Its interesting that some channels are really scraping the bottom of
the barrel, by which I mean running perfectly good series in their
day, but have not weathered time too well, in my opinion.
The first has to be UFO which actually was bad in the first place
with too much over acting and naff ufo effects. Gerry Anderson must
have not been paid enough is all I can say, and as for the naff
space suits apparently made from canvas...
Apparently they were left over from the film Journey to the Far Side of
the Sun (1969). That film was set in Portugal, hence the LHD cars, and the (incorrect) assumption that Britain would have changed to driving on the right by 1980.
On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 09:10:14 +0100
"Brian Gaff \(Sofa\)" <briang1@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
Its interesting that some channels are really scraping the bottom of
the barrel, by which I mean running perfectly good series in their
day, but have not weathered time too well, in my opinion.
The first has to be UFO which actually was bad in the first place
with too much over acting and naff ufo effects. Gerry Anderson must
have not been paid enough is all I can say, and as for the naff
space suits apparently made from canvas...
That sounds as though he had Ed Wood (Plan 9 from Outer Space) as an
advisor!
"Max Demian" <max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote in message news:s8GdnYnGEr-7tNX_nZ2dnUU7-ePNnZ2d@brightview.co.uk...
Apparently they were left over from the film Journey to the Far Side of
the Sun (1969). That film was set in Portugal, hence the LHD cars, and the (incorrect) assumption that Britain would have changed to driving on the right by 1980.
Was there a plan in the 1960s for the UK to change over to driving on the right, using LHD cars? I didn't know that. I think in some ways we should have changed over, like Sweden did, before there were as many cars which would be rendered semi-obsolete by the change.
I think there was such a plan. I remember a reader's letter in the Sunday Expresss saying "It would be much safer if we drove on the right hand side
of the road, The driver would get out of the car straight on to the pavement."
On 02/04/2022 12:20, charles wrote:
I remember a reader's letter in the Sunday Expresss saying "It would be much safer if we drove on the right hand side of the road, The driver
would get out of the car straight on to the pavement."
Thick bugger.
Bill
In article <jar1r2Fj0msU1@mid.individual.net>, williamwright <wrightsaerials@f2s.com> wrote:
On 02/04/2022 12:20, charles wrote:
I remember a reader's letter in the Sunday Expresss saying "It would be
much safer if we drove on the right hand side of the road, The driver
would get out of the car straight on to the pavement."
Thick bugger.
Bill
precisely - and the paper for publishing it.
I remember a reader's letter in the Sunday
Expresss saying "It would be much safer if we drove on the right hand side
of the road, The driver would get out of the car straight on to the pavement."
I think there was such a plan. I remember a reader's letter in the Sunday Expresss saying "It would be much safer if we drove on the right hand side
of the road, The driver would get out of the car straight on to the pavement."
On 02/04/2022 12:20, charles wrote:
I think there was such a plan. I remember a reader's letter in the
Sunday
Expresss saying "It would be much safer if we drove on the right hand
side
of the road, The driver would get out of the car straight on to the
pavement."
I can't remember the title but there is a classic book on road safety.
The author made an equation to estimate the number of accidents in a
country, using population, number of vehicles, miles of roads etc.
It gives a remarkably accurate figure for most countries but a small
number of countries have a lower accident rate than predicted by the equation. All drive on the left hand side of the road.
"Max Demian"<max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote in message news:s8GdnYnGEr-7tNX_nZ2dnUU7-ePNnZ2d@brightview.co.uk...
Apparently they were left over from the film Journey to the Far Side of
the Sun (1969). That film was set in Portugal, hence the LHD cars, and the >> (incorrect) assumption that Britain would have changed to driving on the
right by 1980.
Was there a plan in the 1960s for the UK to change over to driving on the right, using LHD cars? I didn't know that. I think in some ways we should have changed over, like Sweden did, before there were as many cars which would be rendered semi-obsolete by the change.
In article <jar1r2Fj0msU1@mid.individual.net>, williamwright ><wrightsaerials@f2s.com> wrote:
On 02/04/2022 12:20, charles wrote:
I remember a reader's letter in the Sunday Expresss saying "It would be
much safer if we drove on the right hand side of the road, The driver
would get out of the car straight on to the pavement."
Thick bugger.
Bill
precisely - and the paper for publishing it.
I can't remember the title but there is a classic book on road safety.
The author made an equation to estimate the number of accidents in a
country, using population, number of vehicles, miles of roads etc.
It gives a remarkably accurate figure for most countries but a small
number of countries have a lower accident rate than predicted by the equation. All drive on the left hand side of the road.
On 02/04/2022 18:14, MB wrote:
I can't remember the title but there is a classic book on road safety.
The author made an equation to estimate the number of accidents in a country, using population, number of vehicles, miles of roads etc.
It gives a remarkably accurate figure for most countries but a small
number of countries have a lower accident rate than predicted by the equation. All drive on the left hand side of the road.
That's British influence.
On 02/04/2022 12:13, NY wrote:
"Max Demian"<max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote in message news:s8GdnYnGEr-7tNX_nZ2dnUU7-ePNnZ2d@brightview.co.uk...
Apparently they were left over from the film Journey to the Far Side
of the Sun (1969). That film was set in Portugal, hence the LHD cars,
and the (incorrect) assumption that Britain would have changed to
driving on the right by 1980.
Was there a plan in the 1960s for the UK to change over to driving on
the right, using LHD cars? I didn't know that. I think in some ways we should have changed over, like Sweden did, before there were as many
cars which would be rendered semi-obsolete by the change.
This is Britain, don't forget. The change-over would be cars at first
to see how it went, followed by lorries a few weeks afterwards.
:-)
Jim
In article <jarkliFmkqgU3@mid.individual.net>,
williamwright <wrightsaerials@f2s.com> wrote:
On 02/04/2022 18:14, MB wrote:
I can't remember the title but there is a classic book on road safety.
The author made an equation to estimate the number of accidents in a
country, using population, number of vehicles, miles of roads etc.
It gives a remarkably accurate figure for most countries but a small
number of countries have a lower accident rate than predicted by the
equation. All drive on the left hand side of the road.
That's British influence.
Did we influence Japan?
However, it's a pity that we never actually did change, because the vast >majority of the world drive on the right. Scroll down to map here:
https://www.rhinocarhire.com/Drive-Smart-Blog/Drive-Left-or-Right.aspx
On 02/04/2022 12:13, NY wrote:
"Max Demian"<max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote in messageThis is Britain, don't forget. The change-over would be cars at first
news:s8GdnYnGEr-7tNX_nZ2dnUU7-ePNnZ2d@brightview.co.uk...
Apparently they were left over from the film Journey to the Far Side of
the Sun (1969). That film was set in Portugal, hence the LHD cars, and the >>> (incorrect) assumption that Britain would have changed to driving on the >>> right by 1980.
Was there a plan in the 1960s for the UK to change over to driving on the
right, using LHD cars? I didn't know that. I think in some ways we should
have changed over, like Sweden did, before there were as many cars which
would be rendered semi-obsolete by the change.
to see how it went, followed by lorries a few weeks afterwards.
:-)
Jim
On 02/04/2022 21:03, charles wrote:
In article <jarkliFmkqgU3@mid.individual.net>,Good point. No.
williamwright <wrightsaerials@f2s.com> wrote:
On 02/04/2022 18:14, MB wrote:
I can't remember the title but there is a classic book on road safety. >>>> The author made an equation to estimate the number of accidents in a
country, using population, number of vehicles, miles of roads etc.
It gives a remarkably accurate figure for most countries but a small
number of countries have a lower accident rate than predicted by the
equation. All drive on the left hand side of the road.
That's British influence.
Did we influence Japan?
Bill
On Sat, 02 Apr 2022 19:51:40 +0100, Indy Jess John <bathwatchdog@OMITTHISgooglemail.com> wrote:
On 02/04/2022 12:13, NY wrote:
"Max Demian"<max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote in messageThis is Britain, don't forget. The change-over would be cars at first
news:s8GdnYnGEr-7tNX_nZ2dnUU7-ePNnZ2d@brightview.co.uk...
Apparently they were left over from the film Journey to the Far Side
of the Sun (1969). That film was set in Portugal, hence the LHD cars,
and the (incorrect) assumption that Britain would have changed to
driving on the right by 1980.
Was there a plan in the 1960s for the UK to change over to driving on
the right, using LHD cars? I didn't know that. I think in some ways we
should have changed over, like Sweden did, before there were as many
cars which would be rendered semi-obsolete by the change.
to see how it went, followed by lorries a few weeks afterwards.
:-)
Jim
Electric scooters first please.
Rod.
On 02/04/2022 21:03, charles wrote:
In article <jarkliFmkqgU3@mid.individual.net>,
williamwright <wrightsaerials@f2s.com> wrote:
On 02/04/2022 18:14, MB wrote:
I can't remember the title but there is a classic book on road
safety. The author made an equation to estimate the number of
accidents in a country, using population, number of vehicles,
miles of roads etc.
It gives a remarkably accurate figure for most countries but a
small number of countries have a lower accident rate than
predicted by the equation. All drive on the left hand side of the
road.
That's British influence.
Did we influence Japan?
Good point. No.
Bill
I didn’t know until I visited Prague that in Czechoslovakia they drove on the left until the Nazis changed things.
Would it really be worth all the inevitable carnage to try to change?
How much of the billions it would cost would actually be spent on it
and how much would end up in the pockets of politicians' chums?
It's also a bit pointless when we are being told that self-driving cars aren't that many years away.
On 02/04/2022 12:13, NY wrote:
"Max Demian"<max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote in messageThis is Britain, don't forget. The change-over would be cars at first
news:s8GdnYnGEr-7tNX_nZ2dnUU7-ePNnZ2d@brightview.co.uk...
Apparently they were left over from the film Journey to the Far Side of
the Sun (1969). That film was set in Portugal, hence the LHD cars, and the >>> (incorrect) assumption that Britain would have changed to driving on the >>> right by 1980.
Was there a plan in the 1960s for the UK to change over to driving on the
right, using LHD cars? I didn't know that. I think in some ways we should
have changed over, like Sweden did, before there were as many cars which
would be rendered semi-obsolete by the change.
to see how it went, followed by lorries a few weeks afterwards.
Space 1999, I do not think that anything set in a time past will work
now really. The effects in this were pretty naff. I mean jumping lunar
rovers would surely make you puke.
The Champions was a bit of a laugh, that was one of those ITC things
like the Saint (dated) The persuaders (still unbelievable as it was
before), and Tales of the Unexpected ( some were very good, others,
well silly)
I obviously cannot comment about the standard of the actual pictures,
but the sound was very variable. Some of the early ones made on film,
like Avengers etc, seem to have not transferred audio that sounds good.
It sounds like a very bad noise gate is in use or like a non Dolby
tape played back with Dolby on.
On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 19:08:48 +0100, Java Jive<java@evij.com.invalid>
wrote:
However, it's a pity that we never actually did change, because the vast
majority of the world drive on the right. Scroll down to map here:
https://www.rhinocarhire.com/Drive-Smart-Blog/Drive-Left-or-Right.aspx
Interesting map. It shows that we're an island, i.e. we have no land
borders where drivers would have to change over. Most British drivers
will never need to drive anywhere else, so how much inconvenience
would it really save, and at what cost?
When Sweden changed, most cars on their roads were already left hand
drive. If we changed, practically all British cars on British roads
would be the wrong way round for several decades.
Would it really be worth all the inevitable carnage to try to change?
How much of the billions it would cost would actually be spent on it
and how much would end up in the pockets of politicians' chums?
Rod.
On 02/04/2022 21:03, charles wrote:
In article <jarkliFmkqgU3@mid.individual.net>,Good point. No.
williamwright <wrightsaerials@f2s.com> wrote:
On 02/04/2022 18:14, MB wrote:Did we influence Japan?
I can't remember the title but there is a classic book on road safety. >>>> The author made an equation to estimate the number of accidents in a
country, using population, number of vehicles, miles of roads etc.
It gives a remarkably accurate figure for most countries but a small
number of countries have a lower accident rate than predicted by the
equation. All drive on the left hand side of the road.
That's British influence.
On 03/04/2022 08:49, Roderick Stewart wrote:
Would it really be worth all the inevitable carnage to try to change?
How much of the billions it would cost would actually be spent on it
and how much would end up in the pockets of politicians' chums?
It's also a bit pointless when we are being told that self-driving cars >aren't that many years away. There won't be any steering wheel once
safety has been confirmed. Then we can change to driving on the right
if it's considered essential.
Mind you, I wonder how long it'll take other road users and pedestrians
to adapt if we do change to DOTR. :-/
On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 19:08:48 +0100, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid>
wrote:
However, it's a pity that we never actually did change, because the vast
majority of the world drive on the right. Scroll down to map here:
https://www.rhinocarhire.com/Drive-Smart-Blog/Drive-Left-or-Right.aspx
Interesting map. It shows that we're an island, i.e. we have no land
borders where drivers would have to change over. Most British drivers
will never need to drive anywhere else, so how much inconvenience
would it really save, and at what cost?
When Sweden changed, most cars on their roads were already left hand
drive. If we changed, practically all British cars on British roads
would be the wrong way round for several decades.
Would it really be worth all the inevitable carnage to try to change?
How much of the billions it would cost would actually be spent on it
and how much would end up in the pockets of politicians' chums?
You can blame Napoleon Bonaparte for the mixture.
Originally it was customary for anybody meeting someone coming the other
way by keeping left. That way the right arm was free to shake hands as
a friendly greeting or to fight with swords which were always a
right-handed weapon.
On 03/04/2022 10:03, Jeff Layman wrote:
It's also a bit pointless when we are being told that self-driving cars
aren't that many years away.
I think it will be many more years before we see many self-driving cars >around. Might seem OK for Mr Musk on wide American motorways (though his
cars do seem very prone to accidents and fires). The narrow cluttered
road in the UK and many other countries are quite different and often >difficult enough for human drivers.
If everyone did
it, it would have meant that car manufacturers wouldn't have had the
extra cost of producing both LHD and RHD vehicles, etc, etc.
On 03/04/2022 11:19, Java Jive wrote:
If everyone did
it, it would have meant that car manufacturers wouldn't have had the
extra cost of producing both LHD and RHD vehicles, etc, etc.
The small flaw in that argument is that Japan has the steering wheel on
the right and drives on the left hand side of the road, as does
Australia. This makes Japanese cars an attractive proposition in
Britain and Australia because the Japanese cars were originally designed
for right hand drive and it is the left hand drive Japanese models which
are the design afterthought.
If you look at the reliability records of the cars in use in Britain,
most of the models with the fewest faults over any given period of time
are Japanese.
Jim
Even without British involvement, certain other countries also once
drove on the left.
https://tinyurl.com/5n75b2fw
In my opinion, driving on the left (with the steering wheel on the
right) is the more-natural side. My reasoning is that as well as being right-handed, most people are (I believe) 'right eyed'. Their right eye
is their 'sighting eye', and as such, they get a better visual aim down
the crown of the road when driving on the left.
Roderick Stewart <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
On Sun, 3 Apr 2022 10:12:59 +0100, MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
On 03/04/2022 10:03, Jeff Layman wrote:
It's also a bit pointless when we are being told that self-driving cars >>>> aren't that many years away.
I think it will be many more years before we see many self-driving cars
around. Might seem OK for Mr Musk on wide American motorways (though his >>> cars do seem very prone to accidents and fires). The narrow cluttered
road in the UK and many other countries are quite different and often
difficult enough for human drivers.
We can probably make self driving cars now that would kill fewer
people than human drivers, but no politician would want to authorise
that. "Fewer deaths" wouldn't be good enough; it would have to be a
guarantee of "zero deaths", and how likely is that to happen, ever?
When has humanity ever created anything with a zero failure rate?
Rod.
To the proponents of self driving cars all I can say is snow. Almost every visual clue is changed or obscured.
On 03/04/2022 at 13:04, Tweed wrote:
Roderick Stewart <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
On Sun, 3 Apr 2022 10:12:59 +0100, MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
On 03/04/2022 10:03, Jeff Layman wrote:
It's also a bit pointless when we are being told that self-driving cars >>>>> aren't that many years away.
I think it will be many more years before we see many self-driving cars >>>> around. Might seem OK for Mr Musk on wide American motorways (though his >>>> cars do seem very prone to accidents and fires). The narrow cluttered >>>> road in the UK and many other countries are quite different and often
difficult enough for human drivers.
We can probably make self driving cars now that would kill fewer
people than human drivers, but no politician would want to authorise
that. "Fewer deaths" wouldn't be good enough; it would have to be a
guarantee of "zero deaths", and how likely is that to happen, ever?
When has humanity ever created anything with a zero failure rate?
Rod.
To the proponents of self driving cars all I can say is snow. Almost every >> visual clue is changed or obscured.
I also think about how a self driving car would deal with single track country roads with passing places.
On Sun, 3 Apr 2022 10:12:59 +0100, MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
On 03/04/2022 10:03, Jeff Layman wrote:
It's also a bit pointless when we are being told that self-driving cars
aren't that many years away.
I think it will be many more years before we see many self-driving cars
around. Might seem OK for Mr Musk on wide American motorways (though his
cars do seem very prone to accidents and fires). The narrow cluttered
road in the UK and many other countries are quite different and often
difficult enough for human drivers.
We can probably make self driving cars now that would kill fewer
people than human drivers, but no politician would want to authorise
that. "Fewer deaths" wouldn't be good enough; it would have to be a
guarantee of "zero deaths", and how likely is that to happen, ever?
When has humanity ever created anything with a zero failure rate?
Rod.
On 03/04/2022 at 11:47, Indy Jess John wrote:
On 03/04/2022 11:19, Java Jive wrote:
If everyone did
it, it would have meant that car manufacturers wouldn't have had the
extra cost of producing both LHD and RHD vehicles, etc, etc.
The small flaw in that argument is that Japan has the steering wheel on
the right and drives on the left hand side of the road, as does
Australia. This makes Japanese cars an attractive proposition in
Britain and Australia because the Japanese cars were originally designed
for right hand drive and it is the left hand drive Japanese models which
are the design afterthought.
They also drive on the left in India and Pakistan, and there is a fairly large population there.
If you look at the reliability records of the cars in use in Britain,
most of the models with the fewest faults over any given period of time
are Japanese.
They also drive on the left in India and Pakistan, and there is a fairly large population there.
Roderick Stewart <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
On Sun, 3 Apr 2022 10:12:59 +0100, MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
On 03/04/2022 10:03, Jeff Layman wrote:
It's also a bit pointless when we are being told that self-driving cars >>>> aren't that many years away.
I think it will be many more years before we see many self-driving cars
around. Might seem OK for Mr Musk on wide American motorways (though his >>> cars do seem very prone to accidents and fires). The narrow cluttered
road in the UK and many other countries are quite different and often
difficult enough for human drivers.
We can probably make self driving cars now that would kill fewer
people than human drivers, but no politician would want to authorise
that. "Fewer deaths" wouldn't be good enough; it would have to be a
guarantee of "zero deaths", and how likely is that to happen, ever?
When has humanity ever created anything with a zero failure rate?
Rod.
To the proponents of self driving cars all I can say is snow. Almost every visual clue is changed or obscured.
On 03/04/2022 at 13:04, Tweed wrote:
Roderick Stewart <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
On Sun, 3 Apr 2022 10:12:59 +0100, MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
On 03/04/2022 10:03, Jeff Layman wrote:
It's also a bit pointless when we are being told that self-driving cars >>>>> aren't that many years away.
I think it will be many more years before we see many self-driving cars >>>> around. Might seem OK for Mr Musk on wide American motorways (though his >>>> cars do seem very prone to accidents and fires). The narrow cluttered >>>> road in the UK and many other countries are quite different and often
difficult enough for human drivers.
We can probably make self driving cars now that would kill fewer
people than human drivers, but no politician would want to authorise
that. "Fewer deaths" wouldn't be good enough; it would have to be a
guarantee of "zero deaths", and how likely is that to happen, ever?
When has humanity ever created anything with a zero failure rate?
Rod.
To the proponents of self driving cars all I can say is snow. Almost every >> visual clue is changed or obscured.
I also think about how a self driving car would deal with single track country roads with passing places.
On 03/04/2022 12:10, MB wrote:
In my opinion, driving on the left (with the steering wheel on the
right) is the more-natural side. My reasoning is that as well as being
right-handed, most people are (I believe) 'right eyed'. Their right eye
is their 'sighting eye', and as such, they get a better visual aim down
the crown of the road when driving on the left.
Seemingly not borne out by research, where results are conflicting. For example:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocular_dominance
"Approximately 70% of the population are right-eye dominant and 29%
left-eye dominant.[1][5][6][7]"
.... but the very next sentence reads ...
"Dominance does appear to change depending upon direction of gaze[2][8]
due to image size changes on the retinas.[9]"
.... and ...
"In normal binocular vision there is an effect of parallax, and
therefore the dominant eye is the one that is primarily relied on for
precise positional information. This may be extremely important in
sports which require aim, such as archery, darts or shooting sports."
.... but the very next paragraph reads ...
"It has been asserted that cross-dominance (in which the dominant eye is
on one side and the dominant hand is on the other) is advantageous in
sports requiring side-on stances (e.g. baseball, cricket, golf);[15]
however, studies within the last 20 years have shown this not to be the
case. In a 1998 study of professional baseball players, hand–ocular dominance patterns did not show an effect on batting average or ERA.[16] Similarly, in 2005, a South African study found that "cricketers were
not more likely to have crossed dominance" than the normal population.[17]"
Usually, where differently constructed tests and studies show
conflicting results, it means that there is no result to be found, and I suspect that is the case with your assertion above.
In my opinion, driving on the left (with the steering wheel on the
right) is the more-natural side. My reasoning is that as well as being right-handed, most people are (I believe) 'right eyed'. Their right eye
is their 'sighting eye', and as such, they get a better visual aim down
the crown of the road when driving on the left.
In article <t29b5s$1jt$1@dont-email.me>,
NY <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
"Max Demian" <max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:s8GdnYnGEr-7tNX_nZ2dnUU7-ePNnZ2d@brightview.co.uk...
Apparently they were left over from the film Journey to the Far Side of
the Sun (1969). That film was set in Portugal, hence the LHD cars, and
the
(incorrect) assumption that Britain would have changed to driving on
the
right by 1980.
Was there a plan in the 1960s for the UK to change over to driving on the
right, using LHD cars? I didn't know that. I think in some ways we should
have changed over, like Sweden did, before there were as many cars which
would be rendered semi-obsolete by the change.
I think there was such a plan. I remember a reader's letter in the Sunday Expresss saying "It would be much safer if we drove on the right hand side
of the road, The driver would get out of the car straight on to the pavement."
--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle
On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 09:10:14 +0100
"Brian Gaff \(Sofa\)" <briang1@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
Its interesting that some channels are really scraping the bottom of
the barrel, by which I mean running perfectly good series in their
day, but have not weathered time too well, in my opinion.
The first has to be UFO which actually was bad in the first place
with too much over acting and naff ufo effects. Gerry Anderson must
have not been paid enough is all I can say, and as for the naff
space suits apparently made from canvas...
That sounds as though he had Ed Wood (Plan 9 from Outer Space) as an
advisor!
--
Davey.
In article <jar1r2Fj0msU1@mid.individual.net>, williamwright <wrightsaerials@f2s.com> wrote:
On 02/04/2022 12:20, charles wrote:
I remember a reader's letter in the Sunday Expresss saying "It would be
much safer if we drove on the right hand side of the road, The driver
would get out of the car straight on to the pavement."
Thick bugger.
Bill
precisely - and the paper for publishing it.
--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle
In message <59d2dec8f0charles@candehope.me.uk>, charles <charles@candehope.me.uk> writes
In article <jar1r2Fj0msU1@mid.individual.net>, williamwright >><wrightsaerials@f2s.com> wrote:
On 02/04/2022 12:20, charles wrote:
I remember a reader's letter in the Sunday Expresss saying "It would
be
much safer if we drove on the right hand side of the road, The driver
would get out of the car straight on to the pavement."
Thick bugger.
Bill
precisely - and the paper for publishing it.
Perhaps they thought that it might give their readers a laugh.
--
John Hall
"Home is heaven and orgies are vile,
But you *need* an orgy, once in a while."
Ogden Nash (1902-1971)
On 02/04/2022 12:20, charles wrote:
I think there was such a plan. I remember a reader's letter in the
Sunday
Expresss saying "It would be much safer if we drove on the right hand
side
of the road, The driver would get out of the car straight on to the
pavement."
I can't remember the title but there is a classic book on road safety. The author made an equation to estimate the number of accidents in a country, using population, number of vehicles, miles of roads etc.
It gives a remarkably accurate figure for most countries but a small
number of countries have a lower accident rate than predicted by the equation. All drive on the left hand side of the road.
On 02/04/2022 18:14, MB wrote:
On 02/04/2022 12:20, charles wrote:
I think there was such a plan. I remember a reader's letter in the
Sunday
Expresss saying "It would be much safer if we drove on the right hand
side
of the road, The driver would get out of the car straight on to the
pavement."
LOL!
However, it's a pity that we never actually did change, because the vast majority of the world drive on the right. Scroll down to map here:
https://www.rhinocarhire.com/Drive-Smart-Blog/Drive-Left-or-Right.aspx
I can't remember the title but there is a classic book on road safety.
The author made an equation to estimate the number of accidents in a
country, using population, number of vehicles, miles of roads etc.
It gives a remarkably accurate figure for most countries but a small
number of countries have a lower accident rate than predicted by the
equation. All drive on the left hand side of the road.
I'd like to see the original stats, because this sounds like classic pseudo-science to me.
Here in Scotland in the middle of nowhere you see signs reminding people
that we drive on the left here, because we have so many visitors from countries that drive on the right. The implication is, for this to be
worth so many signs in odd places, that our driving on the left is a significant cause of accidents among visitors here, and this is further
borne out by statistics relating to UK drivers abroad:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/513369/FOI_0169-16_Steer_Clear_Press_Release_Final.pdf
"BRITONS DRIVING INTO TROUBLE ABROAD
- With tourists three times more likely to be involved in road accidents
than locals, Foreign Office launches 'Steer Clear of Trouble on Foreign Roads' campaign -
Two thirds of Brits who have driven abroad have run into problems, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) research reveals today. With studies
showing that tourists are three times more likely to be involved in a road accident than local drivers, an FCO survey has shown that when driving abroad, nearly a third (31%) have driven on the wrong side of the road and more than one in 10 have driven the wrong way round a roundabout."
Ditto Eire:
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/right-and-wrong-of-way-1.369893
"Right - and wrong - of way
Sat, Aug 16, 2003, 01:00
The chances of meeting a foreign driver on the wrong side of an Irish road are anything but remote. Unlike us, 80 per cent of the world drives on the right, writes Anne Lucey.
Every year tourist drivers from the US and Europe are involved in many
near misses, and some serious road traffic collisions.
Just this week Deirdre O'Brien Vaughan, the Irish traditional musician
from Newmarket-on-Fergus, Co Clare, was awarded more than ?278,000 in
damages in the High Court for injuries she received in an August 1999
crash involving a French tourist. Liability had been conceded by the holidaymaker, whose car had been on the wrong side of the road.
Growing concern about the dangers posed by tourist drivers led Kerry
County Council recently to pass an emergency motion to erect large signs
and road markings to prevent more collisions at a junction on the N22 near Killarney for Kenmare and west Cork. But even while the wheels of
bureaucracy moved to acquire the paint, poles and danger signs, a serious head-on collision occurred and a number of people were hospitalised."
So, as I said, I'd like to see some hard stats.
--
Fake news kills!
I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website: www.macfh.co.uk
Roderick Stewart <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
On Sun, 3 Apr 2022 10:12:59 +0100, MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
On 03/04/2022 10:03, Jeff Layman wrote:
It's also a bit pointless when we are being told that self-driving cars >>>> aren't that many years away.
I think it will be many more years before we see many self-driving cars
around. Might seem OK for Mr Musk on wide American motorways (though his >>> cars do seem very prone to accidents and fires). The narrow cluttered
road in the UK and many other countries are quite different and often
difficult enough for human drivers.
We can probably make self driving cars now that would kill fewer
people than human drivers, but no politician would want to authorise
that. "Fewer deaths" wouldn't be good enough; it would have to be a
guarantee of "zero deaths", and how likely is that to happen, ever?
When has humanity ever created anything with a zero failure rate?
Rod.
To the proponents of self driving cars all I can say is snow. Almost every visual clue is changed or obscured.
I suspect the appeal of many of the old series *is* that they are naff to
modern eyes!
Space "ninteen and ninepence" always was like watching puppet shows with wooden scripts. The Saint can be entertaining because it is also meant to
be amusing, not just crime. The Saint books in general are also aimed at being amusing and entertaining. Quite distinct from the 'hard boiled'
crime
stories by many US writers who take a 'blowtorch to the face' approach to drama! (Example from a Hadley Chase novel!)
Not seen an "Avengers" recently, but again I think these are aimed at
being
amusing and stylish. Light entertainment. Although some of the early
examples are 'darker' - not just in film terms.
The sound on older examples like "Sgt Cork" can be even worse. But I doubt anyone noticed that much via 405 line TV at the time! :-) Come to think of it,the gap in time between that series being televised and the time when
it
was set is now comparable with the gap between when it was televised and
now! 8-]
Jim
In article <t290dc$fmu$1@dont-email.me>, Brian Gaff \(Sofa\) <briang1@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
Space 1999, I do not think that anything set in a time past will work
now really. The effects in this were pretty naff. I mean jumping lunar
rovers would surely make you puke.
The Champions was a bit of a laugh, that was one of those ITC things
like the Saint (dated) The persuaders (still unbelievable as it was
before), and Tales of the Unexpected ( some were very good, others,
well silly)
I obviously cannot comment about the standard of the actual pictures,
but the sound was very variable. Some of the early ones made on film,
like Avengers etc, seem to have not transferred audio that sounds good.
It sounds like a very bad noise gate is in use or like a non Dolby
tape played back with Dolby on.
--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me. Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html
I think it will be many more years before we see many self-driving cars around. Might seem OK for Mr Musk on wide American motorways (though his cars do seem very prone to accidents and fires). The narrow cluttered
road in the UK and many other countries are quite different and often difficult enough for human drivers.
Indeed, and perhaps dense fog could be included. But whereas many humans
pay no attention to the fact they can't see anything and continue
driving at the same speed, a car programmed correctly will slow down as
its visual clues (I'm not sure if IR "sees" better through snow or fog)
and its communications with nearby cars become less certain, and its
sensors show slipping wheels. It might not prevent crashes, but they
will be at much lower speed, and nothing like the carnage resulting from multi-car pile-ups on a motorway.
I also think about how a self driving car would deal with single track country roads with passing places.
On 03/04/2022 13:06, Wilf wrote:
I also think about how a self driving car would deal with single track
country roads with passing places.
In the Western Isles they just drive down the middle of the road and
hope they do not meet anyone, I heard of one driver who left his lights
off when drunk so the police would not see him.
On the other hand, I've noticed that very few human drivers are able to detect pedestrians about to cross at an uncontrolled junction; the new highway code advises them to give way. I'm not sure that driverless
cars will be any better.
Yes but as most of the country does not normally live in another country, then that could be a red herring.
On 03/04/2022 16:31, David Woolley wrote:
On the other hand, I've noticed that very few human drivers are able toI did my first "give way to pedestrians about to cross a road" last
detect pedestrians about to cross at an uncontrolled junction; the new
highway code advises them to give way. I'm not sure that driverless
cars will be any better.
Friday. The group of three stopped and had a short discussion about
whether they should cross the road before or after I turned into their
side road.
It is one thing inventing rules of the road, but convincing the general public they are sensible rules is another problem entirely.
On 03/04/2022 16:31, David Woolley wrote:
On the other hand, I've noticed that very few human drivers are able to detect pedestrians about to cross at an uncontrolled junction; the new highway code advises them to give way. I'm not sure that driverless
cars will be any better.
I did my first "give way to pedestrians about to cross a road" last
Friday. The group of three stopped and had a short discussion about
whether they should cross the road before or after I turned into their
side road.
It is one thing inventing rules of the road, but convincing the general public they are sensible rules is another problem entirely.
On the other hand, I've noticed that very few human drivers are able to detect pedestrians about to cross at an uncontrolled junction; the new highway code advises them to give way. I'm not sure that driverless
cars will be any better.
On 03/04/2022 13:26, Jeff Layman wrote:
Indeed, and perhaps dense fog could be included. But whereas many humans
pay no attention to the fact they can't see anything and continue
driving at the same speed, a car programmed correctly will slow down as
its visual clues (I'm not sure if IR "sees" better through snow or fog)
and its communications with nearby cars become less certain, and its
sensors show slipping wheels. It might not prevent crashes, but they
will be at much lower speed, and nothing like the carnage resulting from
multi-car pile-ups on a motorway.
You might find that some think they can use the auto systems to drive
faster in fog - many do not understand how slow you really need to drive
in real fog.
On 03/04/2022 14:41, Brian Gaff (Sofa) wrote:
Yes but as most of the country does not normally live in another country,
then that could be a red herring.
Yes, perfectly true, but there again, no! A claim was made that driving
on the left of the road is safer than driving on the right, but no
pertinent statistics were given to back up the claim
If, for example, the car had radar which detected something ahead and
slowed down, and you decided that the "something" was actually further
ahead and not a hazard and ignored the radar and accelerated, then
that's manual control.
To the proponents of self driving cars all I can say is snow. Almost every >visual clue is changed or obscured.
On the other hand, I've noticed that very few human drivers are able to >detect pedestrians about to cross at an uncontrolled junction; the new >highway code advises them to give way. I'm not sure that driverless
cars will be any better.
A further complication is that if a country is used to driving on one
side of the road and it decides to change over to the other, there is
the resulting problem of the sheer number of existing cars with the
steering wheel now on the wrong side of the car for good visibility of
the traffic conditions around.
and by day they sometimes jump out
from behind parked cars
Indeed. The new Highway Code seems to require that we pay the same
attention to kamikaze pedestrians that we always have, but now we're
supposed to read their minds as well, because when we see one at the
side of the road we're supposed to know their intentions and act
accordingly.
There's no reason why the sensory input of an
autonomous vehicle would have to be limited in the same way as ours.
On 04/04/2022 11:59, Roderick Stewart wrote:
Indeed. The new Highway Code seems to require that we pay the same
attention to kamikaze pedestrians that we always have, but now we're
supposed to read their minds as well, because when we see one at the
side of the road we're supposed to know their intentions and act
accordingly.
I have an old edition of the Highway Code but cannot find it. I am sure
it is long been the rule that vehicles have to give way to pedestrians
when turning at a road junction but I keep reading people who think this
is new.
 Dundee Courier - Saturday 11 May 1935
------
Drivers are specially directed to slow when turning from one road into another, to give way to pedestrians at such points, and not to overtake
at pedestrian crossings.
------
On 03/04/2022 16:31, David Woolley wrote:
On the other hand, I've noticed that very few human drivers are able toI did my first "give way to pedestrians about to cross a road" last
detect pedestrians about to cross at an uncontrolled junction; the new
highway code advises them to give way. I'm not sure that driverless
cars will be any better.
Friday. The group of three stopped and had a short discussion about
whether they should cross the road before or after I turned into their
side road.
It is one thing inventing rules of the road, but convincing the general public they are sensible rules is another problem entirely.
What does LIDAR think of snow?
Many years passed, and I was taking the bus to work in a major southern conurbation. In the city centre, the driver swung round a corner and hit
an old gentleman who was crossing the road just as I had been all those
years earlier. He was knocked over, but, although obviously shaken and shocked, was able to get up and stagger off, and, as he did so, the driver opened the bus door and hurled a stream of abuse and invective after him.
I confronted the driver and told him he was in the wrong, which merely resulted in his abusing me. As I arrived at work, my boss, who was due to leave for somewhere else, immediately started to give me instructions, but
I said: "Sorry, A, but there's something more important that I have to do first!", and picked up the nearest phone to ring the bus company to
complain about the driver, describing his appalling behaviour, and giving them information from the ticket needed to identify him. As I did so,
work colleagues, equally appalled, started to look on the internet for the relevant part of the Highway Code and found it, enabling me to quote to
the company its section number and its exact wording. I'm glad to say
that I never saw that driver at the wheel of a bus again.
On 04/04/2022 12:42, MB wrote:
  Dundee Courier - Saturday 11 May 1935
------
Drivers are specially directed to slow when turning from one road into
another, to give way to pedestrians at such points, and not to
overtake at pedestrian crossings.
------
Quite so. But I think originally it was more specific, that when
turning off a major road into a minor road, a pedestrian beginning to
cross or already crossing had right of way.
On 04/04/2022 12:43, Andy Burns wrote:
What does LIDAR think of snow?
A friend worked at RSRE and was involved in one project where they
wondered if a helicopter radar altimeter displayed height above the
surface of snow or height above the ground.
He spent a pleasant couple of weeks in the Cairngorm with a helicopter!
I have an old edition of the Highway Code but cannot find it. I am sure
it is long been the rule that vehicles have to give way to pedestrians
when turning at a road junction but I keep reading people who think this
is new.
When I was young, we were taught something called "kerb drill"
A rather unnerving couple of weeks I would have thought. I wouldn't
want to fly a helicopter over the Cairngorms until I knew the answer
to that question.
When I was young, we were taught something called "kerb drill" and
when my children were young they were taught something called the
"green cross code", which appeared to be the same thing with a
different name,
On 04/04/2022 15:28, Roderick Stewart wrote:
When I was young, we were taught something called "kerb drill" and
when my children were young they were taught something called the
"green cross code", which appeared to be the same thing with a
different name,
I think the difference was that kerb drill required you to look right,
left, then right again, but the green cross code just required you to
look for traffic.
David Woolley <david@ex.djwhome.demon.invalid> wrote:
On 04/04/2022 15:28, Roderick Stewart wrote:
When I was young, we were taught something called "kerb drill" and
when my children were young they were taught something called the
"green cross code", which appeared to be the same thing with a
different name,
I think the difference was that kerb drill required you to look right, left, then right again, but the green cross code just required you to
look for traffic.
and to keep looking as you crossed.
On 04/04/2022 15:28, Roderick Stewart wrote:
When I was young, we were taught something called "kerb drill" and
when my children were young they were taught something called the
"green cross code", which appeared to be the same thing with a
different name,
I think the difference was that kerb drill required you to look right,
left, then right again, but the green cross code just required you to
look for traffic.
This is Britain, don't forget. The change-over would be cars at first
to see how it went, followed by lorries a few weeks afterwards.
:-)
Jim
Electric scooters first please.
On Mon, 04 Apr 2022 23:50:34 GMT, Paul Ratcliffe <abuse@orac12.clara34.co56.uk78> wrote:
On Sun, 03 Apr 2022 08:50:33 +0100, Roderick Stewart >><rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
This is Britain, don't forget. The change-over would be cars at first >>>>to see how it went, followed by lorries a few weeks afterwards.
:-)
Jim
Electric scooters first please.
Makes no difference. The f***ers operating them just go where they like >>without regard to anybody or anything else anyway. Untouchable, until
they go under a lorry. Proof that Darwin is right... eventually.
I wonder how much of the trouble caused by these machines is really
the result of their inherent properties, and how much is the result of
the fact that their users do not carry any visible identification as
cars do? People who can be anonymous and thereby avoid responsibility
for their actions will inevitably behave differently from those who
have to face them.
On Sun, 03 Apr 2022 08:50:33 +0100, Roderick Stewart ><rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
This is Britain, don't forget. The change-over would be cars at first
to see how it went, followed by lorries a few weeks afterwards.
:-)
Jim
Electric scooters first please.
Makes no difference. The f***ers operating them just go where they like >without regard to anybody or anything else anyway. Untouchable, until
they go under a lorry. Proof that Darwin is right... eventually.
I noticed the original Perry Mason being screened the other day, the
sound on that was quite good, albeit mono. I never could stand that
series.
I wonder how far back they can go? There were a lot of old American tv
series made. 77 Sunset Strip, Dragnet,
I did spot a few episodes of a uk series, No hiding place the other day
on Talking pictures, the sound was quit good, but I'm not so soure about Magret with Rupert Davies which was on somewhere the other night. It
might be nice to see Danger Man again, and unlike many I did think The Prisoner was quite good if you read between the lines and look at it as
an extreme idea of how we were going as a society. Brian
On 04/04/2022 21:15, David Woolley wrote:
On 04/04/2022 15:28, Roderick Stewart wrote:
When I was young, we were taught something called "kerb drill" and
when my children were young they were taught something called the
"green cross code", which appeared to be the same thing with a
different name,
I think the difference was that kerb drill required you to look right,
left, then right again, but the green cross code just required you to
look for traffic.
Stop, Look, and Listen before you cross the street.
Use your eyes and use your ears before you use your feet.
That was the road safety message taught in my primary school.
On Sun, 03 Apr 2022 08:50:33 +0100, Roderick Stewart <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:As an Italian colleague once said to me about moped riders in Rome, 'The authorities write their names in pencil'
Makes no difference. The f***ers operating them just go where they like without regard to anybody or anything else anyway. Untouchable, untilThis is Britain, don't forget. The change-over would be cars at firstElectric scooters first please.
to see how it went, followed by lorries a few weeks afterwards.
:-)
Jim
they go under a lorry. Proof that Darwin is right... eventually.
The Maigret series was on Talking Pictures TV recently.
I've also seen scooter users in supermarkets riding full-tilt down an
aisle, barging trolleys left and right out of their way. Utterly
reckless.
"Roderick Stewart" <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote in message >news:oa2o4hhjemev4rnae91cc7u4fq85ubje2m@4ax.com...
On Mon, 04 Apr 2022 23:50:34 GMT, Paul Ratcliffe
<abuse@orac12.clara34.co56.uk78> wrote:
On Sun, 03 Apr 2022 08:50:33 +0100, Roderick Stewart >>><rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
This is Britain, don't forget. The change-over would be cars at first >>>>>to see how it went, followed by lorries a few weeks afterwards.
:-)
Jim
Electric scooters first please.
Makes no difference. The f***ers operating them just go where they like >>>without regard to anybody or anything else anyway. Untouchable, until >>>they go under a lorry. Proof that Darwin is right... eventually.
I wonder how much of the trouble caused by these machines is really
the result of their inherent properties, and how much is the result of
the fact that their users do not carry any visible identification as
cars do? People who can be anonymous and thereby avoid responsibility
for their actions will inevitably behave differently from those who
have to face them.
It is often down to the users having no perception of what is around them
and thinking that they take priority over everyone else.
I once had a user of a mobility scooter back into me in a supermarket when >she engaged reverse and hit the power button even though I was close behind >her. I saw her do it but I wasn't able to react quickly enough. And then >*she* yelled at me for "not getting out of her way". She bloody hurt me, and >I told her so (and other people round me backed me up that it was her fault >entirely) but I didn't get one word of apology.
I've also seen scooter users in supermarkets riding full-tilt down an aisle, >barging trolleys left and right out of their way. Utterly reckless.
It is the standard problem of letting people who are too unsteady on their >feet, and may have other perception problems, ride scooters which require at >least *some* care in using them. When they were younger and on their feet, >would they have suddenly stepped back into the person behind, or would they >have checked over their shoulder?
Jim Lesurf <noise@audiomisc.co.uk> wrote:
Which one? There have been several over the years. The one I remember
The Maigret series was on Talking Pictures TV recently.
liking best was way back in the 1960s on the BBC.
On 04/04/2022 23:17, Indy Jess John wrote:
On 04/04/2022 21:15, David Woolley wrote:
On 04/04/2022 15:28, Roderick Stewart wrote:
When I was young, we were taught something called "kerb drill" and
when my children were young they were taught something called the
"green cross code", which appeared to be the same thing with a
different name,
I think the difference was that kerb drill required you to look right,
left, then right again, but the green cross code just required you to
look for traffic.
Stop, Look, and Listen before you cross the street.
Use your eyes and use your ears before you use your feet.
That was the road safety message taught in my primary school.
The "listen" bit is of a lot less use with approaching EVs. :-(
When they were younger and on their feet,
would they have suddenly stepped back into the person behind, or would they have checked over their shoulder?
On 05/04/2022 11:06, Jeff Layman wrote:
On 04/04/2022 23:17, Indy Jess John wrote:
On 04/04/2022 21:15, David Woolley wrote:
On 04/04/2022 15:28, Roderick Stewart wrote:
When I was young, we were taught something called "kerb drill" and
when my children were young they were taught something called the
"green cross code", which appeared to be the same thing with a
different name,
I think the difference was that kerb drill required you to look right, >>> left, then right again, but the green cross code just required you to
look for traffic.
Stop, Look, and Listen before you cross the street.
Use your eyes and use your ears before you use your feet.
That was the road safety message taught in my primary school.
The "listen" bit is of a lot less use with approaching EVs. :-(
True, to some extent. Some EVs do create tyre noise.
Also note that I was in my primary school in the 1950s. It was relevant
then; exhausts were a lot noisier before catalytic converters were fitted.
Jim
I wonder how much of the trouble caused by these machines is really
the result of their inherent properties, and how much is the result of
the fact that their users do not carry any visible identification as
cars do? People who can be anonymous and thereby avoid responsibility
for their actions will inevitably behave differently from those who
have to face them.
I was always expecting an accident to happen,
hopefully she has been banned from the stores.
I don't think any type of road vehicle would be very safe if they were
used on that basis, regardless of any characteristic of the vehicles themselves, so maybe we shouldn't be surprised at the results of
allowing scooters to be so used.
On Tue, 5 Apr 2022 11:06:53 +0100, Chris Green <cl@isbd.net> wrote:
Jim Lesurf <noise@audiomisc.co.uk> wrote:
Which one? There have been several over the years. The one I remember >liking best was way back in the 1960s on the BBC.
The Maigret series was on Talking Pictures TV recently.
I remember that one, though the only thing I can clearly remember from
it was a scene where Maigret was looking round a dark room using a
torch, and for a moment the beam of light cast a shadow of his hand
holding the torch...
On 03/04/2022 14:41, Brian Gaff (Sofa) wrote:
Yes but as most of the country does not normally live in another country, then that could be a red herring.
Yes, perfectly true, but there again, no! A claim was made that driving
on the left of the road is safer than driving on the right, but no
pertinent statistics were given to back up the claim, a claim which immediately sounded to me as being likely to be an attempt at
rationalising our current situation with pseudo-science, and unlikely to
be even true, let alone prove actual causation even supposing it is (it should be remembered that correlation is not causation).
So, in the absence of any pertinent specific statistics being given to
back up the claim, the first search term I tried yielded only
information about countries with foreign driver problems, wrt which, I
wasn't trying to claim that stats about drivers in countries foreign to
them were meaningful stats about the safety of driving on a particular
side of the road, rather I was pointing out that the fact that various countries, regardless of which side of the road they drive, seem to have
a similar level of problem regarding foreign drivers driving on the
wrong side of the road, rather suggests that no one country and no one
side of driving was likely to prove significantly safer than another.
And now trying a different search term has proved this deduction to be correct, for example here is a rather badly designed webpage, but it
does have some recent stats from a 56 country research study undertaken
by international driver education company Zutobi ...
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/the-worlds-safest-most-dangerous-countries-to-drive/safest-norway/slideshow/81589360.cms
Most dangerous:
1 ​S Africa LHS
2 Thailand RHS
3 USA RHS
4 India LHS
Safest:
1 Norway RHS
2 Japan LHS
3 Sweden RHS
So, no obvious correlation between safety and driving side of road
there, nor here:
https://www.who.int/violence_injury_prevention/road_safety_status/report/state_of_road_safety_en.pdf
"WHO: The state of road safety around the world
[...]
Low-income and middle-income countries have the highest burden and road traffic death rates.
Most (91%) of the world’s fatalities on the roads occur in low-income
and middle-income countries, which have only 48% of the world’s
registered vehicles."
In short, just as I suspected all along, there are myriads of factors determining how safe a nation's roads are, many of which are given in
the final link below - so many that I'm not going to attempt to
provide a summarising quote, people need to read it for themselves -
and whichever side of the road is driven is apparently so unimportant
that it is not even mentioned there:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-related_death_rate
--
Fake news kills!
I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website: www.macfh.co.uk
On 03/04/2022 13:26, Jeff Layman wrote:
Indeed, and perhaps dense fog could be included. But whereas many humans
pay no attention to the fact they can't see anything and continue
driving at the same speed, a car programmed correctly will slow down as
its visual clues (I'm not sure if IR "sees" better through snow or fog)
and its communications with nearby cars become less certain, and its
sensors show slipping wheels. It might not prevent crashes, but they
will be at much lower speed, and nothing like the carnage resulting from
multi-car pile-ups on a motorway.
You might find that some think they can use the auto systems to drive
faster in fog - many do not understand how slow you really need to drive
in real fog.
On 03/04/2022 at 22:17, MB wrote:
On 03/04/2022 13:06, Wilf wrote:
I also think about how a self driving car would deal with single track
country roads with passing places.
In the Western Isles they just drive down the middle of the road and
hope they do not meet anyone, I heard of one driver who left his lights
off when drunk so the police would not see him.
Sounds like a dubious strategy!
Indy Jess John <bathwatchdog@omitthisgooglemail.com> wrote:
On 03/04/2022 16:31, David Woolley wrote:It mostly works pretty well in France, we just need to change habits
On the other hand, I've noticed that very few human drivers are able toI did my first "give way to pedestrians about to cross a road" last
detect pedestrians about to cross at an uncontrolled junction; the new
highway code advises them to give way. I'm not sure that driverless
cars will be any better.
Friday. The group of three stopped and had a short discussion about
whether they should cross the road before or after I turned into their
side road.
It is one thing inventing rules of the road, but convincing the general
public they are sensible rules is another problem entirely.
and expectations, hence the changes in the Highway Code.
On 04/04/2022 21:15, David Woolley wrote:
On 04/04/2022 15:28, Roderick Stewart wrote:
When I was young, we were taught something called "kerb drill" and
when my children were young they were taught something called the
"green cross code", which appeared to be the same thing with a
different name,
I think the difference was that kerb drill required you to look right,
left, then right again, but the green cross code just required you to
look for traffic.
Stop, Look, and Listen before you cross the street.
Use your eyes and use your ears before you use your feet.
That was the road safety message taught in my primary school.
They also drive on the left in India and Pakistan, and there is a fairly large population there.
All the TV footage I've seen suggests that they drive on whatever side
they want:)
On narrow single track roads it's often advantage driving at night with lights on. You see the approaching cars lights illuminating the blind
bends long before you encounter the car.
On 03/04/2022 12:03, Wilf wrote:
They also drive on the left in India and Pakistan, and there is a
fairly large population there.
All the TV footage I've seen suggests that they drive on whatever side
they want :)
I've recently re-watched some of the old "Gideon of The Yard" episodes
that
were made by the same company that had made "The Saint" TV series. The
level of 'drama' is a tad low by modern standards, but the stories seem decent adaptions from the books.
You mentioning Dragnet made me recall a series that I think was called "Cannonball" which was about the adventures of a pair of USA 'truckers'.
But in both cases all I can remember is no more than an image of them on screen - plus, for Dragnet their catchphrase "Ten-Four". I think that was lampooned in "Mad" magazine. 8-]
The Maigret series was on Talking Pictures TV recently.
Jim
In article <t2c98d$aef$1@dont-email.me>, Brian Gaff \(Sofa\) <briang1@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
I noticed the original Perry Mason being screened the other day, the
sound on that was quite good, albeit mono. I never could stand that
series.
I wonder how far back they can go? There were a lot of old American tv
series made. 77 Sunset Strip, Dragnet,
I did spot a few episodes of a uk series, No hiding place the other day
on Talking pictures, the sound was quit good, but I'm not so soure about
Magret with Rupert Davies which was on somewhere the other night. It
might be nice to see Danger Man again, and unlike many I did think The
Prisoner was quite good if you read between the lines and look at it as
an extreme idea of how we were going as a society. Brian
--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me. Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html
Jim Lesurf <noise@audiomisc.co.uk> wrote:
Which one? There have been several over the years. The one I remember
The Maigret series was on Talking Pictures TV recently.
liking best was way back in the 1960s on the BBC.
--
Chris Green
·
On Tue, 5 Apr 2022 11:06:53 +0100, Chris Green <cl@isbd.net> wrote:
Jim Lesurf <noise@audiomisc.co.uk> wrote:
Which one? There have been several over the years. The one I remember >>liking best was way back in the 1960s on the BBC.
The Maigret series was on Talking Pictures TV recently.
I remember that one, though the only thing I can clearly remember from
it was a scene where Maigret was looking round a dark room using a
torch, and for a moment the beam of light cast a shadow of his hand
holding the torch...
Rod.
On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 09:10:14 +0100
"Brian Gaff \(Sofa\)" <briang1@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
I would like to see the USA Highway Patrol series with Broderick Crawford again.
They were very 1940-50 ish but they had style.
--
Mint 20.3, kernel 5.4.0-104-generic, Cinnamon 5.2.7
running on an AMD Phenom II X4 Black edition processor with 16GB of DRAM.
On 04/04/2022 23:17, Indy Jess John wrote:
On 04/04/2022 21:15, David Woolley wrote:
On 04/04/2022 15:28, Roderick Stewart wrote:
When I was young, we were taught something called "kerb drill" and
when my children were young they were taught something called the
"green cross code", which appeared to be the same thing with a
different name,
I think the difference was that kerb drill required you to look right,
left, then right again, but the green cross code just required you to
look for traffic.
Stop, Look, and Listen before you cross the street.
Use your eyes and use your ears before you use your feet.
That was the road safety message taught in my primary school.
It wouldn't be allowed today, it excludes deaf blind kids!
The accident rate is more likely to be related to how many of these
systems go wrong or are only partially working. Once you have 10s of
millions of self driving cars how many will not be 100% fully
operational when it comes accurate steering/braking after they get to
,say, 10 years old?
The aerials seemed to be more like CB ones, but I think were cut for somewhere in what we called band 1, and swung about wildely in the series as they went around corners.
Didn't they use 30-40MHz?
Bill
On 06/04/2022 14:15, williamwright wrote:
Didn't they use 30-40MHz?
Bill
Certainly down around there, must be remembered that there are many
sparsely populated areas in the US.
We had a 47 MHz RT at work and it had very good range (except when Russian trawlers around!).
Also I was told that there was a plan to perhaps use low VHF on Millennium night by the electricity companies because they could have got UK wide coverage with a small number of sites. I think the big worry was having
to do a Black Start.
In message <t2bnsf$ugc$1@dont-email.me>, Jeff Layman <jmlayman@invalid.invalid> writes
On 03/04/2022 08:49, Roderick Stewart wrote:
Would it really be worth all the inevitable carnage to try to change?
How much of the billions it would cost would actually be spent on it
and how much would end up in the pockets of politicians' chums?
It's also a bit pointless when we are being told that self-driving
cars aren't that many years away. There won't be any steering wheel
once safety has been confirmed. Then we can change to driving on the
right if it's considered essential.
Mind you, I wonder how long it'll take other road users and
pedestrians to adapt if we do change to DOTR. :-/
Even more worrying, how do you ensure that the software of all
self-driving vehicles is updated simultaneously? If even 1% don't update
in a timely fashion, it could be carnage.
I wonder what happens when every self-driving vehicle on the road simultaneously updates to a software version with a dangerous bug in it?
On 03/04/2022 11:04, John Hall wrote:
In message<t2bnsf$ugc$1@dont-email.me>, Jeff Layman
<jmlayman@invalid.invalid> writes
On 03/04/2022 08:49, Roderick Stewart wrote:
Would it really be worth all the inevitable carnage to try to change?
How much of the billions it would cost would actually be spent on it
and how much would end up in the pockets of politicians' chums?
It's also a bit pointless when we are being told that self-driving
cars aren't that many years away. There won't be any steering wheel
once safety has been confirmed. Then we can change to driving on the
right if it's considered essential.
Mind you, I wonder how long it'll take other road users and
pedestrians to adapt if we do change to DOTR. :-/
Even more worrying, how do you ensure that the software of all
self-driving vehicles is updated simultaneously? If even 1% don't update
in a timely fashion, it could be carnage.
You update them well ahead of time and make them change over a a set
time on a set date. Presumably they will all have GPS so they will know
the time and date.
On 08/04/2022 07:48, Indy Jess John wrote:
I wonder what happens when every self-driving vehicle on the road simultaneously updates to a software version with a dangerous bug
in it?
Software *and* hardware crash?!
Even more worrying, how do you ensure that the software of all self-driving vehicles is updated simultaneously? If even 1% don't update in a timely fashion,
it could be carnage.
I wonder what happens when every self-driving vehicle on the road simultaneously updates to a software version with a dangerous bug in it?
Do self-driving vehicles even talk to each other (or back to the
mothership) in real-time? Are there standards for compatibility between manufacturers?
On Sun, 03 Apr 2022 08:50:33 +0100, Roderick Stewart <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
This is Britain, don't forget. The change-over would be cars at first
to see how it went, followed by lorries a few weeks afterwards.
:-)
Jim
Electric scooters first please.
Makes no difference. The f***ers operating them just go where they like without regard to anybody or anything else anyway. Untouchable, until
they go under a lorry. Proof that Darwin is right... eventually.
On 05/04/2022 00:50, Paul Ratcliffe wrote:
On Sun, 03 Apr 2022 08:50:33 +0100, Roderick Stewart
<rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
This is Britain, don't forget. The change-over would be cars at first >>>> to see how it went, followed by lorries a few weeks afterwards.
:-)
Jim
Electric scooters first please.
Makes no difference. The f***ers operating them just go where they like
without regard to anybody or anything else anyway. Untouchable, until
they go under a lorry. Proof that Darwin is right... eventually.
+1
Around my way there are a couple of a******s who regularly travel up and
down the pavements at 20 mph weaving in and out of pedestrians who may
be in their way. These electric scooters are near silent until, at the
speed they are travelling, they are very close.
I noticed the original Perry Mason being screened the other day, the sound
on that was quite good, albeit mono. I never could stand that series.
I wonder what happens when every self-driving vehicle on the road >simultaneously updates to a software version with a dangerous bug in it?
Just think of the number of vehicles a car may have to talk to when
everyone gets in their cars at the same time in a parking lot or field
at the end of a well attended sporting event, or similar.
Who's to blame?
On 08/04/2022 09:31, alan_m wrote:
Just think of the number of vehicles a car may have to talk to when
everyone gets in their cars at the same time in a parking lot or field
at the end of a well attended sporting event, or similar.
And someone will hack the software so they get priority over all other
road users, even emergency services.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 297 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 05:19:30 |
| Calls: | 6,666 |
| Files: | 12,213 |
| Messages: | 5,335,948 |
