Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
 

"Steve Firth" wrote in message
. ..

IIRC they showed a change over the period of their degree, which is IIRC
four years, either that or it was a change since the building was
compelted, I forget it was close to 30 years ago. The glass they were
looking at was the covering of their own building which used very large
vertical slabs of glass.

It was the first time that I had heard that glass flows so I remembered
it for that reason alone.

It's news to the field of glass technology. The original story is about
cathedral glass that has flowed to be thicker at the bottom over several
centuries. In actual fact it was probably installed with the thickest edge
at the bottom.

I've seen apparently cool glass that has flown out of cracks in a lead glass
furnace, but not actually flowing. The viscosity at room temperature is so
high that it has a relaxation time of a few million years, so it must have
been heated for a brief period of time, and then cooled again. It is
physically impossible for cold glass to flow.
--
Terry Harper
http://www.terry.harper.btinternet.co.uk/

Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
 

"Neil Williams" wrote in message
...

Outside the UK (certainly in Western Europe), bus services tend to be
run sensibly. In the UK, London is the only place with a proper
planned, useful, well-run and good-value bus network. This is because
it was the only place in which deregulation was not carried out,
probably because the politicians all live/work there.

Try a similarly-sized town in the UK, and you'll see the picture is
not nearly as rosy. In Milton Keynes, while there have been a few
welcome improvements to evening/Sunday services recently, it is a sick
joke. I understand it is far worse elsewhere.

I would challenge your argument. in my view both Oxford and Brighton have
very efficient bus services, at reasonable prices like £2.40 or £2.70 for a
day ticket. Edinburgh has a similar arrangement, but cheaper, I believe. In
all of these, bus use is driven by the car-unfriendly nature of the cities.
--
Terry Harper, Web Co-ordinator, The Omnibus Society
http://www.omnibussoc.org
E-mail:
URL: http://www.terry.harper.btinternet.co.uk/

Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
 

"iantheengineer" wrote in message
...

If you read the earlier posts it is theoretical, the question asked was how
many buses *could* you get through a lane.

No it wasn't. It was about 'throughput of people'.

Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
 

On Sun, 09 Nov 2003 21:49:47 +0000, Paul Smith
wrote:


More it's about not obstructing traffic and not obstructing free
choice with ill conceived schemes which do not benefit the majority.

I firmly believe that there should be statutory minimum utilisation
requirements on all attempts to restrict access to the public highway.
Applied to bus and cycle lanes.


greg

--
$ReplyAddress =~ s#\@.*$##; # Delete everything after the '@'
The Following is a true story.....
Only the names have been changed to protect the guilty.

Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
 

"iantheengineer" wrote in message
...
"Nick Finnigan" wrote in message
...

Even at a bus every 5 seconds I don't see how you
can pick up any passengers; if any bus actually stops,
all the following buses would have to.

The same argument can be used for any mode though if a single lane with no
overtaking is installed as all traffic will be delayed due to stops by any
vehicle. This is why we have bus laybys in many places to prevent this.You
could argue that the car is less effective at this as it stops and can only
let a maximum of 4 people off before resuming the journey. A bus stops in
only a slightly longer timestep and can let a maximum of 72 people depart,
before it can set off So effectively you have the stop the depart and the
set off elements to measure. The stopping and departing are going to be
similar with a couple of extra seconds for the bus, but the efficiency of
the stop is far greater allowing a greater passenger per second exit ratio.

Why do you have to keep going on about cars?

What then are the best possible passenger per second
exit and entry per second ratios, how infrequently do you
have to have buses passing to allow that many passengers
to board at once, and does this help you to calculate the
maximum throughput of people, given that the buses
stop to pick them up using occasional laybys?

And how long and how frequent would these laybys be?

Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
 

"Steve Firth" wrote in message
. ..
Terry Harper wrote:

It is physically impossible for cold glass to flow.

Oh well you live and learn. It's a shame when something that you had
thought you had learned has to be unlearned, but I'll forget that
factoid. Hmm now what made a bunch of uni students think that they were
measuring glass flow? Desire to please their lecturer?

Not impossible. I recall one examination where someone asked the examiner
afterwards what was the correct answer. His reply was that there wasn't one.
Candidates were required to record the start and finish times of their
experiment, which involved a time-dependent reaction. If they were on the
curve, OK, if not, they got marked down. If you repeated the test a number
of times, and got varying results, there was a temptation to apply Cook's
constant.
--
Terry Harper
http://www.terry.harper.btinternet.co.uk/

Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
 

On Sun, 09 Nov 2003 20:33:11 +0000, iantheengineer wrote:
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

The population of the UK remains steady, so the maximum number of licenses
remains steady.

This of course is a flaw in the anti-car brigade's logic. They say build
more roads you get more Traffic, but fail to realise that the absolute
maximum amount of traffic on the roads in car hours per day is equal to
the population * 24.

If you build a western Birmingham bypass and it fills up, traffic on the
M5/M6 will decrease, howeveR more local commuters will use the road,
reducing traffic on local residential roads, which is good.

Think of the chaos that could be caused if the M5 over the river Avon is
closed for 6 months. Suddenly 4 lanes of traffic, including 2 long
distance lanes, is sent through Bristol. I don't know about traffic
planners, but in my industry we have redundancy, and don't run our systems
at anywhere near 100%.

Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
 

On Sun, 09 Nov 2003 23:49:05 +0000, Greg Hennessy
wrote:

More it's about not obstructing traffic and not obstructing free
choice with ill conceived schemes which do not benefit the majority.

I firmly believe that there should be statutory minimum utilisation
requirements on all attempts to restrict access to the public highway.
Applied to bus and cycle lanes.

I have major doubts that there's such a thing as a soundly justified
bus lane.

I also think it's potentially dangerous to create non-aspirational
privilege for classes of road user.
--
Paul Smith
Scotland, UK
http://www.safespeed.org.uk
please remove "XYZ" to reply by email
speed cameras cost lives

Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
 

In message , Chris Jones
writes
When North sea gas runs out, what are we going to do then to replace
it, the best source of heat for the community.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3161414.stm


What has this got to do with my original question. Where do we get gas
when the north sea runs dry?
--
Clive

Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
 

In message , iantheengineer
writes

Unlike rainfall we have another alternative with traffic we can
restrain the source if we choose, which along with the other tools
including where necessary road building will help the road system cope
with the traffic.

As for your example of stones deflecting well thats a new one on me.
Subsidence is due to the mines or other underground tunnel etc
gradually collapsing and what normally happens is failure of the
foudation leaving a crack visible in the supported wall either through
the blocks or the mortar joints whichever is the weakest. Stone and
concrete are strong in compression but weak in tension so as you get a
force acting on one side causing compression in one face through
bending, you get tensiile forces on the other face which normally
resulst in cracking and subsequent failure. I daresay that stone will
deflect to a degree but this would be unmeasurable to the naked eye.


Very interesting (yawn) what has this to do with railways?
--
Clive