Things you always wanted to know the answer to [Vol. 4]
Discussion
Rich_W said:
2) The old Big Breakfast House is 200metres from the Olympic Stadium, compulsory purchased when they built the park. Why haven't they demolished it or sold it as a normal property?
From WikiPedia.In November 2002, seven-and-a-half months after The Big Breakfast was axed, a fire destroyed a significant proportion of the first floor of the cottages. A large part of the roof was also destroyed in the blaze. The fire was suspicious as there was no gas or electrical supply to the building.
Since the fire, extensive work has taken place to restore the house and it is now used as a family home. The house was bought for little more than half the original asking price of £1 million at £550,000. The house was slashed in value because of the fire of November 2002.
The house has now been fully renovated, but some of the well-recognised aspects of the house from its use during the run of The Big Breakfast remain.
The newly renovated house features in the BBC Two show Neneh and Andi Dish It Up, BBC Three's Singing With the Enemy, and most recently Too Fat To Toddle on ITV1.
The cottages are located about 200 metres from the site of the main stadium used in the 2012 Olympic Games. In 2005, the cottages became part of a compulsory purchase order for the Games,[20] giving rise to speculation that the building may be demolished. However, the cottages and gardens remain unchanged.
The house made a cameo appearance in a Channel 4 ident shown in the lead-up to the channel's coverage of the Paralympics in August 2012.
This might be a bit specific for this thread, but here goes.
I may have dreamed it, but in the 90s (perhaps) there was an F40 that did the rounds of the ‘Max Power’ type mags, it was highly (and really distastefully) moddifed, including a modified bonnet that looked a bit like an F50 with the ‘aero bits’. I believe the owner called it his “F50” and this was before Ferrari made their own.
So, did I dream it? I wonder what happened to it, whatever it cost it’s owner back then it must have been a fraction of what it’s worth now, so I suspect it was returned to standard.
I may have dreamed it, but in the 90s (perhaps) there was an F40 that did the rounds of the ‘Max Power’ type mags, it was highly (and really distastefully) moddifed, including a modified bonnet that looked a bit like an F50 with the ‘aero bits’. I believe the owner called it his “F50” and this was before Ferrari made their own.
So, did I dream it? I wonder what happened to it, whatever it cost it’s owner back then it must have been a fraction of what it’s worth now, so I suspect it was returned to standard.
P-Jay said:
This might be a bit specific for this thread, but here goes.
I may have dreamed it, but in the 90s (perhaps) there was an F40 that did the rounds of the ‘Max Power’ type mags, it was highly (and really distastefully) moddifed, including a modified bonnet that looked a bit like an F50 with the ‘aero bits’. I believe the owner called it his “F50” and this was before Ferrari made their own.
So, did I dream it? I wonder what happened to it, whatever it cost it’s owner back then it must have been a fraction of what it’s worth now, so I suspect it was returned to standard.
This one? https://www.supercars.net/blog/1994-hamann-f40/I may have dreamed it, but in the 90s (perhaps) there was an F40 that did the rounds of the ‘Max Power’ type mags, it was highly (and really distastefully) moddifed, including a modified bonnet that looked a bit like an F50 with the ‘aero bits’. I believe the owner called it his “F50” and this was before Ferrari made their own.
So, did I dream it? I wonder what happened to it, whatever it cost it’s owner back then it must have been a fraction of what it’s worth now, so I suspect it was returned to standard.
Bandit110 said:
227bhp said:
Do blind people get away without having to pick their dog poo up?
On a similar note, how do horse riders get away with leaving huge stacks of s
t in the road?Regarding horses, size of deposit would cause an issue, requiring a shovel, not a plastic bag. Also Dog poo can harbour several diseases than can affect humans whereas horse poo is more or less digested grass and breaks down far more easily than dog poo. Also there are far more dogs than horses.
Gareth1974 said:
I've been taking painkillers daily recently, following an operation. The ibuprofen I take have a coating on them, which makes them easy to swallow, but paracetamol and aspirin don't have this coating, and are therefore harder to swallow. Why would this be?
bitter pills
JustinF said:
Gareth1974 said:
I've been taking painkillers daily recently, following an operation. The ibuprofen I take have a coating on them, which makes them easy to swallow, but paracetamol and aspirin don't have this coating, and are therefore harder to swallow. Why would this be?
bitter pillsDoctorX said:
JustinF said:
Gareth1974 said:
I've been taking painkillers daily recently, following an operation. The ibuprofen I take have a coating on them, which makes them easy to swallow, but paracetamol and aspirin don't have this coating, and are therefore harder to swallow. Why would this be?
bitter pillsRostfritt said:
DoctorX said:
JustinF said:
Gareth1974 said:
I've been taking painkillers daily recently, following an operation. The ibuprofen I take have a coating on them, which makes them easy to swallow, but paracetamol and aspirin don't have this coating, and are therefore harder to swallow. Why would this be?
bitter pillsschmunk said:
StevieBee said:
Is anyone in the DoT or any other institution of relevant authority actually aware of the permanent congestion at the Dartford Tunnel and actively looking at ways to address it?
You could use the bridge instead?StevieBee said:
schmunk said:
StevieBee said:
Is anyone in the DoT or any other institution of relevant authority actually aware of the permanent congestion at the Dartford Tunnel and actively looking at ways to address it?
You could use the bridge instead?Sorted.
I saw a tv advert for Facebook last night which got me thinking - do huge companies actually get any significant benefit from advertising?! Surely everyone knows about Facebook/Coke/Apple etc?
(As you may be able to tell, I know nothing about marketing so this may be a stupid question!)
(As you may be able to tell, I know nothing about marketing so this may be a stupid question!)
StevieBee said:
Is anyone in the DoT or any other institution of relevant authority actually aware of the permanent congestion at the Dartford Tunnel and actively looking at ways to address it?
No. They are deliberately leaving it because they hate traffic and want the bridge solely for peds and cyclists and immigrants. 
But.
How would you address it? There are 4 x lanes through the tunnel(s). Which means approximately 4800 vehicles/hour max. Or, 115,200 vehicles/day, if all tunnel bores were at 100% 24/7. (A standard traffic lane tends to block when it carries over 1200vph).
In 2016, the average daily flow was 122,681 vehicles - not spread out across the day, but in peaks and troughs.
Then you have to shut one bore to escort hazardous loads through (regularly).
Then you have to count for people who have "difficulty" - so foreign trucks, foreign drivers, people confused by the tolls, people breaking down, overheating, having accidents etc.
There are 5(?) lanes heading south over the bridge so the capacity is slightly higher, but still borderline breaking point.
There is simply not the space to have free-flowing traffic in either direction - and with all the development there, it is going to be cheaper and easier to put in the Lower Thames Crossing than find space for another tunnel/widen the bridge.
OpulentBob said:
No. They are deliberately leaving it because they hate traffic and want the bridge solely for peds and cyclists and immigrants.
But.
How would you address it? There are 4 x lanes through the tunnel(s). Which means approximately 4800 vehicles/hour max. Or, 115,200 vehicles/day. (A standard traffic lane tends to block when it carries over 1200vph).
In 2016, the average daily flow was 122,681 vehicles - not spread out across the day, but in peaks and troughs.
Then you have to shut one bore to escort hazardous loads through (regularly).
Then you have to count for people who have "difficulty" - so foreign trucks, foreign drivers, people confused by the tolls, people breaking down, overheating, having accidents etc.
There are 5(?) lanes heading south over the bridge so the capacity is slightly higher, but still borderline breaking point.
There is simply not the space to have free-flowing traffic in either direction - and with all the development there, it is going to be cheaper and easier to put in the Lower Thames Crossing than find space for another tunnel/widen the bridge.
As a way to cross a big river like the Thames at that point, is it generally cheaper to build a bridge or a tunnel? But.
How would you address it? There are 4 x lanes through the tunnel(s). Which means approximately 4800 vehicles/hour max. Or, 115,200 vehicles/day. (A standard traffic lane tends to block when it carries over 1200vph).
In 2016, the average daily flow was 122,681 vehicles - not spread out across the day, but in peaks and troughs.
Then you have to shut one bore to escort hazardous loads through (regularly).
Then you have to count for people who have "difficulty" - so foreign trucks, foreign drivers, people confused by the tolls, people breaking down, overheating, having accidents etc.
There are 5(?) lanes heading south over the bridge so the capacity is slightly higher, but still borderline breaking point.
There is simply not the space to have free-flowing traffic in either direction - and with all the development there, it is going to be cheaper and easier to put in the Lower Thames Crossing than find space for another tunnel/widen the bridge.
(accepting there are dozens of 'it depends on' and quickly ignoring them, because I'd just like a neat little answeroid)
Jonboy_t said:
I saw a tv advert for Facebook last night which got me thinking - do huge companies actually get any significant benefit from advertising?! Surely everyone knows about Facebook/Coke/Apple etc?
(As you may be able to tell, I know nothing about marketing so this may be a stupid question!)
Facebook is bleeding users left, right and centre... Mainly due to their own f**ked up UI design. (As you may be able to tell, I know nothing about marketing so this may be a stupid question!)
For brands like coke or McDonalds, they get a huge benefit from advertising. Because they're fast moving, they quickly fade from consciousness so advertising is just a way of saying "We're still here, think of us... Wouldn't you like some McDonalds?". Its heavily affects sales as it will publicise the fact that they have a sale, special item or promotion on.
Apple is a bit different, advertising for them is a way of reinforcing their groupthink. Seeing as most Apple products sold are replacements for the same product, they are trying to prevent the loss of custom rather than increase it.
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff