The totally off-topic thread

[JessicaTam]

Out of interest, what kind of 'mum and dad' stuff do you often find needs re-education? Do you think part of these flaws are also perpetrated through the state driving manual / driving instructors?

Changing gears when turning
Not checking mirrors
Braking during a corner
Not checking mirrors
Leaving a hand resting on the gearstick
Not checking mirrors
Hand position on the steering wheel
Not checking mirrors
Steering technique
Not checking mirrors
Hill starts
Not checking mirrors
General awareness and observation

Driving instructor "Who taught you to drive?"
Student "My parents."
Driving Instructor "They didn't like you very much, did they?"

My understanding is that is illegal for vehicle manufacturers to sell a vehicle where the speedo UNDERregisters. (I can check that with my brother who is a police officer who spent many years in traffic/highway patrol). How recently did you get pinged?

That is why almost every car I've ever driven OVERregisters the speed - usually around 3kph but often more (around 7kph at 100kph). It is, of course, easy to check true speed with a GPS these days. I've never had one that underregisters.

The other thing to remember is fitting tyres of a different size than original fitment can mess with speedo accuracy.

My car overregisters by about 7kph at 110kph (which I find annoyingly inaccurate - I think manufacturers should strive for no more than 3kph discrepancy at around the 100kph mark.

I always set the cruise control for just under 120kph on the open road in WA (110kph limit here) so I know I'm on the limit.

The ADRs require that a speedometer reads no worse than 10% over the actual speed. Unfortunately car manufacturers take that as meaning they should read 10% over. When I queried Subaru about my car reading 110 when I was actually doing 100 the response was 'It conforms to the ADRs, so not our problem'. And that was from corporate Subaru, not the dealer. I made it clear when I came to replace my car why I was not choosing a Subie.

I would hate to have to pay for 100 hours worth of lessons. At around $50 per half hour, of which 10 hours can credit at 3:1, that would cost around $4000 for the lessons! Ouch. A combination of professional lessons and supervisor driving seems to make a lot of sense to me.

An exchange student from (West) Germany was at my school in the mid eighties, and the cost to her would have been DM3,000 had she got her license in Germany. I think that was worth over $1,000 at the time. No wonder she made sure she got it when she was here.

Since when has GP for "general public" entered into the zeitgeist?

I have used GP for ages. Though it was common usage.

 

[amaroo]

Mein Gott, I can't take any credit for that. I picked it up in this thread at 10.22 yesterday. I assumed GP meant general populace rather than Grand Prix. :?:

+ another here......context is always critical!

 

[erkpod]

No, Chinese Walls should be impenetrable, Japanese walls are made of paper.

Unless of course you own a shop called City Wok & are having a running battle with Mongolians...

(although that's got more to do with the fact that I was watching highlights of South Park last night)

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Well, to be honest, society's current trajectory is towards (increasing) political correctness. Whether this is for the purposes of social equality or general social good (egalitarianism?) is arguable in all cases.

Still, (for example) if you are a black person who was refused employment, you would still probably have a real problem proving any prejudice on the side of the employer if you suspected it as such. I'm sure it's quite easy for an employer to conjure up an even superficial reason as to why they selected another candidate over you, unless the differences are extremely disparate or stories contradict one another. When that all washes over, it may not be worth your while having a job there anyway (would you like an employer like that?).

The only reason I asked is because there has been precedent set for some things which you can't discriminate about, but of course that only works if they say it right to your face. For example, the former AN attendants who applied for the then-new Virgin Blue (DJ) only to be refused because they were too old. I was wondering whether criminal activity - whether suspected, alleged or real - can be used legitimately as such. After all, there were ads* run in buses quite a few years back that said that a criminal record would have serious repercussions on one's ability to apply for a job, bank loan or travel internationally.

* The ad was about changes in QLD laws that meant some then-juveniles could be tried as adults in a criminal court.

correct - I made that point before. but there are always stupid people who will actually make an outright statement as to why they didn't employ/provide accommodation/etc. They get made an example of.

even if people hold those views privately - the damage they can cause by making those views public has to be stopped. Legislation can go some way towards that. Having a company say 'we will never hire [homosexuals/blacks/Jews]' for example can have far reaching implications.

 

[Shelf]

I teach driving of emergency vehicles...

Mum and dad + an instructor taught me how to get from A to B.

A couple of weeks under the tutelage of you crazy people taught me how to drive (and slide around corners)

 

[mono88]

Unless of course you own a shop called City Wok & are having a running battle with Mongolians...

(although that's got more to do with the fact that I was watching highlights of South Park last night)

I thought that show should not be watched by anyone.

 

[rogerkambah]

Quite happy with my Subaru even though the speedo is 10k optimistic. Using GPS I can be confident of my true groundspeed.

 

[anat0l]

Changing gears when turning
Not checking mirrors
Braking during a corner
Not checking mirrors
Leaving a hand resting on the gearstick
Not checking mirrors
Hand position on the steering wheel
Not checking mirrors
Steering technique
Not checking mirrors
Hill starts
Not checking mirrors
General awareness and observation

"Not checking mirrors"... well that depends. You mean they don't even look at them at all? That's nuts.

One should consistently check the mirrors; a good driver will use peripheral vision to do so, but that can be tough with the passenger side mirror.

Steering technique... is this referring to how to handle the wheel during a turn? I was always told that one should never cross arms on the wheel. Apart from that, there are two ways to turn the wheel that I've been told (both by a driving instructor): one is to turn the wheel by lifting the hand at the bottom and replacing at the top as you turn; the other is to not lift the hands at all off the wheel but rather shuffle them along the wheel whilst doing the turn.

I don't know how anyone could not be taught how to do hill starts properly. That's almost the first thing you learn when you start to drive. Especially if you're on manual transmission, as it's then quintessential (damn well will save your life if not at least the cost of incidents with your car). Might be biased if you live in a really flat area / town / city (not in Brisbane - we have hills up the wazoo here).

One thing you didn't mention that my driving instructor told me, as well as my test examiner (because I failed to do it three times during the test - still passed) was blind spot checks. That is, turn your head quickly to check the blind spot - particularly important when changing lanes. My parents always told me except for reversing (and even then), one should never turn their head away from the front view of the vehicle; even a second away from the front view could be fatal. I guess a corollary from this is to set up the side mirrors so they take in the view which would normally miss the traditional "blind spot".

Going from a car to a heavy vehicle will obviously require more foresight and amplify every action done by a non-trivial amount. Apart from no use for it, there's a good reason why I'm happy to stick to my car class licence!

 

[MEL_Traveller]

The ADRs require that a speedometer reads no worse than 10% over the actual speed. Unfortunately car manufacturers take that as meaning they should read 10% over. When I queried Subaru about my car reading 110 when I was actually doing 100 the response was 'It conforms to the ADRs, so not our problem'. And that was from corporate Subaru, not the dealer. I made it clear when I came to replace my car why I was not choosing a Subie.

Only if the car was available before 1 July 2006.

The rules after 2006 are summarised by the RACQ here: Speedo Accuracy | Motoring | RACQ

essentially - a speedo cannot give a reading over the actual speed of the vehicle.

 

[The Rok]

I can't see the bolding on the iPhone app.

I think linking a child running in front of a car with the 'risk' reduction method of reducing speed limits implies that lower speed limits reduces the risk of a child running in front of a car.

I maintain the question but the size of the risk we are trying to address by reducing the speed limit. And I also ask how effective it has been at reducing deaths. Some years ago there was an investigative journalist type story that stated the last big reduction in road deaths followed the introduction of seat belts.

In any case, speed limits are mere window dressing compared to something like proper driver education. Road safety experts are deluded as long as they continue to play the financially rewarding speeding game, instead of pushing or better driver education. IMO

The lower speed doesn't reduce the risk of a child running in front of your car, it reduces the risk of you actually hitting that child.

Lower speed = shorter stopping distance

 

[Hvr]

correct - I made that point before. but there are always stupid people who will actually make an outright statement as to why they didn't employ/provide accommodation/etc. They get made an example of.

even if people hold those views privately - the damage they can cause by making those views public has to be stopped. Legislation can go some way towards that. Having a company say 'we will never hire [homosexuals/blacks/Jews]' for example can have far reaching implications.

Sad to see that in NSW, government funded private schools are allowed to expel gay students. Simply for being gay. This is supported by the state Liberal government.

There is no reason why discrimination should be allowed when the characteristics being discriminated agaisnt are not inherent requirements for the position. Especially if the company receives government money or contracts.

 

[mono88]

"Not checking mirrors"... well that depends. You mean they don't even look at them at all? That's nuts.

One should consistently check the mirrors;!

I always check the mirrors before driving off to make sure I look good. Doesn't everybody?

 

[whatmeworry]

Bit of a funny clip I found on youtube. Beware, some colourful language.

[video=youtube_share;EQ6xemaR6Og]http://youtu.be/EQ6xemaR6Og[/video]

 

[rogerkambah]

The only time both my Honda's and my Subaru speedos indicate the actual car speed is when they are stationary.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Sad to see that in NSW, government funded private schools are allowed to expel gay students. Simply for being gay. This is supported by the state Liberal government.

There is no reason why discrimination should be allowed when the characteristics being discriminated agaisnt are not inherent requirements for the position. Especially if the company receives government money or contracts.

I think the current Royal Commission will fundamentally change public attitudes towards certain religious institutions and the legislation allowing discrimination on the basis of 'religious freedom' will almost certainly be re-examined. Certain institutions are almost certainly going to be held far more accountable.

 

[Hvr]

I think the current Royal Commission will fundamentally change public attitudes towards certain religious institutions and the legislation allowing discrimination on the basis of 'religious freedom' will almost certainly be re-examined. Certain institutions are almost certainly going to be held far more accountable.

Not if Tony Abbott gets his way.

 

[Flashback]

I thought that show should not be watched by anyone.

Shame on you!

 

[mono88]

Shame on you!

Yes the South Park disclaimer is shameful and discriminates against anyone!

 

[erkpod]

I thought that show should not be watched by anyone.

All celebrity voices are impersonated ... poorly.

 

[Princess Fiona]

So the stat dec has been completed and will be posted tomorrow. Think the lesson learned re speeding is a work in progress though:
Daughter: "I'll still be driving around local areas of course"
Me: "No you won't as you'll be suspended and uninsured"
Her: "Don't try to take the moral high ground here, you have points on your own licence"