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

I have to ask, How? Brindisi/Calais used to take me two long days
driving.

Jaguar XJR, and eyes open for Les Flics.

And I'm usually not the fastest thing on the roads.

--
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.

A nice Jaguar XJR, and he is concerned about the environment....not, what a
surprise hes a true blue, Im ok Jack

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

I actually work for a consultancy and not a local authority,

Name them so I can cross them off the list of places we do business
with.

--
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.

We dont work for muppets like yourself!

"Philip Bradshaw" wrote in message
. ..

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

I actually work for a consultancy and not a local authority,

Name them so I can cross them off the list of places we do business
with.

Sounds like a good move; my understanding is that anyone still using pcu
is
a tad out-dated.


Hmmm I suggest you are wrong the pcu is still in valid use, ask the authors
of Arcady, Picady and Linsig for starters, they all use pcus as well as all
of the base formulae behind them

wrote:

If we
widened all of the roads and increased parking facilities and
improved all junctions where would we be.

Heaven?

We would have wasted
countless resources such as bitumen and stone. We would encourage
everyone to use their cars at all times polluting the environment and
wasting petro chemicals.

Things are "wasted" when used for a purpose you disapprove of?

Do I get the same privilege?

Hmm yes that would be a wise move, could you realistically see a
modal change through choice????

If the English translation for that question is "Will normal people
willingly stand in the rain for ten minutes waiting for the opportunity to
sit alongside some smelly, spotty oik with a runny nose for an hour when
they could have made the journey in comfort and warmth in ten minutes?",
then the answer is an obvious "No".

Surprised?

"Paul Smith" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 8 Nov 2003 22:43:22 -0000, "iantheengineer"
wrote:

You're a TRAFFIC ENGINEER?

God save us all.

Okay Paul what are your views and ideas

Seriously?

Let the market decide. It will anyway.

All this modern interference wastes resources.

Transport engineering is about facilitating choice, not restricting
it.
--
Paul Smith
Scotland, UK
http://www.safespeed.org.uk
please remove "XYZ" to reply by email
speed cameras cost lives


Facilitating choice at the cost of everything else though??? If we widened
all of the roads and increased parking facilities and improved all junctions
where would we be. We would have wasted countless resources such as bitumen
and stone. We would encourage everyone to use their cars at all times
polluting the environment and wasting petro chemicals.

Hmm yes that would be a wise move, could you realistically see a modal
change through choice????

"Clive" wrote in message
...
In message , iantheengineer
writes

Yes they do I can produce the stats if required from ROSPA that have
been statistically proven to a 90-95% confidence interval, however no
doubt you will doubt these, I have given up with this NG. They seem to
think that government bodies sit thinking of ways to waste momey and
alienate the public, dont you think you are missing the bigger picture???
Who was it said. "There are lies, damn lies and statistics.?
--
Clive

and there lay another doubting thomas suffocated by the fumes from his own
car as he drove to the oxygen shop

"Neil Williams" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 9 Nov 2003 15:50:32 -0000, "iantheengineer"
wrote:

It is known that the bus service always seems to operate on no buses for
ages then a fleet come along at once and this is due to the fact that
people
alighting on the first bus delay it so that the headway between it and
the
following bus reduces, and so on until the first bus is full and perhaps
skips a few stops, and then the second bus will take over until the first
bus is able to stop again. But if the system were saturated the first bus
would load up and set off then the second would load up and set off and
so
on, and the headways would remain overall similar with smaller variation.

It's much more boarding (and ticket sales) rather than alighting that
causes this problem; if off-bus ticketing were the norm (outside
London), and all buses larger than van-derived minibuses were fitted
with two sets of doors, this would be significantly reduced.

Neil

--
Neil Williams
is a valid email address, but is sent to
/dev/null.
Try my first name at the above domain instead if you want to e-mail me.

True and work is being undertaken to speed these issues up as you say the
ticketing issue is a problem, but off bus ticketing is a solution

"Chris Jones" wrote in message
...
We cant travel if the rate of increase in traffic continues

Traffic has only increased at the same rate as the number of driving
license
holders has increased - due largely to women getting their own cars more
these days.

Once the number of license holders flattens out (which it will in due
course), traffic should stop increasing so fast. If we built a decent road
network now, it might be able to serve us forever.



Are we really going to be able to limit licences? I cant see thsi unless we
have to start paying for them. I am sure the human rights brigade would have
plenty to say about allowing Eddie to have a licence but not George

"Chris Jones" wrote in message
...
Speed humps slow drivers down thus making accidents less likely and
less severe.

Not necessarily - they slow down for each hump and speed up in between -
so
they may well be going faster in between the humps than they would be if
the
humps weren't there.


They have been shown to reduce accidents through a reduction in speed. This
has been established and proven to be statistically significant.

As for speed limit in force at all times well if it wasnmt drivers would
get
confused, and is travelling at 20 over that distance such a problem??.

But as it's the school run parents who are usually the ones responsible
for
speeding outside schools, surely having a 24/7 20-limit is wasteful and
unnecessary?



Well yes but as I said before to make it a temporary limit would make it
less likley to be obeyed. I am a parent and I certainly dont speed in
30/40mph zones never mind 20mph

On Sun, 9 Nov 2003 20:27:20 -0000, "iantheengineer"
wrote:

Okay Paul what are your views and ideas

Seriously?

Let the market decide. It will anyway.

All this modern interference wastes resources.

Transport engineering is about facilitating choice, not restricting
it.

Facilitating choice at the cost of everything else though??? If we widened
all of the roads and increased parking facilities and improved all junctions
where would we be. We would have wasted countless resources such as bitumen
and stone. We would encourage everyone to use their cars at all times
polluting the environment and wasting petro chemicals.

Hmm yes that would be a wise move, could you realistically see a modal
change through choice????

If people don't want a modal change then it's absolutely barking of
planners to try to impose one.

Where's the evidence that a majority of people want to be "modally
changed"?

Neither do I think it's about "widening all roads" (etc).

More it's about not obstructing traffic and not obstructing free
choice with ill conceived schemes which do not benefit the majority.
--
Paul Smith
Scotland, UK
http://www.safespeed.org.uk
please remove "XYZ" to reply by email
speed cameras cost lives