Penguin68

...on windscreens tonight. I have just gone out to find snow which fell on my car has already started to freeze. I have scraped clear the screen, hoping for no more snow and no iced up screen tomorrow. Although it doesn't seem to have settled on ED streets I suspect that if it's freezing on the car it will also be freezing on un-gritted roads. So be careful if you are driving.

These are Harem pants

James As the exchange is showing as supporting 21CN (the new network) it may be that SDSL was not seen as being necessary; it also depends on the mix of subs on that exchange - if it's mainly residential then Synchronous DSL (which is more about uploading) is less imperative than for a high mix of business subscribers (who may be served from the Forest Hill TX). BT is talking about rolling out Infinity services (FTTC I believe) in March 2011.

Tony Rabbit - you have got this wrong. There were 2 mobile networks - Cellnet - owned by BT, and Racal-Vodofone - whicb Racal floated off and which is now Vod. Cellnet (which eventaully became O2 before being divested from BT and eventually bought by the Spanish carrier Telefonica) always had its own mobile infrastructure (i.e. cell transmitters etc.) - and the network infrastructure was supplied, as you might expect, by BT. Vod also used (rented) much of BT's cable infrastructure, initially as private circuits - Megastreams etc.. The two networks were broadly comparable in size in the UK. When BT was forced to divest O2 it did so and (in order to stay in the mobile market) formed an MVNO (mobile virtual network operator) initially with T-Mobile. Eventually it migrated its services to Vod. Mobile networks (of which there are now 5, shortly to be 4 - '3', owned by Hutchinson Wampoa, Orange, owned by France Telecom and T-Mobile, owned by Deutsche Telekom, as well as O2 and Vod have often shared masts/ sites - but not (until the Orange/ T-Mobile deal) underlying cell infrastructure. All other 'mobile networks' - e.g Virgin etc. are actually MVNOs. The true mobile networks all had to bid for and buy radio spectrum in which to operate their systems. The others lease that spectrum off them at wholesale prices, together with the cell transmitter infrastructure.

BT doesn't operate the microwave transmission from cell towers it is true (and does use Vod as its mobile carrier, having changed from T-Mobile, its original partner) - however BT is the major infrastructure provider of cable linking towers etc., so is very much a significant wholesale player in mobile networks, just not in mobile cell transmission. BT does of course use microwave transmission within its own core network infrastructure - so it is very much in the 'beaming' business - just not at mobile cell level.

I am on BT broadband, over a standard land-line using ADSL - with a download (Sunday morning) of 11,920 and an upload of 1,006. The BT 'superfast' Infinity service comes to Dulwich in March next year, I believe. I think my service is advertised as 'up to' 20Mgbs - BT suggests that 13Mgbs is more likely, given the state of my local loop and distace from the exchange.

No, I've been watching too few gritters

I have seen one gritter in action during the snow so far, not actually gritting, and have evidence of at least 2 gritting journeys in my street (which is a bus route) one a couple of days before the snow. How many gritters out there doing their stuff in ED has anyone else seen - including the hand gritters James talks about?

Well what a surprise - most of Southwark (Camberwell north) appears to be running smoothly - but ED and College wards (topologically the most challenged) and electorally the most lost to the current administration don't appear to be getting much gritting support - but then, not many votes to lose here, are there?

James - on the sticky thread at the top they've just reported buses slipping down Dog Kennel Hill - I noted on another post that although I saw a gritter in Underhill last night (19.45 approx) it hardly appeared to be gritting at all, it's back plate was spinning but only the occasional grain appeared to be being spread. We all knew last night was going to be bad; have we run out of grit/ salt already? (I know you will say 'no' to that). Last year's snow was a surprise - this year's seems to be just as much a surprise.

I saw a P13 creeping south along Underhill about 10 mins ago, just past the cemetery - no evidence of any gritting on that road - I saw a gritter at about 7.45 last evening, but it wasn't scattering much/ any grit - looked more like a slow leak than a gritting run.

James Thanks for your response - all the main routes seem good now - there was clearly a problem yesterday for buses in Forest Hill Road and even yesterday evening the 'turning circle' by Wood Vale was still pretty treacherous. I haven't seen the hand gritters, but I must say I haven't been driving around a lot to find them - or walking as the side roads and pavements are still bad, and now it's freezing they are worse.

James - a good question has been asked in another thread about boundaries - the Southwark/ Lewisham boundary around Forest Hill etc. is both, well, by definition, hilly, and appears to be missed out by anyone - or at least buses etc. seem to have inordinate problems around there- so maybe this area needs double dosing. The service plan talks about roads and routes, but doesn't seem to identify topology (at least, if it does, I've missed it). The South end boundaries of Southwark sit in some of the hilliest part of SE London, indeed of London - you would think hills (particularly with bus routes - like Underhill by the cemetery) - might get a priority gritting, but they seem to be treated like any other flat section of road. If the plan is to be re-issued perhaps you could get them to mark it up by topology.

Mrs P68 is on a train from Victoria destined (apparently) for Forest Hill - currently stuck outside Clapham Junction (no I didn't understand either) - but no trains appear to be leaving Victoria for Orpington etc. (i.e West Dulwich)

I have this terrible sense of deja vu

Although it's smowing it is also above freezing - that means that what was compacted snow/ ice earlier this morning can now be easily shifted - by anyone who wants to clear previously compacted frozen snow away from their frontages. It will (almost certainly) fall below freezing tonight which means that anything still compacted will be treacherous tomorrow morning. Garden paths, driveways, pavements - the trick may be to do this as late as possible whilst still not frozen to avoid build up, or when it stops snowing (if it does).

I did post this some time ago, but it maybe worth reviving:- Some years ago I developed the theory of skip equilibrium (based on personal experiences in the late ?80s in SE Dulwich, and some previous observations in Clapham). This theory does not apply to skips used for builders rubble or garden waste. On day one, the skip is delivered and you fill it with household rubbish. On night one the skip is half emptied by scavengers and a quarter re-filled by surreptitious neighbours. On day two you refill the skip by adding a further 25% skipfulls of your rubbish. On night two it is again half emptied and a quarter refilled. On day 3 you add a further 25%, now having thrown away 150% skipfulls of rubbish into one skip. On night 3 the skip is emptied by only a quarter and refilled again. The skip has now achieved equilibrium; small amounts will disappear and be added until day seven, when someone throws away an old, wet, carpet which covers the (now mounded) skip and discourages either further additions or more scavenging. The skip is now collected. The important point is that the skip being used as a public object actually allows you to throw away more than if it wasn't. The only caveat is that you must fill it quickly with your own rubish on the first day.

God but you must be in dire straits to be stealing milk at 3.30 in the morning Or coming back from a great party - I've often fancied a nice cold milk at that time at the end of a thrash - it's just that I wait to get home and drink my own. And don't start me on the munchies...

"Please, I want a CPZ just outside my own house, with me the only person allowed to park in it, please, please...." is generally the way people asked about these sort of things see the question ... it ain't gonna be like that, no way, no how. Your next door neighbour, with 3 cars, will be permanently parking outside your house, you will be parking a long way away and having to get up early to move your car etc. etc. When I was in a CPZ area I found out that many more cars were 'permitted' to park in my allocated stretch of street than there were spaces - and why not, it was a money spinner. As others have said, ED being a CPZ free zone is part of its very real attractions - CPZs ineventably spread and become more demanding - some now set the allowable hours as late as after 8.00 in the evening - apparently to ensure that only residents park there, but actually (as there are also meters - look forward to those why don't you) to raise even more money. Hosting children's parties (or visits), except on Sundays, or other than only with guests living very locally is no longer a realistic option. Any poll MUST include adjacent (and wider) streets to a proposed zone - and (I know we on this site pride ourselves as being the voice of ED) we really shouldn't confuse what we are saying with 'the voice of the people'. A thread was started here by one person - James suggests it comes up in surgery whining - but is there really a groundswell?

James 1. Herne Hill has far fewer pubs, restaurants, shops then LL - hence less of a general attractor (including for people working there) for visitors 2. HH station supports trains to Victoria, Blackfriars, Thameslink (when CPZ was created) hence a much bigger commuter attractor than ED station. 3. Residential streets away from HH station somewhat less congested/ parked up - so less backwards pressure once CPZ was set up to extend it - and by the way far more off street parking in immediate streets around HH station. 4. As said above - actual causes of parking problems less clear - if commuters small element (which I suspect) HH solution won't work here. 5. Any CPZ introduction is always thin end of the wedge - once the principle is conceded then more and more bites out of our freedom will be taken. Paranoid? me? no - just experienced

The very moderate Herne Hill scheme apart (as far as I can see) CPZs are about one thing only - revenue generation. I have found few people who have lived inside 'heavy duty' CPZs (as I have in the past) who have discovered that their own parking is now any easier or less fraught - indeed in the main the way it is wardened increases stress and anxiety of residents (exacerbated by the fact that they are having to pay for an increase in stress). The ultimate twist to the torture is micro-zones - where you are buying access only to a tiny portion of the road - and where trying to park even in the next street - sometimes in long roads even the next section of street - places you on the same footing as the most casual of visitors - allowed only to do so well into the evening, if at all, and forced to rise at dawn to find a legitimate parking space. Ciy hall control freaks love this sort of thing, they'd tax the air we breathe if they could think of a method of doing so; our role must be to scotch their desires at every turn. Believe me, if you live now in an over-parked road you will see no change, other than a reduced bank balance, in your lives if it is introduced. No, I correct myself, you will find some local businesses closing or having to charge more because of the disruption to their trade, but then so will those not trapped into this lunacy who enjoy ED facilities. So, broadly, you may be able to infer that I'm probably against CPZs

I thought the point was to catch commuters parking in Melbourne Grove - 15 minutes is ample time to catch someone who has been parked there since 8.30 and won't be back until after 5.00 - they won't have a permit (sorry about using the word ticket, oh how annoying that must be) - anyone parked at that time without a permit gets booked, anyone else doesn't. If some wardens won't take a job for half an hour, or fifteen minutes even, then find someone who would - it would be a great job for soemone who has children at achool and nothing much to do mid morning. I am really really not interested in creating efficient traffic nazis - happy to see that job go completely to the wall.

Whilst being wholly against any CPZs (anywhere) the restriction time must be placed sufficiently late that staggered time commuting cannot take place (if that is the point of the CPZ) - 10.00-10.30am might be a little early - but 11.00-11.15 (say) would effect hardly anyone entering the zone for purposes within the zone, but would drive (!) commuting parkers away, wouldn't disrupt local lunch trade etc. etc. A CPZ 'parking ticket' could be sent out automatically free each year with the Council tax demand (would thus go to locals and save posting costs) - with additional tickets sent at a nominal fee (??5) for households with additional cars (proofs, i.e. photocopies of log books with correct address might be required). Anything other than that smacks of revenue generation, not of consideration for locals. Tickets would be household, not car specific. People who 'vote' for CPZs are frequently simply voting to be taxed and fined - which I resolutely refuse to do.

Either be more explicit (which restaurant?) or don't post such an unfocused warning, it excites curiosity but doesn't requite it - by the way, I do hope you are better now.

It's because local traders refuse to do this that I question their honesty. 'Honesty' - they may be being lazy, they may consider asking customers intrusive questions may appear nosy and put customers off, they may wish simply to avoid the issue they may... but honesty? That is over-egging the pudding. The most you might be able to question is their intellectual honesty, but only if they had entered a debate (which I don't think they have) and obfuscated. Why, if someone doesn't do what you have advocated (on a web site) are they being dishonest? They may consider they have better things to do with their time. Outwith this forum I don't believe (but am very happy to be corrected) that there are currently concrete proposals to introduce a CPZ in ED.