Cyclists carbon footprint
in [UK Drivers]
|
Prev: M25 north of Dartford crossing, fences and SPECS
Next: cheapest laptop battery camera battery camcorder battery
From: GT on 29 Jul 2010 07:38 "mileburner" <mileburner(a)btinternet.com> wrote in message news:i2ro27$g1u$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... > > "GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote in message > news:4c514e53$0$14271$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... >> >> Nobody mentioned slow moving and stationary queues - lets not move the >> goalposts! We were comparing journeys at 20mph vs 30mph. You said that >> 20mph would be faster due to slowing down for junctions and lights and >> the subsequent speeding up again. > > Point of order. You made that bit up. If I am wrong about that please post > the message ID or a Google link and I will apologise Sorry, I don't know how to post a message ID. If you look back through this direct tree of messages, you posted about 8 or so messages above this, you should find your own post that stated the following: **** quote **** OTOH the 20 mph limits encourage drivers to drive at a speed where they are not continuously (and often aggressively) speeding up and slowing down. [snip] Lost time from travelling at 30 is often gained by less time waiting in traffic queues, so the overall time of the journey can make little difference and fuel economy can be better **** end quote **** You implied that more time is lost when travelling at 30 as there will be more time spent slowing down and speeding up than the same journey at 20. This didn't make sense as the points where you slow down and speed up again would be exactly the same. The only difference in the journey is the moving parts in between which I suggested would be faster at 30 than 20. You replied by moving the goal posts - you said there were lots of traffic queues and hold-ups, which had not been mentioned in the discussion thus far. You then posted a 'point of order', denied your own words and then offerred to apologise when we quoted your own post back at you.... Should we stop this now and do something more interesting?
From: GT on 29 Jul 2010 07:41 "mileburner" <mileburner(a)btinternet.com> wrote in message news:i2ro5i$gme$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... > > "GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote in message > news:4c514ec1$0$14318$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... > >> No, that was my personal opinion. I can't talk for anyone else on this >> matter. When I used the 'we' above it was in the context of a discussion >> and I was summarising everyone elses position against your world. > > That will be the "Everyone Else Knows" argument... Yes - you should be familiar with it as you use it all the time. Difference is that you don't have any support! > I am always dubious of anyone who claims to speak on behalf of everyone > else. Then don't believe my summary - just read all the other posts for yourself. No point shouting back some nonsense about... "please miss, he said 'we', but I don't believe him and I refuse to everyone else who says the same thing, 'cos I'm always right".
From: Brimstone on 29 Jul 2010 07:46 "GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote in message news:4c515c5c$0$14274$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... > "Brimstone" <brimstone(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message > news:q-adnXYutvuhzMzRnZ2dnUVZ8sednZ2d(a)bt.com... >> >> "GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote in message >> news:4c514a08$0$14321$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... >>> "Brimstone" <brimstone(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message >>> news:QuudnQdsl7XloMzRnZ2dnUVZ8omdnZ2d(a)bt.com... >>>> >>>> "mileburner" <mileburner(a)btinternet.com> wrote in message >>>> news:i2qs3d$hec$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... >>>>> >>>>> "Brimstone" <brimstone(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message >>>>> news:SPqdnfINtp9vLdPRnZ2dnUVZ7o2dnZ2d(a)bt.com... >>>>>> >>>>>> "GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote in message >>>>>> news:4c4eafe1$0$15827$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... >>>>>>> "Brimstone" <brimstone(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message >>>>>>> news:ie-dnekxsYZ-M9PRnZ2dnUVZ8r6dnZ2d(a)bt.com... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> "GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote in message >>>>>>>> news:4c4eacf6$0$15866$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... >>>>>>>>> "Brimstone" <brimstone(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message >>>>>>>>> news:s4ednS8HDJPnNtPRnZ2dnUVZ8tCdnZ2d(a)bt.com... >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> "GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote in message >>>>>>>>>> news:4c4ea046$0$15829$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... >>>>>>>>>>> "Brimstone" <brimstone(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message >>>>>>>>>>> news:7ZKdnZ9Q97VadtDRnZ2dnUVZ7tOdnZ2d(a)bt.com... >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> "GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote in message >>>>>>>>>>>> news:4c4dea37$0$26079$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... >>>>>>>>>>>>> "Brimstone" <brimstone(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message >>>>>>>>>>>>> news:FqCdnUmuLrZNe9DRnZ2dnUVZ8lGdnZ2d(a)bt.com... >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> "GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote in message >>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:4c4ddd83$0$12278$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "mileburner" <mileburner(a)btinternet.com> wrote in message >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:i2e1s3$2kf$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote in message >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:4c49ba53$0$22739$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "mileburner" <mileburner(a)btinternet.com> wrote in message >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:i2c6v5$s8k$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote in message >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:4c496d79$0$22716$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "mileburner" <mileburner(a)btinternet.com> wrote in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> message >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Boltar's cycling advice is not really very good. I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can't imagine why... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And your road knowledge is very very very bad. We all >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know why! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Who is the "we"? are you and boltar the same person? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I was simply referring to anyone in this *driving* group >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> who knows how to drive properly. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So you are trying to drum up allies for you bizarre points >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of view? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Not my point of view matey - its the DSA and the highway >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> code! >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where in the highway code? >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Check the DSA gov website - you'll find it - look under >>>>>>>>>>>>> "making good progress" >>>>>>>>>>>> Got a link? >>>>>>>>>>> http://lmgtfy.com/?q=DSA.gov >>>>>>>>>> You've cited a specific entry in the Highway Code. Can you >>>>>>>>>> provide a direct link to it or not? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I've already said elsewhere that I can't be bothered trawling >>>>>>>>> through it all. As I have also already said, the quote I gave >>>>>>>>> earlier is from a DSA driving examiner when failing a student on >>>>>>>>> his driving test. If you need more help, please take it up with >>>>>>>>> the DSA and stop shooting the messenger (me)! >>>>>>>> What you have failed to understand is that just because one can >>>>>>>> fail a driving test for failing to do something, that doesn't mean >>>>>>>> it's in the Highway Code nor that it is an offence. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Therefore, until you either provide a link to the relevant page of >>>>>>>> the HC or confirm that your talking bollocks I'll keep shooting. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ... blanks ! >>>>>> So where's the link? >>>>> >>>>> Psst. He made it up, again :-( >>>> Indeed. Still it's nice that he's got a hobby. >>> I gave you a link to the online highway code. >> >> No, you gave me a link to www.direct.gov.uk which is the government >> portal. One then has to search for what one wants. (The previous >> arrangement where the HC had its own web space and domain name was much >> easier.) >> >>> If you refuse to click on it, then perhaps you should just open the copy >>> that you learned before your driving test. You do know the highway code, >>> right? >> I asked for a link to the specific clause you were quoting regarding >> failing to make progress. You have yet to provide it. >> >> That is, I want to you to back up your statement with some evidence. > > I did - check back for the posts regarding the 2 driving tests - one fail > and one minor. As I've said before, what one can fail a driving test for is not necessarily in the Highway Code as a "do not" nor is it an offence. So kindly stop wriggling and link to your source which shows that driving slowly is against the Highway Code and/or is an offence.
From: Brimstone on 29 Jul 2010 07:47 "GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote in message news:4c515c73$0$14274$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... > "Brimstone" <brimstone(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message > news:uYGdnd_El5dVzMzRnZ2dnUVZ8qudnZ2d(a)bt.com... >> >> "GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote in message >> news:4c514b63$0$14288$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... >>> "mileburner" <mileburner(a)btinternet.com> wrote in message >>> news:i2qtim$rv0$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... >>>> >>>> "Brimstone" <brimstone(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message >>>> news:VK6dndNIEaTHMdPRnZ2dnUVZ7sadnZ2d(a)bt.com... >>>>> >>>>> <boltar2003(a)boltar.world> wrote in message >>>>> news:i2m9n0$5j0$1(a)speranza.aioe.org... >>>>>> On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 10:34:57 +0100 >>>>>> "GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote: >>>>>>>Having said this, I'm not sure if the national 60 limit increases to >>>>>>>70 >>>>>>>*automatically* as soon as the central reservation appears. I seem to >>>>>>>remember that there has to be a 'dual carriageway' sign before the >>>>>>>limit >>>>>>>actually goes up to 70, despite the fact that the driver can clearly >>>>>>>see >>>>>>>that the carriageway has split in two. >>>>>> >>>>>> I wonder why they bother with the 60/70 difference. A head on with a >>>>>> closing >>>>>> speed of 120 isn't going to be any more survivable than one at 140. >>>>>> >>>>> A good question, especially as we now have one sign with two meanings. >>>>> >>>>> For those who started driving more recently, the current NSL sign >>>>> (white disc with a black diagonal bar) original meant "No Speed >>>>> Limit". >>>> >>>> Indeed, but it the world of boltar and GT that would mean that any road >>>> user would need to accelerate to infinity otherwise they would failing >>>> to make progress. It needed capping because many drivers saw No Speed >>>> Limit as an excuse to drive as fast as they liked with no regard for >>>> safety. >>> >>> When you misquote things like this, you just end up looking silly - its >>> the DSA's rules, not mine! I think you will find that when you sat your >>> driving test, it was a DSA examiner that sat beside you, not me or >>> Bolter!. If you want to drive around ignoring all the rules of the road, >>> then please just stay away from my children as they walk to school, you >>> lunatic! >>> >>>> And for those with knowledge as limited as GT and boltar, the NSL also >>>> varies depending on the type of vehicle you are driving. >>> >>> My knowledge is limited to that of the highway code and DSA. What more >>> 'knowledge' do we need when discussing road laws and road craft in a >>> driving group? >> How about that knowledge of good driving which is not contained in the >> HC? >> >> Now, how about that link to the clause in the Highway Code which says >> that going too slowly is an offence? > > See other post. Done. How about that link to the clause in the Highway Code which says that going too slowly is an offence?
From: Brimstone on 29 Jul 2010 07:50
"GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote in message news:4c515cbd$0$14322$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... > "Brimstone" <brimstone(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message > news:V_GdnROxh64Tz8zRnZ2dnUVZ7tKdnZ2d(a)bt.com... >> >> "GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote in message >> news:4c514d12$0$14303$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... >>> "Brimstone" <brimstone(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message >>> news:y9-dnS16BpdnoMzRnZ2dnUVZ8oCdnZ2d(a)bt.com... >>>> >>>> "GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote in message >>>> news:4c4ea9fe$0$15854$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... >>>>> "Brimstone" <brimstone(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message >>>>> news:beadnQD0fLE5BtPRnZ2dnUVZ8iidnZ2d(a)bt.com... >>>>>> >>>>>> "Derek C" <del.copeland(a)tiscali.co.uk> wrote in message >>>>>> news:e057a689-fb6a-4647-b423-0dd9d36d2400(a)q2g2000vbd.googlegroups.com... >>>>>> >>>>>>> If you go faster, you have a better chance of getting to the traffic >>>>>>> lights while they are still on green. >>>>>> >>>>>> How do you know they're on green at the moment? >>>>> >>>>> As posted already, in some cities, the lights are timed to increase >>>>> traffic flow - as one set of lights changes to green the traffic >>>>> accellerates up to the speed limit and the lights down the road are >>>>> timed so that as the traffic arrives at the speed limit, the lights >>>>> change to green. Of course, if there is a slow moving vehicle holding >>>>> everyone up and illegally refusing to yield, then this system falls >>>>> down around its feet! >>>>> >>>>> I also read that lots of these timings were changed a few months >>>>> before London brought in congestion charging - this was to falsly >>>>> increase the congestion and then after the congestion charging was >>>>> introduced, they put the timings back and claimed that congestion >>>>> charging was a winner! >>>> All of which may or may not be true, but it doesn't answer my question. >>> >>> To answer your question in a time-fixed statement is impossible. The >>> direct answer to your question is that he can see that they are green at >>> the moment... oh hang on... now they're red... and now green again. It >>> was a silly question! >> No it wasn't. What about sightlines? How many roads do you know where >> it's possible to see the next set of traffic lights from a mile or two >> away? > > Why would you want to see the next set of lights from a mile or two away? > A few hundred yards is far enough and for that, just pick a city! There was nothing about wanting to see them, the comment was, " If you go faster, you have a better chance of getting to the traffic lights while they are still on green." Hence my question, "How do you know they're on green at the moment?" |