Ride an SUB not an SUV

George Conklin wrote:

> "Eeyore" > wrote in message
> >
> > Do you know where she currently lives ?
> >
> > Indian driving is something else again. I've been there a few times.
>
> Well, yes, but do you want a date or something?

I just gone one actually about 3 hours ago for Wednesday. She asked me out too
and said she'd treat me ! How much better can it get.

Graham

In article >,
"Jack May" > wrote:

> "Doc O'Leary" > wrote in message
> ...
> > In article >,
> > "Jack May" > wrote:
> >
> >> Transit has inherent problems that prevent efficient planning of routes.
> >> You
> >> have to get several people to go between destination on a route. The
> >> flexibility does not exist to let people go anywhere they want to go.
> >> Inherently transit must stop and go to pick up and let off riders.
> >
> > It is telling that you don't realize that cars carry the exact same
> > burdens, with the addition of also having to *park* the damn things the
> > 90% of the time they are not in use.
>
> A car does not have to stop and pick up people ever mile or so.

Neither does mass transit. Again, you're getting caught up in the
current model of car-centric, bad transit planning. Stop bothering me
with things we all know are done wrong and lets move on to thinking how
they can be done right.

> That causes
> long delays.

Prove it. Demonstrate that moving just the people *must* take more time
than moving the people *and* their cars. Show me how rush hour results
in an improved flow of traffic. Give me some computed average travel
times on the same route for a few managed transit vehicles compared to
many more unmanaged single-occupant vehicles.

> You also have to get from your work or home to transit and
> wait for the transit to come.

No, you don't *have* to do it that way. I see your kind of
short-sighted "planning" every day, so please spare me here.

>That also increase total door to door time.

You provide no evidence. I've asked for this before, but the very
minimum you can do is figure out your own door-to-door commute time and
distance. I think you will be very fortunate if you find your average
speed ends up exceeding a whopping 25mph. Are you really suggesting
that no other form of travel could possibly beat that?

> You are not forgiven because either trying to play a game with your really
> stupid posts, or you are incapable of understanding what you are saying.

One of us definitely seems incapable of understanding what I am saying.

--
My personal UDP list: 127.0.0.1, 4ax.com, buzzardnews.com, googlegroups.com,
heapnode.com, localhost, x-privat.org

"Doc O'Leary" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> "Jack May" > wrote:
>
> > "Doc O'Leary" > wrote in message
> >
...
> > > In article >,
> > > "Jack May" > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Transit has inherent problems that prevent efficient planning of
routes.
> > >> You
> > >> have to get several people to go between destination on a route.
The
> > >> flexibility does not exist to let people go anywhere they want to go.
> > >> Inherently transit must stop and go to pick up and let off riders.
> > >
> > > It is telling that you don't realize that cars carry the exact same
> > > burdens, with the addition of also having to *park* the damn things
the
> > > 90% of the time they are not in use.
> >
> > A car does not have to stop and pick up people ever mile or so.
>
> Neither does mass transit.

Ok, it has to stop every 2 blocks or maybe even 3 to pick up and drop off
people. You forget I grew up on mass transit and you can't lie to me.

"Bernd Felsche" > wrote in message
...
> Eeyore > writes:
> >nash wrote:
> >> "George Conklin" wrote
>
> >> > But anti-skid brakes changed nothing, unfortunately, in the
> >> > real world.
>
> >> In Europe are they allowed to use cellulars and drive?
>
> >No. The fine for doing so in the UK has just increased to £60
> >($120) and 3 penalty points on your licence (same as the minimum
> >for speeding). 12 points = licence suspension btw. The 'points'
> >expire after 5 yrs IIRC - I'm not quite sure, I've never had any.
>
> Although they didn't actually need any specific laws for it; the
> matter being covered in other aspects as it is/was in Germany. In
> the latter, people get booked for eating and drinking (anything)
> while driving. driving being any time while the vehicle is in
> traffic, so even when stopped at the lights.
>
> >> Anti skid should work on ice.
>
> >Mine does. Saab recommend in the owner's manual that you should
> >test it in such conditions in fact (obviously in a safe place to do
> >so). It simply 'pumps' the brakes as it's supposed to.
>
> Well you're in the (probably) 5% of car owners who read the manual
> at least once. Perhaps you're also in the 0.5% who try out the jack
> and other tools before you need them.

Why would you try out a jack? What is hard about changing a tire? The
hardest part is the lug nuts anyway.

Eeyore > wrote:

>George Conklin wrote:
>> "Eeyore" wrote
>> > Kevin Rhodes wrote:
>> >
>> > > In Europe, if you have an accident at speed on a highway you are more
>> > > likely to die in that accident - higher speeds and smaller cars.
>> >
>> > I doubt that in fact. For starters most Europeans actually wear their seat
>> > belts.
>>
>> 93% locally wear them here.
>
>That's still a lower rate than here.

As with most of your assertions, you're wrong.... and not just subtly
wrong, you're FAR off-base with your claim.

http://www.etsc.be/documents/Fact_Sh...t_Use_2006.pdf

Country Wearing rate,
front seats (%) rear seats (%)
Austria 77 56
Belgium 66 not available
Cyprus n/a n/a
Czech Republic 75 n/a
Denmark 84 63
Estonia 75 21
Finland 89 80
France 97 68
Germany 94 90
Greece 40 (2003) 15 (2003)
Hungary 59 20 (2003)
Ireland 85 (2003) 46 (adults, 2003)
Italy n/a n/a
Latvia n/a n/a
Lithuania n/a n/a
Luxembourg 88 72
Malta 95 43
Netherlands 86 (2003) 63 (2003)
Poland 71 49
Portugal 88 25
Slovakia n/a n/a
Slovenia 81 40
Spain 86 (2003) 42 (2003)
Sweden 92 79
UK 93 83

Data from 2004 (except where noted).

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $795 ti frame

"Kevin Rhodes" > wrote

[snip]

> What I would like to see is the total *accident* rate by whatever
> comparable
> metric between the US and Europe, not the *death* rate.

[snip]

As with the USA, in fact more so, it depends on where you are. Here
in Britain London has lots of accidents, but they tend to be only
fender benders. Car insurance rates are expensive. At the other
extreme is the Dumfries and Galloway district on southern Scotland.
Empty rural roads, but when two cars do collide, people die.

I seem to recall that the most dangerous road in Europe is the main
road along Portugal's southern coast. It is gradually being
upgraded, and varies, frequently and unpredictably, between little
old rural road, and superhighway

Jeremy Parker

George Conklin wrote:
> "Bernd Felsche" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Well you're in the (probably) 5% of car owners who read the manual
>> at least once. Perhaps you're also in the 0.5% who try out the jack
>> and other tools before you need them.
>
> Why would you try out a jack? What is hard about changing a tire? The
> hardest part is the lug nuts anyway.
>
>
The jack is often the worst piece of junk they can design and often not
very safe to use. I tossed my toy spare for a real tire and bought a
mini-hydraulic that is easily ten times better than the wind up toy that
comes with new cars.

Note: You CAN get killed or lose an arm due to the cheap jacks falling
over and letting the car fall on you or a body part.
Does that ever get mentioned?
Bill Baka

-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free software - Baxter Codeworks www.baxcode.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------


"Doc O'Leary" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> "Jack May" > wrote:
>
> >That also increase total door to door time.
>
> You provide no evidence. I've asked for this before, but the very
> minimum you can do is figure out your own door-to-door commute time and
> distance. I think you will be very fortunate if you find your average
> speed ends up exceeding a whopping 25mph. Are you really suggesting
> that no other form of travel could possibly beat that?
>
If you were to start at the Expo Center and go to Borders Book store in
downtown Portland, it would probably take you 5 minutes LONGER by car than
by MAX Yellow Line. Your car trip is probably two minutes faster - but then
you have to find a parking space ...

"Jeremy Parker" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Kevin Rhodes" > wrote
>
> [snip]
>
> > What I would like to see is the total *accident* rate by whatever
> > comparable
> > metric between the US and Europe, not the *death* rate.
>
> [snip]
>
> As with the USA, in fact more so, it depends on where you are. Here
> in Britain London has lots of accidents, but they tend to be only
> fender benders. Car insurance rates are expensive. At the other
> extreme is the Dumfries and Galloway district on southern Scotland.
> Empty rural roads, but when two cars do collide, people die.
>
> I seem to recall that the most dangerous road in Europe is the main
> road along Portugal's southern coast. It is gradually being
> upgraded, and varies, frequently and unpredictably, between little
> old rural road, and superhighway
>
> Jeremy Parker
>
>

In general, rural highways are the most dangerous, as you indicate. In the
USA, historically the data have been broken down by overall rates, rural
highways, urban and interstates.

"George Conklin" > wrote in
ink.net:

>
> "Bill Baka" > wrote in message
> t...
>> Clark F Morris wrote:
>> > On Mon, 05 Mar 2007 12:29:39 GMT, "George Conklin"
>> > > wrote:
>> >
>> >> "Bill Baka" > wrote in message
>> >> ...
>> >>> George Conklin wrote:
>> >>>> "Bill Baka" > wrote in message
>> >>>> t...
>> >>>>> donquijote1954 wrote:
>> >>>>>> On Mar 4, 9:49 am, "Qui si parla Campagnolo"
>> >>>>>> > wrote:
>> >>>>>>> On Mar 3, 11:47 am, "donquijote1954"
>> >>>>>>> > wrote:
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Hey, be smart. You are part of the solution, not part of the
>> >> problem.
>> >>>>>>>> And you save the buck. Dinosaurs are a thing of the past and
>> >>>>>>>> the little furry animals are here to stay.
>> >>>>>>>> There are two versions of it...
>> >>>>>>>> bike:
>> >>>>>>>> http://www.zazzle.com/product/235847689274986069
>> >>>>>>>> and bus:
>> >>>>>>>> http://www.zazzle.com/product/235396990102826110
>> >>>>>>> OK, how is the bus not polluting?
>> >>>>>> You don't see it everyday, but it's possible. Just some new
>> >>>>>> technologies and some political will to make it happen...
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Heaven Help Bus
>> >>>>>> A visit to Iceland spurs dreams of a hydrogen future
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> The loneliness of the long-distance rider.I have seen the
>> >>>>>> future,
> and
>> >>>>>> it works.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> The 111 bus rolls quietly up to the Mjodd terminal in eastern
>> >>>>>> Reykjavik at 11:19 a.m., and I climb aboard. For 45 minutes,
>> >>>>>> we
> cruise
>> >>>>>> through the suburbs and then to the central square downtown,
> picking
>> >>>>>> up and discharging eight passengers along the way. Fuel cells
>> >>>>>> that would have filled the space of several passenger seats
>> >>>>>> five years
> ago
>> >>>>>> are now small enough to fit in the roof panels. And out the
>> >>>>>> exhaust pipe: a trickle of water.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
> http://www.grist.org/comments/soapbo...n-hydrogenbus/
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> I have a dream...that someday buses will not pollute. Actually
>> >>>>>> we could make it happen now much easier than having all the
>> >>>>>> cars be replaced with hybrid. Just change the fleet of buses
>> >>>>>> to hydrogen or some other technologies out there.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> We can make it happen with THE REVOLUTION. Coming soon...
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>> Too optimistic. Somebody, somewhere is probably burning coal or
>> >>>>> oil
> to
>> >>>>> make the electricity to electrolyze the water to make the
>> >>>>> Hydrogen. It only really works if the electricity comes from
>> >>>>> wind, solar,
> hydro,
>> >>>>> or, dare I say it, NUculear (Bush pronunciation).
>> >>>>> Bill Baka
>> >>>> Anything which makes a bus more efficient would make a car even
>> >>>> more efficient than the bus. Right now transit buses waste fuel
>> >>>> big time.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>> Only if nobody rides them. When I was a kid in the Chicago area I
> could
>> >>> go anywhere on a weekend with a travel buddy of mine. We took the
> train
>> >>> into downtown, then the 'el' ( hard to explain), and
>> >>> over/underground subway system. Then there were electric trolley
>> >>> buses, and finally regular buses to get us within walking
>> >>> distance. And, yes, any one of those modes of transportation
>> >>> sucks fuel big time if nobody rides them. If they are full they
>> >>> are a good thing. SUV's
> and
>> >>> single occupant soccer moms have messed up the equation.
>> >>> Bill Baka
>> >> Actually a SUV would use about the same fuel as a current transit
>> >> bus.
>> >>
>> > George, while SUVs are fuel guzzlers, they still get 2 - 3 times
>> > the miles per gallon as a transit bus. The question is whether the
>> > transit bus average loading is 3 or more times greater than the
>> > average loading of an SUV in similar circumstances (urban area
>> > driving only and dead head trips included). Any time there is
>> > carpooling there probably is either dead head mileage or circuity,
>> > sometimes both.
>>
>> Gas is going to have to hit $3 a gallon and stay there for the soccer
>> mom crowd to realize they need a little Geo-Metro 3 banger just to
>> run to the store for a pack of smokes, or some **** paper or other
>> silly little errand. People are slow learners.
>> Bill Baka
>
> It would need to more like $6 for anything much to happen.

I think so too. Who was it who said, people would spend a lot of money to
save a little? Well, we're not all that stupid.

By the way, the carbon credits thing is rediculous. Carbon dioxide is a
nutrient for plants. It is not smog, and it is good for the planet. I'm
not saying we should use gasoline powered cars, though. Other kinds of
pollution from gasoline powered cars are not as fictitious as the carbon
dioxide one.

What I hate to see though is satanic globalist corporations raping the
nations also with high gas prices. Untaxed, fairly priced gas anywhere in
the world should be under a dollar. There is no oil shortage anywhere.
Eac of the continents all have plenty of it, because it rained down on us
out of comet tails as certain new planets crossed paths with the Earth
before settling into their current orbits.

Even as I write this, the satanic globalists have telescopes watching the
skies for a wandering planet called Chernobyl (worm wood)--yes the one in
the Bible. So, we could be getting a refill of oil soon before we even
get close to needing it.

> And
> besides, people will always use their cars for shopping even if they

Not me. In Germany I always used the basket on my bicycle. Even when I
bought a thigh-high deep freezer, I just put it in my bicycle trailer. It
was no problem. A family could do their shopping with their kids in one
trailer and the groceries in the other.

> take transit to work, for no fuel savings,

Surely buses save fuel over cars, if the buses have more than a few
passengers. 1

> but then the bill goes to
> the public in terms of subsidized fares.

Subsidations are not free market, but then again neither is capitalism.
Oh well!