Classic from the Mrs! Vol 2
Discussion
I try not to talk politics with the wife, however she was asking about the general election announcement earlier as "you know about that sort of thing ", I explained why there has been a general election call and she responded with "well according to my timeline (FB I assume) the Lib Dems are going to win", I laughed and she responded with "aren't we Lib Dem and Conservative?".
It's a worry!
It's a worry!
Driving down the A90 toward Stonehaven I noticed a lovely wind jammer out at sea, I said to the OH "Look at that old sailing ship.
She said "Oh when is the Cutty Sark coming back to Aberdeen"
I said "As it's in a sort of dry dock in Greenwich, not in the forseable future, do you mean the tall ships"
She said "Oh that's what I meant".
She said "Oh when is the Cutty Sark coming back to Aberdeen"
I said "As it's in a sort of dry dock in Greenwich, not in the forseable future, do you mean the tall ships"
She said "Oh that's what I meant".
Edited by Vipers on Thursday 20th April 22:23
Speed 3 said:
Reminds me of a discussion with a mate a few years ago about why taxis drive on sidelights only at night. He wouldn't have it that it reduced fuel consumption and I gave up trying to explain, muttering about Newtonian laws. Tragedy was, he was an avionics engineer for a major airline with an Engineering degree.....
I'm afraid I'm with your mate on this one. Whilst I get the theory about extra load on the alternator, I can't believe that in practice it makes a noticeable, or even measurable, difference.Ari said:
I'm afraid I'm with your mate on this one. Whilst I get the theory about extra load on the alternator, I can't believe that in practice it makes a noticeable, or even measurable, difference.
Just done a quick calculation and 100W of extra lighting will cost 0.134 bhp. How much difference that will make to fuel consumption will depend on many factors but it will be negligible (but not zero).driverrob said:
Ari said:
I'm afraid I'm with your mate on this one. Whilst I get the theory about extra load on the alternator, I can't believe that in practice it makes a noticeable, or even measurable, difference.
Just done a quick calculation and 100W of extra lighting will cost 0.134 bhp. How much difference that will make to fuel consumption will depend on many factors but it will be negligible (but not zero).Aircon makes a measurable difference to fuel consumption. Not a huge amount but noticeable on the on board computer. One of the mags did a test once running a car with and without it switched on and with windows open and closed at various speeds. Fuel consumption was better at motorway speeds with air con on rather than windows open.
If you've ever been to Sharm el Sheik in Egypt you'll have seen this. All the taxis only drive on sidelights to save on electricity and most local buses, the small ten seater Transit type, don't use any lights at all.
Mind you thinking about it now, maybe it's to make them invisible to night time air attacks
Mind you thinking about it now, maybe it's to make them invisible to night time air attacks
CanAm said:
Aircon makes a measurable difference to fuel consumption. Not a huge amount but noticeable on the on board computer. One of the mags did a test once running a car with and without it switched on and with windows open and closed at various speeds. Fuel consumption was better at motorway speeds with air con on rather than windows open.
Yes, Mythbusters also did this test. Their experiments were that at speeds above about 50mph, aircon was better than windows down, but below 50mph, the windows open was better. I think more modern aircon systems are considerably more efficient than what they tested though.
Shakermaker said:
Yes, Mythbusters also did this test. Their experiments were that at speeds above about 50mph, aircon was better than windows down, but below 50mph, the windows open was better.
I think more modern aircon systems are considerably more efficient than what they tested though.
Agreed. Even so, in steady state running my computer shows a difference in fuel consumption when the air con is switched on. I'll test the actual figures later.I think more modern aircon systems are considerably more efficient than what they tested though.
Vipers said:
Driving down the A90 toward Stonehaven I noticed a lovely wind jammer out at sea, I said to the OH "Look at that old sailing ship.
She said "Oh when is the Cutty Sark coming back to Aberdeen"
I said "As it's in a sort of dry dock in Greenwich, not in the forseable future, do you mean the tall ships"
She said "Oh that's what I meant".
Whoosh parrot for me on that one.She said "Oh when is the Cutty Sark coming back to Aberdeen"
I said "As it's in a sort of dry dock in Greenwich, not in the forseable future, do you mean the tall ships"
She said "Oh that's what I meant".
Edited by Vipers on Thursday 20th April 22:23
vtecyo said:
Whoosh parrot for me on that one.
The Cutty Sark is a specific tall ship, currently permanently moored in south-east London, and will not be moving in the foreseeable future.Looking over my shoulder, no tall ships are in Aberdeen harbour yet.
Peanut Gallery said:
The Cutty Sark is a specific tall ship, currently permanently moored in south-east London, and will not be moving in the foreseeable future.
Looking over my shoulder, no tall ships are in Aberdeen harbour yet.
Any short ships, perhaps? Anything else of interest to report in the harbour? I'm very bored, mate.Looking over my shoulder, no tall ships are in Aberdeen harbour yet.
TIA.
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff