You tube (shunt) lorry driver keeps his HGV licence
in [UK Drivers]
|
From: Brimstone on 27 May 2010 08:33 "GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote in message news:4bfe626d$0$5456$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... > "Brimstone" <brimstone(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message > news:7LWdnaMlmOAWz2PWnZ2dnUVZ8sCdnZ2d(a)bt.com... >> "GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote in message >> news:4bfe5066$0$17492$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... >>> "Brimstone" <brimstone(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message >>> news:N66dnW4RR9U_02PWnZ2dnUVZ8qCdnZ2d(a)bt.com... >> >>>>>> So all your theories outweigh empirical evidence and the opinion of >>>>>> the police crash investigators, the VOSA investigators and the >>>>>> Traffic Commissioner do they? >>>>> >>>>> They are not my theories, but pure physics. >>>> Like I said theories, regardless of whose they are. >>> >>> You're repeating yourself again. Theories are unproved propositions. The >>> physics invoved here are proven fact. >> >> Show this proof. >> >>>> As I said before, take a ride in a lorry, you'll learn a lot. >>> >>> There is nothing to learn by my taking more rides in lorries, unless I >>> were unfortunate enough to be involved in a 'car dragging' incident! >> If you've ridden in lorries, you certainly didn't learn anything. > > ...because they didn't crash into any cars while I was in them. Are you someone who only learns when something goes wrong?
From: Brimstone on 27 May 2010 08:35 "GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote in message news:4bfe6338$0$5489$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... > "Brimstone" <brimstone(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message > news:XemdnfmAgf69yGPWnZ2dnUVZ8r2dnZ2d(a)bt.com... >> "GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote in message >> news:4bfe5244$0$17490$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... >>> "Brimstone" <brimstone(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message >>> news:gYOdnatc5sSyzWPWnZ2dnUVZ7tmdnZ2d(a)bt.com... >>>> "GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote in message >>>> news:4bfe4d0b$0$17513$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... >>>>> "Brimstone" <brimstone(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message >>>>> news:N9ydneDT6si712PWnZ2dnUVZ8nudnZ2d(a)bt.com... >>>>>> "GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote in message >>>>>> news:4bfe4107$0$17486$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... >>>>>>> "Brimstone" <brimstone(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message >>>>>>> news:svqdndiShcXdqGPWnZ2dnUVZ8m6dnZ2d(a)bt.com... >>>>>>>> "GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote in message >>>>>>>> news:4bfe331f$0$17498$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... >>>>>>>>> "Conor" <conor(a)gmx.co.uk> wrote in message >>>>>>>>> news:865t7kFr7cU9(a)mid.individual.net... >>>>>>>>>> On 26/05/2010 17:33, GT wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> - How come lorries can stop within 6 inches of my rear bumper at >>>>>>>>>>> traffic >>>>>>>>>>> lights then? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Because they don't. Get out and look next time. You'll find its a >>>>>>>>>> lot further than 6 inches. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> At traffic lights or road junction with a "Give Way" or "Stop" >>>>>>>> line, do you stop when the white line is about to disappear from >>>>>>>> your view or do you pull up so that the front of your vehicle is on >>>>>>>> the line? If the latter, how do you know where to stop? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Simple - I stop at the line. The reason I know where to stop is that >>>>>>> I can see the line out of my side 'A' window. Being able to see >>>>>>> something enables me to know where it is. >>>>>> >>>>>> And what leads you to believe that lorry drivers don't use a similar >>>>>> technique so that they know how close they can stop behind a car? >>>>> >>>>> Because the 'line' that you talk about can be seen through the side >>>>> window of a car. >>>> >>>> Are you suggesting that it can't be seen through a lorry's side window? >>> >>> No. I'm suggesting that you and Conor have told us that a truck driver >>> can't see what is immediately in front of him. If you are now telling us >>> that the driver could see the car through his side window, then you have >>> rather destroyed your already flawed argument! >> >> You told us that you can't see a white stop line directly in front of >> your car. But, you have devised a method for stopping with your bonnet >> close to at the line at a junction. > > I don't think you are right to credit me with devising the method of > 'looking out of the window'. A white line can be seen out of the front > side window. You have now twisted things in such a way that you now imply > that the lorry driver *could* see the car in front of him, through his > side window! I think you should stop digging yourself into this hole! How can I be digging when it's you who is manipulating the spade?
From: Brimstone on 27 May 2010 08:37 "GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote in message news:4bfe6385$0$5453$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... > "Brimstone" <brimstone(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message > news:EK6dnaeGqMm9zmPWnZ2dnUVZ8q2dnZ2d(a)bt.com... >> "GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote in message >> news:4bfe4e2b$0$17484$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... >>> "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. >> It travels in a circular pattern until something obstructs it. The >> obstruction in this instance is the firer of the weapon. > > ...who hears the noise at the same volume as the person standing on the > other side of the gun who also obstructs the sound wave - proving that the > gun is heard by both the firer and the observer at the same volume. And what about someone who is positioned behind the firer, what volume will he hear it at?
From: Brimstone on 27 May 2010 08:38 "GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote in message news:4bfe63a1$0$5505$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... > "Brimstone" <brimstone(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message > news:XridnXqq5K-Py2PWnZ2dnUVZ8g-dnZ2d(a)bt.com... >> "GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote in message >> news:4bfe529b$0$17517$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... >>> "Brimstone" <brimstone(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message >>> news:EpidnUNg6bdezWPWnZ2dnUVZ8tWdnZ2d(a)bt.com... >>>> "GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote in message >>>> news:4bfe46e0$0$17524$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... >>>>> "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. >>>> How do you know? >>> I just do. How do you know otherwise? >> Whether I know otherwise is irrelevant. I'm asking you to back up your >> assertion. > and I'm asking you to back up yours. You made the first assertion, you back it up first. Unless you really want to offer, "I just do" as a reasoned argument.
From: Brimstone on 27 May 2010 08:41
"GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote in message news:4bfe6501$0$5486$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... > "Brimstone" <brimstone(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message > news:YNKdnbXS6L7lyWPWnZ2dnUVZ7tCdnZ2d(a)bt.com... >> "GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote in message >> news:4bfe5181$0$17493$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... >>> The only way he would not have heard the noise would be if he were deaf. >> >> Any evidence to support that view? Not theory, hard evidence please. > > You want evidence, watch the video. No science needed to explain the > noise - its coming from the car as it is dragged along and the noise is > louder than the engine. That's from outside the vehicle. We're discussing events inside. Care to try again? |