From: Harry Bloomfield on
Clive George brought next idea :
> "Conor" <conor(a)> wrote in message
> news:MPG.25779d3bc6d13ae0989992(a)
>> In article <MPG.25772afcb6d5bfec9899aa(a)>,
>> Conor says...
>> <snip>
>> I noticed that Clive George has been surprisingly quiet despite
>> answering posts I posted later than this one...
> Yes, because it was bollocks which I'd already answered, and I couldn't be
> arsed to argue it with you. But since you ask...
> I already told you the high beam isn't an indication it's safe to overtake,
> and others agreed. You still seem to believe it is. There's not much more I
> can do about that - you're wrong, and experience shows you're incapable of
> admitting it.
> The idea is that the full beam of the vehicle in front of you shows you the
> nice straight bit of road, _and_ where it might not be straight too, as per
> your examples. It's not "There's nothing coming the other way", but "There's
> the road".
> I'm not going to trust some lorry driver to tell me it's safe to overtake by
> putting full beam on, but I will use the extra vision it affords to help me
> to make my own decision.

This is damned hard work!

I once passengered with a driver who had got the idea stuck in his head
that flashing his head lights also flashed his tail lights. Someone
would pull over to facilitate him overtaking them and having passed
them, he would flash his head lights (on the stalk). Only by getting
him to reverse up to a shop window in the dark, did I manage to
convince him he had the entire principle of operation - WRONG.

Harry (M1BYT) (L)

From: Silk on
On 25/11/2009 20:49, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
> mileburner formulated the question :
>> No wonder the railways struggle to make money. They pay 50 grand for
>> some monkey to sit in a box pulling levers.
> They don't pull any more, they flip switches and push buttons.

To be replaced by a computer in the near future.
From: Silk on
On 24/11/2009 22:09, Harry Bloomfield wrote:

> Yes, but here I was discussing the smaller two wheeled vehicles.

Same kind of thing applies. Bike = very likely to be ridden by someone
with a lower regard for life than other road users, so watch out.
From: Harry Bloomfield on
Silk formulated on Wednesday :
> Information is only that, information. Information could also be that the
> driver may decide to cancel main beam at an inappropriate moment. The word
> you're looking for is confirmation. You can't be sure that you will have
> uninterrupted vision throughout the maneuver, so it's not safe to proceed.
> Opening her up and hoping for the best is not the correct answer.

Is the correct answer. So whilst relying on their lights, you have to
make a decision at which point in the maneuver you should reassess the
maneuver, should they suddenly decide to dip. In my experience most
(courteous) drivers being overtaken, will dip as you become level with
them to avoid blinding you in your mirrors.

Harry (M1BYT) (L)

From: Harry Bloomfield on
Silk formulated the question :
> Same kind of thing applies. Bike = very likely to be ridden by someone with a
> lower regard for life than other road users, so watch out.

Or perhaps someone who simply enjoys demonstrating the level of their
skill in control and safety to themselves. Car driving can also be
quite a risky business, especially for the unskilled - so why with such
an aversion to risk, take up driving?

Harry (M1BYT) (L)