not be carried in the hold either

When travelling with Fevric Jr., and now Fevrica, we've not had a
problem checking in the car seat base at no extra charge (with Easyjet).
The car seat itself is part of the push-chair arrangement and so goes
into the hold at the gate.

Junior is now two so if he wants to come with us next time he'll
have to find the money to pay for his own seat on the plane from
somewhere.

Fevrica's got another year and a half of freeloading in front of her.

(due to straps and handles being vulnerable, they will not accept any
responsibity for damage), this makes life a little difficult.

Our local airport has a stand where some guys will wrap whatever you
want in umpteen layers of super-strong cling-film for about a fiver.

Bob Eager wrote:
On Wed, 2 Sep 2009 16:25:33 UTC, "Fevric J. Glandules"
wrote:

John Rumm wrote:

While this would be nice for indicators, the "instant on" is
actually one of the safety benefits of LED break lights... at
30mph, you can easily gain over a cars length in extra breaking
distance as a result of the faster response.

Ah, but you see, *I* am an expert driver whereas *you* are an
incompetent idiot that clearly shouldn't be on the roads.

Don't take it personally, I just thought we could cut out the usual
tedious guff that arises whenever somebody mentions driving on Usenet
and get straight down to the name-calling.

Sorry, you didn't get it quite right. You have to sign yourself
'dennis'.

ROFLMAO :-)


--
Dave - The Medway Handyman
www.medwayhandyman.co.uk

On Thu, 3 Sep 2009 22:48:31 +0000 (UTC), Fevric J. Glandules wrote:

Steve Walker wrote:

Elsewhere hire companies also do not help their customers to stay within
the law, for instance when travelling to Northern Ireland (travelling on
into the Republic) and using a Hertz hire car, we found that they cannot
provide rear facing child seats, only those suitable for older children -
and as the airlines will not allow your own child seat to be carried in the
cabin and recommend that they should not be carried in the hold either

When travelling with Fevric Jr., and now Fevrica, we've not had a
problem checking in the car seat base at no extra charge (with Easyjet).
The car seat itself is part of the push-chair arrangement and so goes
into the hold at the gate.

Another of my pet hates: we went to Cyprus a few years ago with our two
young children, flying from Manchester to Paphos we took the double trolley
to the gate and were met with it again at the aircraft steps in Paphos, but
on the return journey, the trolley was removed at the aircraft steps and
only returned to us at Manchester's baggage reclaim - unfortunately this
involved my wife (3 months post c-section and septaceamia and still
somewhat weak) and myself (two very dodgy knees) to carry our cabin baggage
and both children a significant distance and then stand in a very long
queue for passport control before we could get the trolley (at one stage I
was trying to carry the bags and both children as my wife could otherwise
go no further). This despite informing the travel agent and the airline of
our problems in advance and again before boarding - this has since happened
at each return that we have made to Manchester and it appears to be
Manchester's policy to only return trollies via the normal baggage reclaim
(fortunately my knees are a lot better now, but we also have three kids!)
That time we only made it as one of the cabin crew saw our plight and
carried one child for us - he promptly threw up over her uniform! Their
only suggestion was to declare ourselves disabled and book wheelchairs, but
we are not and did not need wheelchairs, simply access to our own trolley,
as has been provided at other airports.

Junior is now two so if he wants to come with us next time he'll
have to find the money to pay for his own seat on the plane from
somewhere.

Fevrica's got another year and a half of freeloading in front of her.

(due to straps and handles being vulnerable, they will not accept any
responsibity for damage), this makes life a little difficult.

Our local airport has a stand where some guys will wrap whatever you
want in umpteen layers of super-strong cling-film for about a fiver.

Useful, but I've not seen anything like that here.

SteveW

In message , Simon Dean
writes
Jaf wrote:
On Thu, 3 Sep 2009 03:57:02 +0100, "Bill Wright"
wrote:

"james" wrote in message
...
In message , Simon Dean
writes
I like my 100W lightbulb. My eyes strain with anything less,
There's no such thing as eyestrain.

-- James Follett.
Of course there is. It's when your eyes get tired from reading under
a dim light.

Bill
This is rare so savour it, but I'm definitely with James on this one,
There is no such thing as eye-strain.

Then what is it that feels like eye strain?

This health related website would suggest that there is eyestrain.

http://www.healthguidance.org/entry/...Eyestrain.html
http://www.ccohs.ca/oshanswers/ergon...g_flicker.html

Why do you think there there is no such thing as eye strain?

For sale: Wall mirror. Only looked in once. JF

"james" wrote in message
...
In message , Simon Dean
writes
Jaf wrote:
On Thu, 3 Sep 2009 03:57:02 +0100, "Bill Wright"
wrote:

"james" wrote in message
...
In message , Simon Dean
writes
snip
Why do you think there there is no such thing as eye strain?

For sale: Wall mirror. Only looked in once. JF


AFAIK it's the muscles around the eyes that get strained
which lead to so called eyestrain headaches, etc

Steve Terry

On Thu, 03 Sep 2009 08:44:29 +0100, PeterC wrote:

On 3 Sep 2009 07:26:07 GMT, Huge wrote:

On 2009-09-02, John Rumm wrote:

While this would be nice for indicators, the "instant on" is actually
one of the safety benefits of LED break lights...

What's a "break light"?

It's the one that slowly comes on after the hoot - hit - brake sequence.

It's what you get if you replace your incadescent car bulbs with
energy-saving CFLs. /thread-convergence

On Thu, 03 Sep 2009 14:48:39 +0100, Steve Walker wrote:
A similar thing is going on with tyre manufacturer's trying to push the EU
into mandating the use of separate summer and winter tyres when many areas
of the EU don't have enough serious winter weather to warrant this. Where I
would store 15 extra wheels and tyres (18 if it applies to trailers too) is
another matter! Of course once this comes in, expect to have legislation
requiring tyres of more than a couple of years old to be replaced as well
and many people will end up replacing partly worn tyres on a regular basis.

Interesting. We get some really harsh winters where I am (several ft of
snow for several months each year) and even then the official
recommendation is just to carry some snow chains in the vehicle "just in
case". Snow tyres *are* good in the right conditions, if you have the
space for them, but it is a faff swapping them for regular tyres and back
when needed.

Maybe it's a big conspiracy to push fuel consumption figures up and hence
raise extra revenue via tax for cash-strapped governments. :-)

In message , Steve Terry
writes

"james" wrote in message
...
In message , Simon Dean
writes
Jaf wrote:
On Thu, 3 Sep 2009 03:57:02 +0100, "Bill Wright"
wrote:

"james" wrote in message
...
In message , Simon Dean
writes
snip
Why do you think there there is no such thing as eye strain?

For sale: Wall mirror. Only looked in once. JF


AFAIK it's the muscles around the eyes that get strained
which lead to so called eyestrain headaches, etc

The muscles which control the eyes' accommodation won't have to do
anything unless the objective's distance varies, and the iris muscles
that control aperture don't do much unless the ambient light levels
change. And even if those muscles do have to work, they hardly use
enough energy to challenge their supply of oxygen.

The brain may get tired by an increased level of concentration but there
is no such thing as 'eye strain'. A camera's lens cap is not provided to
protect it from allowing too many images to pass through it.
--
James Follett.
Http://www.pbase.com/jamesfollett
updated to include 'Wings' air and vehicle show pictures at
Dunsfold.
http://www.jamesfollett.dswilliams.co.uk

On Thu, 3 Sep 2009 20:09:21 +0000 (UTC),
(Andrew Gabriel) wrote:

In article ,
August West writes:

The entity calling itself Big Les Wade wrote:

And then there's the French with their five yellow jackets per car.

What? I hired a car in Frnace just last month, and there was no such
requirement.

There is such a requirement (IIRC since beginning of this year).
However, I know several french drivers, and given the national
pasttime for ignoring regulations, non have one.

In spain glasses wearers have to carry an infinite number of spare
specs.

--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) Due to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
(")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking most articles
posted from there. If you wish your postings to be seen by
everyone you will need use a different method of posting.
[Reply-to address valid until it is spammed.]

On Fri, 04 Sep 2009 10:13:01 +0100, Mark
wrote:


There is such a requirement (IIRC since beginning of this year).
However, I know several french drivers, and given the national
pasttime for ignoring regulations, non have one.

In spain glasses wearers have to carry an infinite number of spare
specs.

An opening for a Specsavers advert if ever I saw one.

Derek