doetnietcomputeren

Bear wrote:

> I walked back; you won't believe this, but it measured about 2 feet in
> diameter, and about 1 foot deep.

If this is the case, you'll have no problem laying a claim on the local
authority. There's a set of rules out there about how deep a pothole can
get before they must repair it.

--
Dnc

AW

Badger wrote:

> ITYF the "reasonable time" starts ticking after it has been reported to
> the right person, on the basis that it's unreasonable for councils to
> monitor every stretch of every road, so you'd have to ascertain whether
> it had been reported.
>
> And unless you'd reported it yourself, the only way you can do that is
> by asking them

*Ding*. And of course they'd tell you, wouldn't they.....

While TFL are a generally a useless waste of fresh air and a bunch of
fascists to boot, this link below is a useful facility to report such
things, though it carefully avoids giving you the ability to search
for a previous report by someone else.

https://www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/roadusers.../newfault.aspx

Bear

In article <1185705802.565230.209670@k79g2000hse.googlegroups .com>, AW
says...
> Badger wrote:
>
> > ITYF the "reasonable time" starts ticking after it has been reported to
> > the right person, on the basis that it's unreasonable for councils to
> > monitor every stretch of every road, so you'd have to ascertain whether
> > it had been reported.
> >
> > And unless you'd reported it yourself, the only way you can do that is
> > by asking them
>
> *Ding*. And of course they'd tell you, wouldn't they.....

Right, well it's good news and bad news ...

Good news is the wheel's ok.

Bad news was the really nice chap at Balham Quik Fit pointing to the
rear tyre on the same side and pointing out an *enormous* bulge in the
sidewall; definitely wasn't there when I had the car valeted early on
Saturday morning, so presume the same incident took that out as well.

So, 2 new, low-profile, pricey tyres (Michelin). The nice thing was the
chap notice my NHS pass, asked me if I worked for them, and when I
replied "yes", knocked off £40, coz he's just come out of hospital and
was, he said, treated very well. I did explain I wasn't a clinician,
but he said "well, you all try your best don't you?". Nice chap. They
even checked the spacesaver (supposed to run at 60 psi), pumped it up,
tidied everything away where it should have been (in the wheel well
under the boot carpet), and were generally spiffy, as well as opening
til 4 pm on a Sunday. Thanks chaps.

Total for 2 = £284 including VAT, balancing and all the usual gubbins.
Not great, but it could have been a *lot* worse if the wheel had been
Donald Ducked.
--
Bear

Timo Geusch

Bear wrote:


> So, 2 new, low-profile, pricey tyres (Michelin). The nice thing was
> the chap notice my NHS pass, asked me if I worked for them, and when
> I replied "yes", knocked off £40, coz he's just come out of hospital
> and was, he said, treated very well. I did explain I wasn't a
> clinician, but he said "well, you all try your best don't you?".
> Nice chap. They even checked the spacesaver (supposed to run at 60
> psi), pumped it up, tidied everything away where it should have been
> (in the wheel well under the boot carpet), and were generally spiffy,
> as well as opening til 4 pm on a Sunday. Thanks chaps.

Blimey, that is pretty impressive. *Especially* given the reputation
that these places usually "enjoy".


--
Morini Corsaro 125 | CB450K4 | XL250 Motosport x2 | 900SSD
Triumph T-Bird chop | K1100LT BOTAFOF #33 TWA#10
The UKRM FAQ: http://www.ukrm.net/faq/index.html
"Je profite du paysage" - Joe Bar

Bear

In article <xn0f9a3mg4b4i6000@nermal.unix-consult.com>, Timo Geusch
says...
> Bear wrote:
>
>
> > So, 2 new, low-profile, pricey tyres (Michelin). The nice thing was
> > the chap notice my NHS pass, asked me if I worked for them, and when
> > I replied "yes", knocked off £40, coz he's just come out of hospital
> > and was, he said, treated very well. I did explain I wasn't a
> > clinician, but he said "well, you all try your best don't you?".
> > Nice chap. They even checked the spacesaver (supposed to run at 60
> > psi), pumped it up, tidied everything away where it should have been
> > (in the wheel well under the boot carpet), and were generally spiffy,
> > as well as opening til 4 pm on a Sunday. Thanks chaps.
>
> Blimey, that is pretty impressive. *Especially* given the reputation
> that these places usually "enjoy".

Indeed so. I only used them because they happened to be open on a
Sunday, and I didn't fancy the M4 tomorrow, in rush hour, on a
spacesaver.

But a thoroughly spiffy retail experience, so fair play to them. I was
impressed he spotted the duff rear too, as I was focused on the front.
The older West Indian chap who was dealing with me, Romeo, was an
absolute sweetie, and very thorough, and clearly took a massive pride in
his work.
--
Bear

wessie

Bear <bastardDOTbear@gmail.com> wrote in news:MPG.2116b91ece1ddda598a2e8
@news.individual.net:

> But a thoroughly spiffy retail experience, so fair play to them. I was
> impressed he spotted the duff rear too, as I was focused on the front.
> The older West Indian chap who was dealing with me, Romeo, was an
> absolute sweetie, and very thorough, and clearly took a massive pride in
> his work.

At £140 a pop I bet they checked all the tyres thoroughly...

--
wessie at tesco dot net

BMW R1150GS

"Wessie is a lovely man with many wonderful qualities" TM Blaney

Bear

In article <Xns997CA29ACE97Fwtymmmsas@85.214.90.228>, wessie says...
> Bear <bastardDOTbear@gmail.com> wrote in news:MPG.2116b91ece1ddda598a2e8
> @news.individual.net:
>
> > But a thoroughly spiffy retail experience, so fair play to them. I was
> > impressed he spotted the duff rear too, as I was focused on the front.
> > The older West Indian chap who was dealing with me, Romeo, was an
> > absolute sweetie, and very thorough, and clearly took a massive pride in
> > his work.
>
> At £140 a pop I bet they checked all the tyres thoroughly...

You'd think wouldn't you? But I can think of several places I've been
to that didn't.

And the list price for the tyres was a lot more, so I'm not too unhappy.
--
Bear

Ace

On Sun, 29 Jul 2007 14:30:41 +0100, Bear <bastardDOTbear@gmail.com>
wrote:

>So, 2 new, low-profile, pricey tyres (Michelin).

>Total for 2 = £284 including VAT, balancing and all the usual gubbins.

Do they give you a guarantee with Michelin's over there these days? In
France they do a free "If your tyre bursts we'll recover the vehicle
and replace the tyre" guarantee with all Michelins. Which I find quite
impressive, TBH. Sadly the two tyres I fubarred[1] on the Volvo
recently were Continentals, so not much use on that score.

[1] Remember children, using mobile phones when driving is dangerous,
particularly when you're trying to extricate it from a tight shorts
pocket while negotiating a village with 3" high sharp kerbed
traffic-slowing islets in the middle of the road...

--
_______
..'_/_|_\_'. Ace (brucedotrogers a.t rochedotcom)
\`\ | /`/ DS#8 BOTAFOT#3 SbS#2 UKRMMA#13 DFV#8 SKA#2 IBB#10
`\\ | //'
`\|/`
`

wessie

Bear <bastardDOTbear@gmail.com> wrote in
news:MPG.2116bc32241e303e98a2e9@news.individual.ne t:

> In article <Xns997CA29ACE97Fwtymmmsas@85.214.90.228>, wessie says...
>> Bear <bastardDOTbear@gmail.com> wrote in
>> news:MPG.2116b91ece1ddda598a2e8 @news.individual.net:
>>
>> > But a thoroughly spiffy retail experience, so fair play to them. I
>> > was
>
>> > impressed he spotted the duff rear too, as I was focused on the
>> > front.
>
>> > The older West Indian chap who was dealing with me, Romeo, was an
>> > absolute sweetie, and very thorough, and clearly took a massive
>> > pride i
> n
>> > his work.
>>
>> At £140 a pop I bet they checked all the tyres thoroughly...
>
> You'd think wouldn't you? But I can think of several places I've been
> to that didn't.
>
> And the list price for the tyres was a lot more, so I'm not too
> unhappy.

I use http://www.etyres.co.uk/ and http://www.blackcircles.com/ to get
an idea of price and then haggle with a few independents that I know
reasonably well. It's surprising how much of a discount you can get when
spending over £400 on a set of 4.

Obviously, in your situation, finding someone open with stock changes
the rules somewhat

--
wessie at tesco dot net

BMW R1150GS

"Wessie is a lovely man with many wonderful qualities" TM Blaney

Bear

In article <Xns997CBB55DEDC3wtymmmsas@85.214.90.228>, wessie says...
> Bear <bastardDOTbear@gmail.com> wrote in
> news:MPG.2116bc32241e303e98a2e9@news.individual.ne t:
>
> > In article <Xns997CA29ACE97Fwtymmmsas@85.214.90.228>, wessie says...
> >> Bear <bastardDOTbear@gmail.com> wrote in
> >> news:MPG.2116b91ece1ddda598a2e8 @news.individual.net:
> >>
> >> > But a thoroughly spiffy retail experience, so fair play to them. I
> >> > was
> >
> >> > impressed he spotted the duff rear too, as I was focused on the
> >> > front.
> >
> >> > The older West Indian chap who was dealing with me, Romeo, was an
> >> > absolute sweetie, and very thorough, and clearly took a massive
> >> > pride i
> > n
> >> > his work.
> >>
> >> At £140 a pop I bet they checked all the tyres thoroughly...
> >
> > You'd think wouldn't you? But I can think of several places I've been
> > to that didn't.
> >
> > And the list price for the tyres was a lot more, so I'm not too
> > unhappy.
>
> I use http://www.etyres.co.uk/ and http://www.blackcircles.com/ to get
> an idea of price and then haggle with a few independents that I know
> reasonably well. It's surprising how much of a discount you can get when
> spending over £400 on a set of 4.
>
> Obviously, in your situation, finding someone open with stock changes
> the rules somewhat

Indeedy; I normally time it to whenever I'm coming to Brizzle, give
ProTyre a call, haggle a bit using online prices, and they do the
business - love those folk to bits.

But this was a bit of an emergency, so all things considered I don't
feel too hard done by.

I can't believe the size of the lump in the rear though; it was about
half the size of my fist, on the sidewall.
--
Bear

Dave Emerson

"Bear" <bastardDOTbear@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.2116e49f5fe381e598a2ee@news.individual.ne t...
In article <Xns997CBB55DEDC3wtymmmsas@85.214.90.228>, wessie says...

>I can't believe the size of the lump in the rear though; it was about
> half the size of my fist, on the sidewall.

Had similar on a Cavalier pool car years ago after hitting a motorway-sized
cone at 40mph.

Initial investigation at the first service station just showed damage to the
front valance(? the bit under the bumper) but after a few miles there was a
thump-thump-thump linked to road speed that got louder and heavier as the
miles went on.

By the time we managed to get a good look we found a bump the size and shape
of half a luxury Easter egg on the inside sidewall, which was hitting the
suspension upright and had worn through to the canvas.

Even the RAC guy that came out - as the pool car had a spare but no jack or
wheel brace - was amazed it hadn't gone *BANG*.


--
Dave
ex Motorcycle Maintenance Workshop
http://tinyurl.com/4mhaw

Dr Ivan D. Reid

On Sun, 29 Jul 2007 18:59:04 +0200, Ace <seesig@virgin.net>
wrote in <ojhpa312juvjj9l9qf5se5ul7khr1uhu6p@4ax.com>:

> [1] Remember children, using mobile phones when driving is dangerous,
> particularly when you're trying to extricate it from a tight shorts
> pocket while negotiating a village with 3" high sharp kerbed
> traffic-slowing islets in the middle of the road...

IIRC, that'd be £60 and three points in the UK these days...
Understandable, when using a hand-held increases accident risk to legal-limit
levels. (So does using a hands-free, but that's a harder political sell...)

--
Ivan Reid, School of Engineering & Design, _____________ CMS Collaboration,
Brunel University. Ivan.Reid@[brunel.ac.uk|cern.ch] Room 40-1-B12, CERN
GSX600F, RG250WD "You Porsche. Me pass!" DoD #484 JKLO#003, 005
WP7# 3000 LC Unit #2368 (tinlc) UKMC#00009 BOTAFOT#16 UKRMMA#7 (Hon)
KotPT -- "for stupidity above and beyond the call of duty".

Champ

On Sun, 29 Jul 2007 19:05:58 +0000 (UTC), "Dr Ivan D. Reid"
<Ivan.Reid@brunel.ac.uk> wrote:

>On Sun, 29 Jul 2007 18:59:04 +0200, Ace <seesig@virgin.net>
> wrote in <ojhpa312juvjj9l9qf5se5ul7khr1uhu6p@4ax.com>:
>
>> [1] Remember children, using mobile phones when driving is dangerous,
>> particularly when you're trying to extricate it from a tight shorts
>> pocket while negotiating a village with 3" high sharp kerbed
>> traffic-slowing islets in the middle of the road...
>
> IIRC, that'd be £60 and three points in the UK these days...

It is similarly illegal in France too.

>Understandable, when using a hand-held increases accident risk to legal-limit
>levels.

Can't believe you've bought this line.
--
Champ

ZX10R | GPz750turbo | GSX-R 600 racer
My advice as your attorney is to buy a motorcycle
To email me, neal at my domain should work.

Ace

On Sun, 29 Jul 2007 19:05:58 +0000 (UTC), "Dr Ivan D. Reid"
<Ivan.Reid@brunel.ac.uk> wrote:

>On Sun, 29 Jul 2007 18:59:04 +0200, Ace <seesig@virgin.net>
> wrote in <ojhpa312juvjj9l9qf5se5ul7khr1uhu6p@4ax.com>:
>
>> [1] Remember children, using mobile phones when driving is dangerous,
>> particularly when you're trying to extricate it from a tight shorts
>> pocket while negotiating a village with 3" high sharp kerbed
>> traffic-slowing islets in the middle of the road...
>
> IIRC, that'd be £60 and three points in the UK these days...

Since when have I (or you, for that matter( ever worried about what's
legal and what's not?

--
_______
..'_/_|_\_'. Ace (brucedotrogers a.t rochedotcom)
\`\ | /`/ DS#8 BOTAFOT#3 SbS#2 UKRMMA#13 DFV#8 SKA#2 IBB#10
`\\ | //'
`\|/`
`

Champ

On Sun, 29 Jul 2007 23:31:43 +0200, Ace <seesig@virgin.net> wrote:

>>> [1] Remember children, using mobile phones when driving is dangerous,
>>> particularly when you're trying to extricate it from a tight shorts
>>> pocket while negotiating a village with 3" high sharp kerbed
>>> traffic-slowing islets in the middle of the road...
>>
>> IIRC, that'd be £60 and three points in the UK these days...
>
>Since when have I (or you, for that matter( ever worried about what's
>legal and what's not?

Well *exactly*

Actually, just about *the* most dangerous bit of using a mobile phone
in the car is getting it out of ones pocket.
--
Champ

ZX10R | GPz750turbo | GSX-R 600 racer
My advice as your attorney is to buy a motorcycle
To email me, neal at my domain should work.

deadmail@burnt.org.uk

Champ <neal@champ.org.uk> wrote in message
<hl6qa39st0kh4qmient17gb2kmgcm6ensb@4ax.com>:

>Actually, just about *the* most dangerous bit of using a mobile phone
>in the car is getting it out of ones pocket.

Bollocks, it's getting the picture just right for the MMS message.
--
K75RT, K1100LT, ZXR750H1, 5TA.

I know I aint doing much,
doing nothing means a lot to me.

Champ

On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 00:04:17 +0100, deadmail@burnt.org.uk wrote:

> Champ <neal@champ.org.uk> wrote in message
><hl6qa39st0kh4qmient17gb2kmgcm6ensb@4ax.com>:
>
>>Actually, just about *the* most dangerous bit of using a mobile phone
>>in the car is getting it out of ones pocket.
>
>Bollocks, it's getting the picture just right for the MMS message.

heh.

Texting while driving can be a challenge sometimes too.

So much so, that I believe it once caused Porl to get upset with Bear.
--
Champ

ZX10R | GPz750turbo | GSX-R 600 racer
My advice as your attorney is to buy a motorcycle
To email me, neal at my domain should work.

Andy Bonwick

On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 00:16:38 +0100, deadmail@burnt.org.uk wrote:

snip>

>Anyway, what do you need your right hand for when driving; left hand
>gears, knees steering wheel.

Getting cup of tea out of door pocket.

Rolling cigarettes.

Holding phone while sending text messages.

Gesturing at drivers who flash their lights when they see me doing any
of the above.

Bear

In article <2q7qa3p1msacu35gdegqhigtqlbrdc2lep@4ax.com>, Champ says...
> On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 00:04:17 +0100, deadmail@burnt.org.uk wrote:
>
> > Champ <neal@champ.org.uk> wrote in message
> ><hl6qa39st0kh4qmient17gb2kmgcm6ensb@4ax.com>:
> >
> >>Actually, just about *the* most dangerous bit of using a mobile phone
> >>in the car is getting it out of ones pocket.
> >
> >Bollocks, it's getting the picture just right for the MMS message.
>
> heh.
>
> Texting while driving can be a challenge sometimes too.

Indeedy.

> So much so, that I believe it once caused Porl to get upset with Bear.

He's very butch sometimes, you know.
--
Bear

Dr Ivan D. Reid

On Sun, 29 Jul 2007 21:42:53 +0100, Champ <neal@champ.org.uk>
wrote in <ktupa3hjo2eb04rs8ng3tcqhvn1009945f@4ax.com>:
> On Sun, 29 Jul 2007 19:05:58 +0000 (UTC), "Dr Ivan D. Reid"
><Ivan.Reid@brunel.ac.uk> wrote:

>>Understandable, when using a hand-held increases accident risk to legal-limit
>>levels.

> Can't believe you've bought this line.

I've read the paper. It found that cell-phone users are three
times (IIRC) more likely to have an accident than non-users. I understand
there are later studies that show there is no difference between hand-held
and hands-free, but I've not read them.

--
Ivan Reid, School of Engineering & Design, _____________ CMS Collaboration,
Brunel University. Ivan.Reid@[brunel.ac.uk|cern.ch] Room 40-1-B12, CERN
GSX600F, RG250WD "You Porsche. Me pass!" DoD #484 JKLO#003, 005
WP7# 3000 LC Unit #2368 (tinlc) UKMC#00009 BOTAFOT#16 UKRMMA#7 (Hon)
KotPT -- "for stupidity above and beyond the call of duty".

Badger

Bear wrote:
> I wouldn't want to drive using only one hand.

I worked with someone whose left arm stopped just below the elbow.
Changing gear was slightly challenging, as he had to lean slightly to
reach it, but other than that he had no problems.

--
Rick
NT650V (still)
TWA#11 BREast#6 BOTAFOT#139

Badger

deadmail@burnt.org.uk wrote:
> Anyway, what do you need your right hand for when driving; left hand
> gears, knees steering wheel.

Winding the window down.
Operating any switchgear which might be located to the right of the
steering column.
Erm....other essential and frequently-done activities...erm...

--
Rick
NT650V (still)
TWA#11 BREast#6 BOTAFOT#139

Badger

Dr Ivan D. Reid wrote:
> using a hand-held increases accident risk to legal-limit
> levels. (So does using a hands-free, but that's a harder political sell...)

In what way is using a hands-free unit *more* of a risk than, say,
shouting at the kids in the back?

--
Rick
NT650V (still)
TWA#11 BREast#6 BOTAFOT#139

platypus

Badger wrote:
> Dr Ivan D. Reid wrote:
>> using a hand-held increases accident risk to legal-limit
>> levels. (So does using a hands-free, but that's a harder political
>> sell...)
>
> In what way is using a hands-free unit *more* of a risk than, say,
> shouting at the kids in the back?

With a hands-free, you need a bit of quiet in the car, whereas with kids you
can shriek at them no matter how noisy it is.

--
platypus

"fastidious and precise"

Ace

On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 00:24:30 +0100, Champ <neal@champ.org.uk> wrote:

>On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 00:12:27 +0100, Bear <bastardDOTbear@gmail.com>
>wrote:

>>I wouldn't want to drive using only one hand.
>>
>>Tried it before, didn't like it.
>
>Poof
>
>I drove to Norwich 2 days after I broke my left collar bone.
>
>I did try and minimise gearchanges, mind.

On my second-ever ski trip, Jude and I drove to Val d'Isere for a
weekend with a mate of mine. Both he and I managed, in completely
different circumstances, to temporarily dislocate (i.e. popped out and
back in) our left shoulders. We could both use it to steer, as long as
the other hand lifted it onto the wheel, but moving to the gearchange
was impossible. As we were taking turns to drive home (overnight)
anyway, we just made sure that whoever was in the 'waking up' phase in
the front passenger seat had to do all the gearchanges.

--
_______
..'_/_|_\_'. Ace (brucedotrogers a.t rochedotcom)
\`\ | /`/ DS#8 BOTAFOT#3 SbS#2 UKRMMA#13 DFV#8 SKA#2 IBB#10
`\\ | //'
`\|/`
`

Badger

Dr Ivan D. Reid wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Jul 2007 21:42:53 +0100, Champ <neal@champ.org.uk>
> wrote in <ktupa3hjo2eb04rs8ng3tcqhvn1009945f@4ax.com>:
>> On Sun, 29 Jul 2007 19:05:58 +0000 (UTC), "Dr Ivan D. Reid"
>> <Ivan.Reid@brunel.ac.uk> wrote:
>
>>> Understandable, when using a hand-held increases accident risk to legal-limit
>>> levels.
>
>> Can't believe you've bought this line.
>
> I've read the paper.

References?

> It found that cell-phone users are three
> times (IIRC) more likely to have an accident than non-users.

Is the cause and effect established, or could it be that it's the less
able drivers who are more likely to use a phone in the first place?

> I understand
> there are later studies that show there is no difference between hand-held
> and hands-free, but I've not read them.

Again, references?
And is it likely to comment on headsets in bike helmets?

--
Rick
NT650V (still)
TWA#11 BREast#6 BOTAFOT#139

M J Carley

In the referenced article, Badger <spam@housemartin.f9.co.uk> writes:

>References?

You could start with these:

dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2005.04.007
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2004.06.003

dx.doi.org/10.1167/6.6.872

>Is the cause and effect established, or could it be that it's the less
>able drivers who are more likely to use a phone in the first place?

It seems to be due to an increase in workload.
--
Differenza fra il rivoluzionaro e il cialtrone. Il rivoluzionario
rompe l'orologio e invece di presentarsi alle nove si presenta alle
nove meno cinque. Il cialtrone rompe l'orologio e si alza alle undici.
Home page: http://people.bath.ac.uk/ensmjc/

Hog

Champ wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Jul 2007 23:31:43 +0200, Ace <seesig@virgin.net> wrote:
>
>>>> [1] Remember children, using mobile phones when driving is
>>>> dangerous, particularly when you're trying to extricate it from a
>>>> tight shorts pocket while negotiating a village with 3" high sharp
>>>> kerbed traffic-slowing islets in the middle of the road...
>>>
>>> IIRC, that'd be £60 and three points in the UK these days...
>>
>> Since when have I (or you, for that matter( ever worried about what's
>> legal and what's not?
>
> Well *exactly*
>
> Actually, just about *the* most dangerous bit of using a mobile phone
> in the car is getting it out of ones pocket.

Indeed. I was sold to at a Halfords checkout recently and now have a window
mounted phone holder which takes the M3100. I can see who is calling, decide
whether to answer and pick it up easily.

On the way back from Platys I fumbled and dropped it into the foot well at
12x mph. Perhaps a Dame Edna type chain round my neck would be better.

I slowed and moved into the truck lane to perform an advanced yoga position
because I *knew* it would eventually slide in behind the clutch pedal.

--
Hog
'03 ST4S '96 Bastard12 '89 R100RS '81 XS650 '78 RD400

Champ

On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 09:30:27 GMT, ensmjc@bath.ac.uk (M J Carley)
wrote:

>>Is the cause and effect established, or could it be that it's the less
>>able drivers who are more likely to use a phone in the first place?
>
>It seems to be due to an increase in workload.

This seems obvious. For some people, driving uses all of their mental
capacity. For others, their brain is barely ticking over.

I just don't think the law should limit what I can do down to the
lowest common denominator of stupid people.
--
Champ
I don't know, but I been told, you never slow down, you never get old
ZX10R | GPz750turbo | GSX-R600 (race)
neal at champ dot org dot uk

M J Carley

In the referenced article, Champ <news@champ.org.uk> writes:
>On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 09:30:27 GMT, ensmjc@bath.ac.uk (M J Carley)
>wrote:
>
>>>Is the cause and effect established, or could it be that it's the less
>>>able drivers who are more likely to use a phone in the first place?
>>
>>It seems to be due to an increase in workload.
>
>This seems obvious. For some people, driving uses all of their mental
>capacity. For others, their brain is barely ticking over.
>
>I just don't think the law should limit what I can do down to the
>lowest common denominator of stupid people.

The research finding is that it is the `better' drivers who are more
likely to use a mobile: `older age, female gender, smaller amount of
driving, and occupation promoted not using a phone at all while
driving. Additionally, low skill level and high safety motivation
contributed to this decision.' In other words, the danger does not
come from `stupid people'.
--
Differenza fra il rivoluzionaro e il cialtrone. Il rivoluzionario
rompe l'orologio e invece di presentarsi alle nove si presenta alle
nove meno cinque. Il cialtrone rompe l'orologio e si alza alle undici.
Home page: http://people.bath.ac.uk/ensmjc/

deadmail@burnt.org.uk

ensmjc@bath.ac.uk (M J Carley) wrote in message
<JLzL83.I60.B.midge@bath.ac.uk>:

>In the referenced article, Champ <news@champ.org.uk> writes:
>>On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 09:30:27 GMT, ensmjc@bath.ac.uk (M J Carley)
>>wrote:
>>
>>>>Is the cause and effect established, or could it be that it's the less
>>>>able drivers who are more likely to use a phone in the first place?
>>>
>>>It seems to be due to an increase in workload.
>>
>>This seems obvious. For some people, driving uses all of their mental
>>capacity. For others, their brain is barely ticking over.
>>
>>I just don't think the law should limit what I can do down to the
>>lowest common denominator of stupid people.
>
>The research finding is that it is the `better' drivers who are more
>likely to use a mobile: `older age, female gender, smaller amount of
>driving, and occupation promoted not using a phone at all while
>driving. Additionally, low skill level and high safety motivation
>contributed to this decision.' In other words, the danger does not
>come from `stupid people'.

Odd that with all of this 'danger' I don't know anyone who has (admitted
to) either been on the recieving end or the delivering end of a crash
caused by mobile phone usage.

Personal experience; based on using a phone whilst driving over a period
of more than fifteen years and heavens knows how many hours is that it
wasn't massively dangerous in itself, it's when you needed to make notes
and/or operate a calculator that it got tricky...
--
K75RT, K1100LT, ZXR750H1, 5TA.

I know I aint doing much,
doing nothing means a lot to me.

M J Carley

In the referenced article, deadmail@burnt.org.uk writes:

>Odd that with all of this 'danger' I don't know anyone who has
>(admitted to) either been on the recieving end or the delivering end
>of a crash caused by mobile phone usage.

Who would admit that liability?

`Those who talked on a cellular phone in their vehicle for more than 50
minutes per month were over five times more likely to have a traffic
accident.'

--
Differenza fra il rivoluzionaro e il cialtrone. Il rivoluzionario
rompe l'orologio e invece di presentarsi alle nove si presenta alle
nove meno cinque. Il cialtrone rompe l'orologio e si alza alle undici.
Home page: http://people.bath.ac.uk/ensmjc/

Hog

M J Carley wrote:
> In the referenced article, deadmail@burnt.org.uk writes:
>
>> Odd that with all of this 'danger' I don't know anyone who has
>> (admitted to) either been on the recieving end or the delivering end
>> of a crash caused by mobile phone usage.
>
> Who would admit that liability?
>
> `Those who talked on a cellular phone in their vehicle for more than
> 50 minutes per month were over five times more likely to have a
> traffic accident.'

With reference to what Champ was saying I try and concentrate completely on
driving/riding fast and do find talking on the phone when driving to be
distracting depending on the conversation. Making/breaking calls is the most
distracting part though.

--
Hog
'03 ST4S '96 Bastard12 '89 R100RS '81 XS650 '78 RD400

Dr Ivan D. Reid

On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 10:15:59 +0100, Badger <spam@housemartin.f9.co.uk>
wrote in <46adaba5$0$1601$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader02.plus.net>:
> Dr Ivan D. Reid wrote:
>> On Sun, 29 Jul 2007 21:42:53 +0100, Champ <neal@champ.org.uk>
>> wrote in <ktupa3hjo2eb04rs8ng3tcqhvn1009945f@4ax.com>:
>>> On Sun, 29 Jul 2007 19:05:58 +0000 (UTC), "Dr Ivan D. Reid"
>>> <Ivan.Reid@brunel.ac.uk> wrote:

>>>> Understandable, when using a hand-held increases accident risk to legal-limit
>>>> levels.

>>> Can't believe you've bought this line.

>> I've read the paper.

> References?

http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/short/336/7/453

>> It found that cell-phone users are three
>> times (IIRC) more likely to have an accident than non-users.

> Is the cause and effect established, or could it be that it's the less
> able drivers who are more likely to use a phone in the first place?

>> I understand
>> there are later studies that show there is no difference between hand-held
>> and hands-free, but I've not read them.

> Again, references?

Actually, the first paper came to ths conclusion too; I have heard
news reports in recent times of similar studies.

> And is it likely to comment on headsets in bike helmets?

Probably the attention overload works for bikers as well as cagers.
Maybe even worse, given the greater attention needed to survive on a bike
than in a car.

--
Ivan Reid, School of Engineering & Design, _____________ CMS Collaboration,
Brunel University. Ivan.Reid@[brunel.ac.uk|cern.ch] Room 40-1-B12, CERN
GSX600F, RG250WD "You Porsche. Me pass!" DoD #484 JKLO#003, 005
WP7# 3000 LC Unit #2368 (tinlc) UKMC#00009 BOTAFOT#16 UKRMMA#7 (Hon)
KotPT -- "for stupidity above and beyond the call of duty".