Posts by Steve Barnes
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
I Know that word;
the tactics of the right, including the actions of National in the house is to shout down any opposition to their wants, the fascicle protest at parliament was a case in point.
Posted at 12:16PM on 22 Nov 07. By Steve BarnesFrom Here
Ohh, self quoting makes me weak at the Knees. ;-) -
One of the things that makes the M25 interesting is the Dartford Crossing cosisting of two tunnels and a bridge, The Queen Elizabeth II bridge. This, actually means that the M25 is not a complete loop as most think as the tunnels, bridge and Interlinking roads form the A282
I have been known to entertan many at dinner parties with my knowledge, sometimes until they leave. -
M25 Three
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaThe M25 Three are Raphael Rowe, Michael Davis, and Randolph Johnson, who were incorrectly jailed for life, following a miscarriage of justice at the Old Bailey in March 1990 for a series of attacks and robberies around the M25, London's orbital motorway, on a night in December, 1988. Michael Davis has always protested his innocence.
They were incorrectly found guilty of the murder of hairdresser Peter Hurburgh, who was dragged from his car at gunpoint with his homosexual lover, tied up and beaten, and then suffered a fatal heart attack.
Eventually, the case went to the European Court of Human Rights, who ruled that the three men had not been given a fair trial under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights, stating that their trial had been "compromised" by the prosecution's use of the Public Interest Immunity certificates to withhold evidence useful to the defence.
Raphael Rowe is now an investigative journalist for the BBC and he is a member of the Advisory Council of the National College of Music.
Onr thing they don't say is that Raphael Rowe was a White Van Man
-
What is PAS but online talkback?
That dubious honour most certainly belongs to the Heralds "Your Views" section. It must have taken some IT womble moments to figure out that if you put the posts in a reverse order, last first, that you stilfle all discussion. Here on PAS the forum follows the simple logic of first first, as God intended. On the Harolds site the comments just seem to come out of thin air and so have little substance, just a bitternes that exposes the contributors shallowness of thought.
-
I'm no physicist, but surely it's not the amount of contact with the road that stops a vehicle, but the contact with the brake pads/feet? A loaded truck certainly takes longer to stop than an unloaded truck.
Contact with the brake pads and shoes (where fitted) is essential when braking, when the brake is applied this should definitely happen and the effect should be that the wheel stops rotating, regardless of the torque applied to the wheel by the road surface. Once the friction between the road surface and the tyre is broken the coefficient of friction drops dramatically causing skidding. This can be overcome by a method known as cadence braking, when the pressure on the brake pedal is reduced until the wheel stops skidding and is then reapplied, rapidly. this effect is reproduced in ABS systems to reduce braking distance. As for a loaded truck taking longer to stop. The weight of the load increases the friction between the road surface and the tyre. It is this ratio that determines the size of the brake shoe/pad and the required footprint of the tyre.
As for Helicopters, the counter rotation caused by the powered lift rotor is stabilised by the powered tail rotor. The power of the lift rotor and the "friction" of the air are used to calculate the required power/size of the tail rotor. The physics are the same as for the weight/stopping ratio as above.
Like my Mum said "Everybody loves a smart arse"
;-) -
It is also more likely, due to inertia, to have an accident in the first place.
In the case of 4wd's having, in most cases, a higher COG than most cars then you are right. However, doncha just love that word? However, as I said, if you are referring to the weight of the vehicle having a bearing on the vehicle "having" an accident then you are mistaken. It is inherent in the design of vehicles that the stopping distance is roughly equal between both models and type. For instance, the heavier the vehicle the more weight and therefore friction onto the road surface, this along with the fitting of a tyre with the correct "footprint" this ensures that the vehicle could stop in a proscribed distance. If it doesn't comply then it's not worth a COC (certificate of Compliance)
So there, Na na na na na. ;-) -
the motorbike license test is a piece of cake. They just follow you round on another motorbike. I have no idea how they can see what you're doing
I remember a good few years ago back in the UK. A Friend of mine was taking his test on a scooter. In those days the tester would tell you to drive around the block and watch you at random points. Before you set off he would tell you "at some point i will step out in front of you and hold up my hand and you will do an emergency stop' Well, said Friend set out around the block and saw the tester a couple of times and carried on around the block. A little while later he rounded the corner to see the tester laying in the road next to a guy in a helmet and a scooter not too dissimilar to his own. Oh how we laughed.
BTW they all lived happily ever after. ;-) -
Why is it that everytime I see the title of this thread I think of Mr Ed?
-
For an explanation of the Thought Police comment, for those who will never ever read Bruce's book: there is a scary movement in the world in which people no longer restrict being offended to what a person says or writes: they get offended by what they were thinking.
As opposed to being offended by the colour of their skin or their "funny" names or the clothes the wear or the way they talk or just the fact that they don't agree with you. EH?
-
If we supported too many people financially who were unable to repay us, or worse, who turned to crime thus making our standard of living worse, it would be a bad idea.
So...You have a sick baby. Coughing its little lungs out, the poor wee bairn is taken to hospital, a public hospital payed for by the poor over taxed hard working people. Later, after years of state funded rehabilitation he is reintroduced into society by a caring National Government, caring for the tax payer(who no longer gives a toss because he don't pay no more) and finds, to his chagrin, that he cannot repay us. He tries to obtain employment in the newly regulated employment industry, requiring a minimum of 6.5% unemployment to keep inflation in check. So he turns to crime, the crime of taking enough to survive because he must pull himself up by the bootstraps to exist in the new pay as you go, loser pays, National Dream? Or should he do the noble thing..................and emigrate to Australia?