exdulwicher

TheCat Wrote: ----------------------------------------------- > Other than to say, let's all remember this is a > forecast....it is not a fact. Yeah but you watch the weather forecast and plan activities, clothing etc around that because you know it'll be broadly factual. You might watch the stock market and know that most of the stuff going on there is again reasonably forecast able (if you know what you're looking for). Many games and sports you can sort of forecast the tactics if you're a keen follower of said sport and know the broad brush strokes of how it's played. Obviously there's a bit more luck involved but you can broadly expect a forecast in the right ball park from a decent sports pundit. But here it's just Project Fear? Here it's only a forecast and can safely be ignored because if you believe hard enough it'll surely all be alright? Weird.

Not sure any of this was written on the side of a bus.... https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/831199/20190802_Latest_Yellowhammer_Planning_assumptions_CDL.pdf Yellowhammer papers - worst case scenarios of a no-deal Brexit. Not quite the unicorns and sunlit uplands is it? Doesn't look like we've regained much control of anything. Not sure that "sovereignity" puts food on the table or fuel in the car or medicines in the hospitals... Well done Leavers. Great work. Are you finally going to admit that you were all conned? Or do you still think all this is wonderful and just what the country needs? It's like someone who has been conned out of their life savings or pension and instead of being furious, is sitting there going "oh well I hope the scammer has a nice time on his holidays with my money".

Alan Medic Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > diable rouge Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Boris Johnson rules out election pact with > Brexit > > Party. Senior Tory source: ''Neither Nigel > Farage > > nor Arron Banks are fit and proper persons and > > they should never be allowed anywhere near > > government'' > > > > That's quite the statement coming from the > driver > > of the Brexit clown car... > > And quite peculiar at this point in time. I wonder > why? The whole point of the "leaving the EU" referendum was to remove votes from Farage and UKIP and pull the right-wingers back to the Tory Party. Remain would win, the UKIP'ers would be shot down in flames, the Tories reinvigorated with all their former voters coming back from the UKIP / BNP / Farage wilderness and life could go on more or less as normal with the Tories quietly continuing to asset strip the country in the name of austerity. Sadly..... They're now terrified that Farage will take all their Leave votes. The remain votes have already gone to Lib Dem / Green and to a certain extent Labour which is why the Tories couldn't care less about Remain and are pushing their "leave no matter what" agenda because if they fail at that, all the Leave voters get fed up and disappear off to Farage. So now they're discrediting Farage as much as possible even though he was a useful ally to Boris in the Leave campaign. The smart thing to do now is to revoke Article 50. Remain would all come back and go "oh, you aren't that bad after all", Leave can safely be discounted cos they're in the minority now and Farage can take responsibility for the ultra-right wing lunatic branch which should have the effect of showing him up for what he is - a neo-Nazi thug albeit one who is marginally more educated than the Tommy Stephen Yaxley Robinson Lennon lot.

It's the Ordnance Survey aerial photography/mapping aircraft. Based out of East Midlands airport.

Agreed but added to that is the problem were now in where literally nothing "respects the result of the referendum" because it was never spelled out HOW we leave. With a deal (and if so what kind of deal) without a deal... Michael Gove said there's no chance of us leaving without a deal because we'll get a great deal. We were told that a deal would be "the easiest thing in human history". We were promised that we could stay in the single market. All sorts of random promises, statements, all of them total bollocks and none of them fully understood by the politicians and assorted hangers on making them or by the public hearing/reading them. May's deal didn't get rejected by traitorous Remoaners, it got rejected by ultra-hard Brexiteers for whom it wasn't hard enough (mostly because it still meant the UK would be bound by the new EU Anti Tax Avoidance laws). So until the Brexiteers can actually agree what "leave" means and until they can sell that idea to the public we can't leave! This is all it is to the tiny cabal of ultra-right-wing elites. A tax dodging measure so they can be even richer. There is no version of Brexit that benefits the general public in any way.

Passiflora Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > But Sephiroth, you have just spent a week in > another EU country and said it was a blessed > relief. Why? > > As somebody who voted to Leave in the 2016 > Referendum I really don't think the UK should be > worried about how the EU are viewing us. I think the UK needs to be very worried about how not just the EU but the entire rest of the world is viewing us. Never before has a country voluntarily elected to make itself poorer, less influential, more isolated. Never before has a Government been shown to be so wildly incompentent. I mean, there are corrupt Governments, dictatorships etc but in a supposed democratic first-world nation, our Government has shown the world that it is composed almost entirely of a bunch of lying self-serving charlatans, spivs and incompetents. Newspapers all over the world are saying the same thing - countries are looking on in a mixture of sadness that a once-respected nation has sunk this low, incredulity that they're continuing on this course of action, and they're thinking - do we really want to do trade deals with these people, do we want them in collaborative porjects, do we want to use their services and goods, can we trust them? So yes, our world standing is vitally important to us.

Genuine question: What laws and rules are you looking forward to once we've left? What will you be able to do then that you can't do now? What aspects of your life will change for the better? What has the EU specifically done that has made your life worse?

Umm...he's kind of got a point about the traffic but NO, that is absolutely not appropriate for a lesson to teach you to look behind / around you and develop situational awareness. Nowhere even close to correct protocol. It's like saying "oh you've come to join the circus? Here's a whip, get in the lion cage!" I'd be talking to the training provider. To teach looking behind and signalling you go to a quiet (ideally completely closed) road, start off cycling straight and doing "glances" left/right then making it more of a look until finally you can cycle along looking over your shoulder and using visual references to the sides to maintain straight and level direction. Same with signalling, you start on the same road gently releasing one hand then slowly developing until you can hold it out to one side while maintaining direction. What he did was irresponsible at best. Hope you're OK and it's not put you off too much.

To be fair, aircraft are in constant development and it's not the airport that is responsible for what lands there, it's the airlines who run the routes in and out of the place who are constantly looking for quieter and more fuel efficient planes. The CS100 is now called that Airbus A220 (Airbus owning a majority stake in Bombardier) and the next size up, the Airbus A318 which is only allowed becasue it has steep approach capabilities (entry into LCY is about 5.5 degrees, compared to entry into Heathrow which is 3 degrees). That's it for "big" jets, the rest of it is still biz-jets, BAe 146 etc. And it doesn't allow helicopters - they mostly head off to Battersea.

intexasatthe moment Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I would love that to be the case Blackcurrant but > it seems a little... um .... counter intuitive ? I'd say you're right, it's completely counter-intuitive since it means the buyer needs to factor in another ?100,000 just to get it to standard. It's not like moving into a property where everything is new(ish), functional etc but you just don't like the wallpaper. Some friends spent about 12 years doing this more or less as a business. Started off buying a tiny 2-bed flat on the cheap - did it up nicely (doing almost all the work themselves), sold it for a decent profit, spent the money on a slightly bigger property, repeated this process. They ended up with a lovely 4-bedroom house that they now live in. It was a huge amount of hard work, juggling it with a full-time job initially but they were both very good DIYers, had access to a lot of the tools, paint etc and they made it work. Helped by an upturn in the market and the area, one of their properties got them over ?50,000 in clear profit. The trick to selling is either to leave it as is and just say "needs extensive refurbishment" in which case the price won't be great unless it's an amazing location / unique house (there's a couple in the village that sold for big money even though they were in need of extensive modernisation just because they came onto the market so rarely) or to re-do it to a "plain" standard that is functional, safe and can be lived in while any further refurbishment is done "as and when" by the new buyer. Just need to price up the work that needs doing to bring it to that standard and the extra that you'll sell it for offset against when you want / need to move.

Link to a Guardian article: https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2019/jul/15/invasion-electric-scooter-backlash and I guess this is The Observer one you refer to? From June though, not "yesterday" which in the course of this thread I assume to be Sunday 14th July... https://observer.com/2019/06/electric-scooter-injuries-study/ Personally I'd say the more small mobility devices there are over and above massive polluting mobility devices (cars...) the better. Our useless Governement is so paralysed over Brexit though that literally nothing esle is getting through Parliament. I was in Italy last summer, we were having a couple of drinks in a small bar on the corners of one of those lovely little residential, cobbled streets just watching the world go by. It was full of e-things. e-bikes (students, people doing the shopping, couples heading out for a ride along the river), e-scooters (seemed to be mostly kids but there were a few families too). Lovely atmosphere, quiet, peaceful - plenty of people strolling along unbothered by the little e-things which generally were fairly sedately ridden. I think in the entire time we were there we saw maybe half a dozen cars. It was so nice. It can work fine. The problem is that people see one death / injury and immediately start to invent laws banning them. Shame they don't do that with cars...

Look, there's one of them! Obviously not out on the streets raiding bins as it's learnt to use a computer! How do foxes take a dog for a walk? ;-)

http://www.uksteam.info/tours/trs19.htm Website of the scheduled steam tours. The Belmond (which is almost certainly what you saw) is based out of Victoria. If you're ever going through a station and see an unusually large crowd of people all with cameras and phones at the ready, chances are there's a steam train due through! London Underground do similar trips on a vintage tube train, usually out of Moorgate / Ealing Broadway. And finally, curry in Streatham, go to Taj Mahal, Leigham Court Road. More or less opposite Streatham Hill station which means a change at West Norwood if you're travelling to / from East Dulwich.

It is and London is some of the most protected and well-controlled airspace in western Europe. That said, emergency services (which is the majority of helicopter traffic around there) are exempt. Majority is still around 1000 - 1500ft; the sort of height where it can move relatively freely without cluttering up Gatwick and Heathrow radar and approaches. Track enough helicopters around there and you'll find a lot are in and out of Battersea Heliport but their descent pattern is almost always along the river. The idea of "Boris Island" airport (which has been around in one form or another since the late 1970s) was an alternative to expanding Heathrow, not a complete replacement. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thames_Estuary_Airport It'll never happen now. The best long term answer is actually to link other, smaller airports and use their capacity. HS2 could easily link Heathrow, Birmingham and Manchester airports - and once the HS2 spur goes up to there, Leeds-Bradford can hook in too. It's the most environmentally friendly option, it has the advantage that you're not reliant on ONE airport and it means you're not subjecting anyone to excessive noise because the load is spread around. It does rely on some good integrated project management though, lead at Government level and currently the Government is busy deciding which complete moron is going to wreck the country the quickest so who knows... *edited for spelling*

I avoided saying anything about fault, liability or blame because it would depend entirely on any incident. Who or what was hit by who, the injuries or damage suffered, the situation that lead to the incident and any other circumstances - for example is the bike roadworthy (other than the non-working or non-existent lights...). And of course the question of if it's sorted out by insurance or if it goes to court. There was a story in the papers only a couple of days ago about a cyclist / pedestrian collision - the pedestrian was on the phone and trying to cross on a red light; the cyclist had a green light and was doing about 12mph so not excessive but the judge still said it was 50:50 because once a pedestrian is in the road, they have priority regardless of what the traffic lights are showing. Although it still acknowledged that the pedestrian was half way liable for stepping out while distracted.

So you saw him then... Same how you'd see pedestrians (who usually have no lights or hi vis or reflectives) or cats, dogs, foxes, trees, bins, parked cars, kerbs, road debris.... I've often thought that the one true way of guaranteeing you're seen as a cyclist is to have no lights, wear all black and jump red traffic lights / ride on the pavement. Suddenly *everyone* seems to see you! Not only do they see you, they write into the local paper (or these days, post on the village message board). Caught out by conditions, riding home later than he expected, lights were broken / stolen / had flat battery, he was too stupid to know any better, he knew but didn't care, he thought the rear light was working but it had got water damaged in the storm, he was "only" going a couple of miles and thought it'd be OK, he thought he'd be fine on the segregated lane from Vauxhall but didn't realise it stopped at Oval.... Lots of possible reasons.

DulwichFox Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ED Light Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > If you?re not a customer you shouldn?t park > there > > - agree to that > > Yes.. > > But how does the Camera Know if you enter the pub > or not. Or if you buy anything. > You enter the car Park. The Camera uses ANPR to > register your registration and then what. ??? When you go to the bar, there's an iPad type thing there and you have to put your registration in. At least, I assume that's the case, it's how a similar place local to me operates but I've not been to The Plough. Other than to go to Sainsbury's there...

I don't have any noise stats for it but new York has three main airports: JFK, LaGuardia and Newark Liberty. If ONE of those airports has to change it's arrival / departure direction due to weather, the other two HAVE to change as well simply to deconflict. It's not quite that bad at Heathrow / Gatwick / City. There's a noise & flight tracking map for New York here: https://aircraftnoise.panynj.gov/track-flights/ Schipol is a major international hub with 6 runways and it's only 5 miles from the centre of Amsterdam. That said, only two are usually in use at any one time although they can go up to 4 at very busy times. The Dutch seem very good with noise mitigation measures; the airport has all sorts of intelligent design stuff built in and most people there seem to accept that living in Amsterdam has more benefits than not - they've got considerably cleaner air and less noise in the first place because of the cycle friendly layout which dramatically lowers vehicle use. Problem is that building a third runway doesn't just mean extra flights, it also means tens of thousands of extra vehicle journeys in and around the Heathrow and M25/M4/M3 area. It's really not an easy problem to solve without flattening the entire area and starting from scratch.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-48668001 It's going to get noisier....

Download an app called Flightrader24. Allow it to access your location and then just fire it up. It'll show you a near-enough live map of all aircraft movements, you can click/tap on a plane and it'll bring up its flight path, departure & arrival airports, aircraft type, altitude and speed. You'll soon get an idea of flightpaths and you can pick out the 4 stacks that Heathrow have (Bovingdon, Lambourne, Ockham & Biggin), the paths from there into the approach path and so on. Most aircraft coming over East Dulwich inbound for Heathrow are about 4000ft, descending at roughly 600fpm (at that moment, the exact rate fluctuates a bit) and doing about 180 knots (205mph). Slightly different for City which generally takes smaller aircraft.

Lovely pics @PeckhamRose! I saw the flypast from Hyde Park, missed the balloons though.

Yes and no. I can see your point (and it's been made by a couple of people on this thread) about *direct* links but that is unrealistic for everyone. The bus routes are being revised because, in the centre of town, there are simply too many buses, they get in each others way, cause congestion etc so makes sense to take some of them out of the centre of town and force people to change. The Hopper fare should mean that it actually doesn't cost any more for most people most of the time. In terms of *indirect* links into the centre of town though, London is incredibly well served. You can get pretty much anywhere using phased transport (ie bus then tube or bus with a change) and it'll always be capped at ?7(?) per day. I pay more than that for a return train ticket where live now. Coming back to Dulwich is a welcome treat for how good public transport is!

There's a certain failure of understanding there as to how flight paths work. You've got arrivals and departures for Heathrow, Gatwick, City and (to a certain extent) Stansted and Luton to deconflict. Weather patterns dictate a lot of it as do the established flight corridors that act to separate all those flights. Also, how are aircraft supposed to land at Heathrow if they're higher coming over Dulwich?! The whole point they're that height is because they're landing there. If they were higher or lower they'd miss the landing and/or hit something else... Me too. 6pm - as kids we'd run to the window to watch it. Far fewer jumbo jets now, almost everything is a twin engine bar the occasional A380.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-48524152 News item about TfL's consultation on a plan to roll out 20mph across TfL-managed roads in London over the next few years.

Zebedee Tring Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > More importantly, what about elderly and disabled > people who need help from supermarket staff? My mother (in her mid-70's) loves them. Going to the normal checkouts, she often finds items being scanned and passed down the conveyor too fast for her to pack them properly and she gets confused and disorientated by that and feels embarrssed at holding up other people in the queue. Using the scanner, she can pack her shopping logically and carefully, keep an eye on how much she's spending and she just finds it much less stressful. She uses technology more than I do!