Jump to content
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble

Justin Smith

Patron Donate to Canal World
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

16 Neutral

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  • Interests
    Swimming, boating, TV/radio transmission, railways and my family, not necessarily in that order.

Previous Fields

  • Occupation
    Shop owner

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Recent Profile Visitors

4777 profile views
  1. This post cannot be displayed because it is in a forum which requires at least 10 posts to view.
  2. This post cannot be displayed because it is in a forum which requires at least 10 posts to view.
  3. Sorry what is it I`m "claiming with certainty" which you appear to be saying has little basis in fact ? It is my own website, though fortunately this isn`t Wikipedia. I say that because some editors use Wikipedia`s rather esoteric editing rules very inconsistently to essentially censor arguments they disagree with. I have noticed this consistently over the years I`ve been a Wikipedia editor.
  4. "A key distinction between activities in your list of statistics is that only rail travel and flying (by commercial airliner) are activities where the risk is essentially completely controlled by a third party." The risk of being hit by another car by another vehicle is, to a large extent, out of your control. Hence the fact the law tries to clamp down of dangerous driving. But they could do so very much more strongly, and I would support that, but they choose not to. GPS limited throttles, easy way to upload dashcam footage to the police (who would actually check every single one) etc etc. This would make a massively greater contribution to life saving. Whatever, I hate sitting in those seats where you can hardly see out of the soddin` window, and I know enough about train safety to know it`s making no discernible difference to my safety, or if it is it`s so small as to be immeasurable, so a negative, with no corresponding positive.
  5. There is an essential contradiction in this. If it`s safety above all, even if it makes an infinitesimal difference on the margin, why don`t they introduce rules which would make a significantly greater difference ? Though they would still be battling against the statistical tide of making train travel safer. Why don`t they get rid of windows altogether ? Why don`t they insist all seats face way from eth direction of travel (easily done, Taiwan`s HSR`s change the direction of all the seats every time the train reverses at the terminus). Why don`t they insist on seat belts ? etc etc.
  6. I don`t think it`s odd at all : The left hand pic is a "Pendolino", the right hand pic is "Meridian" The term "more dangerous" is highly misleading. The previous coach was the BR Mk3, an exceptionally strong piece of rolling stock. I`m not sure what the exact statistics are with either coach, but we can be 100% sure you`d be in more danger of injury or death using your stairs. Any one who is so risk averse they`d rather travel in a train with smaller windows "because it`s safer" shouldn`t ever drive, in fact they shouldn`t go on the roads at all, and they should live in a bungalow. These are just statistical facts.
  7. "Uninformed" : I understand you`re challenging the accuracy of the Royal Statistical Society News and its article by Frank Duckworth (as in one half of those responsible for the cricket Duckworth Lewis scoring method). Brave man that`s all I can say. I think you miss the point of the article, it`s making the point that H&S rulings should be based on a thorough study of the statistical risk, bearing in mind that every H&S edict has, without exception, a cost somewhere along the line, even if it`s to deny people life enhancing experiences. Do I take it nobody has done a statistical analysis into just how much safer a train is by having smaller windows ? I would bet all the money I have larger windows on trains still make it the safest place to be, other than on a ship, which is, apparently, the safest.
  8. We`ll have to agree to disagree abiout if it`s a rant, depending upon ones definition of a rant. More to the point, the whole thrust of that article is this : Exactly how much safer does it make me ? And what am I sacrificing to achieve that ? So in the case of claustrophobic trains : Exactly how much safer does having huge window pillars and small windows make me ? That`s a serious question by the way, I mean statistically how much safer does it make me ? Do you, or anyone else, actually know the answer to that ? If not there`s no basis for it.
  9. I never said I was blaming the H&S executive, it`s the pervading culture of the time I`m blaming. And I think you`re right, I suspect the H&S executive are sick to the back teeth of being blamed for loads of stuff they wouldn`t push through in a million years. In fact H&S gets the blame for loads of stuff which in many cases has nothing to do with either Health or Safety. it`s juts used as an excuse to, say, prevent customers from using shops' toilets
  10. I`m sure you know as well as I do that H&S has gone too far. Classic example. The road closures around Sheffield Wednesday`s football ground - Hillsborough - have been getting more and more sever over the years. In the last few years they`ve started shutting Leppings lane (a busy route) for the entire match at massive inconvenience. Just this year it`s gone to another level, Penistone Rd, right outside the ground, is a dual carriageway (but with a 30mph limit) onto which most traffic heading north out of Sheffield is funnelled. They used to shut the inside lane alongside the ground. But they've now started shutting off not only both lanes of outbound carriageway (next to the ground) but the whole road for about an hour when the crowds come out. That creates gridlock for miles around the Nth of Sheff. As far as I know no fan has ever been killed spilling out of SWFC as they exit the ground. But even if they had it`d be far less trouble for thousands of motorists, if they just introduced a temporary 20mph limit enforced by speed cameras. This is classic H&S overkill. Bring in a draconian rule to eliminate a supposed risk which has never (as far as I know) ever resulted in a fatality, and, this bit is crucial, not taking into account the costs of doing so. Not only in terms of money but also of lost time and increased aggravation, not to mention all that extra pollution from gridlocking half of the Nth of Sheffield
  11. Other than advances in medical science, I`d rather be bringing my lad up in the 70s, definitely. This short tale (about driving a BR diesel in the sidings next to the national Railway Museum) is why. These days kids, and people generally, aren`t allowed to do anything. These days it seems people only expect to be allowed to do something if it specifically says you can. It used to be that people expected to be able to do something unless it specifically said you can`t, and it didn't say that very often.... Furthermore I want to keep my lad away from smart phones and soddin` Facebook as long as possible. Did you know, I can remember reading this in The Times, there`s a very expensive private school in silicon valley to which many of the managers in the IT companies there send their kids, and that school bans smartphones till the kids are really quite old (I can`t remember exactly, possibly 14) and social media and stuff. That`s got to tell you a lot.
  12. I`m simply going by the numbers, on the three forums I`ve seen this mentioned, who are not happy about it. That`s just three of the thousands of forums in the net, and that`s just people who go on forums. I would suspect that, amongst people who don`t go on forums, the percentage who do not have smart phones (and therefore who will be more affected by text`s discontinuance) would be significantly higher.
  13. I would bet you a large amount of money it`ll be a lot more than "a few thousand". By the way, I object to being called a "dog in the manger", why be so negative about a perfectly reasonable position for me and more than a few thousand others to take ? Speaking as an ex TV engineer, I`d have thought, like for like service, it`d be cheaper to do it digitally. I agree the service isn`t like for like, text these days is more comprehensive than it was in analogue times. TBH I could cope with a reduction in the number of pages, maybe to just weather, news and basic sport.
  14. You are correct that an internet forum is not the ideal place to find people who haven`t got a Smart phone ! However, most people don`t go on internet forums, thus I`d surmise, the %age without Smart phone access (and who will miss text the most) will be much higher in the general population than on any internet forum. That said, as previously mentioned, there were a significant number of people admitting they will miss teletext on some of the other forum threads on this subject. Most worryingly for the BBC they all latched onto the fact they will be less happy paying their licence fee than they were before..... as above
  15. You might be surprised how many people use it, I`ve been contributing to a few forum threads on this. At the end of the day text must be a very minor part of the BBC`s budget, and they could piss off quite a few people (relative to the cost of providing text) over this I`m not interested in any of those, I want my text, the weather, mainly, but also news headlines and the football results. Interestingly I`m not actually that interested in football anymore, I just check up on the results out of habit.
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.