On 10/05/2016 21:05, Vir Campestris wrote:
On 09/05/2016 10:11, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
I would say that my driving is now less safe than it used to be,.
because of the time spent looking for repeater boards and at the speedo,
rather than at the road and other road users.

+1

Not being able to take in the sign and other stuff is a sign that you
are driving too fast for your ability.
Either learn to do it better or slow down.
Why do you think old people drive slower?

On 10/05/2016 22:03, dennis@home wrote:
On 10/05/2016 21:05, Vir Campestris wrote:
On 09/05/2016 10:11, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
I would say that my driving is now less safe than it used to be,.
because of the time spent looking for repeater boards and at the speedo,
rather than at the road and other road users.

+1

Not being able to take in the sign and other stuff is a sign that you
are driving too fast for your ability.
Either learn to do it better or slow down.
Why do you think old people drive slower?

Rubbish. It is a proliforation of short zones of dfferent speeds where
once there would have been few changes and a constant fear that a simple
mistake will be caught on camera and you'll be punished for it.

On 10/05/16 22:03, dennis@home wrote:
On 10/05/2016 21:05, Vir Campestris wrote:
On 09/05/2016 10:11, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
I would say that my driving is now less safe than it used to be,.
because of the time spent looking for repeater boards and at the speedo,
rather than at the road and other road users.

+1

Not being able to take in the sign and other stuff is a sign that you
are driving too fast for your ability.

********.
Its a sign that its hidden mostly, behind hedges, parked vehicles and WHY.

The whole point of speed legislation is now not about safety, its about
public perception, and about making money by tricking you into thinking
you are in one speed limit when you are in another.

That's the legacy of Blair: No one makes money out of doing something
productive or useful anymore. They doi it by ripping off someone else,.
The whole EU runs on that principle.



--
A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on
its shoes.

On Wed, 11 May 2016 08:28:44 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Not being able to take in the sign and other stuff is a sign that
you
are driving too fast for your ability.

********.
Its a sign that its hidden mostly, behind hedges, parked vehicles and
WHY.

Signage that is obscured by over grown hedges is a hook to hang
getting a ticket dismissed on. Particulary if the road appears to
have a higher default limit and the camera is "close" to the obscured
signage.

First ticket I got after 30 odd years of driving was for doing 40
something in a 30 limit. Road was dual carriage way, camera a few
hundred yards after the 30 boards (streetmap...). There was traffic,
I'd never driven that stretch of road before (or since), I'm pretty
sure the signage was obscured and the 30 may well have been from the
NSL (70). If the place wasn't 100 miles away I'd have been out with a
camera of my own and contested the ticket.

--
Cheers
Dave.

On Sun, 08 May 2016 12:19:44 +0100, Peter Johnson
wrote:

snip

Years ago I noticed that those who lived closest to work were
invariably the last to arrive at shift changeover, which meant those
being relived were rarely relieved early, whereas those who lived
closest often were.

I wonder if any of that was 'I live close so' a) 'it won't take long
to get to work' (but then don't allow enough) and / or b) 'I don't
have to allow any extra time' (but really should), or c) it was just
coincidence?

The other thing is those using public transport where the interval of
said transport (bus, train, plane even) is such that to be at work for
say 9am means getting in at 8.15 or 9:15?

When I was working in the city the 08:30 train would *normally* get me
into Liverpool St for about 9 and a 10 min walk would get me to the
Training Centre with 20 minutes to spare (for a 09:30 start).

But even a single cancelled train would make me late and I was stuck
on the train for over an hour when it broke down a couple of times
(over a 7 year period).

Now delegates coming in from Cambridge or Bristol would obviously have
a longer journey time but these inter-city trains generally seemed
more reliable, often ran as frequently as the local 'shuttles' I used,
and the delegate was only doing so for a week at a time and it wasn't
so 'obvious' if one delegate was late (versus the instructor). ;-(

I think my final conclusion that short of sleeping there I could never
*guarantee* I would be there on time *every* time so it was a matter
of running the odds and doing what most considered was 'reasonable'?

When I was working in IT Support we had one tech that whilst supposed
to start at 9am, would always arrive at 9:30. I modified a big wall
clock with another 9 where the 10 should be to accommodate him g.
The thing with him though was he would always have his hour for lunch
and be out of the door dead on 5:30. Apparently it was just 'how he
was' and I guess if he turned up reliably and otherwise did what was
asked of him then they must have thought it acceptable. shrug

The rest of us didn't really care because whilst we all generally got
there at the allotted time, our boss was pretty flexible and as long
as we got all the work done on a customer site, we wouldn't be
expected to go back to the office if we were back in the area a bit
before knocking off time (or if we hadn't stopped for lunch etc).

Cheers, T i m

On Sun, 08 May 2016 12:22:34 +0100, charles
wrote:

In article ,
Peter Johnson wrote:
On Sat, 07 May 2016 23:42:08 +0100, T i m wrote:


Now, on a good day my total commute took about 2 minutes so I would
leave at 5 to 9 to be there 'on time'. However, if we got caught up
behind the dustcart that 2 minutes could lengthen to maybe 10 minutes
and if there was some other issue (fire engine in the road) then it
could be even longer (making me 'late').


Years ago I noticed that those who lived closest to work were
invariably the last to arrive at shift changeover, which meant those
being relived were rarely relieved early, whereas those who lived
closest often were.

+1

A colleague who often was supposed to relieve me at 1pm was frequently 30
or more minutes late. His excuse was always interesting - "had to take the
cat to the vet" was probably the most believable - "Overslept" was not.

OOI, when it impacts someone directly like that, was it ever
highlighted to 'da management' and if so what did they say?

Cheers, T i m

On Tue, 10 May 2016 21:58:27 +0100, polygonum wrote:

I find myself using cruise control in situations I never would have
considered in years gone by.

Another influence is modern cars. Mine will do happily do 30+ at
tickover in 5th (out of 6) on the flat and the anti-stall will
actually accelerate it very gently to keep revs around 750. Give it
even a slight bit of down hill and it'll be off. Then you wonder why
you're having to brake so hard... Pressing the go pedal at 30 in 5th
doesn't have much effect, to actually drive at 30 you need to be in
3rd and even then on a moderate hill it'll still run away.

--
Cheers
Dave.

In message l.net,
Dave Liquorice writes
On Wed, 11 May 2016 08:28:44 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Not being able to take in the sign and other stuff is a sign that
you
are driving too fast for your ability.

********.
Its a sign that its hidden mostly, behind hedges, parked vehicles and
WHY.

Signage that is obscured by over grown hedges is a hook to hang
getting a ticket dismissed on. Particulary if the road appears to
have a higher default limit and the camera is "close" to the obscured
signage.

First ticket I got after 30 odd years of driving was for doing 40
something in a 30 limit. Road was dual carriage way, camera a few
hundred yards after the 30 boards (streetmap...). There was traffic,
I'd never driven that stretch of road before (or since), I'm pretty
sure the signage was obscured and the 30 may well have been from the
NSL (70). If the place wasn't 100 miles away I'd have been out with a
camera of my own and contested the ticket.

Now there is a money making website opportunity:-)

Help evade my speeding ticket .com Modest payment offered for
current photo of obscured speed limit signage......


--
Tim Lamb

On 11/05/16 10:25, Tim Lamb wrote:
In message l.net,
Dave Liquorice writes

First ticket I got after 30 odd years of driving was for doing 40
something in a 30 limit. Road was dual carriage way, camera a few
hundred yards after the 30 boards (streetmap...). There was traffic,
I'd never driven that stretch of road before (or since), I'm pretty
sure the signage was obscured and the 30 may well have been from the
NSL (70). If the place wasn't 100 miles away I'd have been out with a
camera of my own and contested the ticket.

Now there is a money making website opportunity:-)

Help evade my speeding ticket .com Modest payment offered for
current photo of obscured speed limit signage......

Another use for a dash cam.




--
djc

(–€Ì¿Ä¹Ì¯–€Ì¿ Ì¿)
No low-hanging fruit, just a lot of small berries up a tall tree.

In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:

That's the legacy of Thatcher: No one makes money out of doing something
productive or useful anymore. They doi it by ripping off someone else,.
The whole of our society runs on that principle.

Corrected your post for you there, NP! (twice)

As I have said here befo she took our (i.e. humanity's) worst
weaknesses - greed, selfishness, etc - and declared them to be virtues.

What Tony Blair did was just as unforgivable: instead of reversing the
trends Thatcherism started, he endorsed and thus accelerated them.

J.

On 10/05/2016 23:18, Steve Walker wrote:
On 10/05/2016 22:03, dennis@home wrote:
On 10/05/2016 21:05, Vir Campestris wrote:
On 09/05/2016 10:11, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
I would say that my driving is now less safe than it used to be,.
because of the time spent looking for repeater boards and at the
speedo,
rather than at the road and other road users.

+1

Not being able to take in the sign and other stuff is a sign that you
are driving too fast for your ability.
Either learn to do it better or slow down.
Why do you think old people drive slower?

Rubbish. It is a proliforation of short zones of dfferent speeds where
once there would have been few changes and a constant fear that a simple
mistake will be caught on camera and you'll be punished for it.


What have short zones go to do with it?
Don't you see the signs at the end of long zones either, there isn't any
difference.

On 11/05/2016 08:28, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 10/05/16 22:03, dennis@home wrote:
On 10/05/2016 21:05, Vir Campestris wrote:
On 09/05/2016 10:11, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
I would say that my driving is now less safe than it used to be,.
because of the time spent looking for repeater boards and at the
speedo,
rather than at the road and other road users.

+1

Not being able to take in the sign and other stuff is a sign that you
are driving too fast for your ability.

********.
Its a sign that its hidden mostly, behind hedges, parked vehicles and WHY.

If they are hidden behind tree, etc., get the local authority to
maintain them.
If they are obscured by parked vehicles then so are children and animals
so if you miss them its your fault!


The whole point of speed legislation is now not about safety, its about
public perception, and about making money by tricking you into thinking
you are in one speed limit when you are in another.

That's ********, the local authority sets the speed limits but doesn't
get a penny from its enforcement.

They do get revenue from parking control so watch where you park.


That's the legacy of Blair: No one makes money out of doing something
productive or useful anymore. They doi it by ripping off someone else,.
The whole EU runs on that principle.

Idiot it has nothing to do with Europe but then neither do the problems
you kippers keep shouting about.

On 11/05/2016 09:55, Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Tue, 10 May 2016 21:58:27 +0100, polygonum wrote:

I find myself using cruise control in situations I never would have
considered in years gone by.

Another influence is modern cars. Mine will do happily do 30+ at
tickover in 5th (out of 6) on the flat and the anti-stall will
actually accelerate it very gently to keep revs around 750. Give it
even a slight bit of down hill and it'll be off. Then you wonder why
you're having to brake so hard... Pressing the go pedal at 30 in 5th
doesn't have much effect, to actually drive at 30 you need to be in
3rd and even then on a moderate hill it'll still run away.

Won't run away with the cruise control in my car - that will keep speed
down even on quite a steep hill. And if it doesn't need to be actively
braking, it will switch to coasting mode - so there will be no
relationship between rpm and road speed.

Will mostly stay in 4th uphill at 30 - but will sometimes drop to 3rd.
(Of course, some hills are too steep for that.)

--
Rod

On 11/05/16 18:55, dennis@home wrote:
On 11/05/2016 08:28, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 10/05/16 22:03, dennis@home wrote:
On 10/05/2016 21:05, Vir Campestris wrote:
On 09/05/2016 10:11, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
I would say that my driving is now less safe than it used to be,.
because of the time spent looking for repeater boards and at the
speedo,
rather than at the road and other road users.

+1

Not being able to take in the sign and other stuff is a sign that you
are driving too fast for your ability.

********.
Its a sign that its hidden mostly, behind hedges, parked vehicles and
WHY.

If they are hidden behind tree, etc., get the local authority to
maintain them.
If they are obscured by parked vehicles then so are children and animals
so if you miss them its your fault!


The whole point of speed legislation is now not about safety, its about
public perception, and about making money by tricking you into thinking
you are in one speed limit when you are in another.

That's ********, the local authority sets the speed limits but doesn't
get a penny from its enforcement.

Someone does though.



They do get revenue from parking control so watch where you park.


That's the legacy of Blair: No one makes money out of doing something
productive or useful anymore. They doi it by ripping off someone else,.
The whole EU runs on that principle.

Idiot it has nothing to do with Europe but then neither do the problems
you kippers keep shouting about.

Keep taking the medication dennis. It will stop the foaming mouth and
the swivelling eyes.


--
To ban Christmas, simply give turkeys the vote.

On 11/05/2016 18:55, dennis@home wrote:
On 11/05/2016 08:28, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 10/05/16 22:03, dennis@home wrote:
On 10/05/2016 21:05, Vir Campestris wrote:
On 09/05/2016 10:11, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
I would say that my driving is now less safe than it used to be,.
because of the time spent looking for repeater boards and at the
speedo,
rather than at the road and other road users.

+1

Not being able to take in the sign and other stuff is a sign that you
are driving too fast for your ability.

********.
Its a sign that its hidden mostly, behind hedges, parked vehicles and
WHY.

If they are hidden behind tree, etc., get the local authority to
maintain them.

Some hope! One of the roads that I go to work on used to leave the
motorway at a roundabout and have a 60mph speed limit - there is no
pedestrian, cycle or other access as it only connects to the motorway at
that end. The next roundabout along has just been removed and replaced
by traffic lights. The speed limit now goes
Motorway50lights60roundabout60roundabout40, why that 50 is there
is a mystery. It has been only a couple of weeks since the limit changed
and the 50 signs were erected and if anyone misses the 50 sign (easily
done if vision is obscured by a truck while entering and immediately
exiting a busy roundabout), the first two, brand new, repeaters are
hidden in bushes.

On 11/05/2016 21:04, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

What Tony Blair did was just as unforgivable: instead of reversing the
trends Thatcherism started, he endorsed and thus accelerated them.

Thatcher didnt start those trends.

For once you got something correct, greed and selfish behaviour was well
established in trade unions well before Thatcher arrived on the scene.

On Wed, 11 May 2016 18:58:12 +0100, polygonum wrote:

Won't run away with the cruise control in my car - that will keep speed
down even on quite a steep hill.

Previous car on same hill didn't run away in 3rd. To stop this car
running away it needs to be in 2nd but that means the engine is doing
about 3,000 rpm. IIRC 30 in 3rd is is just under 2,000 rpm, yes that
is a big ratio change, also I'm pretty sure 4th to 6th are all
overdrives.

And if it doesn't need to be actively braking, it will switch to
coasting mode - so there will be no relationship between rpm and road
speed.

Mines manual, it does have Hill Descent Control but the fastest that
will do is around 15 mph and will only become active, if switched on,
in 1st or 2nd. Its a "feet off", steer only thing, you set the speed
via the cruise control +/- buttons.

--
Cheers
Dave.

On 11/05/16 22:48, Tim Streater wrote:
In article om,
dennis@home wrote:

On 11/05/2016 21:04, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

What Tony Blair did was just as unforgivable: instead of reversing the
trends Thatcherism started, he endorsed and thus accelerated them.

Thatcher didnt start those trends.

For once you got something correct, greed and selfish behaviour was
well established in trade unions well before Thatcher arrived on the
scene.

In fact thad these traits not existed as you describe, Thatcher would
not have arrived on the scene. She wouldn't have been able to.

The country elected Maggie to do one thing only. Break the Unions.

If only she had stopped there....


--
€œit should be clear by now to everyone that activist environmentalism
(or environmental activism) is becoming a general ideology about humans,
about their freedom, about the relationship between the individual and
the state, and about the manipulation of people under the guise of a
'noble' idea. It is not an honest pursuit of 'sustainable development,'
a matter of elementary environmental protection, or a search for
rational mechanisms designed to achieve a healthy environment. Yet
things do occur that make you shake your head and remind yourself that
you live neither in Joseph Stalins Communist era, nor in the Orwellian
utopia of 1984.€�

Vaclav Klaus

On Wednesday, 11 May 2016 22:01:36 UTC+1, dennis@home wrote:
On 11/05/2016 21:04, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

What Tony Blair did was just as unforgivable: instead of reversing the
trends Thatcherism started, he endorsed and thus accelerated them.

Thatcher didnt start those trends.

For once you got something correct, greed and selfish behaviour was well
established in trade unions well before Thatcher arrived on the scene.

Didn't the unions learn that from the landowners and slavery trade.

In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
The country elected Maggie to do one thing only. Break the Unions.

And despite draconian laws, discovered they weren't actually the problem.
So just closed the industries instead.

What is of note is that the party of business was incapable of sorting any.

Took the Germans, Japanese and Indians to show the UK how to build cars
here. So where does that leave those BREXITS who go on and on about
Sovereignty?

Same with most of UK industry. All foreign owned.

--
*Do they ever shut up on your planet?

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

whisky-dave wrote
dennis@home wrote
The Natural Philosopher wrote

What Tony Blair did was just as unforgivable: instead of reversing the
trends Thatcherism started, he endorsed and thus accelerated them.

Thatcher didnt start those trends.

For once you got something correct, greed and selfish behaviour was well
established in trade unions well before Thatcher arrived on the scene.

Didn't the unions learn that from the landowners and slavery trade.

Nope, they got started because of the obscene working conditions that
so many people got to wear, and then realised that they could exploit the
power they ended up with to **** over the industrys they were involved in.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote
The Natural Philosopher wrote

The country elected Maggie to do one thing only. Break the Unions.

That's a lie. Maggie was also elected because of the incompetence
of the Labour govts that preceded here, particularly the ones that
were actually stupid enough to get involved in car manufacturing etc.

And despite draconian laws, discovered they weren't actually the problem.

Another lie with the coal miners alone and those in the car industry too.

So just closed the industries instead.

Another lie. Coal mines were uneconomic long before Maggie got
to do anything and in fact more were closed before she showed up.

What is of note is that the party of business was incapable of sorting
any.

Another lie.

Took the Germans, Japanese and Indians to show the UK how to build cars
here.

Nothing to do with the govt. At least the Torys weren't actually
stupid enough to get the govt involved in making cars.

So where does that leave those BREXITS
who go on and on about Sovereignty?

Where they have always been, with a damned
good point on that govt policy wise.

Same with most of UK industry. All foreign owned.

Another bare faced lie.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolls-Royce_Holdings

In article l.net,
Dave Liquorice writes
On Wed, 11 May 2016 18:58:12 +0100, polygonum wrote:

Won't run away with the cruise control in my car - that will keep speed
down even on quite a steep hill.

Previous car on same hill didn't run away in 3rd. To stop this car
running away it needs to be in 2nd but that means the engine is doing
about 3,000 rpm. IIRC 30 in 3rd is is just under 2,000 rpm, yes that
is a big ratio change, also I'm pretty sure 4th to 6th are all
overdrives.

And if it doesn't need to be actively braking, it will switch to
coasting mode - so there will be no relationship between rpm and road
speed.

Mines manual, it does have Hill Descent Control but the fastest that
will do is around 15 mph and will only become active, if switched on,
in 1st or 2nd. Its a "feet off", steer only thing, you set the speed
via the cruise control +/- buttons.

If it's a Land Rover variant I would get it seen to. The aim of HDC is
to limit your rate of descent to 5mph.
--
bert

In article , The Natural Philosopher
writes
On 11/05/16 22:48, Tim Streater wrote:
In article om,
dennis@home wrote:

On 11/05/2016 21:04, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

What Tony Blair did was just as unforgivable: instead of reversing the
trends Thatcherism started, he endorsed and thus accelerated them.

Thatcher didnt start those trends.

For once you got something correct, greed and selfish behaviour was
well established in trade unions well before Thatcher arrived on the
scene.

In fact thad these traits not existed as you describe, Thatcher would
not have arrived on the scene. She wouldn't have been able to.

The country elected Maggie to do one thing only. Break the Unions.

If only she had stopped there....


She was stopped as she was about to break the EU.
--
bert

On 08/05/2016 08:10, Tim Watts wrote:
On 08/05/16 07:59, Chris French wrote:
John Rumm Wrote in message:
On 06/05/2016 19:44, F wrote:
On 05/05/2016 22:21, Tim Watts wrote:

Does he know there are an arse load of speed cameras on the southern
section that are now activated even when the variable limit is at 70?

The variables on the M62 will also flash at 70+ (79? - 70 +10% +2) even
when they're not displaying a limit and, apparently, turned off.

Given most cars speedos will over read 10%, that would be getting on fo
an indicated 90 ish...

The bits of variable speed road I have been on seem to have had
average speed cameras anyway. So you wouldn't see them flash as
they don't.



Several of the new ones are HADECS 3 and they don't flash either.

The variable speed gantries on the M62 flash. I've seen them do so on
the 'other' carriageway.

--
F

On Sun, 15 May 2016 20:49:52 +0100, bert wrote:

Mines manual, it does have Hill Descent Control but the fastest
that
will do is around 15 mph and will only become active, if switched
on,
in 1st or 2nd. Its a "feet off", steer only thing, you set the
speed
via the cruise control +/- buttons.

If it's a Land Rover variant I would get it seen to. The aim of HDC is
to limit your rate of descent to 5mph.

The older versions HDC (Disco II) certainly but you selected the
fixed speed by gear and it only operated in low ratio, IIRC. Finding
a hill steep enough for it to be kick in was not easy, 1:6 required
for it to start to run away in 2 low. I never found one steep enough
for 1 low. I did use 1 low to keep the wheels turning when decending
a several inches deep snow covered 1:6, still didn't go in the
direction it was being steered but it was a controlled decent not a
locked up slide. B-)

FL2 has no low box but 1 and 2 are quite high ratio gears (the only
two gears HDC will operate in) max speed in 2 is about 12 mph and you
can set the actual speed down to a few mph via the cruise +/1 nudge
buttons.

--
Cheers
Dave.