On Tuesday, 29 September 2015 20:13:07 UTC+1, Rod Speed wrote:
Dave Plowman (News) wrote
Rod Speed wrote

A business vacates a shop and another takes it over. The first thing
they do is take out all the fixtures and fittings and put new ones in,

Not necessarily, most obviously with petrol stations

Petrol stations round here get closed and houses built in their place.

I've never seen that happen here, but we build a hell of a lot more
new houses on a bare block of land than happens in London now.

that's because there aren't as many bare blocks of land in london than in Aus. In fact Aus is pretty much a bare block of land.

The
town has more than doubled in size in the 45 years I have been here.

physical size or population.

On Tuesday, 29 September 2015 21:23:10 UTC+1, Rod Speed wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 29 September 2015 13:26:18 UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
brightside S9 wrote:

Manufacturers will normally deliberately calibrate their speedos to
read 'high' by some amount between 100% and 110% to keep themselves
within the law.

It also means the car shows a higher top speed than reality. Better MPG.
And needs servicing more frequently. So a win win win for the makers.

In these days of pulse counting speedos, there is no need for the same
sort of tolerance as once. Only thing which will effect the reading is
tyre wear - which makes it read on the 'safe' side anyway.

No the thing that effects the reading is the software and the digits
it chooses to show on the display.
I thought VW emissions reading will have taught everyone that.

That doesn't involve displaying anything.

Yes it does, it's was plastered on their website how low the emissin levels are.
Thios is why is was classed a s a low emissions car, did you not understand such a simple concept.


So whatever a car says it's doing means little.
It can't be that difficult to fudge speedometers to under read.

It's rather more complicated than it looks at first
given that the rate at which you get pulses depends
on the tyres installed and the pressure in them and
how much they have worn etc.

simple just halve the number of pulses and the speedo reads half of
what it would have read.


The police should use their methods of reading speed
which should be checked and calibrated regualry.

They obviously are.

yes I know isn't the error allowed in Aus about 2-3% .

On Tuesday, 29 September 2015 23:20:27 UTC+1, Jim Thomas wrote:
"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message


No point in insuring if they won't pay out on a claim.

I don't insure for payouts.

There is no other reason to insure.

The law is the reason most poeple insure as far as car insurance goes.
If you're not insured you can't legally drive.


It's you that are liable to the other party if you
are at fault, not your insurance company. If they
refuse to pay that claim, you get to wear the
claim just like you would if you were not insured.

In article ,
Rod Speed wrote:
The underground storage tanks have a finite life.

Nope.

Forgot you lived in a country where safety and human life is so cheap.

--
*Great groups from little icons grow *

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

On Tue, 29 Sep 2015 23:20:20 +0100, Jim Thomas wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news
On Tue, 29 Sep 2015 20:48:04 +0100, Jim Thomas wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Tue, 29 Sep 2015 14:27:59 +0100, Indy Jess John
wrote:

On 29/09/2015 14:17, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Mon, 28 Sep 2015 22:36:53 +0100, Johnny B
wrote:


Since they'd only managed to clock me as doing 35mph (probably in
the
first ten yard stretch after the 30mph limit sign by means of a a
hidden
mobile speed camera), I was given the option of doing a speed
awareness
course in lieu of a fine and 3 points. Just coincidentally, the cost
of
the course happened to be the same as the fine (£60) but it was a no-
brainer to take this option since it saved me accumulating 3 points
on
my
licence.

But you got brainwashed. You only take those if you think you risk
running low on points.

Not necessarily. If you have points on your licence you will find that
changing insurance companies is more difficult and the premiums higher
than if you shop around without points on your licence.

Don't tell them about the points then.

And get them deny your claim when you make one.

Never happened.

It has actually.

Not to me.

No point in insuring if they won't pay out on a claim.

I don't insure for payouts.

There is no other reason to insure.

To stop the police from pulling me over.

It's you that are liable to the other party if you
are at fault, not your insurance company. If they
refuse to pay that claim, you get to wear the
claim just like you would if you were not insured.

So what?

--
I still say a church steeple with a lightning rod on top shows a lack of confidence. -- Doug McLeod

On Wed, 30 Sep 2015 02:49:40 +0100, Bill Wright wrote:

Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:

Don't tell them about the points then.

And get them deny your claim when you make one.

Never happened.

No point in insuring if they won't pay out on a claim.

I don't insure for payouts.


You know, Mr Toughguy, you are a bit of a chump aren't you?

Can't you think of another reason?


--
In the 60's people took acid to make the world weird.
Now the world is weird, people take prozac to make it normal.

On Wed, 30 Sep 2015 02:48:23 +0100, Bill Wright wrote:

Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:

You may get done for dangerous driving if you are driving too slow for
the conditions but that's not the same thing.

It's exactly the same thing. If you're going under 30 on the motorway,
people are going to be swerving round you, and you'll get done for it.
I once did 40mph on the motorway as my bonnet had become loose and was
threatening to fly up. I got about 50% of people hooting at me,
especially the lorries. A policeman would no doubt have been rather
annoyed.

If you take a slow vehicle onto a dual carriageway you must have a
yellow beacon clearly visible from the rear.

It wasn't a slow vehicle, it was a broken fast vehicle.

--
You need only two tools in life. WD-40 and duck tape.
If it doesn't move and it should, use WD-40.
If it moves and shouldn't, use the tape.

On 27/09/2015 20:30, Bill Wright wrote:
Adrian wrote:

But what've "half a million foreigners coming in" got to do with the
price of fish?

Apart from anything else, VERY few recent migrants will be buying
properties.

For those coming from outside the EU - over half of all migrants -
they quite simply can't get mortgages unless they have ILR - which few
will have.

So they'll be put in social housing, or private rented accommodation.
This will increase pressure on the lower end of the market, and the
pressure will translate upwards.

Or do you imagine that we have half a million properties sitting empty,
every year, just awaiting the migrants?

You can be quite sure that they won't be expected to live in tents.

B'sides over half of all population growth in the UK is from the
number of births outstripping the number of deaths.

Of course, and that's a big factor. But take the immigrants out of the
equation and the pressure is much less.

Bill

bill you do it so well, from disabled to curry and the largest no. of
posts I've seen for a long time.You should think about writing for The Mail.

"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 29 September 2015 20:13:07 UTC+1, Rod Speed wrote:
Dave Plowman (News) wrote
Rod Speed wrote

A business vacates a shop and another takes it over. The first thing
they do is take out all the fixtures and fittings and put new ones
in,

Not necessarily, most obviously with petrol stations

Petrol stations round here get closed and houses built in their place.

I've never seen that happen here, but we build a hell of a lot more
new houses on a bare block of land than happens in London now.

that's because there aren't as many bare blocks of land in london than in
Aus. In fact Aus is pretty much a bare block of land.

The town has more than doubled in size in the 45 years I have been here.

physical size or population.

Physical size. The population hasn't increased as
much as that, essentially because its an irrigation
area with many relatively small farms that grow
everything from wine grapes to all the usual tree
crops like oranges and plums etc thru to lots of
vegys like onions etc. Hell of a lot of them were
originally done by new immigrants, mostly from
Italy just after the war. Many of the professionals
like doctors where english and irish immigrants.

"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 29 September 2015 21:23:10 UTC+1, Rod Speed wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 29 September 2015 13:26:18 UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:
In article ,
brightside S9 wrote:

Manufacturers will normally deliberately calibrate their speedos to
read 'high' by some amount between 100% and 110% to keep themselves
within the law.

It also means the car shows a higher top speed than reality. Better
MPG.
And needs servicing more frequently. So a win win win for the makers.

In these days of pulse counting speedos, there is no need for the same
sort of tolerance as once. Only thing which will effect the reading is
tyre wear - which makes it read on the 'safe' side anyway.

No the thing that effects the reading is the software and the digits
it chooses to show on the display.
I thought VW emissions reading will have taught everyone that.

That doesn't involve displaying anything.

Yes it does, it's was plastered on their website how low the emissin
levels are.

That isn't the displaying being discussed and you know it.

So whatever a car says it's doing means little.
It can't be that difficult to fudge speedometers to under read.

It's rather more complicated than it looks at first
given that the rate at which you get pulses depends
on the tyres installed and the pressure in them and
how much they have worn etc.

simple just halve the number of pulses and the speedo reads half of
what it would have read.

Even sillier than you usually manage.


The police should use their methods of reading speed
which should be checked and calibrated regualry.

They obviously are.

yes I know isn't the error allowed in Aus about 2-3% .

It varys by state. All except Victoria in theory allow
something like 5%, but in practice, particularly with
the change from 60KMph to 50K in built up areas,
you don't actually get booked doing 60.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Rod Speed wrote:
The underground storage tanks have a finite life.

Nope.

Forgot you lived in a country where safety and human life is so cheap.

You never could bull**** your way out of a wet paper bag.

On Tue, 29 Sep 2015 08:15:18 -0700 (PDT) Sm_jamieson wrote :

If your sat nav indicates speed, it is interesting to see the difference between
that and the car speedo.

107kph on the speedo, 100 on the GPS on my X-Trail

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

On Mon, 28 Sep 2015 21:36:53 GMT Johnny B Good wrote :
On Mon, 28 Sep 2015 17:22:49 +0100, dennis@home wrote:

....

What's worse is that the magistrates colluded in this 'zero tolerance'
nonsense when they failed to demonstrate good common sense when presented
with a case involving a speeding offence where the recorded speed was a
mere 35mph in a 30mph zone (right on the +10% +2mph allowance limit).

.....

And if pressed, traffic engineers might confirm that they considered 35 to
be a safe speed on said road. This being so it couldn't be given a 40 limit
but 35 would be considered safe under normal conditions notwithstanding the
official limit being 30.

We had the nonsensical situation here of some speed limits being reduced
from 90kph to 80kph to 'tidy things up' - nothing to do with safety.

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

On 04/10/2015 11:58, Tony Bryer wrote:

We had the nonsensical situation here of some speed limits being reduced
from 90kph to 80kph to 'tidy things up' - nothing to do with safety.

I know of one road where it had a 60mph speed limit for many years and
was easily usable at that speed in most weather conditions. Then the
60mph signs were replaced by 50mph signs and a speed camera was
installed. Someone made a lot of money from the commuters who knew the
road and drove as they always had done, until the fine dropped through
their letterbox.

Jim

On 04/10/2015 11:58, Tony Bryer wrote:

We had the nonsensical situation here of some speed limits being reduced
from 90kph to 80kph to 'tidy things up' - nothing to do with safety.


There's a road that I use when going to the airport that has lots of
different speed limits on different sections. It's confusing, and I'd
rather they used the same (albeit lower) limit throughout.




---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

On 04/10/2015 11:58, Tony Bryer wrote:
On Mon, 28 Sep 2015 21:36:53 GMT Johnny B Good wrote :
On Mon, 28 Sep 2015 17:22:49 +0100, dennis@home wrote:

....

What's worse is that the magistrates colluded in this 'zero tolerance'
nonsense when they failed to demonstrate good common sense when presented
with a case involving a speeding offence where the recorded speed was a
mere 35mph in a 30mph zone (right on the +10% +2mph allowance limit).

.....

And if pressed, traffic engineers might confirm that they considered 35 to
be a safe speed on said road. This being so it couldn't be given a 40 limit
but 35 would be considered safe under normal conditions notwithstanding the
official limit being 30.

We had the nonsensical situation here of some speed limits being reduced
from 90kph to 80kph to 'tidy things up' - nothing to do with safety.



Not all speed limits are set because of safety, some are set to allow a
more stable flow of traffic, some to reduce noise, some to annoy ARW.

On 04/10/2015 15:11, Indy Jess John wrote:


Yes, the law is the law and is supposed to be obeyed; but when the law
appears to be blatantly unfair it brings the law into contempt. Whilst
I don't condone it, I can understand why some speed cameras were the
subject of arson attacks.

Well that would be the sort of driver that shouldn't drive.

"Tony Bryer" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 28 Sep 2015 21:36:53 GMT Johnny B Good wrote :
On Mon, 28 Sep 2015 17:22:49 +0100, dennis@home wrote:

....

What's worse is that the magistrates colluded in this 'zero tolerance'
nonsense when they failed to demonstrate good common sense when presented
with a case involving a speeding offence where the recorded speed was a
mere 35mph in a 30mph zone (right on the +10% +2mph allowance limit).

.....

And if pressed, traffic engineers might confirm that they considered 35 to
be a safe speed on said road. This being so it couldn't be given a 40
limit
but 35 would be considered safe under normal conditions notwithstanding
the
official limit being 30.

We had the nonsensical situation here of some speed limits being reduced
from 90kph to 80kph to 'tidy things up' - nothing to do with safety.

That's done to minimise the number of speed limit changes.

NSW has in fact gone the other way adding more 60kph sections
where the 50kph built up area limit isn't very sensible, usually on
the higher volume roads in built up areas.

On 04/10/2015 15:11, Indy Jess John wrote:

If you have driven past a sign that shows 60, every working day for
years, would you really be confident of noticing one day that the 6 had
changed to a 5? I am a reasonably observant driver but I am not sure I
would, because my focus would be on the things that vary, the road and
the traffic, and not on something that had always been there.

You sure you'd not notice the difference between a 50 sign and the NSL
one? They're really quite different...

On 04/10/2015 15:11, Indy Jess John wrote:
If you have driven past a sign that shows 60, every working day for
years, would you really be confident of noticing one day that the 6 had
changed to a 5?

In that case I would - because it would be NSL - 50. Or was it a dual?

I drive everyday along a mile long straight with no houses and wide
verges. The limit is 60. You know why?

Because there was a fuel crisis in 1973.

Andy