You tube (shunt) lorry driver keeps his HGV licence
in [UK Drivers]
|
From: GT on 27 May 2010 06:49 "Conor" <conor(a)gmx.co.uk> wrote in message news:866vfdFh59U9(a)mid.individual.net... > On 27/05/2010 11:18, GT wrote: >> "Conor"<conor(a)gmx.co.uk> wrote in message >> news:866u5aF87fU6(a)mid.individual.net... >>> On 27/05/2010 09:53, GT wrote: >>> >>>>> To the side of it. Noise is always louder to the side. >>>> >>>> In whos world? >>> >>> Everyones. I've been in the Army. A rifle being fired sounds a shitload >>> louder to the person to the side of it than the person firing it. >> >> That's simply not true. >> > And your first hand experience is? ..22 rifles and shotguns. And regardless of what guns you have fired, the sound waves are emmitted in a circular pattern, with the exception of directly in front of the weapon as the silencer bounces the sound round and muffles it.
From: Brimstone on 27 May 2010 06:52 "GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote in message news:4bfe4ccc$0$17489$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... > "Conor" <conor(a)gmx.co.uk> wrote in message > news:866velFh59U8(a)mid.individual.net... >> On 27/05/2010 11:17, GT wrote: >> >>>> There was no sudden adding of weight. >>> >>> There was in your post - I was replying to you saying "...even 5 tonnes >>> on >>> the back of an artic..." >>> >> I never mentioned a sudden adding of weight. > > Yes you did - we are talking about the sudden addition of significant, > frictional weight to a moving vehicle when you posted saying that adding 5 > tonnes to an artic wouldn't make any difference. If you were not talking > about the sudden addition of weight then your post was a time-wasting > irrelevance and we should leave this thread as it will very soon turn to > insults again. In this instance there was no sudden addition, it was comparatively gradual.
From: Brimstone on 27 May 2010 06:53 "GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote in message news:4bfe49cf$0$17497$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... > "Brimstone" <brimstone(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message > news:s-mdnSZ1j58V1GPWnZ2dnUVZ8nWdnZ2d(a)bt.com... >> <boltar2003(a)boltar.world> wrote in message >> news:htldfr$6gk$1(a)speranza.aioe.org... >>> On Thu, 27 May 2010 10:09:10 +0100 >>> "Brimstone" <brimstone(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>> Well mine has about 350 but thats beside the point. The noise of >>>>> hitting >>>>> the >>>>> cone and the scraping sound would have been a giveaway if I hadn't >>>>> seen it >>>>> already (cone knocked over by another vehicle in roadworks , going to >>>>> fast >>>>> to >>>>> swerve , not an interesting tale). >>>>> >>>>What if you hadn't seen it and the collision was so gentle that there >>>>was no >>>>noise transmitted to you? >>> >>> Then I wouldn't have heard the initial bang. But I'd still have heard >>> the >>> scraping sound coming from under the car. >>> >> How do you know beyond all reasonable doubt that you would have heard it? >> > Because it is audible on the video clip which is recorded on a low > quality, low sensitivity microphone from 20 feet away and is clearly much > louder than the engine noise from the truck. The comment was directed at Boltar's suggestion that he would hear such a noise from inside his car.
From: GT on 27 May 2010 06:54 "Brimstone" <brimstone(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message news:kpWdnXz9l73Q02PWnZ2dnUVZ8rednZ2d(a)bt.com... > "GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote in message > news:4bfe4ba2$0$17517$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... >> "Brimstone" <brimstone(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message >> news:fMCdnWBOlNJD2mPWnZ2dnUVZ7vCdnZ2d(a)bt.com... >>> "GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote in message >>> news:4bfe3e42$0$17506$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... [snip] >>> Why are you criticising the lorry driver when the situation only arose >>> because of the stupidity of a car driver? >> >> I'm criticising the lorry driver because he should have stopped >> regardless of who caused the incident. > > Indeed, but if one is not aware of an incident then there is no reason to > stop is there? We have established the mechanics of the incident and we know that he was aware of the loss in power and so should have stopped. Hence my criticism.
From: Brimstone on 27 May 2010 06:55
<boltar2003(a)boltar.world> wrote in message news:htliaq$d5t$1(a)speranza.aioe.org... > On Thu, 27 May 2010 11:29:22 +0100 > "Brimstone" <brimstone(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>What if you hadn't seen it and the collision was so gentle that there >>>>was >>>>no >>>>noise transmitted to you? >>> >>> Then I wouldn't have heard the initial bang. But I'd still have heard >>> the >>> scraping sound coming from under the car. >>> >>How do you know beyond all reasonable doubt that you would have heard it? > > This is just getting silly now. It got silly when you started going on about things of which you know nothing. > The sound of a cone being dragged is quite > noticable! That depends on the vehicle one is in. > Also on a side note , don't try and kick the thing into the bushes once > you > extracate it from under the car. They have concrete bases and it hurts! :) > I've never seen a traffic cone with a concrete base, but I'll take you word that it hurts. |