|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
“He just kept saying cyclists have the right of way. Well then, they should be paying road tax.”
|
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
“He just kept saying cyclists have the right of way. Well then, they should be paying road tax.”
On 18/05/2019 08:36, MrCheerful wrote:
https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/new...roads-16251050 They go "too fast" but drivers have difficulty overtaking. Huh? |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
“He just kept saying cyclists have the right of way. Well then, they should be paying road tax.”
On a /m^2 basis or road damage basis?
CIA |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
“He just kept saying cyclists have the right of way. Well then, they should be paying road tax.”
On 18/05/2019 15:42, Bret Cahill wrote:
On a /m^2 basis or road damage basis? CIA Part of the problem in the UK is that it has become fashionable for people to move out of town into country areas and buy cars that are too wide for the roads. It's always somebody else's fault that there are potholes on roads built in the 1920's and there isn't enough space to park, overtake a cyclist or whatever. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
“He just kept saying cyclists have the right of way. Well then, they should be paying road tax.”
On Saturday, May 18, 2019 at 8:36:33 AM UTC+1, MrCheerful wrote:
https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/new...roads-16251050 Anyone driving before the Road Fund Licence was abolished probably should not still be driving. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
“He just kept saying cyclists have the right of way. Well then, they should be paying road tax.”
On a /m^2 basis or road damage basis?
CIA Part of the problem in the UK is that it has become fashionable for people to move out of town into country areas and buy cars that are too wide for the roads. Someone needs to do a formal study on it to get the actual numbers but the reason they buy oversized cars in the U. S. is they are too fat to fit into a normal car. Have you ever tried to wear a suit that's 2 - 3 sizes too small? With my own informal observations I get a correlation coefficient of ~ 0.9 for the junk food in the shopping cart vs obesity relationship. Guessing not so wildly the correlation coefficient must be at least 0.8 for the obese driving oversize motor vehicles. The commercial aircraft industry struggles in vain to get the lard off the runway. I feel sorry for Boeing, GE, Airbus, RR, Pratt, etc. No matter how big they make the fans the passengers just keep getting heavier. It's getting more and more difficult to design a plane where the props or fans don't hit the runway. The engines are already almost as large as the fuselage. Sooner or later they will have to go VTOL with props designed to disintegrate on impact on emergency landings. It's always somebody else's fault that there are potholes on roads built in the 1920's and there isn't enough space to park, overtake a cyclist or whatever. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
“He just kept saying cyclists have the right of way. Well then, they should be paying road tax.”
On 21/05/2019 06:14, Bret Cahill wrote:
On a /m^2 basis or road damage basis? CIA Part of the problem in the UK is that it has become fashionable for people to move out of town into country areas and buy cars that are too wide for the roads. Someone needs to do a formal study on it to get the actual numbers but the reason they buy oversized cars in the U. S. is they are too fat to fit into a normal car. Once upon a time American and European cars were a different size. European cars were a better fit for European roads. Have you ever tried to wear a suit that's 2 - 3 sizes too small? The useful interior of a car doesn't correlate with the outside dimensions. When cars did not have central locking and it was possible for the driver to reach across to operate the passenger door lock. Most of the extra width has just put more air between driver and passenger. With my own informal observations I get a correlation coefficient of ~ 0.9 for the junk food in the shopping cart vs obesity relationship. Guessing not so wildly the correlation coefficient must be at least 0.8 for the obese driving oversize motor vehicles. The commercial aircraft industry struggles in vain to get the lard off the runway. I feel sorry for Boeing, GE, Airbus, RR, Pratt, etc. No matter how big they make the fans the passengers just keep getting heavier. ....and if the airlines charged for the total weight of passenger and luggage, the politically correct brigade would shout "discrimination!". It's getting more and more difficult to design a plane where the props or fans don't hit the runway. The engines are already almost as large as the fuselage. Sooner or later they will have to go VTOL with props designed to disintegrate on impact on emergency landings. Increasing bypass makes the engine more efficient. Whereas the car industry only has to concern itself with consumer vanity and paying lip service to government regulations, the commercial aircraft industry has to concern itself with operating costs. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
“He just kept saying cyclists have the right of way. Well then, they should be paying road tax.”
On a /m^2 basis or road damage basis?
CIA Part of the problem in the UK is that it has become fashionable for people to move out of town into country areas and buy cars that are too wide for the roads. Someone needs to do a formal study on it to get the actual numbers but the reason they buy oversized cars in the U. S. is they are too fat to fit into a normal car. Once upon a time American and European cars were a different size. European cars were a better fit for European roads. Have you ever tried to wear a suit that's 2 - 3 sizes too small? The useful interior of a car doesn't correlate with the outside dimensions. When cars did not have central locking and it was possible for the driver to reach across to operate the passenger door lock. Most of the extra width has just put more air between driver and passenger. That may be true in part, but they are mostly concerned about how they look the 3 seconds required getting into and out of the vehicle. Once they are in or out it doesn't matter much. With my own informal observations I get a correlation coefficient of ~ 0.9 for the junk food in the shopping cart vs obesity relationship. Guessing not so wildly the correlation coefficient must be at least 0.8 for the obese driving oversize motor vehicles. The commercial aircraft industry struggles in vain to get the lard off the runway. I feel sorry for Boeing, GE, Airbus, RR, Pratt, etc. No matter how big they make the fans the passengers just keep getting heavier. ...and if the airlines charged for the total weight of passenger and luggage, the politically correct brigade would shout "discrimination!". It's getting more and more difficult to design a plane where the props or fans don't hit the runway. The engines are already almost as large as the fuselage. Sooner or later they will have to go VTOL with props designed to disintegrate on impact on emergency landings. Increasing bypass makes the engine more efficient. Whereas the car industry only has to concern itself with consumer vanity and paying lip service to government regulations, the commercial aircraft industry has to concern itself with operating costs. 2 oilcos are now calling for a carbon tax + rebate along with the 4 former Fed chairs and 27 Noble laureates. That may make operating costs an issue an for vehicles as well. Here's one suggested aggressively progressive carbon tax table: Tons/Year Income from your carbon debit card 0 $5000 1 $5000 2 $5000 3 $4950 4 4850 5 4700 6 4500 7 4250 8 3950 9 3600 10 3200 11 2750 12 2250 13 1700 14 1100 15 450 - Break even 16 -300 17 -1150 18 -2100 19 -3150 20 -4300 21 -5550 22 -6900 23 -8350 24 -9900 25 -11550 26 -13300 27 -15150 28 -17100 29 -19150 30 -21300 31 -23550 32 -25900 33 -28350 34 -30900 35 -33550 36 -36300 37 -39150 38 -42100 39 -45150 40 -48300 41 -51550 42 -54900 43 -58350 44 -61900 45 -65550 46 -69300 47 -73150 48 -77100 49 -81150 50 -85300 51 -89950 52 -95100 53 -100750 54 -106900 55 -113550 56 -120700 57 -128350 58 -136500 59 -145150 60 -154300 61 -163950 62 -174100 63 -184750 64 -195900 65 -207550 66 -219700 67 -232350 68 -245500 69 -259150 70 -273300 71 -287950 72 -303100 73 -318750 74 -334900 75 -351550 76 -368700 77 -386350 78 -404500 79 -423150 80 -442300 81 -461950 82 -482100 83 -502750 84 -523900 85 -545550 86 -567700 87 -590350 88 -613500 89 -637150 90 -661300 91 -685950 92 -711100 93 -736750 94 -762900 95 -789550 96 -816700 97 -844350 98 -872500 99 -901150 100 -930300 101 -960450 102 -991600 103 -1023750 104 -1056900 105 -1091050 106 -1126200 107 -1162350 108 -1199500 109 -1237650 110 -1276800 111 -1316950 112 -1358100 113 -1400250 114 -1443400 115 -1487550 116 -1532700 117 -1578850 118 -1626000 119 -1674150 120 -1723300 121 -1773450 122 -1824600 123 -1876750 124 -1929900 125 -1984050 126 -2039200 127 -2095350 128 -2152500 129 -2210650 130 -2269800 131 -2329950 132 -2391100 133 -2453250 134 -2516400 135 -2580550 136 -2645700 137 -2711850 138 -2779000 139 -2847150 140 -2916300 141 -2986450 142 -3057600 143 -3129750 144 -3202900 145 -3277050 146 -3352200 147 -3428350 148 -3505500 149 -3583650 150 -3662800 151 -3742950 152 -3824100 153 -3906250 154 -3989400 155 -4073550 156 -4158700 157 -4244850 158 -4332000 159 -4420150 160 -4509300 161 -4599450 162 -4690600 163 -4782750 164 -4875900 165 -4970050 166 -5065200 167 -5161350 168 -5258500 169 -5356650 170 -5455800 171 -5555950 172 -5657100 173 -5759250 174 -5862400 175 -5966550 176 -6071700 177 -6177850 178 -6285000 179 -6393150 180 -6502300 181 -6612450 182 -6723600 183 -6835750 184 -6948900 185 -7063050 186 -7178200 187 -7294350 188 -7411500 189 -7529650 190 -7648800 191 -7768950 192 -7890100 193 -8012250 194 -8135400 195 -8259550 196 -8384700 197 -8510850 198 -8638000 199 -8766150 200 -8895300 201 -9025450 202 -9156600 203 -9288750 204 -9421900 205 -9556050 206 -9691200 207 -9827350 208 -9964500 209 -10102650 210 -10241800 211 -10381950 212 -10523100 213 -10665250 214 -10808400 215 -10952550 216 -11097700 217 -11243850 218 -11391000 219 -11539150 220 -11688300 221 -11838450 222 -11989600 223 -12141750 224 -12294900 225 -12449050 226 -12604200 227 -12760350 228 -12917500 229 -13075650 230 -13234800 231 -13394950 232 -13556100 233 -13718250 234 -13881400 235 -14045550 236 -14210700 237 -14376850 238 -14544000 239 -14712150 240 -14881300 241 -15051450 242 -15222600 243 -15394750 244 -15567900 245 -15742050 246 -15917200 247 -16093350 248 -16270500 249 -16448650 250 -16627800 251 -16807950 252 -16989100 253 -17171250 254 -17354400 255 -17538550 256 -17723700 257 -17909850 258 -18097000 259 -18285150 260 -18474300 261 -18664450 The Canadian carbon card would be tastefully embossed with a hologram of a tits up grizzolar bear. Tilt the card a little and the legs of the bear twitch as in the later stages of rigor mortis. Bret Cahill "A little more, a little less. How much fate rides on so little!" -- Nietzsche |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
“He just kept saying cyclists have the right of way. Well then, they should be paying road tax.”
On 21/05/2019 17:16, Bret Cahill wrote:
On a /m^2 basis or road damage basis? CIA Part of the problem in the UK is that it has become fashionable for people to move out of town into country areas and buy cars that are too wide for the roads. Someone needs to do a formal study on it to get the actual numbers but the reason they buy oversized cars in the U. S. is they are too fat to fit into a normal car. Once upon a time American and European cars were a different size. European cars were a better fit for European roads. Have you ever tried to wear a suit that's 2 - 3 sizes too small? The useful interior of a car doesn't correlate with the outside dimensions. When cars did not have central locking and it was possible for the driver to reach across to operate the passenger door lock. Most of the extra width has just put more air between driver and passenger. That may be true in part, but they are mostly concerned about how they look the 3 seconds required getting into and out of the vehicle. Once they are in or out it doesn't matter much. Well it can matter... the seat in my previous car was obviously designed for people that bring their own upholstery; it had side bolsters which no part of me touched when sitting centrally and it gave me back ache from trying to stop myself from sliding around. Being a slim, agile cyclist, a Lotus/Caterham 7 would be sufficient for me so the entry/exit issue doesn't really cross my mind. I would have thought it better to have taller, narrower bodywork, like cars from the 20's, to give a bigger door aperture when the opening is restricted between parked cars. Include suicide doors - I am sure they can be made safe enough these days. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
“He just kept saying cyclists have theright of way. Well then, they should be paying roadtax.”
On Tue, 21 May 2019 19:39:11 +0100, TMS320 wrote:
Include suicide doors - I am sure they can be made safe enough these days. A handful of modern cars have them. Quite a high proportion of Rolls Royce have them for at least some of the doors. regards, Ian SMith -- |\ /| no .sig |o o| |/ \| |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
The things cyclists do to avoid paying anything. | Mrcheerful | UK | 1 | January 19th 15 06:53 PM |
Cyclists, why are we paying for your bikes? | Mrcheerful[_3_] | UK | 5 | August 8th 13 05:53 PM |
Cyclists, why are we paying for your bikes? | Mrcheerful[_3_] | UK | 0 | August 1st 13 12:22 AM |
Paying Road Fund dues was never a fee for using a road | Squashme | UK | 13 | September 18th 11 12:00 AM |
UK - Paying for the road | Vincent Patrick | Australia | 11 | December 10th 06 01:04 AM |