Discussion
One of our Board members served as John Glenn's physician on his last trip into space on a Shuttle mission.
I have had the privilege of meeting Eugene 'Gene' Cernan, the last astronaut to land on the moon. Plus Tim P (a supporter of ours), Dumitru 'Dorin' Prunariu (another Board member), Helen Sharman (advisor), and a myriad other astronauts.
It's an absolute honour to meet them all and fulfill childhood dreams. But what strikes me most is their humble and self effacing attitudes.
John Glenn, Yuri Gagarin, Valentina Tereshkova, Alexei Leonov, Edward White, all 536 people who have been into space, whether Low Earth Orbit, ISS or the Moon, are all pioneers whom we are the richer because of.
I have had the privilege of meeting Eugene 'Gene' Cernan, the last astronaut to land on the moon. Plus Tim P (a supporter of ours), Dumitru 'Dorin' Prunariu (another Board member), Helen Sharman (advisor), and a myriad other astronauts.
It's an absolute honour to meet them all and fulfill childhood dreams. But what strikes me most is their humble and self effacing attitudes.
John Glenn, Yuri Gagarin, Valentina Tereshkova, Alexei Leonov, Edward White, all 536 people who have been into space, whether Low Earth Orbit, ISS or the Moon, are all pioneers whom we are the richer because of.
DoubleD said:
RobinOakapple said:
We should be striving to remove the need to travel.
Yeah, who wants to visit friends and family.RobinOakapple said:
You lot take things very literally I've noticed. Friends and family would be a legitimate reason for travelling, but I put it to you that a large proportion of the journeys undertaken by people in cars aren't really necessary. Office workers especially.
Free up a bit of roadspace and the rest of us could safely go faster.Somewhat at odds with your position?
cmaguire said:
RobinOakapple said:
You lot take things very literally I've noticed. Friends and family would be a legitimate reason for travelling, but I put it to you that a large proportion of the journeys undertaken by people in cars aren't really necessary. Office workers especially.
Free up a bit of roadspace and the rest of us could safely go faster.Somewhat at odds with your position?
glenrobbo said:
However, if you turn off onto one of the occasional side roads, then NSL applies, which is 60 mph, even though there are blind bends and crests and it is very narrow.
It seems to me to be a nonsense.
eatcustard said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Speed doesn't kill, but rapid deceleration will get you every time.
If you are driving at say 100mph and you hit a dog who is standing still, the dog dies but as he was not moving, how can deceleration kill him?
gazza285 said:
singlecoil said:
What speed would a 12 stone person dropping say 6 feet attain?
The same as a six stone person, nearly 14 mph.andrew said:
how do they know he did 17,522 mph ?
surely the radar guns aren't calibrated that high ?
or was it some early sort of averaging camera ?
Now this post is missing Pitmansboots , or whatever his nom de guerre is this year to tells us that speed equipment is that accurate and can reach that high, and that REDUCING SPEED is the solution to road safety. Of course, he forgets to tells us that the speed he talks about comes in tablet form . surely the radar guns aren't calibrated that high ?
or was it some early sort of averaging camera ?
Of course the camera could be the one that clocked an Austin Metro/Allegro (police special ,perhaps?) at 400MPH. Or a school bus at some other ridiculous speed.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff