Re: Cunting lorry drivers.
Andy Bonwick
>On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 17:01:18 +0000 in uk.rec.motorcycles, Andy Bonwick
>says:
>
>>On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 16:48:35 +0000, Silk <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>>
>>>On 22/11/2009 14:07, R C Nesbit wrote:
>>>
>>>> So why didn't you?
>>>
>>>Bikers and lorry drivers are two sides of the same coin. Both pig
>>>ignorant and think they're better than everyone else, in spite of having
>>>a death wish.
>>
>>The only sensible thing to do is to make all vehicle users pass a test
>>in all types of vehicle within two years of passing the first one.
>>
>>Not a full test, just a test of basic competency so everyone
>>appreciates what other drivers/riders are having to put up with.
>
>Be a bit difficult for the prostitute murderers don't you think?
>
Yes, and your point is?
>>
>>Once we've got that lot sorted out we can pass a law making it legal
>>to kill cyclists who get in the way of anyone paying road tax.
>
>harsh, but fair.
Like I give a fuck if it's a bit harsh.
Peter Grange
And who, precisely, pays road tax?
--
Pete
Andy Bonwick
Omigod it's a pedant.
Now go and cause a 20 mile tailback on the M25.
Clive George
news:t6bjg55r4tp7ustal...@4ax.com...
> And who, precisely, pays road tax?
Oh, Peter. Are a bit hungry today?
Peter Grange
<nos...@bonwick.me.uk> wrote:
Seems a long way to go just to annoy you. Better things to do.
--
Pete
Peter Grange
Sometimes one just has to ask. It's been a slow day down 'ere :-(
Conor
says...
> Be a bit difficult for the prostitute murderers don't you think?
If the HGV test is so easy, how come so many car drivers fail it?
--
Conor
www.notebooks-r-us.co.uk
I'm not prejudiced. I hate everybody equally.
vulgarandmischevious
>In article <cc6e4852c33ba720...@blakeley.plus.com>, boots
>says...
>
>> Be a bit difficult for the prostitute murderers don't you think?
>
>If the HGV test is so easy, how come so many car drivers fail it?
I passed it.
Lozzo
So did I, albeit only class 2 when it existed.
--
Lozzo
Versys 650 Tourer, CBR600F-W racebike in the making, SR250 SpazzTrakka,
TS250C, RD400F (somewhere)
Garage clearout - Yamaha SpazzTrakka 250 for sale, email for details
Andy Bonwick
>In article <cc6e4852c33ba720...@blakeley.plus.com>, boots
>says...
>
>> Be a bit difficult for the prostitute murderers don't you think?
>
>If the HGV test is so easy, how come so many car drivers fail it?
Because they're being trained by Yorkie munchers?
It's obvious really because people wanting to take their motorcycle
test are trained by motorcyclists and the pass rate is pretty high.
Wannabe big fat truckers are trained by big fat truckers and the fail
rate is pretty high.
Silk
> In article<cc6e4852c33ba720...@blakeley.plus.com>, boots
> says...
>
>> Be a bit difficult for the prostitute murderers don't you think?
>
> If the HGV test is so easy, how come so many car drivers fail it?
Because only the desperate want to be lorry drivers.
Steve Firth
> It's obvious really because people wanting to take their motorcycle
> test are trained by motorcyclists and the pass rate is pretty high.
That explains why the standard of riding in this country is so low.
Oily
"Andy Bonwick" wrote.........
Conor wrote:
>
> >
> >If the HGV test is so easy, how come so many car drivers fail it?
>
> Because they're being trained by Yorkie munchers?
>
Atkinson drivers chew tobacco.
Halmyre
Heh. My Dad used to drive an Atkinson 6-wheeler with a Gardner 180
engine. I think Chuck Norris would have pee'd his pants if faced with
it.
--
Halmyre
Conor
says...
> It's obvious really because people wanting to take their motorcycle
> test are trained by motorcyclists and the pass rate is pretty high.
>
Maybe its because the HGV driving test is twice as long so people who
manage to wing a car/bike test fail because they can't keep the standard
up.
Conor
Yeah, desperate to get out of the prison cell that is an office.
Conor
@j9g2000vbp.googlegroups.com>, Halmyre says...> > "Andy Bonwick" ï¿œwrote.........
> > ï¿œConor ï¿œwrote:
> >
> > > >If the HGV test is so easy, how come so many car drivers fail it?
> >
> > > Because they're being trained by Yorkie munchers?
> >
> > Atkinson drivers chew tobacco.
>
> Heh. My Dad used to drive an Atkinson 6-wheeler with a Gardner 180
> engine. I think Chuck Norris would have pee'd his pants if faced with
> it.
'Kin ell, there's a beast and a half. Only a brave man would take that
out in the middle of winter.
Ace
>In article <nifkg556j2ks1cslf...@4ax.com>, Andy Bonwick
>says...
>
>> It's obvious really because people wanting to take their motorcycle
>> test are trained by motorcyclists and the pass rate is pretty high.
>>
>
>
>Maybe its because the HGV driving test is twice as long so people who
>manage to wing a car/bike test fail because they can't keep the standard
>up.
Or maybe it's just that most applicants are tick as pigshit? I'm not
saying they are, but maybe, eh?
Conor
> Or maybe it's just that most applicants are tick as pigshit? I'm not
> saying they are, but maybe, eh?
Judging by the standard of non-HGV drivers I came across in my HGV
driving career, I'd say that there were far more none HGV dribbling
inbred fuckwits than HGV driving ones. Visit any food factory and the
number of non-HGV driving dribbling fuckwits outnumbered the HGV ones
100:1.
Krusty
> Judging by the standard of non-HGV drivers I came across in my HGV
> driving career
As an (ex) HGV driver, can you answer the original question? If you
didn't see it, the gist was why do the vast majority of HGV drivers
never use full beam at night, thus making it much harder for the
cars/bikes stuck behind them to overtake as they can't see when there's
a straight bit of road ahead?
I'd guess that being professional drivers they know they're making it
harder for people, so is it just that they like keeping everyone behind
them, or are they just too lazy to flick between full & dip? It is a
serious question btw.
--
Krusty
'03 Tiger 955i '02 MV Senna '96 Tiger (for sale)
'79 Fantic Hiro 250 (for sale) '81 Corvette (for sale)
Esra Sdrawkcab
wrote:
> Conor wrote:
>
>> Judging by the standard of non-HGV drivers I came across in my HGV
>> driving career
>
> As an (ex) HGV driver, can you answer the original question? If you
> didn't see it, the gist was why do the vast majority of HGV drivers
> never use full beam at night, thus making it much harder forcars/bikes
> stuck behind them to overtake as they can't see when there's
> a straight bit of road ahead?
Whilst there are many difficulties facing cyclists today, I consider
overtaking HGVs at night to be not amongst them (thirty-six and his over
60 mph excepting!)
x-posts removed to try to tame the heat.
>
> I'd guess that being professional drivers they know they're making it
> harder for people, so is it just that they like keeping everyone behind
> them, or are they just too lazy to flick between full & dip? It is a
> serious question btw.
>
--
Nuns! Reverse!
Harry Bloomfield
> If the HGV test is so easy, how come so many car drivers fail it?
Not very many car drivers will actually take it, most will already be
gainfully employed.
--
Regards,
Harry (M1BYT) (L)
http://www.ukradioamateur.co.uk
Harry Bloomfield
> As an (ex) HGV driver, can you answer the original question? If you
> didn't see it, the gist was why do the vast majority of HGV drivers
> never use full beam at night, thus making it much harder for the
> cars/bikes stuck behind them to overtake as they can't see when there's
> a straight bit of road ahead?
>
> I'd guess that being professional drivers they know they're making it
> harder for people, so is it just that they like keeping everyone behind
> them, or are they just too lazy to flick between full & dip? It is a
> serious question btw.
The answer is - they they are still looking for the dip-switch.
The Older Gentleman
> Or maybe it's just that most applicants are tick as pigshit?
And Irish?
--
BMW K1100LT Ducati 750SS Honda CB400F Triumph Street Triple
Suzuki TS250ER GN250 Damn, back to six bikes!
Try Googling before asking a damn silly question.
chateau dot murray at idnet dot com
Silk
> In article<hedh0q$d15$2...@aioe.org>, Silk says...
>>
>> On 23/11/2009 01:37, Conor wrote:
>>> In article<cc6e4852c33ba720...@blakeley.plus.com>, boots
>>> says...
>>>
>>>> Be a bit difficult for the prostitute murderers don't you think?
>>>
>>> If the HGV test is so easy, how come so many car drivers fail it?
>>
>> Because only the desperate want to be lorry drivers.
>
> Yeah, desperate to get out of the prison cell
With a small amount of editing, that now makes sense.
petrolcan
Older Gentleman says...
>
> Ace <b.ro...@ifrance.com> wrote:
>
> > Or maybe it's just that most applicants are tick as pigshit?
>
> And Irish?
Heh.
Silk
> In article<5d1lg5didah8h3l4f...@4ax.com>, Ace says...
>
>> Or maybe it's just that most applicants are tick as pigshit? I'm not
>> saying they are, but maybe, eh?
>
> Judging by the standard of non-HGV drivers I came across in my HGV
> driving career, I'd say that there were far more none HGV dribbling
> inbred fuckwits than HGV driving ones. Visit any food factory and the
> number of non-HGV driving dribbling fuckwits outnumbered the HGV ones
> 100:1.
Most people don't work in food factories.
eamo
Gentleman) wrote:
> Ace <b.rog...@ifrance.com> wrote:
> > Or maybe it's just that most applicants are tick as pigshit?
>
> And Irish?
>
We all dont be all tick, sur....
Conor
> As an (ex) HGV driver, can you answer the original question? If you
> didn't see it, the gist was why do the vast majority of HGV drivers
> never use full beam at night, thus making it much harder for the
> cars/bikes stuck behind them to overtake as they can't see when there's
> a straight bit of road ahead?
>
Because they don't go fast enough to need it, are on roads they know.
There's something else which I would like to explain but have trouble
articulating. Its kind of like an ability to see better at night because
you do so much of it.
> I'd guess that being professional drivers they know they're making it
> harder for people,
No.
> so is it just that they like keeping everyone behind
> them, or are they just too lazy to flick between full & dip? It is a
> serious question btw.
They have no need to put full beam on. Its not being lazy or doing it to
be annoying - its just that they don't feel the need to.
As for not apparently being able to overtake at night unless the driver
in front uses full and dipped beam, I would suggest the deficiency lies
with the person wanting to do the overtaking - I've never found it an
issue as a car driver.
Conor
Bloomfield says...
>
> Conor explained on 23/11/2009 :
> > If the HGV test is so easy, how come so many car drivers fail it?
>
> Not very many car drivers will actually take it, most will already be
> gainfully employed.
What bearing does that have on anything?
Conor
Same applies to virtually all delivery locations I went to.
Chris N Deuchar
co...@gmx.co.uk says...
>
> In article <hedh0q$d15$2...@aioe.org>, Silk says...
> >
> > On 23/11/2009 01:37, Conor wrote:
> > > In article<cc6e4852c33ba720...@blakeley.plus.com>, boots
> > > says...
it?
> > Because only the desperate want to be lorry drivers.
>
> Yeah, desperate to get out of the prison cell that is an office.
That would be me then - two years ago
Chris D
--
The Deuchars BBB#40 COFF#14
Yamaha XV750SE, Suzuki GS550t, Honda CG125 (MSOHP)
http://www.Deuchars.org.uk
Krusty
> In article <hee35f$rt$1...@news.eternal-september.org>, Krusty says...
>
> > As an (ex) HGV driver, can you answer the original question? If you
> > didn't see it, the gist was why do the vast majority of HGV drivers
> > never use full beam at night, thus making it much harder for the
> > cars/bikes stuck behind them to overtake as they can't see when
> > there's a straight bit of road ahead?
> >
> Because they don't go fast enough to need it, are on roads they know.
Yeah I know that, but the point is I often don't /need/ full beam
either, but I use it to make life easier for anyone behind me who may
want to overtake, & also so anyone coming the other way can see the
glow from my lights long before they can actually see me. That way
there's a chance they'll dip their lights before actually coming into
view (& thus temporarily dazzling me).
> > I'd guess that being professional drivers they know they're making
> > it harder for people,
>
> No.
Seriously? Blimey.
> > so is it just that they like keeping everyone behind
> > them, or are they just too lazy to flick between full & dip? It is a
> > serious question btw.
>
> They have no need to put full beam on. Its not being lazy or doing it
> to be annoying - its just that they don't feel the need to.
Because they don't feel the need to be considerate to other road users.
Unless you're right about them not knowing it makes it virtually
impossible for people to overtake safely, in which case I might have to
start believing some of those trucker stereotypes.
> As for not apparently being able to overtake at night unless the
> driver in front uses full and dipped beam, I would suggest the
> deficiency lies with the person wanting to do the overtaking - I've
> never found it an issue as a car driver.
See that's the sort of comment that just makes you come across as an
arrogant cunt. If you can see there's a straight bit of road ahead, you
can overtake. If you can't see where the road goes, you can't overtake.
If that's never been an issue for you, then either you never drive on
unlit, unknown roads at night, or you're happy to sit at 40mph.
Chris N Deuchar
dontw...@nowhere.invalid says...
> Conor wrote:
> > In article <hee35f$rt$1...@news.eternal-september.org>, Krusty
says...
> >
> > > As an (ex) HGV driver, can you answer the original question? If you
> > > didn't see it, the gist was why do the vast majority of HGV drivers
> > > never use full beam at night, thus making it much harder for the
> > > cars/bikes stuck behind them to overtake as they can't see when
> > > there's a straight bit of road ahead?
> > >
> > Because they don't go fast enough to need it, are on roads they know.
>
> Yeah I know that, but the point is I often don't /need/ full beam
> either, but I use it to make life easier for anyone behind me who may
> want to overtake, & also so anyone coming the other way can see the
> glow from my lights long before they can actually see me. That way
> there's a chance they'll dip their lights before actually coming into
> view (& thus temporarily dazzling me).
>
> > > I'd guess that being professional drivers they know they're making
> > > it harder for people,
> >
> > No.
Agreed - so point taken, I will think about this more in future.
> Seriously? Blimey.
Yes.
> > As for not apparently being able to overtake at night unless the
> > driver in front uses full and dipped beam, I would suggest the
> > deficiency lies with the person wanting to do the overtaking - I've
> > never found it an issue as a car driver.
>
> If that's never been an issue for you, then either you never drive
on
> unlit, unknown roads at night, or you're happy to sit at 40mph.
For any single track road that maximum is the law for HGV/LGV trucks
anyway...
...you did know that didn't you?
...if not, HTH :-)
Krusty
> In article <hegbrp$877$1...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> dontw...@nowhere.invalid says...
> > Conor wrote:
> > > In article <hee35f$rt$1...@news.eternal-september.org>, Krusty
> says...
> >
> > > > I'd guess that being professional drivers they know they're
> > > > making it harder for people,
> > >
> > > No.
>
> Agreed - so point taken, I will think about this more in future.
That'd be lovely, especially if you can spread the word. It's always
been a bit of a niggle, but I've been doing a couple of hundred miles a
week on unlit roads recently & it's become a major frustration. Getting
stuck at 40 for several miles of bends because you missed your chance
to overtake due to not knowing a straight was long enough isn't my idea
of fun.
> > If that's never been an issue for you, then either you never drive
> on
> > unlit, unknown roads at night, or you're happy to sit at 40mph.
>
> For any single track road that maximum is the law for HGV/LGV trucks
> anyway...
> ...you did know that didn't you?
Yes, that's why I said it!
Trevor A Panther
very boring
I actually find that "lorry" drivers give me far more room than do car
drivers. I have been knocked off my velo 3 times by car drivers in the last
4 + years!!!
And never ever in my life by a "truckie"
FU set
--
From
Trevor A Panther
In South Yorkshire,
England, United Kingdom
www.tapan.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk
"Chris N Deuchar" <chr...@ukrm.net> wrote in message
news:MPG.2575bf35e...@news.individual.net...
Conor
> > They have no need to put full beam on. Its not being lazy or doing it
> > to be annoying - its just that they don't feel the need to.
>
> Because they don't feel the need to be considerate to other road users.
> Unless you're right about them not knowing it makes it virtually
> impossible for people to overtake safely, in which case I might have to
> start believing some of those trucker stereotypes.
The problem isn't with their lack of use of high beam but wholly in your
lack of skills at night driving.
>
> > As for not apparently being able to overtake at night unless the
> > driver in front uses full and dipped beam, I would suggest the
> > deficiency lies with the person wanting to do the overtaking - I've
> > never found it an issue as a car driver.
>
> See that's the sort of comment that just makes you come across as an
> arrogant cunt.
Why, because it differs from yours?
> If you can see there's a straight bit of road ahead, you
> can overtake. If you can't see where the road goes, you can't overtake.
>
But it has never ever been an issue for me even before I started driving
lorries.
> If that's never been an issue for you, then either you never drive on
> unlit, unknown roads at night, or you're happy to sit at 40mph.
I've driven on plenty of unlit unknown roads. It would appear that
unlike you, I seem to know what cues to look for.
Conor
>
> Chris N Deuchar wrote:
>
> > In article <hegbrp$877$1...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> > dontw...@nowhere.invalid says...
> > > Conor wrote:
> > > > In article <hee35f$rt$1...@news.eternal-september.org>, Krusty
> > says...
> > >
> > > > > I'd guess that being professional drivers they know they're
> > > > > making it harder for people,
> > > >
> > > > No.
> >
> > Agreed - so point taken, I will think about this more in future.
>
> That'd be lovely, especially if you can spread the word. It's always
> been a bit of a niggle, but I've been doing a couple of hundred miles a
> week on unlit roads recently & it's become a major frustration. Getting
> stuck at 40 for several miles of bends because you missed your chance
> to overtake due to not knowing a straight was long enough isn't my idea
> of fun.
So learn how to overtake and to drive at night. There's plenty of cues,
its just you don't know what to look for.
Silk
> In article<heeqfh$a96$2...@aioe.org>, Silk says...
>>
>> On 23/11/2009 13:22, Conor wrote:
>>> In article<5d1lg5didah8h3l4f...@4ax.com>, Ace says...
>>>
>>>> Or maybe it's just that most applicants are tick as pigshit? I'm not
>>>> saying they are, but maybe, eh?
>>>
>>> Judging by the standard of non-HGV drivers I came across in my HGV
>>> driving career, I'd say that there were far more none HGV dribbling
>>> inbred fuckwits than HGV driving ones. Visit any food factory and the
>>> number of non-HGV driving dribbling fuckwits outnumbered the HGV ones
>>> 100:1.
>>
>> Most people don't work in food factories.
>
> Same applies to virtually all delivery locations I went to.
If you really want to see people busy doing nothing, you need the Civil
Service.
steve auvache
<dontw...@nowhere.invalid> writes
>> > been a bit of a niggle, but I've been doing a couple of hundred
>> > miles a week on unlit roads recently & it's become a major
>> > frustration. Getting stuck at 40 for several miles of bends because
>> > you missed your chance to overtake due to not knowing a straight
>> > was long enough isn't my idea of fun.
>>
>> So learn how to overtake and to drive at night. There's plenty of
>> cues, its just you don't know what to look for.
>
>you know where the road goes when it's pitch black & you're sat behind
>a truck using dipped lights.
Allow me.
Frightened of a little danger biker boy?
Honestly you lot from ukrm are a fucking embarrassment at times you
really are. Other than wanking, just what is your right hand for?
--
steve auvache
steve auvache
<dontw...@nowhere.invalid> writes
Yeah and you come across just the same as all the other anal cage using
arseholes hereabouts.
You ride a bike, this gives you skills and knowledge that makes you a
superior road user and the rest of them a bunch of self opinionated
fucking losers. End of fucking story.
--
steve auvache
Silk
> In article<mn.bc227d9b5b...@NOSPAM.tiscali.co.uk>, Harry
> Bloomfield says...
>>
>> Conor explained on 23/11/2009 :
>>> If the HGV test is so easy, how come so many car drivers fail it?
>>
>> Not very many car drivers will actually take it, most will already be
>> gainfully employed.
>
> What bearing does that have on anything?
I think the implication is that the smart people already have good jobs
and have no need to take an LGV test. That only leaves the thick and
desperate - a bit like the Forces really.
The Older Gentleman
> I think the implication is that the smart people already have good jobs
> and have no need to take an LGV test.
Care to guess how/why I got one?
Harry Bloomfield
> As for not apparently being able to overtake at night unless the driver
> in front uses full and dipped beam, I would suggest the deficiency lies
> with the person wanting to do the overtaking - I've never found it an
> issue as a car driver.
It (could be) fine overtaking if the following driver knows the road
well, but don't you think it just a little unfair to not help the
following drivers to be able to see past you?
I don't believe for one second that HGV driver have any special ability
to see beyond the end of their lights. I do accept that they do not
travel that fast, but they need more room to stop - so main beam gives
them extra warning of a need to stop or slow.
Harry Bloomfield
> For any single track road that maximum is the law for HGV/LGV trucks
> anyway...
> ...you did know that didn't you?
> ...if not, HTH :-)
However most do ignore that limit.
Marc
drivers, if you are you unemployable, and too stupid to fiddle the dole
you can still drive a taxi. The pikey version in the rest of the country
not the London Hackney carriage type. I remember doing a sociology
course and a diagram that plotted various "professions" and their
"pecking order" ,Taxi Driver" was a lot higher than I expected, then I
realised that the author lived in London, and probably wasn't talking
about the scum that are given licences by LAs
Catman
> Chris N Deuchar submitted this idea :
>> For any single track road that maximum is the law for HGV/LGV trucks
>> anyway...
>> ...you did know that didn't you?
>> ...if not, HTH :-)
>
> However most do ignore that limit.
>
They do? Wish I could find some round here.
--
Catman MIB#14 SKoGA#6 TEAR#4 BOTAFOF#38 Apostle#21 COSOC#3
Tyger, Tyger Burning Bright (Remove rust to reply)
116 Giulietta 3.0l Sprint 1.7 GTV TS 156 V6 2.5 S2
Triumph Sprint ST 1050: It's blue, see.
www.cuore-sportivo.co.uk
Conor
> Lol. Come on then genius, share some of your wisdom. Please tell us how
> you know where the road goes when it's pitch black & you're sat behind
> a truck using dipped lights.
No such thing as pitch black for most of the UK but I use such wonderful
sillouetted clues you can see like hedge lines or trees. In addition to
that, the centre white line will give you some kind of clue. If you've
truly got your eyes open and aren't driving up the arse of the lorry,
you'll see any warning signs. No warning sign = bend fast enough to go
round at 60MPH without fear of becoming a cropper. Also unless you
happen to be on a completely straight bit of road, looking down the
inside or round the outside of the wagon when you go round even the most
gentle bends should give you enough idea if something is coming the
other way. If it isn't, pull out and have a look see. Another thing to
possibly try is positioning yourself to the right of the lane and
dropping back a bit so you can actually see past the lorry enough to
know whether you can move over a bit to get a better look, you know,
like the Police do?
Once you've pulled out to the side of the lorry, you'd be able to see
what was ahead anyway.
Conor
> If you really want to see people busy doing nothing, you need the Civil
> Service.
I was offered a job in June working for DWP Jobcentreplus. I declined
it.
Conor
>
> I think the implication is that the smart people already have good jobs
> and have no need to take an LGV test. That only leaves the thick and
> desperate - a bit like the Forces really.
Many people who have got fed up of whatever career they've had have
taken up lorry driving.
Bod
in the distance cannot be seen because it is in a
dip in the road. Without seeing a long way ahead
it would be stupid to overtake any vehicle in
front without clear line of sight.
For that reason alone, it makes sense for the
vehicle in front to put their main beam
on(whenever possible) to also assist any vehicle
behind.
Bod
Conor
Bloomfield says...
> It (could be) fine overtaking if the following driver knows the road
> well, but don't you think it just a little unfair to not help the
> following drivers to be able to see past you?
>
If they can see past me using my headlights then they can see far enough
to know its clear to overtake...
> I don't believe for one second that HGV driver have any special ability
> to see beyond the end of their lights.
You'd be wrong. It is actually possible on a clear moonlit night to
drive up the A1 at 50+MPH with no lights on whatsover and still see
perfectly well enough to keep in your own lane and avoid any obstacles.
Go stand in a dark area. Give your eyes 5 minutes to adjust without
looking at any light source..
Bod
headlights coming from the other way meet your
eyes, you are momentarily left almost blind,
untill your eyes adjust again.
Bod
Mr Pounder
"Conor" <co...@gmx.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.2573f7b76...@news.eternal-september.org...>> Be a bit difficult for the prostitute murderers don't you think?
>
> If the HGV test is so easy, how come so many car drivers fail it?
>
Hallo Conner :-)
Mr Pounder
Mr Pounder
"vulgarandmischevious" <vulgarandm...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ivvjg5l67s74ho9r4...@4ax.com...
> Conor <co...@gmx.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>In article <cc6e4852c33ba720...@blakeley.plus.com>, boots
>>says...
>>
>>> Be a bit difficult for the prostitute murderers don't you think?
>>
>>If the HGV test is so easy, how come so many car drivers fail it?
>
So did I, many years ago.
Mr Pounder
Marc
> In article <heh3fj$u8r$1...@aioe.org>, Silk says...
>
>> If you really want to see people busy doing nothing, you need the Civil
>> Service.
>
> I was offered a job in June working for DWP Jobcentreplus. I declined
> it.
>
Mr Pounder
Yes.
Mr Pounder
Conor
> Many roads have gradients and troughs where a car
> in the distance cannot be seen because it is in a
> dip in the road.
However you'd see the "halo" of light from their headlights...
> Without seeing a long way ahead
> it would be stupid to overtake any vehicle in
> front without clear line of sight.
> For that reason alone, it makes sense for the
> vehicle in front to put their main beam
> on(whenever possible) to also assist any vehicle
> behind.
>
Nope, still not even remotely convinced.
Conor
> The only problem with that, is as soon as any
> headlights coming from the other way meet your
> eyes, you are momentarily left almost blind,
> untill your eyes adjust again.
>
That's because like most day drivers, you look at the oncoming lights.
Its a natural reflex.
Champ
>In article <mn.c4837d9bbc...@NOSPAM.tiscali.co.uk>, Harry
>Bloomfield says...
>
>> It (could be) fine overtaking if the following driver knows the road
>> well, but don't you think it just a little unfair to not help the
>> following drivers to be able to see past you?
>If they can see past me using my headlights then they can see far enough
>to know its clear to overtake...
This is utter bollocks, but it has helped in clarifying your position.
You're an ignorant cunt with no consideration for other road users.
--
Champ
We declare that the splendor of the world has been enriched by a new beauty: the beauty of speed.
ZX10R | Hayabusa | GPz750turbo
neal at champ dot org dot uk
Conor
No..I reckon the frustration at the sheer level of fuckwittery
demonstrated by the staff coupled with my non politically correct views
and the fact I don't mince around a subject, I'd not have lasted long.
Bod
> In article <7n2t6tF...@mid.individual.net>, Bod says...
>
>> The only problem with that, is as soon as any
>> headlights coming from the other way meet your
>> eyes, you are momentarily left almost blind,
>> untill your eyes adjust again.
>>
> That's because like most day drivers, you look at the oncoming lights.
> Its a natural reflex.
>
>
>
Bod
Conor
> Why can't you just admit it'd be a whole lot easier if the lorry put
> their lights on full beam?
Because it makes fuck all difference.
> If you don't think it would, then you're
> clearly either insane, or just another usenet keyboard warrior.
No, just someone with vastly more driving experience at night.
Harry Bloomfield
> No, just someone with vastly more driving experience at night.
..and the vast majority of that experience in a situation where you
have nil chance of overtaking anything.
Harry Bloomfield
>> I don't believe for one second that HGV driver have any special ability
>> to see beyond the end of their lights.
>
> You'd be wrong. It is actually possible on a clear moonlit night to
> drive up the A1 at 50+MPH with no lights on whatsover and still see
> perfectly well enough to keep in your own lane and avoid any obstacles.
Agreed - I would even agree with star light being bright enough, if
your eyes are given enough time to adjust, but the problem is that they
are not. You are following some clown ahead on dipped beam. The dipped
beam lights up a small patch of road upto 50 yds and completely ruins
your night vision for what might be ahead of the patch of light.
Marc
> In article <g7udnRR15LJaopHW...@bt.com>, Marc says...
>> Conor wrote:
>>> In article <heh3fj$u8r$1...@aioe.org>, Silk says...
>>>
>>>> If you really want to see people busy doing nothing, you need the Civil
>>>> Service.
>>> I was offered a job in June working for DWP Jobcentreplus. I declined
>>> it.
>>>
>> Back too bad to move paper around?
>
> No..I reckon the frustration at the sheer level of fuckwittery
> demonstrated by the staff coupled with my non politically correct views
> and the fact I don't mince around a subject, I'd not have lasted long.
>
Ray Keattch
I was at university and drove a taxi to earn money while doing it. In
the evening I manned the radio - I did coursework between phone/radio
messages. By doing this, I didn't need to sign on or claim benifits.
I left university and became a programmer and gave up the taxi driving.
--
MrBitsy
Marc
And then become a bus driver, train driver, driving instructor and full
time twat.
Steve H on the road
"Marc" <initial...@btintenret.com> wrote in message
> And then become a bus driver, train driver, driving instructor and full
> time twat.
Well, he has to find some way to pay for that Rover 75 he paid several
thousand pounds too much for, financed via Pikey Kneecap Finance Ltd.
--
Steve H
In Cheltenham
Ray Keattch
I was a train driver 26 years ago.
When I was made redundent in 2006, rather than sit on my arse when I
found out I didn't like driving instructing, I took the PCV course and
drove busses for a month while I waited for my signaller training to start.
I have been a signaller for two and a half years now. My earnings last
year were �50,000, so I am not sure where my bad decision was.
--
MrBitsy
mileburner
"Ray Keattch" <r.keat...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:nuKdnbBQ76f27ZHW...@giganews.com...
>
> I have been a signaller for two and a half years now. My earnings last
> year were �50,000, so I am not sure where my bad decision was.
No wonder the railways struggle to make money. They pay 50 grand for some
monkey to sit in a box pulling levers.
mileburner
> In article <heh9tk$6si$2...@aioe.org>, Silk says...
>>
>
>> I think the implication is that the smart people already have good jobs
>> and have no need to take an LGV test. That only leaves the thick and
>> desperate - a bit like the Forces really.
>
> Many people who have got fed up of whatever career they've had have
> taken up lorry driving.
That *is* very sad.
Marc
When you decided to be a full time twat.
Andy Bonwick
I look on it as care in the community.
I actually think it's great and I'll bet more than a few posters are
looking at it and wondering if anyone would ever find out if they went
for a similar job themselves.
Keitht
> In article <heeqfh$a96$2...@aioe.org>, Silk says...
>> On 23/11/2009 13:22, Conor wrote:
>>> In article<5d1lg5didah8h3l4f...@4ax.com>, Ace says...
>>>
>>>> Or maybe it's just that most applicants are tick as pigshit? I'm not
>>>> saying they are, but maybe, eh?
>>> Judging by the standard of non-HGV drivers I came across in my HGV
>>> driving career, I'd say that there were far more none HGV dribbling
>>> inbred fuckwits than HGV driving ones. Visit any food factory and the
>>> number of non-HGV driving dribbling fuckwits outnumbered the HGV ones
>>> 100:1.
>> Most people don't work in food factories.
>
> Same applies to virtually all delivery locations I went to.
>
Ah we find someone who delivers to Macdonalds
Not surprising he's so bitter about everyone else on the road - hauling
more shit than a slurry wagon.
--
Its never too late to reinvent the bicycle
Ray Keattch
Pulling levers in a control center in London - I think you are ever so
slightly ignorant!
--
MrBitsy
Conor
> >If they can see past me using my headlights then they can see far enough
> >to know its clear to overtake...
>
> This is utter bollocks,
Only to someone who is incapable of driving at night.
> but it has helped in clarifying your position.
> You're an ignorant cunt with no consideration for other road users.
No, I just don't excuse piss poor driving.
Conor
Looking at some of the staff, there's not that much heavy lifting.
Conor
>
> Conor wrote:
>
> > In article <hehfco$6hi$1...@news.eternal-september.org>, Krusty says...
> >
> > > Why can't you just admit it'd be a whole lot easier if the lorry put
> > > their lights on full beam?
> >
> > Because it makes fuck all difference.
>
> than dipped.
>
No, I'm saying it should make fuck all difference to the person wanting
to overtake.
> > No, just someone with vastly more driving experience at night.
>
> I'm finding it hard to believe you've *ever* driven at night. Certainly
> not on unlit roads.
Well I did 3 years as a night driver for Hygena, doing over 2000 miles a
week, 1 year as a night driver for Parceline, a year for Howdens
Kitchens, again 2000+ per week and for various other firms over the past
15 years.
And as YOU have pointed out that most of us don't use high beam, then
due to the fact we're not all falling off the road, it can't be that
much of an issue.
Oh, and I come from East Yorkshire which has proper dark unlit roads
unlike the street lit nonsense that you get further south.
Conor
Bloomfield says...
>
> Conor explained on 24/11/2009 :
> > No, just someone with vastly more driving experience at night.
>
> ..and the vast majority of that experience in a situation where you
> have nil chance of overtaking anything.
So the 300 miles per week I did in my car, I never overtook anything?
When I go out on a night now, I never overtake anything? Strange I can
recall overtaking EVERYTHING on the way back from Bridlington to
Driffield on Sunday night.
Conor
Bloomfield says...
Light travels in a straight line. On a bendy road, what use is high beam
to the person following the truck?
Conor
Personally I thought it was mad too but then again, I was an electronics
engineer and vehicle mechanic before I started driving trucks.
Krusty
> In article <hehhar$o8q$1...@news.eternal-september.org>, Krusty says...
> >
> > Conor wrote:
> >
> > > In article <hehfco$6hi$1...@news.eternal-september.org>, Krusty
> > > says...
> > >
> > > > Why can't you just admit it'd be a whole lot easier if the
> > > > lorry put their lights on full beam?
> > >
> > > Because it makes fuck all difference.
> >
> > So you're seriously saying that full beam gives you no more
> > visibility than dipped.
> >
> No, I'm saying it should make fuck all difference to the person
> wanting to overtake.
Riiiight. Because being able to see much further ahead obviously makes
no difference to how far ahead you can see.
> > > No, just someone with vastly more driving experience at night.
> >
> > I'm finding it hard to believe you've ever driven at night.
> > Certainly not on unlit roads.
>
> Well I did 3 years as a night driver for Hygena, doing over 2000
> miles a week, 1 year as a night driver for Parceline, a year for
> Howdens Kitchens, again 2000+ per week and for various other firms
> over the past 15 years.
Did a lot of overtaking at night on unlit single carriageway roads in
your trucks did you? No, of course you didn't. Which probably explains
your point of view. It's pretty clear I've got substantially more
experience of being in the position where I'm both willing & able to
overtake everything in my path, on bikes & in cars.
> And as YOU have pointed out that most of us don't use high beam, then
> due to the fact we're not all falling off the road, it can't be that
> much of an issue.
Because you're doing 40mph, & sticking to your side of the road, so
don't need to see very far ahead. Surely even you can see the
difference. And as I also pointed out, I don't need to use full beam
most of the time in the cars either.
> Oh, and I come from East Yorkshire which has proper dark unlit roads
> unlike the street lit nonsense that you get further south.
"unlit roads". Oh, & my parents live in the middle of nowhere in mid
Wales, & once I'm past Gloucester, it's unlit country roads all the
way. Dark enough for you?
Bored with you now. If you'd like to point me towards some information
detailing this weird law of physics where lighting up things doesn't
make them more visible[1], I'd love to read it. But until then I'm
outta here.
[1] Anyone who mentions infra-red will be duly ignored.
--
Krusty
'03 Tiger 955i '02 MV Senna '96 Tiger (for sale)
'79 Fantic Hiro 250 (for sale) '81 Corvette (for sale)
Krusty
You thick, thick, *thick* cunt! It lets you see it *is* a straight bit
of road, which is the whole fucking point of the thread!
Conor
> Riiiight. Because being able to see much further ahead obviously makes
> no difference to how far ahead you can see.
>
accuracy and certainty to make an absolute judgement?
> > Well I did 3 years as a night driver for Hygena, doing over 2000
> > miles a week, 1 year as a night driver for Parceline, a year for
> > Howdens Kitchens, again 2000+ per week and for various other firms
> > over the past 15 years.
>
> Did a lot of overtaking at night on unlit single carriageway roads in
> your trucks did you? No, of course you didn't. Which probably explains
> your point of view. It's pretty clear I've got substantially more
> experience of being in the position where I'm both willing & able to
> overtake everything in my path, on bikes & in cars.
>
No, I did it in my car, overtaking trucks on unlit roads which didn't
use their high beam.
> Because you're doing 40mph, & sticking to your side of the road, so
> don't need to see very far ahead. Surely even you can see the
> difference. And as I also pointed out, I don't need to use full beam
> most of the time in the cars either.
>
So why the whinge?
> > Oh, and I come from East Yorkshire which has proper dark unlit roads
> > unlike the street lit nonsense that you get further south.
>
> "unlit roads". Oh, & my parents live in the middle of nowhere in mid
> Wales, & once I'm past Gloucester, it's unlit country roads all the
> way. Dark enough for you?
>
Equally so.
> Bored with you now. If you'd like to point me towards some information
> detailing this weird law of physics where lighting up things doesn't
> make them more visible[1], I'd love to read it. But until then I'm
> outta here.
>
I'd like you to point out anywhere where it says it makes overtaking
safer.
Conor
> You thick, thick, *thick* cunt! It lets you see it *is* a straight bit
> of road, which is the whole fucking point of the thread!
If its straight, thick cunt, you'd be able to see any oncoming
headlights regardless of the status of the headlamps of the truck in
front merely by pulling to the right of the lane.
If you don't know the road how do you know if there's a bend up ahead or
not, such as a left hander which may be hidden from view by the truck
even with its high beams on but be sufficiently close that you could not
complete the overtaking manouvre before you reached it or to clear the
truck before any oncoming car?
Here's such a bend:
http://tinyurl.com/yedbh7t
I've included the entire stretch where the left hander would be hidden
from view by a truck. It starts just after you clear a gentle left
hander. The reasonable overtaking distance is 1200ft which, assuming the
lorry is travelling at 40MPH, gives you 20 seconds to make the decision
and carry out the overtake. If you took 4-5 seconds to make the decision
to overtake then if something oncoming came round the corner at the same
point you were about halfway down the wagon, there's a chance that you
could pile into them unless you had the wits about you to drop back and
pull back in although most don't. If you didn't start your overtake
until you were at the point just after where the dark green field at the
bottom starts, there's a real high possibility of a head on as you'd
just about clear the lorry as you came up on the corner.
Gets even worse.
A couple of miles up the road is this stretch:
Conor
Conor says...
>
> Gets even worse.
>
> A couple of miles up the road is this stretch:
Looks deceptively straight, but in reality isn't, and is a uphill climb
but it has a long convex curve as you head south west and reach the end
of the woods.
IN BROAD DAYLIGHT someone heading SW (not a local as none of us are that
stupid to overtake there) thought it was clear to overtake and it
resulted in several people being killed. Someone using high beam heading
SW wouldn't turn it off until someone heading NE came over the crest but
for anyone behind the lorry heading SW, it would look clear to overtake.
So that's FOUR EXAMPLES I've now given within a 10 mile radius of where
I live that show why yours is a fuckwitted idea and I know of countless
more.
Ace
>In article <hej6o0$qhp$1...@news.eternal-september.org>, Krusty says...
>
>> You thick, thick, *thick* cunt! It lets you see it *is* a straight bit
>> of road, which is the whole fucking point of the thread!
>
>If its straight, thick cunt, you'd be able to see any oncoming
>headlights regardless of the status of the headlamps of the truck in
>front merely by pulling to the right of the lane.
You really are thick aren't you. If the vehicle in front hasn't got
its main beam on, how can a follwoing vehicle know if it's a straight
road or not?
>If you don't know the road how do you know if there's a bend up ahead or
>not, such as a left hander which may be hidden from view by the truck
>even with its high beams on but be sufficiently close that you could not
>complete the overtaking manouvre before you reached it or to clear the
>truck before any oncoming car?
Easy - if the vehicle in front has its main beam on you have more
information on which to base your decision.
What part of this is causing you such a problem?
bolta...@yahoo.co.uk
Conor <co...@gmx.co.uk> wrote:
>http://tinyurl.com/yetlvcg
>
>Looks deceptively straight, but in reality isn't, and is a uphill climb
>but it has a long convex curve as you head south west and reach the end
>of the woods.
Of course it might help if roads in this country were actually built in a
straight line instead of following every sodding little medieval ditch and
field boundary they can find. The number of country roads I've driven on
that wind and twist their way through otherwise empty farmland I've lost count
of.
B2003
d...@telent.net
Champ
wrote:
>Of course it might help if roads in this country were actually built in a
>straight line instead of following every sodding little medieval ditch and
>field boundary they can find. T
As someone who very much enjoys driving and riding around corners, I'm
very glad that many of our roads are like this.
--
Champ
We declare that the splendor of the world has been enriched by a new beauty: the beauty of speed.
ZX10R | Hayabusa | GPz750turbo
neal at champ dot org dot uk
bolta...@yahoo.co.uk
d...@telent.net wrote:
>> Of course it might help if roads in this country were actually built in a
>> straight line instead of following every sodding little medieval ditch and
>> field boundary they can find. The number of country roads I've driven on
>> that wind and twist their way through otherwise empty farmland I've lost
>count
>> of.
>>
>> B2003
>
>That would be any number greater than four, then
Aww bless, a lurker has popped up with a gag he's probably spent all year
trying to remember. Shame its older than the hills these roads go through
though.
B2003
bolta...@yahoo.co.uk
Champ <ne...@champ.org.uk> wrote:
>As someone who very much enjoys driving and riding around corners, I'm
>very glad that many of our roads are like this.
Yeah , why get somewhere quickly with minimum fuss when you can waste fuel
and brake pads riding a circuitous route dictated by the whims of a feudal
lord c1450.
B2003