Conference terri::cars_uk

How about banning diesel trucks that deliver milk at 5 am? (what's a milk 
float?)

Let's get rid of cyclists - put the lead back in your fuel and poison 'em!!


Seriously, why not look upon being stuck behind a slow-moving vehicle, of
whatever type, as an opportunity to relax a little and let some of those
silly frustrations melt away?  Stop rushing around everywhere when there's
no need for it; we can all do without giving ourselves ulcers, right? Move
to an area where your quality of life outweighs the frustrations you sense
by being restricted to less than 30 - when did rush hour traffic ever move 
that fast anyway?  Work flexi-hours and avoid the jams anyway!

Be creative instead of negative!  Isn't that 90% of DEC's woes too?

Brian

P.S. I'd rather be flying - with visibility of 70 miles plus up here today
it's a crying shame to waste it!

    - Tractors,

most tractors are driven by agricultural workers who have been at work for 
several hours when the pampered masses hit the road in so called "rush hour". It
would be most unfair to force them to lose working time after the working day 
has started


    - Slow moving trucks,

agreed: the above scenario might also apply, but my experience is that many 
trucks erupt out onto the road during rush hour and could easily move later.


    - Wide loads,

50-50 on this one - many wide loads are slow moving and a curfew might add
extra days to the journey. But I'd favour a ban on short haul moves of wide
loads during rush hour.

    - Learner Drivers,

definately

    - Reliant Robins ( joke :-) ),

:-)

    - Milk floats,

I favour a total ban on milk floats that are incapable of sustained speeds in 
excess of the speed limit throughout their "round" - petrol or diesel vehicles 
should be used until battery technology matures.

    - anything else that cannot reach a 30mph ( say ) minimum speed limit.

Maybe.

/. Ian .\

    Learner Drivers?  Then I suppose you'd all moan if they passsed thier
    test and could not cope with rush hour traffic!  
    
    Travelling to Newbury in the mornings, I'd be glad to be able to get 
    up to 30 mph!!
    
    Why don't we also ban those people who seem to forget that there is a
    national speed limit of 60mph, and think the A4 is a wonderful race
    track.
    
    Mikef

    
    How do you define 'rush hour'? Here (DEC Park) that extends for two
    hours+ in the morning, and nearer three in the evening - _but_ banning
    slow moving vehicles wouldn't make any difference at all - nothing
    (except cyclists and motorbikes) are moving above 5mph!
                                                        
    I don't think it would help very much at all where the traffic is
    really heavy, but I suppose in some situations it would mean that you
    could get to you destination maginally faster.......
    
    Another thing - what about banning the people driving round the
    countryside at 30mph, and enjoying the view, when I want to go
    faster....  
                                                        

Judging by the traffic that builds up outside of DECPark in the evening, a 
milkfloat would have no trouble keeping up with a Countach.  Anyhow, I thought
that milkfloat speeds were low so that the milk bottles didn't break.

I think that the major problem with this is defining when the rush hour is.

There was recently a fatal accident near my home: a driver overtook a milkfloat
in a no-overtaking zone and had a head on impact with an oncoming car. Both 
drivers were seriosly injured, the innocent one died. The one who overtook
is reported to have said "I got so d***ed frustrated following that ****** float
for miles and miles I couldn't wait any longer".

If milk floats could drive with the flow (in the absence of moving obstructions 
it does 50-60 mph on this strecth at this time) it is arguable that this
accident wouldn't have happened.

I repeat I do not consider battery operated floats to be suitable for delivery
over long distances and on routes that include extensive stretches of 
"derestricted" (60/70 mph limit) A-roads. I myself have followed a float from 
Pangbourne to Streetley (about 5 miles) and by the time we reached Streetley
the queue of traffic must have been 200-300 cars long.

---

Learners are not an excessive problem but for once I agree with "The Sun" and 
believe that newly qualified drivers should use 'R' plates for a year 
(personally I'd make it two) before they are allowed unfettered use of the 
roads. In any event we expect them to learn to drive on motorways without 
practice, so why should peak hour traffic be any different?

---

Commercial traffic curfews are used in many places around the world, and I 
believe they should be introduced here.

/. Ian .\

    Learners - again it depends oon how you define Peak, I guess we'd start
    restricting the working hours of Instructors tho', which might not be
    too fair.
    
    As a driver of 6 months, I wouldn't mind having an R sticker. 
    Personally, I'd much rather be behind (or in front of) someone 
    who had just passed his test, then some p**t who has been driving
    for years, think he owns the roads, and likes to cruise at 80 
    in his company car.
    
    Mikef

    Taking the other view I would ban all non commercial traffic from
    the roads at 'rush hour' they just
    
    1. Jam up the traffic, 
    2. Cause the cost of milk to be higher by slowing down the milk floats
    3. Cause the cost of food to be higher by slowing down the tractors and the
       lorries delivering it. 
    4. Pollute the air.
    
    These people NEED these vehicles to do theirjob. 
    You lot can take the bus or train and help the environment
    while you are ate it.
                                                
    M 
    

    
    this person can't commute without a car because there isn't an
    alternative form of public transport.
    
    so don't make generalized statements without thinking the matter
    through please.

    
    Yup, ban all the slow vehicles from 7:30 - 9:30
    (public transport excepted)
    
    Ban all the lorries over 7.5t from 7:30 - 9:30 
    (Mways and dual carriageways excepted)
    
    And definitely no deliveries by stopping on the road and
    unloading.... (driver should be gaoled without trial)
    
    Also make it a �200 fine for anyone parking on a double yellow
    line during that time.... 

    

    
>>    Ban all the lorries over 7.5t from 7:30 - 9:30 
>>    (Mways and dual carriageways excepted)
    
      This does raise the problem of what do you do with the lorries while
    they are not allowed on the roads - You would need huge lorry parks
    outside towns, (and in my opinion that space would be better used as a
    car park with regular 'shuttle' bus service into towns/industrial
    estates)
    
    
>>    Also make it a �200 fine for anyone parking on a double yellow
>>    line during that time.... 
    
      I thought that a double yellow line meant NO parking at any
    time...... (although there do seem to be a lot of people who disagree)
    
    Elaine

re .8: (I think) I also cannot use public transport - I have a 30 mile commute
to work that isn't serviced by either buses or trains, though I could make a 2
mile walk, take two trains and then a bus (and about 2 and a half hours) to get
to work I suppose, but I don't think that very practical.

re last: (not allowing unloading on the road) that is a good defination of a
Parkinson style "Red Route".

I would also favour a total ban on all vehicles over 7.5 tonne using any road
that has a carriageway width less than twice the vehicle width.

/. Ian .\

    
    As a side issue - the amount of damage done to the roads by the bulk
    carriers which charge around the back roads in Berkshire is terrible,
    the roads just aren't wide enough for them and another vehichle to pass
    easily, so the roadsides very quickly become broken up, and huge
    potholes form. These lorries should not be allowed to use the country
    lanes as short-cuts. (at any time of day!)

You could always leave the country roads to the lorries and use the major
highways yourself, then everyone's happy, right?

    here we go again with the majority of CAR drivers (my emphasis)
    thinking that they have a God given right to the roads to the exclusion
    of all road users. Personally I think that the only sane opinion
    expressed in this debate is that of Brian Naylor (.2, I think or
    there abouts)....... there are better things to do with time that
    sitting in little tin boxes hearing the same "News" bulletin for
    the umpty-umpth time at any time of the day, let alone just in the
    "rush hours".
    
    Personally, I'd rather be spending time with my family or building
    my steam engine....... 

    
    My point about the lorries was the amount of damage they were doing to
    roads which were not designed to take them. As far as sitting in a tin
    box listening to the news is concerned, I agree that there are _far_
    better things to do with my time, which is why I've taken to two
    wheels!
    
    Elaine

    Oh yes, and ban:
    
     - Steam Engines,
     - Cars with Caravans, trailers, etc...
     - Police cars on motorway bridges etc... slowing down the traffic,
     - Road works during bank holidays,
     - BMW drivers ( another joke, :-) ).
    
    and maybe:
    
     - Cars with only 1 person in them in the right hand lane of motorways.
    
    
    Regards
    
    Steven

>>    Oh yes, and ban:
    
>>     - Steam Engines,


why on earth would anyone want to ban any of these rare and beautiful machines?

STOP THE CAR AND ENJOY!!!


I was in Detroit the other week.  Want to see some *real* crazy driving?  Or
how about Atlanta, GA?  7 lanes, in EACH direction, all packed solid and doing
80 mph..   Our poor little GEO Metro couldn't keep up :-{

The suggestion to ban driver-only cars from the right hand lane isn't so silly;
in the states (so I'm told) there are signs above freeways with number on them;
you can only use that lane if you've got at least as many people in your car
as on the number sign.

Seems sensible; ban one-person cars from the most congested routes at the most
congested times, and force people to share (which is what they should be doing
anyway!).

Not only cuts down on traffic jams, but on pollution too.

Scott

re special lanes for full cars...

I can just see the old car with 5 people in it strugling to top 60 down the
right hand (4 people +) lane of the M4 finding it impossible to get off - all 
the 80mph driver-only cars thundering past on the inner two lanes.....

Jc

re: last

If your car doesn't have enough power to go over 60 mph while carrying more than
one person, then you should be smart enough to stay out of the passing lane,
anyway!

	If they ban/restrict cars with only one person in them, then
	I think is about time I invest in a blow up doll for the 
	passenger seat.  Unless you're going _very_ slowly no-one 
	will notice the difference.

	Alan

    ... and what about motorbikes - 1 person, MR2s, 2 persons???

    But motorbikes generally drive between the lanes anyway so they don't
    count, and you can always put a third person ( just ) in the boot of
    the MR2.
    
    Steven

    
    Here's a few more I want to ban.... (just to show I'm not in favour
    of all cars too....)
    
    
    Police cars near junctions.... because they slow traffic down
    
    Cars dropping kids off at school
    
    Cars that break down
    
    
    

    
    and what about drivers who insist on re-designing their cars...

    re: lanes reserved for cars with >= x passengers.
    
      In Sydney we have Transit lanes (kerbside) on 3 lane arterial roads
    which are reserved for busses, motorbikes, taxis and private vehicles
    with 3 or more passengers. Of course they are also useful for emergency
    vehicles. The restrictions apply during peak hours (6:30am-10:00am,
    3:30pm-7:00pm)
      They work fairly well and can greatly reduce travelling times for
    those who use them. As usual there are also those people who abuse
    them, mostly BMW drivers talking on their car phones. 
      The situation with coupes is not entirely clear. I believe they
    are not allowed to use them with 2 passengers, although I've seen
    them drive through police traps without being stopped. The rules are
    strictly enforced by police (law abiding drivers in stationary lanes 
    generally applaud the cheats getting caught). Unfortunately the traps 
    are usually in known locations and it isn't that uncommon to see a BMW
    move into a legal lane some time before the trap then get back into the
    transit lane afterwards. 
      The blowup doll trick doesn't work (I know someone who tried it,
    the police were NOT amused). Since these aren't motorways the speed
    limit is 60KPH (35MPH) but actual speed is more like 40KPH. Even at
    that it's better than the stop start queues in the other lanes. My
    travel time in peak hour is usually between 30 and 45 mins for the
    12km trip to STL. On the occasions when I have 2 passengers this is
    reduced to 20-25 mins. Public transport takes over an hour and costs
    HEAPS!
    
    						John Gillings, Sydney CSC

    
    stops everyone else from moving.....'cause they insist on getting out
    of their cars and chatting for about � hour  :-)

    
    If you have to have a FULL car before being allowed to use whatever
    it was that was being discussed, then i would have thought an MR2
    was the ideal vehicle...

    Nigel

I have always claimed that my (2 seater) car is better utilized than the normal
4/5 seater Sierra etc.  After all, it is 50% full...

Dave

    
    
    Defenitly ban milk floats.  Why do they exist anyway ????  
    
    Dont we all go shopping for the MANY other food items ? 
    
    Can you imagine having a 'special' delivery say, just for 
    Lemonade bottles ! or Wine ! or tomato Ketchup......
    
    We simply put 'milk' on our shopping list and do way with all
    the milk floats.
    
    Toze
    
     
    
    
     

	In Italy wine is delivered by "Wine-Float".

	-John

    Let us not forget that its the Governments fault that the roads
    are crowded/destroyed by lorries.
    
    Rich (Trains-are-greener)

re a few back:
where my parents live they *do* have a door to door lemonade delivery (once a 
week).

/. Ian .\

The reason for milk floats, and daily milk deliveries, is:
  - Generally people use more milk than most other foods
  - People don't want to have to go shopping every day
  - So to buy a week's supply of milk would take up a lot of space in the fridge
  - Milk won't keep for a week anyway.

From what I've seen, electric floats are used for urban areas and quiet back
roads, but where a round must include main roads petrol engined floats are used.
Perhaps this should be encouraged in more areas?

Most milk floats also carry bread, potatoes, LEMONADE :-), and in rural areas
the dairies will arrange to deliver just about any food you ask them to.

Scott

    I applaud daily milk (and other perishables)deliveries.
    
    Any vehicle which is unable by design to keep up with reasonable
    traffic speeds should be banned from normal traffic.
    
    A London to Brighton run for classic milk floats could be fun, though.
    
    Steve

    re.33
    I would imagine that an Italian Wine-wagon will comfortably out
    perform your average British milk float.
    Perhaps we ought to make it the London to Brighton International
    door-to-door delivery vehicle rally?

    What about the lorrys that go around emptying dustbins first thing in
    to morning, with those silly men that play "CHICKEN" with the on coming
    traffic, whilst towing a "wheelybin". These are a real pain especially
    on the small roads when you can not see around the thing to get pass
    it. I feel these should be banned until after 9.30am, (you don't need
    to ban them in the evening rush hour - you never see them in the
    afternoon).
    
    Neil
    
    P.S.  I hate being woken up at 6:30!!!!!!

How about adding people driving their kids to work during peak hours??

This week has so far been bliss...no really bad snarl-ups.

Perhaps if schools started after peak commuter-time then parents would not be
quite so tempted to give little Fiona and Henry a lift to school ("its only a
little out of my way, though the centre of town and I only stop on the double
yellow lines for a very short time....").

I speak of course as a childless (so far ;-)) parent and having never been
pampered by lift during my school-life perhaps I'm all bitter and twisted...

	Share and enjoy...

		Ian.

Yes, I've noticed how much less the traffic is now that school's out, I didn't
know so many 12 year olds drove cars...  Of course, when I was a lad, I walked
to school (12 miles in the snow in bare feet - after getting up in the middle of
the night and rubbing gravel in my hair).  I guess most kids still walk (judging
by the sweety wrappers in my garden, they have their breakfast on the hoof.
However, a lot are driven.  From my experience, they're mainly driven by the
mother, although, if I left the house earlier maybe I'd see more fathers.

Now, back to the point.  This note is going the way of a lot of notes in this
conference.  The problem is always someone else.  If catagories {x, y, z} 
would get off the roads when I want to use them, then I'd be alright.  The
truth is that we are the problem.  The roads are busy 'cos we're using them.
There are solutions that will reduce road traffic.  They mainly consist of
higher penalties (ie higher road tax, or restrictions, like odd number plates
only between certain times and even numbered ones between other times) or better
public transport.

Dave

RE 1007.41...

� 		Of course, when I was a lad, I walked
�to school (12 miles in the snow in bare feet - after getting up in the middle of
�the night and rubbing gravel in my hair).

... and tell that to the youth of today and they wouldn't believe you.

Simon ;-)

In the old days bus strikes were common. I often had to walk to or from
school (6 miles, and no I didn't go bare foot).

Fortunately the darling Maggie has destroyed the unions and privatised the buses
so such things are part of the dim distant past...

/. Ian .\

    I think our darling maggie has made Buses a thing of the past!
    
    Mikef

    Still, soon our darling Maggie will be a thing of the past as well.

    
    nah, busses were a thing of the past long before Maggie....
    
    you can't blame that one on her :-)

    Wanna bet!!  i can remember when (etc,etc,...)  :-)
    
    Mikef

    
    Lets ban Kids :-)
    

    
         
    Think of all the benefits....
    
    Reduce the road accident figures
    Less traffic as no-one will be taking the kids to school
    In 17 years we'd be able to make most examiners redundant
    Loads fewer BSM Metros clogging up the roads.
    

    And no education charges in the community.....
    
    (Oops, wrong topic?)

WELL... almost on the same tack, think how much faster traffic would flow 
without lollipop [wo]men.

Children could learn the proper crossing drill, and the scandalous waste of
money these leeches (not the kids) represent would be stopped (sorry, 
wrong topic...)

/. Ian .\

    Learning the proper drill is fine, providing there are decent gaps in
    the traffic to apply it to!!
    
    Mikef
    
    Leeches????...we demand a smiley!!

Oh come now - the suggestion was too preposterous to be meant seriously - even
coming from me...

However I do wonder sometimes when I see lollipop people every 100 metres along 
a fairly quite B-road I know...

/. Ian .\

    
    you mean this topic was meant to be serious ???
    
    you lot sure had me fooled :-)

    
    Yeah, they suck don't they....

    No, lollipop people are ok. Its 70 year olds in 'A' reg Meastros
    that I dont like.

        To try and bring this topic back onto an even keel,how about
    trying this for size. I've recently returned from Singapore and
    considering how many vehicles there are over there,the city centre
    is almost empty. The centre is designated the C.B.D. or Central
    Business District. Vehicles entering the C.B.D. must display a sticker
    on the windscreen,similar to a tax disc,which is purchased each
    day. The upshot of this is that most people leave cars at home and
    share a cab(which is dirt cheap anyway)or share their own car.
        I don't doubt that comments will be coming in thick and fast.
    I think that with a bit of thought for regional differences,this
    could work.
    
    				Phil.
        

re: .56
>    The upshot of this is that most people leave cars at home and
>    share a cab(which is dirt cheap anyway)or share their own car.
>        I don't doubt that comments will be coming in thick and fast.
>    I think that with a bit of thought for regional differences,this
>    could work.
Phil,

Am I right in saying if it's the cab first trip to the CBD the driver makes
the customer pay for the permit on top of the fare? If so what sort of
charge would this be and would it make you think about taking the cab in
the first place?

Dave

    While not wishing this to be a political statement (!) I think it is
    fair to say that, if there was a GOOD public transport system (such as
    in many "European" countries such as Holland) coupled with adequate
    parking at out-of-town sites then there would be some sense in having 
    parking restrictions and/or payment disincentives in town centres and
    folk would be much keener to leave their vehicles at home. 
    
    However, in this country, we have already almost completely run down
    the waterways and railways and are hell-bent on clogging up the roads
    with all the freight that used to travel on these routes (even cars are
    no longer transported by rail which, judging by the efficiencies of
    cars per driver or cars per "vehicle" really makes sense!).
    
    Holland and Germany still use waterways a great deal, have extensive
    railways (which seem to ALWAYS run on time) and, in city centres, have
    often trams and bicycle lanes to supplement buses and cars.
    
    As the average speed in cities like London is now only 3mph greater
    than than it was 74 years ago (1986 average was just 10mph compared to
    7mph in 1912, although now there is three times as much traffic) and
    with new car registrations still coming thick and fast despite the
    price of petrol and the taxes on company cars, something has GOT to
    happen soon or none of us are going to go anywhere ever again!!!
    
    Colin

    I don't wish to be too controversial, but shouldn't drivers who insist
    on parking in more than one bay also be banned? I realise the Peugeot
    205 is a huge car, but is that any excuse for parking so close to my 
    car (which was well within the lines) that I could only just squeeze 
    through the door? 
    
    Andy

    While not wishing to sound too much like a member of the National 
    Front (!) I've had a bucket-full of those drivers who park any-which-way.
    
    Recently a car (yes, a red Peugeot 205 GTI) parked so close to my 
    Citroen that I was only able to exit through the boot. This meant
    removing the rear seat with the only tools I had available, ie 10lb
    lump hammer, junior hacksaw and sky hook.
    
    I could go on, but I've got some work to do.
    
    

If you don't like people parking close drive a battered Land Rover 109 with ARB 
bullbars (*very* heavy duty) fitted. This vehicle looks mean... :-)

If they still park too close, just reverse out... the 44 foot turning circle
guarantees that they won't do it again - at least until after substantial
bodywork repairs...

/. Ian .\

(only joking)

    re .60
    
    Kevin, since you park in the same car park, that wouldn't be the same 
    red 205, would it?
    
    Andy

    BAN the inconsiderat people who park in the spaces designated for
    the disabled, when said people are clearly not disabled.
    
    They are the lowest form of life !
    
    		Wayne

    I think Citreon CX cars should be banned as they are far too long to
    fit into your average car parking space!
    
    I think the Cavalier cars should be banned because of their
    unpredictable behavior, i.e. not going when they should, and not when
    the shouldn't!
    
    Steven
    
    P.S. Maybe the 205 in question needs a lot of space to show off how
         good a car it is.  At least it starts when asked to!!!

    re .62
       Thomas,
           It undoubtedly is. I think the "driver" must switch off the   
           motor when within sight of the car park, then just free-wheel
           into the biggest open space he can see, next to that new red
           Cavalier (the one that fries chips !)
    
           Which reminds me, all Cavalier drivers should be banned.....

    At least the driver is thinking of the environment by turning off his
    engine early.
    
    Steven
    
    P.S.  Come the revolution Cavalier drivers will be first up against
          the wall!!!

    Steven,
    
    Would I be correct in thinking that the 205 parked so close to mine 
    yesterday was yours?
    
    Andy

    
>    P.S.  Come the revolution Cavalier drivers will be first up against
>          the wall!!!
    
    
    Re: .66
    
    I thought that honour was going to Mercedes drivers...
    
    :-)

    re .67
    
    Do you mean to say 'le driver' was not still wrestling with the
    steering wheel ("if I move it this way, the car should go that way")
    when you arrived in the chip-van ?
    
    Which reminds me, ban all chip-vans and ice-cream vans. Have you 
    noticed that these things always seem to chuck out loads of diesel fumes 

    Andy,
    
    I wouldn't be seen dead next to your car, I don't know what I might
    catch.
    
    
    Steven

    re ; .69
    
    
    They also 'chuck out' loads of kids ;-)

        In reply to .57.
    			Dave,
    			     you are correct that the cab driver makes
    the customer pay for the C.B.D. sticker.  However, the fee is S$2.00.
    That's about 60p(English).  Most people share taxis to work anyway,
    so yes, I would still take a cab, especially taking into consideration
    how much stress you wouldn't get in a cab, as compared to driving
    yourself.
        If it is not the first journey into the C.B.D. then there is
    no surcharge.  Also, if there are four people (including the driver)
    in the car, it is automatically exempt.  There is also a charge
    of S$1.00(30p) for all vehicles leaving the C.B.D. between 4pm &
    7pm.  With all this, you have to bear in mind, you'd have to pay
    it if you were in your own car anyway, so why bother.
        If i was lucky enough to live in Singapore, I would seriously
    consider if it was worth owning a car, as all public transport is
    readily available and frequent.
        Hope this answers your question,
    
    
    		Best Regards,
    
    			     Phil.