From: Brimstone on
"GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote in message
> "Man at B&Q" <manatbandq(a)> wrote in message
> news:3a6236a1-cfde-4278-90bb-81e6f0637636(a)
> On May 27, 11:38 am, "GT" <a...(a)b.c> wrote:

>> I'm criticising the lorry driver because he should have stopped
> MBQ failed to indent properly:
> "
> OH! He did! he was even praised for his subsequent behaviour.
> "
> Nobody questioned that - its the amount of time from the 'joining of
> vehicles' to the stopping that is the problem.
Only for you. Those with knowledge and experience of such things found that
it wasn't a problem.

From: Brimstone on
"GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote in message
> "Man at B&Q" <manatbandq(a)> wrote in message
> news:087a203b-560c-483c-90ff-9097c0a7d9f4(a)
> On May 27, 11:30 am, "GT" <a...(a)b.c> wrote:
>> "Brimstone" <brimst...(a)> wrote in message
>> news:s-mdnSZ1j58V1GPWnZ2dnUVZ8nWdnZ2d(a)
>> > <boltar2...(a)> wrote in message
>> >news:htldfr$6gk$1(a)
>> >> On Thu, 27 May 2010 10:09:10 +0100
>> >> "Brimstone" <brimst...(a)> 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
> MBQ failed to indent his post:
> "
> So what's the frequency response of that "low quality, low
> sensitivity" microphone? How does it corrspond to the frequencies
> being emitted from (a) the scraping of the car (b) the engine noise?
> "
> The frequency response of mobile phone mics are typically between 300
> hertz and 3,400 hertz, which is somewhere between the high pitched squeel
> of tyres on tarmac and the low gritty noise of a large diesel engine.
> Despite the noises being outwith the phone's sensitive response range, the
> phone would picked up both noises with equal sensitivity.
The only thing audible in the clip is a possible bit of wind noise, some
muffled sounds from the interior of the observer's car and the comment from
one of the occupants.

What do you think can be heard?

From: Brimstone on
"GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote in message
> in the same way as you can still blow a candle out even if you hold a
> wine bottle in between your mouth and the flame.
Why would anyone want to blow a candle out in such a manner?

From: Brimstone on
"bod" <bodron57(a)> wrote in message
> Brimstone wrote:
>> "bod" <bodron57(a)> wrote in message
>> news:866rjrF6lmU12(a)
>>> Brimstone wrote:
>>>> "bod" <bodron57(a)> wrote in message
>>>> news:866qevF6lmU6(a)
>>>>> Like I said at the start of this thread; "Why hasn't she been nicked
>>>>> for her obvious dangerous driving"? Or at the least, 'driving without
>>>>> due care and attention'?
>>>> I'd guess because it was a damage only incident so the police will
>>>> leave to the insurance companies.
>>> But he was taken to court and on the face of it, it was (IMO) her
>>> fault. Seems a bit one sided?
>> I hadn't realised he'd been prosecuted. As you say, one sided, but "very"
>> rather than "a bit".
> I thought a judge said he could keep his licence?
That was the Traffic Commissioner.

It's the fact, as you suggested, that he's been prosecuted and she hasn't
that is one sided.

From: Brimstone on
"GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote in message
> "Brimstone" <brimstone(a)> wrote in message
> news:5MednbJe8JpB9WPWnZ2dnUVZ8m2dnZ2d(a)
>> "GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote in message
>> news:4bfe6469$0$5477$c3e8da3(a)
>>> "Brimstone" <brimstone(a)> wrote in message
>>> news:YNKdnbXS6L7lyWPWnZ2dnUVZ7tCdnZ2d(a)
>>>> "GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote in message
>>>> news:4bfe5181$0$17493$c3e8da3(a)
>>>>> Perhaps not the first horn, but after a few horns, any alert driver is
>>>>> going to wonder what is going on!
>>>> And how many of the other "alert drivers" in the vicinity stopped to
>>>> check that there was nothing wrong with their vehicles?
>>> I should imagine a lot of other drivers checked round them to see if
>>> something was wrong, but none of them found another vehicle pinned to
>>> the front of theirs making a terrible screeching noise, smoking from its
>>> tyres and slowing them down.
>> How do you know the lorry driver didn't look around and see nothing
>> amiss?
> You don't really need an answer to that, do you?? OK! If he had looked
> about a bit, he would have spotted that there was a car stuck to the front
> of his truck!!

How can he see what's that close in front when it's out of his line of
sight, are you suggesting that he should leave his seat and walk round
whilst bowling along the m/way at 56 mph?

> He either didn't look round or wasn't bothered. I can't say which.