HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: kieron@root.co.uk (Kieron Drake)
Newsgroups: uk.transport
Subject: Re: Driving v Public Transport
Date: 25 Jan 93 16:42:32 GMT
Distribution: uk
Organization: UniSoft Ltd., London, England

In <1993Jan22.173314.8649@praxis.co.uk> martin@praxis.co.uk (Martin Croxford) writes:

>I live in Bradford-on-Avon and commute 6 miles to Bath each day. In the
>car it takes 15-20 minutes, half of that sitting in a traffic jam at a
>bottleneck with about 100 (?) other one-person cars. On the train it
>takes about 15-20 minutes, more if you include waiting for the train. The
>reason I drive is
	[ convenience & cost #50 p.month .v. #15 petrol p.month ]

>Driving is cheaper, more convenient and more reliable than public
>transport (over my annual mileage).

Have you considered a bike? You'd get into Bath in about the same time
and it's much more pleasant than sitting in a car and you're free of
the waiting required by the train timetable. If you're worried about
the traffic you could even go along the towpath by the Kennet & Avon
canal. You could even canoe there in an hour or so!

	kieron
-- 
kieron@root.co.uk	Tel: +44 71 729 3773 (or 071 729 3773 in the UK)
Kieron Drake		Fax: +44 71 729 3273 (or 071 729 3273 in the UK)
Senior Consultant, UniSoft Ltd., Spa house, Chapel Place, Rivington Street,
London EC2A 3DQ, UK
From: snail@lsl.co.uk
Newsgroups: uk.transport
Subject: cycling.
Date: 25 Jan 93 15:56:26 GMT
Organization: Laser-Scan Ltd., Cambridge

Posting this for Gareth (G.L.Morgan@uk.ac.durham) who doesn't have write
access to News. snail@lsl.co.uk Posted with my comments added.

~Just fully seconding your comments about cycling and driving
~as posted 25/1/93
~
~I am, like you, both a cyclist and a driver (and a pedestrian). I too find
~that other cyclists slow me down (as do other pedestrians who are too slow).
~And like you I firmly believ in giving cyclists a wide birth. Also I find that
~cycling like a car at junctions, eg following the route I would take driving,
~is 99% of times far safer than following the one I was taught as a cyclise
~(the one in the highway code (old ed) about going round the edge of
~roundabouts etc)

Thats right. In Cambridge (when I lived there) I used to cycle very fast indeed
and actually overtook an articulated lorry on Milton road (40 Mph zone). I
reckoned I was doing about 35, since the cars were drifting past me. They got
a real shock when I indictated to pull out to overtake the truck. It was as if
I was a space alien.

I don't usually cycle that fast (it is a long flat fast road - well when 
theres no wind) but find that cycling the way I would drive is safer than
hiding in the gutter. Problem is you can only do this in Cambridge, since out
of Cambridge the roads are slower (for bikes) and there is more wind. You 
really do need speed to cycle this way effectively. I suppose its an aggresive
style of riding - it has to be to cycle at speeds approaching car speeds.
Odd since my driving is laid back and relaxed normally. Get a
good adrenalin high out of cycling like that. My cycling is now restricted to
the fens, usually in the summer, since the winds out there are bloody cold
winter time.

You need to be assertive in the positioning of yourself on the road. If you
aren't people won't see you. You also need to be very aware of what you're
doing. Cyclists who travel at 5mph are a real menace. They may as well walk.
Usually they have the bike in the wrong gear, and don't realise it. Foreign
students are really bad, I've seen some two or three abreast cycling along
a road with a care in the world, with a queue of cars behind them - and they
wonder why people get annoyed at them! Histon raod in the summer is a good
place to see examples of this.

~What about cycle paths? I don't like them in the UK. Usu they are full of 
~rubbish and are liable to damage the bike, through you off, etc etc. (Too
~little traffic to 'sweep' them clean, unlike roads.) In Holland though their
~cycles paths are well used, and are v. v. good. Comments?

~Feel free to post this, I can't as don't have write access to News.
~_____________________________________________________________________________
~ Gareth L de C Morgan      |  "Take some of these pills when you go to bed  
~ g.l.morgan@durham.ac.uk   |   at night, and another one if you wake up in  
~ Univeristy of Durham      |   the morning."                                
~From:	CBS%UK.AC.DURHAM::G.L.MORGAN 25-JAN-1993 15:09:54.94
Newsgroups: uk.transport
From: gtoal@pizzabox.demon.co.uk (Graham Toal)
Subject: Re: Rear end drivers, etc
Organization: Cuddlehogs Anonymous
Distribution: uk
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 11:57:13 GMT

In article <1993Jan20.144627.2953@lsl.co.uk> snail@lsl.co.uk writes:
:And you miss the point entirely. The people who advocate a higher limit
:have also been saying educate people so that they know how to drive safely
:and considerately. Someone doing so (regardles of the speed limit) would not
:drive at such speed in the conditions you describe. Indeed I doubt if you'd
:survive at 50mph, for the circumstances described. So that nullifies that
:argument, despite the fact that Motorways don't have 'little dips' in them.

As someone who used to regularly do London to edinburgh by M1/M6, I can assure
you there *are* places where you come across totally unexpected fog.  However,
if you want a better argument - pick a 'safe speed' over the limit and tell
me what happens when you unexpectedly blow a tyre.  Or some kid decides
to play 'chicken' on the M1 right in front of you, drunk, at 1am...

G
From: anw@maths.nott.ac.uk (Dr A. N. Walker)
Newsgroups: uk.transport
Subject: Re: City Traffic
Date: 27 Jan 93 17:18:58 GMT
Reply-To: anw@maths.nott.ac.uk (Dr A. N. Walker)
Organization: Maths Dept., Nott'm Univ., UK.

In article <SM.93Jan22163103@suns2.cel.co.uk> sm@cel.co.uk (salim mehta)
writes:
>If 50 people make journey A-B by bus they each pay UKLx. If they now repeat
>that journey by private transport they also incur the cost (to all of us)
>of the increased congestion (journey time) and pollution (journey quality).

	Yes, and they also save on the cost of road repairs [damage goes
up as a high power of axle loading], the cost of employing a bus driver
[and possibly also a conductor, and other personnel costs], and the cost
of building bus shelters and other street furniture [itself a cause of
congestion on the pavements and of accidents].

	Meanwhile, if buses were to be scrapped, traffic would not always
be being held up by buses stopping to pick up and set down passengers,
and bus lanes would become available to other traffic.

	Meanwhile, if 1 person makes journey A-B by bus, it is perfectly
clear that it would benefit us all [except the redundant driver] if the
journey were made by car instead.

	The balance simply isn't all that clear cut.  Buses work well in
situations where batching up lots of people makes sense, and not where
it doesn't.  In a free society, we should not be forcing people into
batches when it isn't appropriate.

	One of my more interesting relevant experiences was working in
Liverpool in 1968 [give or take a year] when there was a bus strike.
People continued to queue at bus stops, and passing motorists gave them
lifts.  It worked extremely well -- the congestion was much reduced, and
everyone got to work much faster.  There were social benefits too;  I
got to know Liverpool rather well, and I met some interesting people.
Pity this scheme couldn't be formalised!

>Someone has to pay for these, it should be the motorist.

	It *is* the motorist!  "Road Fund" licence, fuel tax, VAT, not
to mention insurance, depreciation, etc.  In addition, motorists, of
their nature, pay hugely more on average in income tax and other general
taxation than those who can't afford cars.

-- 
Andy Walker, Maths Dept., Nott'm Univ., UK.
anw@maths.nott.ac.uk
From: steve@acorn.co.uk (Steve "daffy" Hunt)
Newsgroups: uk.transport
Subject: Re: Rear end drivers, etc
Date: 23 Jan 93 18:03:37 GMT
Organization: Acorn Computers Limited, Cambridge, UK
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]

Richard T Peat (ssurpeat@csug.cs.reading.ac.uk) wrote, in lines exceeding
80 columns which I have thoughtfully reformatted since he couldn't be
bothered:-

: You may be right that the driver *shouldn't* be held responsible, but
: he will.  I have always been told that if there is an accident (of ANY
: sort) on a road, and your car is moving, YOU are to blame.

If you mean morally to blame, there might be some justification for
this view.  If you mean legally to blame, then you have been
misinformed.
-- 
				Steve Hunt	steve@acorn.co.uk
From: roj@cs.bham.ac.uk (Robert O Jackson)
Newsgroups: uk.transport
Subject: Re: Bus vs Car Costs (Was: Re: City Traffic)
Date: 25 Jan 93 13:27:45 GMT
Organization: School of Computer Science, The University of Birmingham, UK

In article <1993Jan22.122213.6563@its.bt.co.uk>, tjo@its.bt.co.uk (Tim Oldham) writes:

|> While the marginal cost of driving is certainly lower, the actual cost
|> of driving is usually a good deal higher than catching the bus. I could
|> buy a year's bus-pass with just my insurance premiums and still have
|> enough left over for a newspaper to read on the bus every day; to say
|> nothing about depreciation. The money it takes to run a car buys a lot
|> of public transport.
|> 
|> Your mileage will vary; the relative costs will depend on your travel
|> pattern, access to buses, car parking fees, particular bus-pass schemes,
|> number of passengers, costing in your time, exposure to car thieves etc
|> etc. 
|> 

Are you taking into account the hidden costs of:

Taxis late at night / in strange towns where you don't know
the bus times

Train or other transport costs when travelling further afield

Hiring vehicles when you want to move anything more than
just yourself 


The truth is that even if you are using public transport to commute you
will still run a car for the other uses ie shopping and so you will incur
the 'hidden costs' anyway. 


Maybe the solution to city conjestion is more teleworking ?

-roj
From: steve@acorn.co.uk (Steve "daffy" Hunt)
Newsgroups: uk.transport
Subject: Re: Speed Limits
Date: 22 Jan 93 19:06:27 GMT
Organization: Acorn Computers Limited, Cambridge, UK
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]

Graham Toal (gtoal@pizzabox.demon.co.uk) wrote:
: :Take the motorways.  They were designed for higher speeds than 70mph,
: :but for a much lower traffic density than we have today.  At night the

: How do you know this?

I think it is obvious that they were designed for lower traffic
density; most of the motorway network was planned twenty or thirty
years ago.  There were far fewer vehicles on the road in those days.

As far as the higher design speed is concerned, remember that
initially the motorways were unrestricted (ie, no speed limit).  I
think the "experimental" 70mph limit was introduced in the early
seventies.
-- 
				Steve Hunt	steve@acorn.co.uk
From: mod@cs.man.ac.uk (Mike O'Docherty (Teaching Company Associate))
Newsgroups: uk.transport
Subject: Re: Driving in UK : help !
Date: 25 Jan 93 12:12:01 GMT

isc40041@nusunix1.nus.sg (LOO KOK HOE) writes:

>Hi

>We intend to rent a car to tour UK for about
>2 weeks ...

>so far the cheapest we can get is for Ford Fiesta 1.1 / Rover Metro 1.1

>we are wondering if a 1100cc car is good enough for UK motorway
>or should we get a bigger car ( more $$) ...

>any commends?

Both of these should do you fine. Both will easily cruise at 80 mph for
long distances (and that's about the maximum without serious risk of being
stopped for speeding).

I'd go for the Rover Metro myself, nice little car, good acceleration/parking
round town. Never have liked Fiestas.

Mind you I wouldn't recommend anyone over six feet tall to travel for long
periods on the rear seats of either of these two cars!

>internet:   isc40041@nusunix1.nus.sg


>Thanks !


>george from Singapore
From: ianking@nnsgs52 (Ian King)
Newsgroups: uk.transport
Subject: Re: Rear end drivers, etc
Date: 20 Jan 1993 08:39:34 GMT
Organization: Northern Telecom Europe Ltd
Reply-To: ianking@lon40.nt.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: nnsgs52.lon40.nt.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]

Speed Freak (ian@pharaoh.cyborg.bt.co.uk) wrote:
: you will always be making roads 'safer'.  But how safe do want the roads to
: be ?  Deaths are inevitable and, at a certain level, are an acceptable 
: price for the contribution to society that the motor car makes.  The only 
: question is, "What is the acceptable death rate ?"

On railways even one death is unacceptable.


--
ADVANCE MICRO COMPUTERS LTD & Wolverton Rail | EMAIL: ianking@amicro.demon.co.uk
 PO Box 362, Olney, Nr. Milton Keynes,       |   or   ianking@lon40.nt.com
  Bucks, MK46 5ES, ENGLAND, UK.              |                ^^^^^^^^^^^^ UK not USA
   TEL: +44 (0)234-711615 FAX: +44 (0)234-240976 MOBILE: +44 (0)831-535618
Newsgroups: uk.transport,rec.railroad
From: igb@fulcrum.co.uk (Ian G Batten)
Subject: Re: Small Gods Annotations
Organization: Fulcrum Communications
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 12:16:33 GMT

In article <1993Jan27.104508.24667@infodev.cam.ac.uk> rf@cl.cam.ac.uk (Robin Fairbairns) writes:
> tendency only intermittently to operate track circuits that detect the
> presence of trains on a portion of track.  Now, since railways are
> hung about with _so_ much safety legislation, the lack of this
> information (which in days of yore used to be supplied by the people
> sitting in signal boxes at every significant junction) means serious

Track circuits never replaced human viewing of tail-lights; it added to
it.  The worrying number of accidents caused by problems with trains
stopped at home signals being ``forgotten'' by signalmen who then
accepted movements past the distant made track circuiting one of the big
issues at the beginning of this century, along with continuous brakes
and AWS (which was in use by the GWR well before the second war).

Rolt's ``Red For Danger'' provides a rather superficial look at this
issue, while Nock's ``Railway Accidents'' is a little less colourful but
more accurate. 

ian
From: rap@bnr.co.uk (Richard Porter)
Newsgroups: uk.transport
Subject: Re: Motorbikes on Congested Motorways
Date: 26 Jan 1993 13:20:35 GMT
Organization: BNR Europe Limited
NNTP-Posting-Host: bnsgs193.bnr.co.uk

In article <1993Jan26.101209.3713@wraxall.inmos.co.uk> des@inmos.co.uk
(David Shepherd) writes:

>It's certainly against the highway code for cars/vans/lorries to change
>lanes in solid slow moving traffic.

All the Highway Code says on this point is "Overtake only on the right unless
traffic is moving in queues and the queue on your right is moving more slowly
than you are. Do not move to a lane on your left to overtake."

"When approaching a junction make sure you are in the correct lane; ..."
Obviously you may need to change lanes if you need to leave the motorway
or if you have to pull off in an emergency, whether the traffic is moving
in queues or not. Surprisingly, there is very little in the new Highway
Code specifically concerning motorcycles.

Richard
From: d_smith@csd.uwe.ac.uk (Dylan Smith)
Newsgroups: uk.transport
Subject: Re: Rear end drivers, etc
Date: 26 Jan 93 15:23:52 GMT
Distribution: uk
Organization: University of the West of England, Bristol

In article <C17D7D.Ay4@demon.co.uk> gtoal@pizzabox.demon.co.uk (Graham Toal) writes:

>As someone who used to regularly do London to edinburgh by M1/M6, I can assure
>you there *are* places where you come across totally unexpected fog.  However,
>if you want a better argument - pick a 'safe speed' over the limit and tell
>me what happens when you unexpectedly blow a tyre.  Or some kid decides
>to play 'chicken' on the M1 right in front of you, drunk, at 1am...

A child is very likely to be killed at 40 mph. Perhaps we should lower
all speed limits to 40 then?

Not.

-- 
Email : JANET  dylan@uwe.hal | Everywhere else : dylan@hal.uwe.ac.uk
             d_smith@uwe.csd |                 d_smith@csd.uwe.ac.uk
Newsgroups: uk.transport
From: gtoal@pizzabox.demon.co.uk (Graham Toal)
Subject: Re: Speed Limits
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 19:16:49 +0000

Steve 'Daffy' Hunt quacked:
:Ian King (ianking@nnsgs52) wrote:
:: 70mph is the *law* whether I or you like it or not. If you break the law then
:: you should be nicked. Yes... maybe you should be nicked for driving at an

:This comment is not relevent because we are discussing the basis and
:validity of the law itself, not whether or not to break it.

That's very reassuring.  I assumed from your proselytizing and bombast
that you were one of those twerps who *did* regularly exceed the legal
limit because they think they know better than the law.  Nice to hear
you don't; I may have misjudged you.

G
From: snail@lsl.co.uk
Newsgroups: uk.transport
Subject: Re: Assholes and Education
Date: 25 Jan 93 11:55:12 GMT
Distribution: uk
Organization: Laser-Scan Ltd., Cambridge

In article <1993Jan19.171429@cs.bham.ac.uk>, roj@cs.bham.ac.uk (Robert O Jackson) writes:
> 
> There is already a restriction applied to bad / inexperienced / young drivers.
> Its called motor insurance. Insurance premiums take into account age/experience
> of the driver, how many speeding tickets/accidents he/she has had in the last
> year, how many insurance claimshave been made, the type of car, the region in
> which it is being driven, and whether the driver has passed an advanced test.
                                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Hmmm, never seen that one on an insurance form. Anyone know of firms who do
this? NOt that I dis-believe Robert, just never heard of it.
 
> If these massive financial penalties are not enough then why would more education
> help ?

Because this education is *voluntary*, and as we know on the net, we aren't
exactly typical of the population, and tend to value education higher than 
most people. If the education was mandatory to taking a driving test surely
that would be better. Maybe even to the extent of having a doctor explain
how much force is required to break a leg or arm, and showing X rays of
mashed up leg and how it was done (accident photos, simulated footage etc).
-- 
snail@lsl.co.uk      

"Washing one's hands of the conflict between the powerful and the powerless
 means to side with the powerful, not to be Neutral."
                                                     Quote by Freire.
                                                     Poster by OXFAM.
From: steve@acorn.co.uk (Steve "daffy" Hunt)
Newsgroups: uk.transport
Subject: Re: Assholes and Education
Date: 23 Jan 93 18:16:59 GMT
Organization: Acorn Computers Limited, Cambridge, UK
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]

Richard T Peat (ssurpeat@csug.cs.reading.ac.uk) wrote:
: In article 21153@acorn.co.uk, steve@acorn.co.uk (Steve "daffy" Hunt) writes:
: >You're can't be serious.  You can penalise someone as much as you like
: >for being a bad driver, but it won't magically make them a good
: >driver.  

: In that case, why don't we just ban any so called 'bad drivers' permenantly?

For wilfully committed offences, especially drunk driving, punishment
can be effective and appropriate.

But where "bad" driving is due to the poor standards accepted by the
driving test, it is less clear that punishment is effective, since
presumably the driver does not understand what he is doing wrong.  (Or
does not understand *why* it is wrong.)  In such cases perhaps
compulsory attendence at driving school would be a better approach -
this is done in some states of America.
-- 
				Steve Hunt	steve@acorn.co.uk
From: des@inmos.co.uk (David Shepherd)
Newsgroups: uk.transport
Subject: Re: Motorbikes on Congested Motorways
Date: 26 Jan 93 10:12:09 GMT
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]

Ian King (ianking@nnsgs52) wrote:
: Here is a question I've been meaning to ask and it can really only be
: answered by those of you who ride motorbikes on motorways during the rush hours.

: Q. Suppose the traffic is stop/start and all three lanes are full. It is early
:    morning (7am ish), in the dark, on the M1 southbound, say around Junct 9 (to
:    give an idea of traffic density). What is happening is that cars/vans/lorries
:    are changing lanes when the traffic does start to move and this happens every
:    morning. The motorway is lit here.
:    
:    Now along comes a motorbike(s) between the outside lane and the middle lane
:    travelling faster (say 10-15mph) than the rest of the traffic. This happens
:    most mornings.
:    
:    Is it illegal to ride  between the lanes?.

It's certainly against the highway code for cars/vans/lorries to change
lanes in solid slow moving traffic.

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
david shepherd: des@inmos.co.uk                     tel: 0454-616616 x 625
                inmos ltd, 1000 aztec west, almondsbury, bristol, bs12 4sq
		Life doesn't imitate art, it imitates bad television
						      - Husbands and Wives
From: mathew <mathew@mantis.co.uk>
Newsgroups: uk.transport
Subject: Re: Dispell The Myth Of Imortality
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 18:08:17 GMT
Organization: Mantis Consultants, Cambridge. UK.
X-Newsreader: rusnews v0.98

pr@praxis.co.uk (Peter Rose) writes:
> I believe one of the causes of motor accidents to be the false sense of
> security and isolation induced by modern vehicles.

I agree.  The dashboards of cars should be fitted with rotating knives, and
the seats packed with explosives attached to a bumper trigger.

> Prehaps some sort of accident video presentation as a mandatory component
> of a driving course is called for? 

Yeah.  Should do well at the box office too.


mathew
From: rjh@cs.bham.ac.uk (Bob Hendley)
Newsgroups: uk.transport
Subject: Re: City Traffic
Date: 25 Jan 93 17:19:25 GMT
Distribution: uk
Organization: School of Computer Science, University of Birmingham, UK

In article <1993Jan22.143422.23243@gssec.bt.co.uk> amatthew@gssec.bt.co.uk (Alan Matthews) writes:

>Try taking into account the cost to an individual (over a year) of:
>

[some deleted]

>
>and also the less quantifiable costs which everyone contributes to:
>
>cost of road repairs caused by every extra car on the road
>cost of new roads / road widening needed due to the extra cars on the road
>cost of pollution
>
>On that basis, public transport is cheaper not only for individuals but for
>society as a whole.
>

This would appear to assume that buses (in particular) cause less
damage to roads, require less road space and cause less pollution than
cars. 

The first is clearly untrue. The other two are, I understand, fairly
evenly balanced.


Bob


-- 
R.J.Hendley@cs.bham.ac.uk
School of Computer Science			Phone: +44 21 414 4761
University of Birmingham			Home:  +44 21 444 8656
PO Box 363, Birmingham, UK			Fax:   +44 21 414 4281
From: ianking@nnsgs52 (Ian King)
Newsgroups: uk.transport
Subject: Re: Speed Limits [was: Rear end drivers, etc]
Date: 22 Jan 1993 13:44:54 GMT
Organization: Northern Telecom Europe Ltd
Distribution: uk
Reply-To: ianking@lon40.nt.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: nnsgs52.lon40.nt.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]

John C Sager (jcs@zoo.bt.co.uk) wrote:
: by taking a coach or the train, but then I'm without personal transport at the
: far end, and it's cheaper using the car when transporting the family.

As most people probably realise, I am quite keen on railways (not train
spotting... the history).

I am taking my family to Scotland and Fort William. What a good idea I
thought.. lets go by Motorail. Now 1-weeks stay in one of those Scandanavian
style lodges costs 300 pounds. We enquired from BR about the rail fare from
Milton Keynes. (Standby for shock)  WITH A FAMILY RAILCARD it would have
cost us 220 for the car, 70 each for myself and wife plus 40 pounds each for
my two children ie 440 pounds!!! Yes I know its like a hotel on wheels but
thats incredible.

Regards...
.........Ian

--
ADVANCE MICRO COMPUTERS LTD & Wolverton Rail | EMAIL: ianking@amicro.demon.co.uk
 PO Box 362, Olney, Nr. Milton Keynes,       |   or   ianking@lon40.nt.com
  Bucks, MK46 5ES, ENGLAND, UK.              |                ^^^^^^^^^^^^ UK not USA
   TEL: +44 (0)234-711615 FAX: +44 (0)234-240976 MOBILE: +44 (0)831-535618