Tyres!

That can only be because everyone gives them a wide berth. ;-)

Ironically, a white van man (10 year old Transit) had an accident involving damage and injury in a store car park about 3/4 mile from where I live.

I received notification of intent to prosecute because the b*****d gave a false name, and my address and postcode, and also filled in a transfer of ownership to the false name at my address.

I had some "interesting" communications with police, a lawyer, and the DVLA before I could convince them I had never seen the vehicle.

A simple phone call satisfied the law firm, but the cops required a recorded delivery for the vehicle documents, even then still harassed me, and my daughter made a personal call at the station and gave them a piece of her tongue. That shut 'em up, but they obviously failed to take up my lead of "why don't you pursue the previous owner", because then the DVLA entered the scene with a threatened debt recovery action because I hadn't taxed or SORN ed the van or paid a fine!

That necessitated a Fax of my declaration and evidence, but all went quiet after that...

I have no doubt that some white van men are first class chaps!

Nedavno Mrcheerful napisa:

Testing was done from 100kph (~62mph ~28mps).

Someone will correct me if I am wrong:

a=(v1^2-v0^2)/2s=28^2/2*60.5~6.5m/s^2

v1=sqrt(vo^2-2as)=sqrt(28^2-2*6.5*45.3)~14mps ~50kph ~30mph

So while car with Pirelli tires is stationary, same car with Linglongs will still travel at 30mph.

whic sounds plausible and a speed I don't want to hit anything at. Particularly not a person.

I am very glad that has never happened to me, I hate grief like that. I once had the misfortune to mow down a pedestrian that walked straight off the pavement, she only suffered bruising, but I went and reported it and produced the documents at the nearest police station within a couple of hours of the collision. Two weeks later I got a recorded delivery letter threatening prosecution for failing to produce! Happily everything had been correctly written down, so quite why it happened I'll never know, but it made me feel quite physically sick at the time.

ears sell pirelli at 58 quid in that size

If the cars are nose to nose, then why use this measure instead of the perfectly understandable 10.5m. As I pointed out, 10.5m is NOT 3 small cars driving on the road! So your introduction of small city cars were irrelevant. Perhaps I am more familiar with the metric system than you are. But the length were give in metres in the first place.

I do too as a habit, probably because of fear of missing the odd camera. But I feel that cars behind me don't like this and start tailgating; they expect me to go faster after passing the camera. But I don't...

If you block the tyres, then friction is a constant negative force, so the negative acceleration (a) is constant, so the speed decays linearly in time.

v = v0 - at, stops at T= v0/a

s = [integral (v0 - at) from time 0 to time T ] = v0*T - aT^2/2

When substituting T = v0/a gives s = 1/2 v0^2/a

--------------- 0 ----------------- Now we have to cases

s1 = 1/2 v0^2/a1 = 45.3m

s2 = 1/2 v0^2/a2 = 60.5m

In the second case, what is the speed at 45.3m? Fist we need to find the time (t2) at 45.3m. We use the integral again:

s1 = v0*t2 - a2*t2^2/2 (notice that I have used the slower accellaration a2)

This gives a quadratic equation for t2 from which we can find the speed

But to cut a long story short, I end up with the result

speed at 45.3m = v0*SQRT( 1 - 45.3/60.5) = 62mph*0.501238 = 31mph !

---------------- 0 ------------------

But more to the point, at 62mph he could have reacted 0.55 secs earlier, that would have solved the problem.

If it stops at 60.5, then the speed at 45.3 m

In message , johannes writes

One of 'em is on the wrong side of the road, or has just spun.

Even more to the point, he didn't. Consistent with his mental aptitude in which he "justifies" his tyre choice, he reacts slower.

In message , Mrcheerful writes

I can understand that.

I hope he's trolling.

No, his argument was that 3 * 3.5m = 10.5m and he somehow had to use baby cars in order to solve the arithmetic. The cars were packed on a car transporter, so nose to nose was perfectly possible.

Honestly, having been around on usenet for a while, and frequenting a few of the same groups as he does, he's a fully signed up foil hat wearing looney.

On Wed, 28 Mar 2012 18:09:46 +0100, johannes drooled:

Who gives a s*it what the distance between the cars is? It makes no difference if there is *no* cars in front of you if one suddenly appears from a side road, or do your cheap and nasty tyres have some magic car- repellent in them?

On Wed, 28 Mar 2012 18:09:46 +0100, johannes drooled:

Who gives a s*it what the distance between the cars is? It makes no difference if there is *no* cars in front of you if one suddenly appears from a side road, or do your cheap and nasty tyres have some magic car- repellent in them?

On Wed, 28 Mar 2012 18:09:46 +0100, johannes drooled:

Who gives a s*it what the distance between the cars is? It makes no difference if there is *no* cars in front of you if one suddenly appears from a side road, or do your cheap and nasty tyres have some magic car- repellent in them?

On Wed, 28 Mar 2012 18:22:00 +0100, johannes drooled:

So you admit you're a self-serving fool? I keep to them because of the conditions I described, not because I'm worried about cameras.