On Sat, 8 Nov 2003 13:39:59 -0000, "iantheengineer"
wrote:



As I explained I have made a career out of drainage and traffic enginering
so I am full aware of what works. What happens when you de-bottleneck as you
put it, you send the problem downstream,

I take it this does not amount to a defense of bottlenecks in traffic
systems. You wouldn't propose build-outs and chicanes in the M1?

this exactly what I was saying with
the drainage problems. You remove one obstruction letting more traffic
through and then it hits the next one and so on and so on. At some point you
have to step back from the problem and say well this isnt really solving the
problem just transferring it, how do we solve it. With traffic we can change
the way that the demand is satisfied through public transport which
effectively increases the passengers that can be got ionto the town without
increasing infrastructure. We could keep going down the road of improving
junctions but where would it end,

Good question where will it all end? Since there are no answers to
that why don't we just sort out the problems we have now that have
been created by the previous governments over the previous 45 years.

we have been doing this for the past 100
or so years and we still havent solved it this way.


Cars solved the horse and cart problem in London for 70 of the last
hundred years. Taking our eye of the ball over the last 30 has left us
in the state we are now.

DG

"Steve Firth" wrote in message
.. .
iantheengineer wrote:

An avalanche ( arent these made of snow which formed water!!!) made of
rock

http://library.thinkquest.org/C00360...rockavalanches
shtml

, I think you are talking of a pyroclastic cloud.

I think you possibly mean Nuée Ardente, but that's not what I was
referring to.

Go on then Steve upto what level and in what areas are you educated
too???

What the **** has my education to do with you?


--
Having problems understanding usenet? Or do you simply need help but
are getting unhelpful answers? Subscribe to: uk.net.beginners for
friendly advice in a flame-free environment.

Just curious???

"Steve Firth" wrote in message
.. .
iantheengineer wrote:

but to go by your theories we would only need one mathematical formula
to
solve all of the worlds issues and this isnt the case

Wrong again.

--
Having problems understanding usenet? Or do you simply need help but
are getting unhelpful answers? Subscribe to: uk.net.beginners for
friendly advice in a flame-free environment.

How so?

"Paul Smith" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 8 Nov 2003 13:39:59 -0000, "iantheengineer"
wrote:

As I explained I have made a career out of drainage and traffic
enginering
so I am full aware of what works. What happens when you de-bottleneck as
you
put it, you send the problem downstream, this exactly what I was saying
with
the drainage problems. You remove one obstruction letting more traffic
through and then it hits the next one and so on and so on. At some point
you
have to step back from the problem and say well this isnt really solving
the
problem just transferring it, how do we solve it. With traffic we can
change
the way that the demand is satisfied through public transport which
effectively increases the passengers that can be got ionto the town
without
increasing infrastructure. We could keep going down the road of improving
junctions but where would it end, we have been doing this for the past
100
or so years and we still havent solved it this way.

You're a TRAFFIC ENGINEER?

God save us all.
--
Paul Smith
Scotland, UK
http://www.safespeed.org.uk
please remove "XYZ" to reply by email
speed cameras cost lives

and drainage

"Steve Firth" wrote in message
.. .
Paul Smith wrote:

You're a TRAFFIC ENGINEER?

I doubt it. He may be a thick **** working in a local authority
somewhere. They usually have exaggerated views of their own
capabilities.

--
Having problems understanding usenet? Or do you simply need help but
are getting unhelpful answers? Subscribe to: uk.net.beginners for
friendly advice in a flame-free environment.

I actually work for a consultancy and not a local authority, so wrong again
Steve

"Steve Firth" wrote in message
.. .
iantheengineer wrote:

As an engineer

..you over rate your abilities.

--
Having problems understanding usenet? Or do you simply need help but
are getting unhelpful answers? Subscribe to: uk.net.beginners for
friendly advice in a flame-free environment.

At least I have abilities Steve unlike your good self

"Steve Firth" wrote in message
.. .
derek wrote:

Professor Unwin, I assure you that around here I can show you stone
(most likely millstone grit) walls that have deflected (The stones
have bent it's not that the all the motor joints have broken and the
wall is just a collection of stones in formation) by about an inch in
a 5 foot run under their own weight and the weight of the stones above
them.

I'm wondering what sort of engineer he is (service 'engineer'?) Any
engineer worth his salt knows that rock and glass both flow. On one
degree course that I know of engineering students were monitoring the
changes in the glass of the building that they worked in. Knowing that
glass and rock will deform and flow under pressure is essential for
civils. If they can't design around the known characteristics of the
material then they are **** all use to anyone.

--
Having problems understanding usenet? Or do you simply need help but
are getting unhelpful answers? Subscribe to: uk.net.beginners for
friendly advice in a flame-free environment.

I keep asking myself what use you are Steve but as yet you havent been any

"Steve Firth" wrote in message
.. .
derek wrote:

Professor Unwin, I assure you that around here I can show you stone
(most likely millstone grit) walls that have deflected (The stones
have bent it's not that the all the motor joints have broken and the
wall is just a collection of stones in formation) by about an inch in
a 5 foot run under their own weight and the weight of the stones above
them.

I'm wondering what sort of engineer he is (service 'engineer'?) Any
engineer worth his salt knows that rock and glass both flow. On one
degree course that I know of engineering students were monitoring the
changes in the glass of the building that they worked in. Knowing that
glass and rock will deform and flow under pressure is essential for
civils. If they can't design around the known characteristics of the
material then they are **** all use to anyone.

--
Having problems understanding usenet? Or do you simply need help but
are getting unhelpful answers? Subscribe to: uk.net.beginners for
friendly advice in a flame-free environment.

PS Im not a service engineer, they arent engineers, Im a chartered engineer
thankyou

"Steve Firth" wrote in message
.. .
derek wrote:

Professor Unwin, I assure you that around here I can show you stone
(most likely millstone grit) walls that have deflected (The stones
have bent it's not that the all the motor joints have broken and the
wall is just a collection of stones in formation) by about an inch in
a 5 foot run under their own weight and the weight of the stones above
them.

I'm wondering what sort of engineer he is (service 'engineer'?) Any
engineer worth his salt knows that rock and glass both flow. On one
degree course that I know of engineering students were monitoring the
changes in the glass of the building that they worked in. Knowing that
glass and rock will deform and flow under pressure is essential for
civils. If they can't design around the known characteristics of the
material then they are **** all use to anyone.

--
Having problems understanding usenet? Or do you simply need help but
are getting unhelpful answers? Subscribe to: uk.net.beginners for
friendly advice in a flame-free environment.

What are you then Steve,or shall we go all defensive again

"Paul Smith" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 8 Nov 2003 13:39:59 -0000, "iantheengineer"
wrote:

As I explained I have made a career out of drainage and traffic
enginering
so I am full aware of what works. What happens when you de-bottleneck as
you
put it, you send the problem downstream, this exactly what I was saying
with
the drainage problems. You remove one obstruction letting more traffic
through and then it hits the next one and so on and so on. At some point
you
have to step back from the problem and say well this isnt really solving
the
problem just transferring it, how do we solve it. With traffic we can
change
the way that the demand is satisfied through public transport which
effectively increases the passengers that can be got ionto the town
without
increasing infrastructure. We could keep going down the road of improving
junctions but where would it end, we have been doing this for the past
100
or so years and we still havent solved it this way.

You're a TRAFFIC ENGINEER?

God save us all.
--
Paul Smith
Scotland, UK
http://www.safespeed.org.uk
please remove "XYZ" to reply by email
speed cameras cost lives

Okay Paul what are your views and ideas