Reorte

So my Fiesta is faster than a fighter jet (if it's parked in a hangar)? :D

Hadn't realised they were Mk4s!

I just wondered when I saw the Manchester - Cardiff train pass by yesterday, from a not-very-detailed glance the doors looked pretty much like I always remember them being. Odd-looking train though, appears to have been cobbled together from whatever was lying around, 67, four coaches (IIRC) and a DVT.

There's a racehorse stables near my parents and for quite a while all these fancy racehorses were accompanied by a donkey because apparently being rather more intelligent they end up leading the herd and help keep them under control and behaving themselves.

I'm guessing the few remaining Mk3s still going around in regular service have had the doors converted to power?

Whether something's newsworthy or not is down to how unusual it is at the time, and these days horses running around central London out of control is pretty unusual. Seeing a car would've been newsworthy once.

Last time I used trains with slam doors semi-regularly was early 2000s, when Manchester - Scotland services were still loco-hauled (then replaced with shorter, more overcrowded Voyagers, which in turn were replaced with even shorter, even more overcrowded 185s). I'd have been in my 20s then. At any rate I assume they were slam doors, I can't remember the doors but AFAIK no-one had converted any loco-hauled stock then, but I couldn't even tell you if they were Mk2s or 3s.

And from what I gleaned Twitter is the company he's about the most hands on with. Rumours going around that most of the other companies he's involved with have people devoted to keeping him out of the way.

When did all the Mk3s end up with it? I didn't think they were built like that and it was quite a late add-on, but I'm probably completely wrong.

That's why you have to gauge the general level of sentiment and consult the experts about how that can actually be achieved in reality. Public opinion should rarely decide the details, but there's no other acceptable way of assessing what the appropriate general level of risk acceptance should be. The alternative is a small number of people imposing their own opinions on where the lines should be drawn on everyone else (there's no such things as an objectively correct answer to this). The way that's done is by governments coming up with appropriate legislation. If the public doesn't like the legislation, whether they think it goes too far or not far enough, there's the opportunity to vote for someone who'll change it. I'm not talking about consulting the public over every rule.

Considering quite a few of my posts I think it's fair to assume that there's zero chance of me ever buying a Tesla.

Unfortunately the BBC seems to have gone rather tabloid in its headlines these days.

Come to think of it I'd be more nervous about doors not staying closed on modern Boeing planes than on old BR coaches... I'll get my coat.

Several years ago there was one of those in the news not far from here. It got in the news because the perpetrator was a bit of an idiot and kept crashing outside the same office, making the people in the office rather suspicious.

Agree very much on touchscreens in cars, and not simply because of my dislike of excessive electronics everywhere. They're a very bad idea for exactly the reason you say, can't operate by touch (there's an irony there I suppose). Haven't some manufacturers started to move away from them?

I wouldn't go that far - a ship losing control when passing under a bridge that ships routinely pass under is a more foreseeable risk than someone deliberately flying a plane in to the building. There's also considerably less you can practically do with a building for the latter. Personally I'd argue that it depends on the frequency of sea traffic too - if a ship large enough to cause this much damage passing under was a once in a blue moon event vs a regular occurrence then things may be different.

Manchester had its big, spikey piece of "art." Unfortunately the spikes started falling off...

On the first one I don't fear an incident enough to feel a need for one. There's always the chance of course, the risk isn't zero, but I hate the idea of going through life with a "but what if? Better protect myself!" attitude. There's a time and a place for that but the concern has to be rather higher. On two, well, that's sort of the point. We shouldn't want to be getting more like Russia!

Are you assuming I have a mobile phone? Anyway the presence of other bad stuff doesn't invalidate complaints about this lot, and since this is a thread about driving it's the things in the car that'll get mentioned here.

I don't have a dashcam, it would be a bit rich to complain about being recorded if I then went around doing it to others. Cast your mind back quite a few years to when there was a widely-observed meteor in Russia (don't worry, this will get to being on-topic!) There was a lot of dashcam footage of it, and I remember hearing a lot of people here surprised by that, thinking how iffy a place Russia must be if people felt the need to drive around with a camera in their car like that. Yet here we are doing the same.

Even then of course it's still not quite as good as dipping the headlights before you come face to face with the car coming the other way. I usually dip mine before the other car gets around the corner or over the brow of the hill.

I quite like the idea of dynamic cruise control, not sure about the rest though. I've noticed more often people come around a corner with full beam right in my face before doing anything, and I've wondered if that's down to those sorts of lights.

I've never been interested in electric cars because of any savings, just simply because burning the current amount of petrol and diesel doesn't have a long-term future. No "smart" meter here and no desire to have one (see my post above this one). But electric cars look like being the future, and it's one of the few things about the future I find quite positive. How the tax etc. aspects of them are managed, rather the opposite, but that's not a fundamental feature of the technology, just how we (mis)use it.

If the only way they can find out is to be recording everything myself and everyone else does then no, I wouldn't. I'd prefer to take my chances. And not because I want to drive like a *$@"! either (I don't). Since the way the world is means that it's impossible for a large proportion of the population not to drive the idea of being recorded doing a basic, ordinary part of every day life is something I'm deeply uncomfortable with. It's not a sign of a healthy, tolerant, respectful society.

Glad I travelled on it before that was stopped. It was something I did somewhat nervously though (only when the line was turning on my side so I could see right along the train if there were any obstructions before leaning out, head back in when it moved the other way).