17 April 2006

on 17 April 2006 at 04:30

Everything else is just stamp-collecting

I have to admit that science was not my favourite subject at school, but I have picked up a fair bit in the 40 or so years since then, so I was delighted to see that a reader who chided me for my allegedly faulty physics was swiftly corrected.

Someone who knows far more than me points out that not only is acceleration irrelevant when working out the impact of a vehicle at 30 and 35mph, but that the appropriate formula – kinetic energy = half mass x velocity squared – shows that for the energy at impact to be twice as severe as at 30 mph, the vehicle would have to be travelling at 42.43 mph, not 35 mph. I am grateful to John Pitchers of Coltishall for this elucidation. And to the reader who observed that there is much more involved in accidents than can be revealed by physics, which was my original implication when I commented on the misleading RoSPA figures.

Meanwhile, here is a comment from another reader to illustrate how dangerous it is to allow our lives to be governed by simplistic slogans. “On the last leg of a return journey from London recently, on the stretch of road between Swaffham and Fakenham, I found myself on the back end of a line of traffic, a couple of vans and big lorries mixed among the cars – seven vehicles all travelling at about 60mph.

“As I happened to look down along the line, I saw a green car pull slowly out of a side road right in front of the leading lorry, causing it to jam on its brakes and the rest of us to nearly run into each other. A concertina crash was only narrowly avoided.

“We all then continued at about 30mph – our speed kept down by this same car, now at the head of the queue. As we progressed and frustration grew, each vehicle took its chance to overtake, some only just scraping in before an oncoming vehicle.

“So after nearly causing one major accident, this same slow car then almost caused several more. When the last car in front of me got past him, the point being made was clear. There on the back window of the green car was a big sticker reading: ‘Speed Kills’!”

Houseago shed key to evil twin probe

A spacecraft is currently collecting information about the hostile environment on “earth’s evil twin”, as the planet Venus is now affectionately known.

According to news reports the craft, Venus Express, is the size of a garden shed – but what is not generally known is that the shed in question comes from Norfolk and belongs to Henry (Fred) “Shrimp” Houseago, of Erpingham.

Mr Houseago, a local legend, revealed yesterday that Venus Express had to be the same size as his shed because much of the equipment it contains was pioneered by him in the shed on a site near Pondhenge, in North Norfolk.

He explained that the area was ideal because it had almost the same kind of hostile environment as Venus, give or take the heat. “We were able to demonstrate that climate change in the Pondhenge area was caused by great crested newts,” he said. “I expect newts to be found on Venus, unless they hide, which they probably would.”

Last week a reporter walking near Whitlingham Broad just outside Norwich found remains of dried-up frogs and toads on the path, but no newts. “That more or less proves it,” said Mr Houseago. Latest evidence shows that the surface of Venus is about 465 degrees centigrade, or roughly half as hot as a blaze that destroyed a Norfolk factory in January 1998.

Whynge beaten to exciting new traffic project

An exciting new experiment in traffic management which was to be pioneered in the Norfolk town of Whynge has been abandoned.

Whynge came to prominence as a village that emerged from the sea following a drop in sea levels. It became reclassified as a town following a visit from John Prescott, the Minister for Pointless Building.

The revolutionary traffic experiment consisted of closing off the main road into the town for a couple of weeks, or maybe more, carefully timed to coincide with the annual influx into the town of thousands of holidaying Easter People, who live in the nearby countryside.

It was also planned to erect hundreds of Diversion signs to block up the other main entry point, but without saying where people were being diverted to.

A key part of the plan was to position long-phase pedestrian crossings close to major junctions, so that they became completely blocked. This became known as the Prince of Wales scheme, to make people think it had royal patronage and thereby avert criticism.

The scheme was abandoned when it was pointed out to authorities in Whynge that the whole project had already been put into operation in Norwich, and there had been little sign of movement there for some time.

“We have no intention of playing second fiddle,” said a spokesperson.

Bird-loving policeman nailed by wardens

A few readers may not know that the 13th century Great Hospital in Norwich contains the only remaining swan pit in Britain. In former times, I am told by a holder of arcane knowledge, the Swan Man in charge of the pit had to prove himself by swimming with the swans.

It is the sort of job you might expect PC Christopher Ashton to have applied for in more enlightened days.

Mr Ashton, a bird lover who spent happy hours, we are told, watching house martins nesting at his cottage, found himself in court when he tried to remove what he thought was an empty and decaying nest after the birds had apparently flown.

Sadly, against the odds, some birds were still there, and even more sadly a pair of wardens had flown their Broads Authority nests and seen the whole thing. They also saw Mr Ashton trying to return the now homeless birds to the wild.

In any normal, healthy society two things might have happened: the wardens might have had a quiet word, pointing out that there was a not very widely known Act of Parliament forbidding the removal of even unused and unsightly nests, and he shouldn’t do it again; or they might even have stepped in and stopped him doing it.

Instead, they prosecuted him, using an Act clearly designed to protect birds from vandals and illegal collectors. Happily the magistrate employed a bucket of common sense that had gone missing from the Broads Authority and gave him a conditional discharge. I wonder if she would like a job as a Broads Authority warden.

3 April 2006

on 3 April 2006 at 05:00

No hurry to rethink speed doctrine

In this apparently irreligious age, there are still one or two doctrines that we are not allowed to question. One is that humans are causing climate change, and the other is that speed is a major cause of accidents.

When I suggested last time that many speed limits needed adjusting upwards, I expected and got the usual reaction that speed is bad, man. One reader suggested consulting the Rospa website. By all means do, but think about it as well. Do you really believe that “reducing the average running speed of vehicles by just 1 mph would reduce the number of accidents by 5 per cent”? And that “at 35 mph a driver is twice as likely to kill someone as they are at 30 mph”?

If you do, don’t bother to write in, because there is clearly nothing left for us to discuss. To my mind such nonsense eliminates any credibility the rest of the site might have had (though there is much to disbelieve). Still, by all means look, and to get a counterbalance, look also at www.safespeed.org.uk and www.abd.org.uk. The same reader assumed that I wanted to drive faster because I was in a hurry. This is a common misconception. I do not want to drive excessively fast, or to hurry. I simply want to correct limits that make me and many others drive at below the optimum safe speed and turn what should be an enjoyable experience into something dreary and hazardous.

Over 40 years of driving have convinced me that it is mainly slower drivers who cause accidents because they simply do not concentrate on what they are doing. Making people drive too slowly means making them drive badly. But then I suspect that most people who are desperate to keep speeds low are less interested in road safety than in maintaining draconian laws. As Einstein said, “unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth”.

In response to my friend Mr Durrant, who wrote to say that some speed limits are correct, yes of course they are (though I don’t agree with the example he gives). And some people – mainly young people with little experience, as the EDP correctly revealed last week – drive too fast and too close to the driver in front. But the great thing for Mr Durrant and his allies is that there is no minimum speed limit in this country. They can drive as slowly as they like, however dangerous it is. And no-one will blink an eyelid. Isn’t freedom wonderful?

Fears that Norwich may attack neighbours

Fears that the ancient kingdom of Norwich may want to eliminate some of its smaller neighbours are causing concern at international level. Diplomats fear that the current government of Norwich may be stockpiling weapons of mass destruction in an attempt to wipe Broadland and South Norfolk off the map.

An unnamed Norwich spokesperson said last night: “There is simply no reason for them to exist. They are collecting rubbish and building on land that we should be controlling.

“They claim to be creating a healthy environment, but that is our job. We know best.”

A source in a blue beret said that such talk was regrettable and showed clear aggressive intent. The proposed Norwich Eye was not, as the city suggested, an attempt to produce electricity but an obvious spy device which could probably deliver deadly projectiles.

A peacekeeping force might have to be put together, and invasion was not out of the question, he said. He blamed radical clerics at the centre of government.

Give us back our restful Sundays

I was unable to convince a financial adviser the other day that it was nonsense that her bank should be able to provide 128 different kinds of ISA, but did not have one no-strings instant access savings account. “It’s what people want,” she said.

I’m afraid I do not believe her, any more than I believe that people are clamouring for even longer shop opening hours on Sundays. It may be what the banks and the shops want, but it is of no value to the man and woman in the street.

You may have not heard about it, but the Government is consulting people on this, and the deadline for comments approaches: it is April 14.

Don’t laugh. If, like me, you hanker for those quiet Sundays before 1994, when you could actually enjoy empty roads and quiet walks through the city, plus a day of rest from all the frantic commercialism of the rest of the week, take the trouble to tell the Government what you think by e-mailing them at sundaytrading@dti.gov.uk.

You may think that like most consultation, this is a waste of time and effort. But take heart: an NOP consumer poll last year found that 87 per cent of people think it is important for family stability and community life to have a common day off each week. You are not alone.

Views from the football pitch

I know many of you are eager to hear footballers’ views on life. Happily I am able to help. A reader has sent me a transcript he has deviously obtained of an interview with a high-earning footballer (though not, of course, a Canary). The identity of both has been disguised to protect the innocent. And the interviewer.

I expect you’re looking forward to Saturday’s match.

Well, you know, I mean to say, at the end of the day, we hope to get a result.

A result is inevitable, surely?

Well, you know, I have to say, I mean I don’t know nothing about that. Me and my mates will give 120 per cent effort though, to be honest, if you know what I mean.

No, not really. Surely 120 per cent is more than a complete effort?

Well, you know, to be honest, I don’t know nothing about percentages.

So you didn’t learn them at school?

I got kicked out of school because I didn’t want to learn nothing, so I just mucked about, you know.

So you don’t know anything about algebra?

No, I don’t know nothing about him. I got a mate called Al Jones. He went to university and done sports psychology. But he didn’t get no job and he owes a lotta money.

So, would you say your brains are in your feet?

Well, you know, I mean to say, I don’t know nothing about that. My agent, he can’t play football but he makes more money than I do, if you see what I mean, to be honest. Most definitely.

Thank you for your valuable time. I shall need to think about priorities.