From: Cynic on
On 10 Jun 2010 14:37:10 GMT, Adrian <toomany2cvs(a)> wrote:

>It's precisely the difference between driving in a controlled situation,
>such as a track, and an unpredictable one, such as the road, that means
>they need to practice on the road.

These days all the necessary skills could be practised *more*
effectively using computer simulators than than they can on a real
road. You cannot guarantee that every condition that is needed to be
practised will occur frequently enough (if at all) on a real road, but
a simulator can be programmed to create a similar set of conditions
time and time again until the trainee has mastered coping with them.

The effect of a blowout or rear-end shunt at 100MPH and other very
dangerous situations could not even be *demonstrated* in a real car,
but a trainee could practise recognising and coping with such
situations over and over again in a simulator, as well as seeing the
possibly fatal effects of doing something incorrectly. Differences in
the characteristics of different vehicles can be demontrated in
minutes by setting up 100% identical situations with the simulator in
various vehicle modes.

No time is wasted getting to or from the roads needed to practise on,
and the situations that require training need not be interspersed with
many minutes of routine driving - all leading to faster training and
less instructor time. Weather conditions and day and night can be set
up exactly when needed for the training schedule.

Sure, such simulators are expensive, but would save lots of money in
both manpower and fuel/vehicle costs as well as providing faster and
more effective training for the reasons stated, and so would pay for
themselves within a reasonable period. A modern simulator is just the
same as the real thing in everything except the *full* simulation of
"G" force - and a 3-axis simulator comes very close to simulating even

Airline pilots *only ever* practise dealing with abnormal situations
in a simulator. If you believe what the police say about driver
training only being possible in the "real thing", you would be
demanding that pilots deliberately shut down engines, set the aircraft
on fire and depressurise cabins in order to practise their emergency
procedures on a real flight.


From: Adrian on
Graham Murray <newspost(a)> gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying:

>> It's precisely the difference between driving in a controlled
>> situation, such as a track, and an unpredictable one, such as the road,
>> that means they need to practice on the road.

> Or do as airline pilots do and learn and practice in a simulator rather
> than on the road. That way they can be trained to handle potentially
> dangerous situations before they encounter them on the road.

Have you ever seen how much an airliner simulator costs? Even to hire?

Here's a clue...
From: AlanG on
On Thu, 10 Jun 2010 13:24:39 +0100, "GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote:

>"AlanG" <invalid(a)> wrote in message
>> On Thu, 10 Jun 2010 10:15:17 +0000 (UTC), boltar2003(a)
>> wrote:
>>>On Thu, 10 Jun 2010 10:59:36 +0100
>>>AlanG <invalid(a)> wrote:
>>>>243 DO NOT stop or park
>>>> * on a bend
>>>Thats a bit vague. What radius of bend? Most roads bend to some extent.
>>>rarely do you find one thats arrow straight.
>> There is a difference between a bend where your view is appreciably
>> restricted and a curve where it isn't. If you don't know the
>> difference then you shouldn't be driving
>Aren't bend and curve synonyms? The introduction of 'visibility' definitely
>adds to the sentence, but but a bend is a curve is a bend!
Take it up with the compilers of the highway code and road traffic
regulations. I only go by what I was taught in 1964 when I first got
behind the wheel of a land rover.
From: Nick Finnigan on
AlanG wrote:
> On Wed, 09 Jun 2010 20:12:03 +0100, Nick Finnigan <nix(a)>
> wrote:
>> AlanG wrote:
>>> On Wed, 09 Jun 2010 17:31:02 +0100, Nick Finnigan <nix(a)>
>>> wrote:
>>>> However, there is no law against parking on pavements outside London.
>>> There is.
>> No there isn't.
> Yes there is

No, there isn't.

>>> It is called obstruction and the local plod use it a few
>> You can park on a pavement without obstructing. You can obstruct a road
>> by parking on the carriageway.
> So?
> The police will still issue a FPN in this area if you park on the
> footpath.

As they should, but not on pavements. Where is 'this area'?

> Note the 'elsewhere' and the 'obstruct'

And the lack of MUST NOT outside London.

>> There is no law against parking too close to the junction.
> Yes there is

No, there isn't.

> 242 You MUST NOT
> You MUST NOT leave your vehicle or trailer in a dangerous position or
> where it causes any unnecessary obstruction of the road.

And that does not automatically include close to the junction.
The Lighting Regulations clarify that you may park there.
From: Adrian on
Cynic <cynic_999(a)> gurgled happily, sounding much like they
were saying:


> Or not. I cannot see anything on that site that discusses the cost of a
> flight simulator. I cannot even find the cost they are hiring time on
> one without registering.

Roll down to the bottom of that page.

Prices start at CHF1175 for half an hour on an MD-80 sim, and rise to
CHF2100 for two hours on an A330 sim. That's £700 to £1300.