B Road - what does the ‘B’ stand for? Bumpy? Broken? Bad?
Posted by David Hurst in Motorcycling, Motoring, Rants on March 29th, 2010
Regular readers of my blog will know that I am a keen motorcyclist, and there’s nothing we motorcyclists like more than a far-reaching ribbon of ultra smooth tarmac. Britain has some amazing rural routes with lovely bends and fabulous scenery, but it doesn’t have too much of the aforementioned high quality roads. Indeed, our rural B roads are only resurfaced on average every 79 years. This is just about twice as long as the recommended resurfacing interval of 40 years. In fact, our road network is now in need of a whopping £8.5billion spend just to bring the road surfaces up to a minimum standard.
This is hardly just an issue affecting bikers. Poor road surfaces increase the dangers to all road users and increase the damage inflicted upon our vehicles. Sadly, the powers that be choose to spend their time and money focusing on speed limit reductions and enforcement that have no discernable impact on road safety. Even as we speak, there is a campaign afoot to reduce the speed limit on rural roads to 50mph. Given that the majority of road traffic accidents on rural roads occur at speeds below 50mph or above 60mph, this change will make no difference to accident statistics. Rural roads will likely be difficult to police anyway, unless (as I suspect) the change is just an excuse to bang up a load more speed cameras. All this limit change will do is cost money and ruin our landscape. At the moment rural roads are by default set at National Speed Limit (60mph for car or motorbike), whereas if they are set at 50mph, there will need to be vast numbers of speed limit signs installed. This represents a vast expense and an unnecessary blight on our beautiful countryside. In most cases, the roads themselves dictate the naturally safe speed limit and this is often well below 60mph.
The Asphalt Industry Alliance (AIA) believes there to be more than 1.5million potholes in need of repair on UK roads. This figure has been dramatically affected by the recent cold weather, and is only likely to increase as winters become more extreme, and funding for road maintenance continues to be cut. As with many things in life, prevention is far cheaper than the cure. This is certainly true in the case of road re-surfacing, where basic re-surfacing costs about £14 per square metre, whereas full reconstruction costs a whopping £70.
How much does the government net from road tax? £47billion! More than enough to maintain our road networks in exemplary condition and vastly reduce the number of road deaths and accidents as a result. The problem of course is that most of this money goes nowhere near the roads.
When will you sit up and take notice of the sad state of neglect of our rural roads? Will it be before you round that corner on your bike only to be met with a giant pothole that sends you and your bike sliding down the road or into oncoming traffic? Will it be before you hit that broken surface in your car and are unable to brake effectively causing a collision with another road user?
Why is the transport network so low on the agenda?
Roadside memorials - at what point should the line be drawn?
Posted by David Hurst in Motoring, Rants on March 25th, 2010
One of the sad downsides to the wonders of the combustion engine is the number of road deaths that occur each year in the UK. Whilst the figure could be reduced if the British Government stopped propagating spin and misleading facts about the causes of road accidents (all in support of their cash machine speed camera policy), there will always be a small percentage of road users that wind up dead.
Along with the increase in road deaths, I’ve also noticed a growing trend for relatives to make little roadside memorials for their dearly departed. Many of these are fairly dignified affairs with a photo of their loved one(s) and a few flowers, and many are removed after a month or two. Others seem to linger and expand.
There’s a classic example of this on the A3088 just outside Yeovil that I pass regularly, and over the last two years I have watched it grow from a fairly modest photo + flowers setup, to a full-on multi-coloured shrine. The grass around it is mown, flowers are regularly tended, photographs are attached to a tree and a rockery seems to have appeared upon which are placed various objects and toys.
I make my comments as an outside observer, and mean no disrespect to the deceased or his family and friends. Losing a loved one is an impossible thing to bear, and I do feel for all involved.
That said, the shrine that is so lovingly tended by the relatives is surely built upon land owned by the Highways Agency (feel free to correct me if I’m wrong here anybody)? Does this mean that I can go and erect any structure of my choosing next to an A road? Perhaps a nice pergola with some vines and a bench? I doubt it.
I imagine it would take a very brave person at the local council to remove the shrine - the local press would revel in the sickly sentimentality and jump at the opportunity to have a go at the powers that be over a “sensitive issue”.
So, I wonder where it will stop. Will our nation’s roadsides become festooned with rockeries, gardens and mini photo galleries? Surely, gardens of remembrance and shrines do not need to be built on the actual site of the accident? Where should we draw the line between what constitutes an acceptable roadside memorial and what doesn’t?
Perhaps it would be better if the shrine didn’t have to be built in the first place. Road safety is not solely a speed issue as the Government would try and have us believe, and the sooner they stop their ludicrously blinkered approach, the sooner roadside shrines would become fewer.
Schumacher denies that F1 is boring
Posted by David Hurst in Personal on March 25th, 2010
Did you watch the opening race of the 2010 season? Did you manage to keep your eyes open the whole race? If you did, well done. I drifted off a couple of times and I don’t remember that happening since the last time Herr Schumacher was in the cockpit of one of the cars. Of course he doesn’t think the new rules have made F1 boring: the seasons when he was driving for Ferrari were dull as the proverbial ditch water.
The new rules stipulate that the cars may not refuel during the race, therefore all the cars have to start with a full tank of fuel. Some bright spark thinks that this will somehow increase excitement and overtaking. I don’t see how. There isn’t much overtaking in Formula 1 at the best of times, so the added tactical interest of working out who would be re-fuelling on which lap made the whole thing a bit more interesting. It allowed teams to only lightly fuel the car to make a big weight saving, which could then be turned into positions on track, provided they timed the re-fuel stop right.
Another new rule states that the first ten cars on the grid have to use the same (partially worn) tyres that they qualified on. I think this could have a small field levelling effect, but I don’t see how it will add to the excitement of the race from a spectator’s point of view.
I’ll reserve full judgement until I’ve seen the Australian Grand Prix.
BA Cabin Crew to lose cheap travel perks
Posted by David Hurst in Current Affairs on March 24th, 2010
According to the BBC News website, British Airways has confirmed that cabin crew that took part in the Unite union’s 3 day strike action will lose their travel perks permanently. Currently, BA staff are given free or heavily discounted flights as a “non-contractural perk”, however all the cabin crew were advised before the strike action that if they took part, they would forfeit their travel perks.
The union has obviously immediately cried foul and is claiming that discounted travel is not just a perk but “custom and practice”. Well of course the union would say that.
The reality is that British Airways lost £401million in the 2009 financial year, and in the nine months to December 2009 in the current financial year, were already showing a loss of £342million. The three day action by strikers that’s just been completed is estimated to have cost BA £21million, and goodness only knows how much customer goodwill. If you book the holiday of a lifetime with British Airways and the flight gets cancelled, how likely are you to re-book with BA? Regardless, of the reason for the cancellation, I imagine not many people would trust the airline again. This situation will be made even worse with more proposed strike action this weekend.
Where does this get anybody? The cabin crew want more money, but BA doesn’t have any money to give them. All they are doing is running the business into the ground. Who benefits if British Airways goes bust? The cabin crew won’t get what they want - they won’t even have jobs at all. All the non-striking members of staff lose their jobs through no fault of their own. The nation loses an institution. The big cheeses at the top, have loads of cash in the bank and will simply move on to the next high paid job. The only people that get hurt are the workers themselves who are striking.
Should they lose their travel perks? Of course they should. They have a contract of employment, the terms of which they agreed to when they joined the company. If they refuse to come to work and are actively damaging their employer, why should the employer hand out perks? In my company there is no automatic entitlement to any kind of bonus or pay review. If the company has had a poor year and no money has been made, then there are no perks, bonuses or pay rises. That’s life. In that event we just have to each try harder to make the company a profitable enterprise the following year.
Why should there be rewards for failure?
OS X Single User Mode - reset forgotten password
Posted by David Hurst in Apple, Guides on February 11th, 2010
Have you forgotten your OS X password? Maybe you bought a second hand Mac and don’t know the password, or even the username? This quick guide will solve your troubles.
- Shutdown your Mac
- Start the Mac whilst holding down Command + s
- The mac should boot to a command prompt with white text on a black background.
- Type: sh /etc/rc
- Now if you know your username, skip to step 9, otherwise follow on…
- Type: cd /Users
- Type: ls
- You are now looking at the contents of the Users folders where the users’ home directories are. The directories will match the names of the users, ergo you now have a username to change the password for. (You may need to repeat this if there are multiple users until you find an admin user.)
- Type: passwd username - where username is the name you want to change the password for.
- You now type a new password and confirm it.
- Type: shutdown -r now
- The Mac will now reboot and you can log in with your new password. From here, you can set up new user accounts via System Preferences etc.
I hope that helps someone out there.
