104mph cop keeps job -- The Simple Truth about Speeding from the Horse'sMouth

I dunno, I think he's right about selfishness. There's no courtesy
left on the roads, is there? It used to be that if you erred and
another driver admonished you, a wave of apology was proffered and
accepted. Now a bout of apoplectic rage ensues.

And nobody ever lets anybody out any more - except the dipshit in
front of me on a main road who tests her ABS to a smoking halt to let
a funeral cortege out. Or something like that.

 

It usually means business property and interest extorted by the state from
the private owners that financed and developed it to a profitable state. It
means profitable businesses or businesses with potential for growth or
profitability being managed in accordance with outmoded and discredited
socialist quasi-religious dogma in order to cripple them financially,
destroy productivity and make vast numbers of workers unemployed and
dependant upon the state.

Examples from the UK include (but are not limited to), shipbuilding,
aircraft manufacture, railways, railway infrastructure and dependant
industries, weapons manufacturing, car manufacturing, truck/LGV and bus
manufacturing, the coal industry, the steel industry ...

 

If he's right no-one seems to have told my employers, or their
shareholders for that matter.

 

yone going less than 70 on any m-way.

90kmh is the speed they cruise along at. And bloody dangerous it is
too.
Imagine, you've got 480hp, cruise control, automatic engine braking
and a speed limiter that is set at 90kmh. It might be set at 90, but
it could come in at anywhere between 85 and 95. Thats why you get
trucks crawling past one another on the motorway, at speeds below the
speed limit for the class of vehicle.
Befor truck speed limiters were madatory (iirc 1992) there were far
fewer truck overtakes as the driver was responsible for maintaining
the speed, not the limiter. On the motorway, virtually all the trucks
that could maintain 60mph did so with only a few underpowered motors
going slower.
Now most trucks have sufficient power to maintain cruising speed up
most motorway hills, but all are on limiters that vary from truck to
truck so you get more trucks overtaking.

--
ColonelTupperware
spouting bollocks on Usenet since 1997
Usenet FAQ at
http://www.its.caltech.edu/its/services/internetapps/news/news2.shtml
UPCE FAQ at http://upce.org.uk/
UKRM FAQ at http://www.ukrm.net/faq/

 

What do you think I mean by the word "accident", as a rule people
don't crash their cars on purpose.

 

I never said that it did. I said that the faster you are travelling
when accident occurs the greater the force of impact of a collision
and the higher the chance of fatalities.

 

Pip wrote

Not unless there has been a major changer in the way Homo Sapiens think
and act in the last 50 years. Man has always been selfish, the nature
of the beast and all that. These days the roads just happen to be the
place they tend to congregate in large numbers.

I wouldn't know, I never err. And if by some mischance I ever do I
certainly won't be slowing down just to exchange cheery waves with
someone on the verge of a heart attack. Although I might consider
giving them the internationally recognised gesture indicating that I am
about to pull a wheelie. Attempt to pull a wheelie, sorry.

Have you considered that there may be a connection between this and the
Badgers nest you had removed form your head recently? A slaphead Pip is
not a pretty sight.

 

You fail to mention the nature of that proportionality.

It could be argued that, as a result of their reduced mass, bikes
should be allowed to travel legally at speeds far in excess of those
permitted for cars.

Or that Caterhams should be able to go faster than Bentleys.

 

You really don't know what you're talking about.

How is a four point belt and a /roll/ cage going to dissipate the energy?

 

An "accident" is a totally unforseen event. Most road traffic incidents are
totally foreseeable and avoidable.

 

Hence the police signs requesting information no longer say "accident"
but "crash". Certainly here in Sussex.

 

How do you work that one out?
A lot of high speed accidents, due to modern technology, are survivable

You should go out and drive on a British road. There are lot more things
dangerous things done on UK road than speeding.

 

: chris wrote:
:
: >The railway's have effectively
: >been nationalised again by the back door by Labour.
:
: You haven't any idea what "nationalised" means, have you?

I have every idea. What makes you think the railway's haven't been
effectively re-nationalised again?

Railtrack - a private firm, with private shareholders - was brought back
under state control. Bought back at a minimal price. Indeed, whilst
the train companies are still private companies, Railtrack (now Network
Rail) is a STATE OWNED COMPANY.

It is _you_ who needs to do further reading, not me.

 

I try to take the precaution of Not Having Accidents.

It's worked pretty well for the last ten years, though I did have some
karmic credit rolled over from the couple of years before that...

 

They haven't.

 

I'd agree with the old bloke that smells of wee here.

I pass a motorway accident about once a week, so call it once in about
5-600 miles of driving. I wouldn't think most of them were heavy, but
to be honest I'm too busy watching the road to rubber-neck the accident
properly.

 

Actually, I though I'd better expand on my "They Haven't" post.

Network Rail is *NOT* a state owned company. The railways have *NOT*
been renationalised. I suggest you know what you're talking about before
arguing the toss with railway employees.

Network Rail is a company limited by guarantee. This means that, while
they are a private organisation and operate as a commercial business,
they have no shareholders. Instead they are accountable to members, who
do not receive dividends or share capital. They have similar rights to
those of shareholders in a public company, except they have no financial
or economic interest in Network Rail. This means they have a duty to act
in the best interests of the company without personal bias.

 

Quite. As I mentioned on ukrm recently in another thread, I have what I
call Fear Of The Unknown when it comes to cornering. I go in far less
hard than I would if I had full foreknowledge of the road ahead, or was
following someone else (after all, if they're not embedded in a surprise
tractor, odds are I'll get through too)

Not an unhealthy fear, that. But rarely related to doing 120mph on
mostly clear motorways...

 

Bollocks has the OP stated speed doesn't kill its the incompetent
driver driving at high speed that does the killing. You can bet had
they ridden the accident storm when there was no speed limits on the
first Mways instead of imposing the 70 limit there would not be half
the accidents on Mways now that there are .
Grant .

 

What's a "posh" car?


--
Cheers

Peter

Remove the INVALID to reply