On Mon, 26 Dec 2011 12:21:50 -0000 Doctor Drivel wrote :
The Prius is also brilliant to drive. - seamless, no step up or down gear
changes. Passengers love it.

That is certainly true - drives like a mini limousine. Which is why it would
not appeal to BMW M3 drivers.

--
Tony Bryer, Greentram: 'Software to build on',
Melbourne, Australia www.greentram.com

On Mon, 26 Dec 2011 14:15:43 +0000 Andy Champ wrote :
what do you mean by "drove it like a limousine" on the motorway? From
what I've seen Limos go up the motorway at the same speed as all the
other traffic - not quite fast enough to interest Plod.

There's not a lot of acceleration going on that would be different
between Limo and sports car.

What I meant by "drove it like a limousine" is reading the road and
anticipating what's ahead. You see more than a few who will see traffic
slowing ahead or a red light and drive hard up to it, then brake hard, or
who wait until the last possible moment before jumping across to a
motorway exit. And of course driving any car in this way significantly
improves economy.

--
Tony Bryer, Greentram: 'Software to build on',
Melbourne, Australia www.greentram.com

On 24/12/2011 12:32, tony sayer wrote:
It's quite telling that when rolling stock needs to be moved around for
maintenance work or refurbishment, they often find it cheaper to move it
by road rather than rail.

SteveW


Sure your not referring to that on preserved railways?..

Definitely not. I'm talking about current stock.

SteveW

On 26/12/2011 11:45, Doctor Drivel wrote:

"John Williamson" wrote in message
...
Doctor Drivel wrote:

"ARWadsworth" wrote in message
...
Doctor Drivel wrote:

And it left the miners able to hold the country to ransom. They
brought down the previous Conservative government,

They never. Heath couldn't handle industry properly. Lack of
investment, poor management, etc, etc. Miners were poorly paid
working in appalling conditions.

Again..
"It was NOT subsidised. Coal created economic growth. Coal provided
the energy to create electricity. The economic growth was cycled
back to get the energy. Understand that."

Coal mining in the UK was not profitable.

Idiot, again...
"It was NOT subsidised. Coal created economic growth. Coal provided
the energy to create electricity. The economic growth was cycled back
to get the energy. Understand that."

It cost more to dig the coal out than it could be sold for.

Not another one. If London Underground was run on ticket sales only half
would be closed down and tickets would be £20 a go. London, economically
would decline rapidly.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=47Jb-rlXJYg

Harrison's points include:-

* Passengers pay twice
* Trains pay for themselves
* Trains more than covers their costs
* Governments can pay for railways without taxing their citizens
* Investment in railways yields huge profits
* The problem is the way governments pay for the capital they invest in
the tracks and rolling stock
* Payback is like winning the lottery
* The Jubilee line raised productivity in the London economy. Every one
pound invested provided a payback of 4 pounds
* That is what railways do, make the economy more efficient
* Who pocketed the fat profit? Not the shareholders, not the taxpayers,
wages were not raised
* Profits cascaded into the profits of the land owners
* Taxes destroy jobs

.. and he's right, you know.

The same applies to economic growth creating energy - COAL

The comparison is false. If I want to travel into London, I must use
whatever transport infrastructure is there and it must either charge the
true (even if expensive) cost or be subsidised at a cost to the UK (or
local) taxpayer. If I want to run a power station on coal, I will not
use very expensive coal, so either the UK taxpayer must pay again or I
will import cheaper coal! The economic benefit of subsidising coal is
therefore NOT the benefits and economic growth that coal/power brings,
it is only the number of mineworkers and support workers that the
industry supports. This means that the required subsidies can rapidly
outweigh the benefits.

SteveW

In message , Doctor Drivel
writes

"hugh" ] wrote in message
...
In message , Doctor Drivel
writes

"hugh" ] wrote in message
news
Plus the NMU under Scargill insisted that all pits were kept open
whether economic or not.

They were "all" economic as they crated economic growth which is not
qualified by the selling price of the coal, as London Tube's prices
are not qualified by the ticket price. Take away the Tube and London
collapses. Run on ticket sales only and most stations will close
down charging £12 per trip.

I see economics is your weak spot.

And I see it's a fantasy world for you.

You do not a clue about economics. What appears on the surface as
"uneconomic" is not. DO NOT read the Daily Mail
No it's the underground coal that is uneconomic. Opencast is profitable.
--
hugh

In article ,
Tony Bryer wrote:
On Mon, 26 Dec 2011 12:21:50 -0000 Doctor Drivel wrote :
The Prius is also brilliant to drive. - seamless, no step up or down
gear changes. Passengers love it.

That is certainly true - drives like a mini limousine.

Wonder what you mean by limousine? One of those stretched Hummer things?

Which is why it would not appeal to BMW M3 drivers.

Or anyone who enjoys driving.

--
*Snowmen fall from Heaven unassembled*

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

Doctor Drivel wrote:

Passengers love it.

Thinking of you and a passenger in a prius triggers this image:

http://www.dionic.net/_images/drivelprius.png

--
Tim Watts

In article ,
Doctor Drivel wrote:

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Tony Bryer wrote:
On Mon, 26 Dec 2011 12:21:50 -0000 Doctor Drivel wrote :
The Prius is also brilliant to drive. - seamless, no step up or down
gear changes. Passengers love it.

That is certainly true - drives like a mini limousine.

Wonder what you mean by limousine?

It seamlessly glide you silly old coot!

Right - so nothing like a Pious?

Those who compare it to a limousine must be used to Lada.

--
*Real women don't have hot flashes, they have power surges.

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

In article ,
Doctor Drivel wrote:
There's not a lot of acceleration going on that would be different
between Limo and sports car.

The Prius does not hang about.

Name any other car of its physical size and cost which is slower in any
way. 0-10 mph doesn't count.

--
*If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? *

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

In article ,
Doctor Drivel wrote:
Most tests of the Prius have shown relatively poor mpg on long runs.

They have not.

Give some figures to back this up and not just the ones you've plucked
from the air. In reality, it consumes more fuel on a long run than other
comparative sized cars.

The engine is Atkinson cycle too, so beats a regular petrol engine at low
RPM.

Cobblers.

It is an Atkinson cycle.

You're right there. But of course missed out an Atkinson cycle engine
being horribly inefficient outside its narrow power band. Ever wondered
why even Toyota don't use Atkinson cycle on their other designs of
hybrids?
Silly question to one who only reads adverts.

--
*If at first you don't succeed, then skydiving definitely isn't for you *

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

In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:
In article , Doctor Drivel
wrote:

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article , Tony Bryer
wrote:
On Mon, 26 Dec 2011 12:21:50 -0000 Doctor Drivel wrote :
The Prius is also brilliant to drive. - seamless, no step up or
down gear changes. Passengers love it.

That is certainly true - drives like a mini limousine.

Wonder what you mean by limousine?

It seamlessly glide you silly old coot!

Right - so nothing like a Pious?

Those who compare it to a limousine must be used to Lada.

I thought a limousine was a car where there was room for the (grown-up)back
seat passenger to sit upright.

--
From KT24

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.16

On Mon, 26 Dec 2011 11:29:27 -0000, Doctor Drivel
wrote:



Like constant speed in cars with complex tractor engines, from Heathrow
to Sussex. But average types of driving can get 75mpg in a Prius. And
eons more in a Chevy Volt.


Eons are VW not Chevy or Toyota...

--
Rod

In article ,
charles wrote:
Right - so nothing like a Pious?

Those who compare it to a limousine must be used to Lada.

I thought a limousine was a car where there was room for the
(grown-up)back seat passenger to sit upright.

I thought the original definition was a vehicle where the passengers and
driver were separated by a division. As in a London taxi, etc. But it
seems not. It's just a large luxurious car. The very last thing you'd call
a Pious.

--
*The man who fell into an upholstery machine is fully recovered*

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

On Tue, 27 Dec 2011 08:02:53 -0000, Doctor Drivel
wrote:


"Steve Firth" wrote in message
...
funkyoldcortina wrote:
[snip]

That's not true for the Prius. You still get better mpg than a
conventional petrol car on motorway trips, as once you're up to speed
you
can ease off the pedal and the electric motor does most of the work to
keep you at-speed, requiring much lower power output from the engine.

That's compete ********. The Prius only has one small advantage on the
motorway. Some energy lost when braking can be recovered. That's it. The
electric motor cannot suck energy from thin air.

Most tests of the Prius have shown relatively poor mpg on long runs.

They have not.

The engine is Atkinson cycle too, so beats a regular petrol engine at
low RPM.

Cobblers.

It is an Atkinson cycle.

Lost of oil, but not sweet.

--
Rod

polygonum wrote:

Lost of oil, but not sweet.


Is that Shakespeare?

In article , Dave Plowman (News)
scribeth thus
In article ,
tony sayer wrote:
Unions are a very good idea in any well run industry. Allowing management
a convenient way to negotiate etc with their workforce. As all the
successful companies know only too well.



Well a very few places where I've worked in the past they didn't have
Unions as they were very well run companies. And if a company is well
run there're shouldn't be a need for a Union thats just a needed
response to the **** poor management that sometimes still prevails...

How do you explain to each and every member of staff in a large company
how any pay rise etc is arrived at? By letter?

Well these were quite young small companies...

Also, a member of staff with a grievance or whatever is likely being
happier talking it over with a colleague who is a member of that union
rather than a manager. The rep can then put across the point - likely
without the heat of the previous scenario.


Never knew anyone who had one. The pay was good conditions good, staff
treated like human beings. Management were as often as not likely to be
buying rounds in the pub after work. People wanted to work there and
enjoyed it..


Of course none of that would be needed with a perfectly run company. But
being run by humans, most unlikely.


Course I never worked for the likes of BT or a large nationalised firm
that I could imagine wouldn't be anywhere near the same;(.

I did have a uncle who worked in a large factory up North, he hated the
management there with a large vengeance....
--
Tony Sayer

In article ,
scribeth thus
On Sat, 24 Dec 2011 12:35:55 +0000, tony sayer
wrote:

Well a very few places where I've worked in the past they didn't have
Unions as they were very well run companies. And if a company is well
run there're shouldn't be a need for a Union thats just a needed
response to the **** poor management that sometimes still prevails...

Hmm... some of the worst companies I've worked for were non-union
places. Some of the unionised companies I've worked for were among the
best.
Of course, the reverse of both the above is also true, in my direct
experience.
So there - got any more generalisations?

Not a generalisation Grimly, just an observation as I saw it ;!...
--
Tony Sayer

In article , Doctor Drivel
scribeth thus

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article
-
september.org,
Tim wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:
In article
-
september.org,
Tim wrote:
Did you see that Top Gear where they drove a Pious round their test
track as fast as it would go (ie slowly) and followed it with a BMW
M3? (The M3 has the poorest fuel consumption of the 3 series range.)

The Pious used considerably more fuel...

It was a pointless test though, all it showed was using a vehicle in a
way that it's not designed to be used results in less than optimum
performance.

So it's not designed to be driven fast or even enthusiastically?
Figures.

What's your point, other than stating the obvious?

I mean, deriding the Prius for not being good at something it was never
designed for comes across as petty point scoring.

You miss the point. It claims to be economical under all conditions.

It is. In fact they do not, they have always claimed "average" in some way,
which is realistic.

The Prius IS good on Mway driving. Better in average town driving. Senile
people can't see that.


Most cars are good on straight continuous roads and throttle settings...
--
Tony Sayer

In article , Doctor Drivel
scribeth thus

"dennis@home" wrote in message
eb.com...


"funkyoldcortina" wrote in message
...

That's not true for the Prius. You still get better mpg than a
conventional petrol car on motorway trips, as once you're up to speed you
can ease off the pedal and the electric motor does most of the work to
keep you at-speed, requiring much lower power output from the engine.

Well that's plain rubbish.
If the electric motor is doing the work then it has to get its energy from
somewhere.
It can't be the battery or it would go flat.

Engine braking and wheel braking put energy back into the battery reclaiming
otherwise wasted energy. The Prius is old hat now - 1997. The Volt and the
new Volt, Lotus/Jaguar designs are the way now.

Kinetic energy is best reclaimed using supercapacitors -


electric trains use
these.


Which ones, any in the UK?...
--
Tony Sayer

On Tue, 27 Dec 2011 12:11:15 -0000, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

polygonum wrote:

Lost of oil, but not sweet.


Is that Shakespeare?

Thanks for the compliment. A typo by any other name...


--
Rod

On 27/12/2011 07:31, Doctor Drivel wrote:

"Steve Walker" wrote in message
...
On 26/12/2011 11:45, Doctor Drivel wrote:

"John Williamson" wrote in message
...
Doctor Drivel wrote:

"ARWadsworth" wrote in message
...
Doctor Drivel wrote:

And it left the miners able to hold the country to ransom. They
brought down the previous Conservative government,

They never. Heath couldn't handle industry properly. Lack of
investment, poor management, etc, etc. Miners were poorly paid
working in appalling conditions.

Again..
"It was NOT subsidised. Coal created economic growth. Coal provided
the energy to create electricity. The economic growth was cycled
back to get the energy. Understand that."

Coal mining in the UK was not profitable.

Idiot, again...
"It was NOT subsidised. Coal created economic growth. Coal provided
the energy to create electricity. The economic growth was cycled back
to get the energy. Understand that."

It cost more to dig the coal out than it could be sold for.

Not another one. If London Underground was run on ticket sales only half
would be closed down and tickets would be £20 a go. London, economically
would decline rapidly.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=47Jb-rlXJYg

Harrison's points include:-

* Passengers pay twice
* Trains pay for themselves
* Trains more than covers their costs
* Governments can pay for railways without taxing their citizens
* Investment in railways yields huge profits
* The problem is the way governments pay for the capital they invest in
the tracks and rolling stock
* Payback is like winning the lottery
* The Jubilee line raised productivity in the London economy. Every one
pound invested provided a payback of 4 pounds
* That is what railways do, make the economy more efficient
* Who pocketed the fat profit? Not the shareholders, not the taxpayers,
wages were not raised
* Profits cascaded into the profits of the land owners
* Taxes destroy jobs

.. and he's right, you know.

The same applies to economic growth creating energy - COAL

The comparison is false.

Nonsense!

If I want to travel into London, I must use whatever transport
infrastructure is there and it must either charge the true (even if
expensive) cost or be subsidised at a cost to the UK (or local) taxpayer.

You are confused.

subsidy (definition)

- (Economics) a financial aid supplied by a government, as to industry,
for reasons of public welfare, the balance of payments, etc.
- (Economics) any monetary contribution, grant, or aid

"Reclaiming" economic growth and cycling it back into the mechanism that
assisted in creating it in the first place is not a subsidy.

Energy and power generation creates economic growth in the wider
community. You have difficulty with this.

Energy and power generation happen anyway. The argument is about coal -
subsidies (or recycling growth) as you wish to call it enable coal to be
mined in the UK creating mining and support industry jobs and reaping
some taxes back. In the absence of such subsidies, the coal is mined
abroad, losing those jobs - the coal is however still mined and the
power produced, allowing the rest of society to grow just the same. Only
the mining and support industy jobs are lost, not the growth in the rest
of industry.

Thatcher had the corner shop profit mentality. The idiot said the coal
and rail industries were not making a profit. Few rail networks do on
passenger ticket sales. They are profitable as they create economic
growth in a society. This crystalizes as wealth, which is taxed to run
the mechanism that assists in creating the economic growth completing
the circle. The same with coal used for power generation. Rail was
neglected and the country, and cities with extensive rail lines were
unable to expand urban networks, suffered greatly.

Rail is very good for moving bulk freight and large numbers of rush hour
commuters, but it is a very expensive and slow way of moving people from
widely distributed homes to widely distributed workplaces - roads work
much better for that. Targetted road improvements could produce the same
economic benefits at lower cost (for instance short, low weight
restricted flyovers at major road junctions, allowing the centre lanes
of traffic to flow, while only turning traffic and heavier vehicles need
queue at the junction).

Also the free-market was, and still is, rigged. Thatcher took on board
the view of Milton Freidman of the Chicago School of Economics. this
view still holds in the UK - this school, recommend to Chile that
unemployment be raised to keep wage costs down (rigging the
free-market). Dictator Pinochet did so. They assessed that a 60 million
country like the UK needs approx an unemployment level of 1 million to
keep wage costs down (rigging the free-market). We roughly have had that
since Thatcher, going down to approx 0.5 m under Blair and at one point
zero with Blair.

And if wage costs are not kept down? The manufacturing that has left the
UK has done so because they cannot compete against lower cost production
(low wages) elsewhere. As companies offshore their production,
employment rises, increased unemployment acts as a brake on wages and
the rate of job losses declines - a feedback loop. Artificially
subsidising jobs to reach zero unemployment allows wages to rise,
ensuring that we remain uncompetetive and those subsidies eat up tax
revenues.

The unemployment float is intentional. They see the unemployed as a part
of the solution - a solution based on an rigged so-called free-market.

See above.

Thatcher did not know what the free-market as long as she had a hole in
her bum.

SteveW

On Thu, 22 Dec 2011 20:01:10 +0000, John Williamson wrote:

Doctor Drivel wrote:

"dennis@home" wrote in message
b.com...


"Doctor Drivel" wrote in message
...

One train can take 50 trucks off the roads.

50 trucks can go to 50 different places.

You really don't get it. Rail can do all the long distance stuff and
then freight taken in smaller trucks to local destinations.


In a perfect world, yes. In this one, the cost (Money, and probably fuel
as well) of taking stuff off a lorry and putting it onto a train, then
doing the same in reverse is a lot more than just leaving it on a lorry,
and letting the lorry do the whole journey.

What's the maximum height allowable on a UK railway? Around here they
stick the entire* loaded lorry trailer onto the train and all that's
needed at the destination is the tractor unit to haul it; the loading and
unloading operation is quick and easy. I suspect there's just not the
clearance under bridges etc. to do that in the UK though :-(

* and mile-long trains with shipping containers stacked one atop the
other aren't unusual, either. I'm glad that lot doesn't end up on the
roads.


cheers

Jules

On Fri, 23 Dec 2011 02:14:00 -0800, harry wrote:
Must be fiendishly complex, heavy and expensive. It is an attempt to
cover all bases.

No, because it lacks a sail on the roof and a wood gassifier in a trailer
at the back.

cheers

Jules

On Thu, 22 Dec 2011 00:25:19 +0000, Tim Watts wrote:
If you let people buy a bit of farmland and stick 1-4 houses on it with
the condition that build-build distance was say 1/4 mile, the
countryside would be preserved and villages would not be shoehorned to
bursting with rabbit hutches. There's an awful lot of green space down
here and having a house or small bunch of houses every 1/4-1/2 mile
would not ruin that, as you can see when you pass exactly such houses
that sprang up pre-planning- laws.

Infrastructure is more of a problem, but electricity, water and phones
are fairly easy to drop in. Drains are more of a problem, so such places
would probably need a klargester type setup.

That's not too far from what we have here, and everyone has 'leccy,
phone, 'net and TV to their property. Water is all from private drilled
wells, waste is all into septic systems.

The only planning and building laws are for electrical - other than that
you can do whatever you want, because it's not like it treads on anyone
elses' toes anyway.

cheers

Jules

On Mon, 26 Dec 2011 20:51:58 +0000, ARWadsworth wrote:
To be fair, he never understood the meaning of "when in a hole, stop
digging". His village has lots of tunnels.

.... but only one idiot :-)

On Sat, 24 Dec 2011 17:42:18 +0000, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
If the Pious was sold as a town only car - as it is in the US - all
that would then matter is the high price.

I don't know, I see quite a few of them where I am in the US, and the
population density's so low that covering large distances to get anywhere
useful is normal.

Most of the rural road network is a 55mph limit though, and even the
major freeways are only 60mph (and heavily patrolled by police) - so
perhaps those kinds of speeds suit the Pious better than UK motorway
trips at 80mph.

cheers

Jules

On Tue, 27 Dec 2011 07:58:33 +0000, Doctor Drivel wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Tony Bryer wrote:
On Mon, 26 Dec 2011 12:21:50 -0000 Doctor Drivel wrote :
The Prius is also brilliant to drive. - seamless, no step up or down
gear changes. Passengers love it.

That is certainly true - drives like a mini limousine.

Wonder what you mean by limousine?

It seamlessly glide you silly old coot!

Like a bar of soap in an empty bathtub, you mean...

On Mon, 26 Dec 2011 12:37:13 +0000, Doctor Drivel wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
So it's not designed to be driven fast or even enthusiastically?

Yes, if you want to.

I think Dave was talking about the sort of fast and enthusiastically that
adults can get from driving real cars, not the sort of experience you had
on the bumper cars at Great Yarmouth when you were six.

In article ,
tony sayer wrote:
How do you explain to each and every member of staff in a large company
how any pay rise etc is arrived at? By letter?

Well these were quite young small companies...

Usually far less need for a union in those as everyone should know
everyone else.

Also, a member of staff with a grievance or whatever is likely being
happier talking it over with a colleague who is a member of that union
rather than a manager. The rep can then put across the point - likely
without the heat of the previous scenario.


Never knew anyone who had one. The pay was good conditions good, staff
treated like human beings. Management were as often as not likely to be
buying rounds in the pub after work. People wanted to work there and
enjoyed it..

Somehow, I don't think that happened in the companies we were talking
about. Management thought their job was only to manage - ie to get the
most out of the workforce for the least possible money/effort. Ie maximum
profit at all costs. If they have that attitude, you can't really blame a
workforce from taking the exact opposite one.


Of course none of that would be needed with a perfectly run company. But
being run by humans, most unlikely.


Course I never worked for the likes of BT or a large nationalised firm
that I could imagine wouldn't be anywhere near the same;(.

I did have a uncle who worked in a large factory up North, he hated the
management there with a large vengeance....

Sadly all too common. But when a 'them and us' situation develops, it's
usually the fault of the management.

--
*I don't suffer from insanity; I enjoy every minute of it.

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

In article , Dave Plowman (News)
scribeth thus
In article ,
tony sayer wrote:
How do you explain to each and every member of staff in a large company
how any pay rise etc is arrived at? By letter?

Well these were quite young small companies...

Usually far less need for a union in those as everyone should know
everyone else.

Also, a member of staff with a grievance or whatever is likely being
happier talking it over with a colleague who is a member of that union
rather than a manager. The rep can then put across the point - likely
without the heat of the previous scenario.


Never knew anyone who had one. The pay was good conditions good, staff
treated like human beings. Management were as often as not likely to be
buying rounds in the pub after work. People wanted to work there and
enjoyed it..

Somehow, I don't think that happened in the companies we were talking
about. Management thought their job was only to manage - ie to get the
most out of the workforce for the least possible money/effort. Ie maximum
profit at all costs. If they have that attitude, you can't really blame a
workforce from taking the exact opposite one.

Good management will know how to get the best from their workforce and
that doesn't mean terrorising them or mistreating them.


Of course none of that would be needed with a perfectly run company. But
being run by humans, most unlikely.


Course I never worked for the likes of BT or a large nationalised firm
that I could imagine wouldn't be anywhere near the same;(.

I did have a uncle who worked in a large factory up North, he hated the
management there with a large vengeance....

Sadly all too common. But when a 'them and us' situation develops, it's
usually the fault of the management.

And that .. was what I meant in the previous post..
--
Tony Sayer

On 26/12/2011 20:55, Tony Bryer wrote:
What I meant by "drove it like a limousine" is reading the road and
anticipating what's ahead. You see more than a few who will see traffic
slowing ahead or a red light and drive hard up to it, then brake hard, or
who wait until the last possible moment before jumping across to a
motorway exit. And of course driving any car in this way significantly
improves economy.

Ah right. I do this in my sports car (yes, I can spell mid-life
crisis!). But I've gone off it a bit after an incident a couple of
years ago where I was rolling gently towards a red light and a used car
dealer overtook me on the left, braked hard, then cut across. Wrote the
car off.

Andy

In article ,
tony sayer wrote:
Somehow, I don't think that happened in the companies we were talking
about. Management thought their job was only to manage - ie to get the
most out of the workforce for the least possible money/effort. Ie
maximum profit at all costs. If they have that attitude, you can't
really blame a workforce from taking the exact opposite one.

Good management will know how to get the best from their workforce and
that doesn't mean terrorising them or mistreating them.

Indeed. And wherever you see a dispute it's pretty obvious that hasn't
happened. The most obvious one at the moment being the LT one. Both sides
firmly entrenched - and trying to score points off one another.

--
*Could it be that "I do " is the longest sentence? *

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

"tony sayer" wrote in message
...
In article , Doctor Drivel
scribeth thus

"dennis@home" wrote in message
web.com...


"funkyoldcortina" wrote in message
...

That's not true for the Prius. You still get better mpg than a
conventional petrol car on motorway trips, as once you're up to speed
you
can ease off the pedal and the electric motor does most of the work to
keep you at-speed, requiring much lower power output from the engine.

Well that's plain rubbish.
If the electric motor is doing the work then it has to get its energy
from
somewhere.
It can't be the battery or it would go flat.

Engine braking and wheel braking put energy back into the battery
reclaiming
otherwise wasted energy. The Prius is old hat now - 1997. The Volt and
the
new Volt, Lotus/Jaguar designs are the way now.

Kinetic energy is best reclaimed using supercapacitors -

electric trains use
these.

Which ones, any in the UK?...

In Germany and experimental in UK. Some have the capacitor bank on the side
of the track rather that on the train.

"Jules Richardson" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 27 Dec 2011 07:58:33 +0000, Doctor Drivel wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Tony Bryer wrote:
On Mon, 26 Dec 2011 12:21:50 -0000 Doctor Drivel wrote :
The Prius is also brilliant to drive. - seamless, no step up or down
gear changes. Passengers love it.

That is certainly true - drives like a mini limousine.

Wonder what you mean by limousine?

It seamlessly glide you silly old coot!

Like a bar of soap in an empty bathtub, you mean...

Smooooooooooooooooooooooth ans Quieeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeet

"Jules Richardson" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 24 Dec 2011 17:42:18 +0000, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
If the Pious was sold as a town only car - as it is in the US - all
that would then matter is the high price.

I don't know, I see quite a few of them where I am in the US, and the
population density's so low that covering large distances to get anywhere
useful is normal.

Most of the rural road network is a 55mph limit though, and even the
major freeways are only 60mph (and heavily patrolled by police) - so
perhaps those kinds of speeds suit the Pious better than UK motorway
trips at 80mph.

The Mways are so crowded you are lucky to get 65mph

"Jules Richardson" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 26 Dec 2011 12:37:13 +0000, Doctor Drivel wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
So it's not designed to be driven fast or even enthusiastically?

Yes, if you want to.

I think Dave was talking about the sort of fast and enthusiastically that
adults can get from driving real cars, not the sort of experience you had
on the bumper cars at Great Yarmouth when you were six.

He doesn't know the difference.

"Tim Lamb" wrote in message
...

Generator efficiency will presumable vary with load

It does, but not much. Microturbines rev at 30,000 rpm. High speed gennies
are smaller and more efficient. Microturbines are looking good for range
extenders - new Jag to have one. The size of a large can of beans.

and I wonder if the overall performance tails off as the battery
approaches full charge?

The charge will be used by the driving motor and depending on the management
software, either preserve the battery, or use both or either.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Doctor Drivel wrote:
Most tests of the Prius have shown relatively poor mpg on long runs.

They have not.

Give some figures

Silly Plantpot

"Jules Richardson" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 26 Dec 2011 20:51:58 +0000, ARWadsworth wrote:
To be fair, he never understood the meaning of "when in a hole, stop
digging". His village has lots of tunnels.

... but only one idiot :-)

You are on the short list. Be prepared to move house.

"tony sayer" wrote in message
...
In article , funkyoldcortina
scribeth thus
On 20/12/11 10:39, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In ,
wrote:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-16244634

"It was later established that the bus had run out of diesel."

Just like a Pious, then. Half decent fuel consumption in start stop town
traffic, but far worse than a conventional vehicle at near steady speed
motorway, etc, work.

That's not true for the Prius. You still get better mpg than a
conventional
petrol car on motorway trips, as once you're up to speed you can ease off
the
pedal and the electric motor does most of the work to keep you at-speed,
requiring much lower power output from the engine.

So err, the electrical power is free of charge then;?....

What he means is that it will be on part load and energy normally wasted
would be used to charge the battery, which will mean the electric motor will
come in on accelerating on the Mway or just cuts in to assist when battery
is charged - management system decides.

The engine is running at optimum to what the conditions are. It is well
known that engines specifically designed for gennies and designed to run at
constant speeds are far more efficient than variable speed engines. Lotus
have designed a small aluminium 3 cylinder engine for general sale to any
maker for gennies in hybrid cars, running at two speeds, depending on load.
The engine is multi-fuel.

Where they improved a lot is in the lith-ion batteries and smaller more
efficient electric motors. Toshiba have set up sales offices to sell their
latest battery:,,,
Read on..... Temperatures as low as -30C Wow! I need one now!!! ......

http://www.toshiba.com/ind/data/news/news_241.pdf

Toshiba International Corporation, January 27, 2010 - Toshiba proudly
announces that it has established US-based sales and technical support for
its new product, the Super Charge Ion Battery, SCiBT. This nano-based
breakthrough lithium technology is noted for its rapid charging capability
of 90% charge in less than 5 minutes, long life of more than 10 years even
at rapid charge rates, and excellent safety performance. The SCiBT product
line will be supported out of the Toshiba International Corporation
headquarters in Houston, Texas and the SCiBT team will focus on business
development activities, battery pack design, prototyping, assembly,
technical support, and service.

The SCiBT battery technology offers numerous performance advantages that
make it an ideal solution for many of today's toughest energy storage
challenges.

* Inherently Safe - Advanced Lithium Chemistry Based on Nano-Technology
Prevents Thermal Runaway Even Under Extreme Physical Duress
* Fast Charge Rates - Capable of Full Recharge in 10 Minutes, 90% in 5
Minutes
* Superior life - Minimal Capacity Loss, Even After 6,000 Rapid
Charge-Discharge Cycles
* Greater Usable Capacity - Up to 85% Usable Capacity Without Compromising
Cycle Life
* High Output Performance - Equivalent Discharge Rates to those of
Ultra-Capacitors
* Superb Low-Temperature Performance - Excels at Temperatures as Low
as -30°C
* Proven Production - Produced on a State-of-the-Art Automated Production
Line

SCiBT cells comprising the battery packs will be supplied from Toshiba's
state-of-the-art automated production line in the Saku Factory located in
Nagano, Japan. Initial market development activities in the US will focus on
automotive HEV/PHEV/EV, industrial lift trucks, smart grid/grid storage,
medical equipment, wind and solar power, scooters, and UPS market segments.

Toshiba currently has two battery pack offerings commercially available, a
12 V, 4.2 Ah pack and a 24 V, 4.2 Ah pack. Both offerings are based on
Toshiba's 2.4 V, 4.2 Ah cells and include Toshiba's proprietary battery
management system, which ensures optimum performance and safety. Additional
packs are under development.
--------

This means the full Electric Car is now within easy reach. All it needs is
charging points around for most cars and a small range extender for some
longer range vehicles in remote parts of the world. Use a specifically
designed engine on a generator set and the combustion engine will rarely cut
in.

Toshiba claim the discharge is the same as supercapacitors. I would rather
have supercapacitors with a high energy density storage than a battery.
Supercapacitors do not wear out, they are more efficient as there is no
state change inefficiencies when charging or discharging.

Other applications for these batteries? Planes of course. CHP (cogen) in
homes? Roof mounted PV cells can charge them up and use the energy later.
The same with boats with cells on the roofs. Battery power tools comes to
mind. In a minutes and the drill is charged again.

Mass production will get the prices down. They could be retrofitted to
existing hybrid cars when their battery sets require replacing. This will
transform many of them.

The Internal Combustion Engines gennies are big and heavy and pollute far
more than the turbines. The heat is concentrated in the exhaust in a turbine
making it easier extracting heat for other uses.

A lot is is going for the turbines:

- small
- powerful
- uses less fuel
- light
- simple
- far more reliable
- should be cheaper to make one mass production is applied.
- etc

They should be fine for turbine/electric trains. In overground urban trains
using a battery/supercapacitor set as a buffer for acceleration and
claw-back braking energy, they should work well. These trains stop and start
constantly. And a cheaper alternative to expensive electrification.

In boats they shine in that they are very small. Lith-ion batteies, and the
new Toshiba?, store twice as much energy per size than others. So a bank of
Lith-ion low down to even out weight dstribution, maximising space.