I went on a canal boat trip in Birmingham last weekend. It was only a small boat, about 12 seats and the whole thing was wrecked by 3 perfectly well behaved children, sitting right next to their parent(s) and shouting as a mean of normal communication. The boat engine wasn't vaguely noisy, it was the rotten kids! Non-PC Thread drift follows Mods delete if too bad!
In Germany in the 50s a British serviceman's wife was in a local supermarket and having a bit of grief from her kids. In the end she gave the offender a clip round the ear which sorted things out, until a German lady came up to her and (imagine the accent!) - "In Shermany vee are not smackink our cheeldren" to which the English lady replied "Well in England we aren't gassing our Jews". She, husband and children were back to UK the next day and quite right too but it was a sharp riposte!
Edited by Armitage Shanks {p} on 04/09/2009 at 19:06
|
|
Maybe the children on the boat were deaf ?
|
Deaf people don't shout, they get shouted at! Think about it!
|
|
Actually, people who could hear at one time but subsequently go deaf are prone to talking loudly, as they cannot hear ther own voice, but 3 kids afflicted like this would be a bit unlikely !
|
|
....an the motoring connection is ?
|
KwikFit advert?
I have clipped my ear!
Edited by Old Navy on 04/09/2009 at 21:24
|
talking of adverts which annoy, I hate the ones where they get cars to dance or jump off buildings. Unfortunately this usually applies to 4x4's which do nothing more strenuous than park on the kerb outside Oddbins on a Friday night.
Vauxhall did one where their cars were being knocked around by buildings that moved and recently Nissan is advertising it's Qashqai and its siblings performing some kind of street gang related 'dance' routines. Utter rubbish.
I also detest ads that show a car being driven along a totally deserted city street at night where the camera focuses on the wife in the passenger seat with a stupid Valium induced grin on her face.
aaarrrggghh!
|
|
|
|
That's a thought !
I wonder how deaf people cope with driving cars. If you think about it, we use our hearing sense to
aid our driving in a number of ways.
It must be quite awkward really but I suppose the upside is, you could drive a car which makes a right old din and it would be like a limo to said person.
Motoring link re-established
;-)
|
I wonder how deaf people cope with driving cars. >>
I would assume superb observation, and a feel for the cars vibrations and motion.
Edited by Old Navy on 04/09/2009 at 21:42
|
|
Nah, they just buy an Eh? Class.....
|
One problem that deaf drivers have is in hearing the parking sensors on most cars, since they rely on a changing acoustic tone to tell the driver how close they are getting to the nearest object.
Of course, some cars parking-sensors give you visual signals ,and some even feature rear-view cameras - but then things start to get rather expensive.
|
Or of course they could try relying on their eyes and their mirrors like the rest of us did before such gadgetry became commonplace.
As to the ad; yes it is amusing, and a darn sight more entertaining than most of the anally-retentive junk which tries to flog new cars.
Edited by Pugugly on 05/09/2009 at 00:31
|
But think about how you change gear in a manual car, you do it by listening to the engine.
It is something you do subconciously.
Deaf people will never hear the wonderful sounds that engines can make like a V12 in full song.
|
Or of course they could try relying on their eyes and their mirrors like the rest of us did before such gadgetry became commonplace.
H. that's a bit harsh, if you don't mind me saying so.
The trend with modern cars is to include various styling and safety (and penny-pinching) features that reduce visibility compared to 20 years ago. The average driver, in the average family car of 20 years ago, could cope without parking aids - now I am not so sure.
e.g Vauxhall Insignia vs Cavalier, Audi A4 vs Audi 80, BMW 3-series, Mazda 3 vs Mazda 323.
|
H. that's a bit harsh if you don't mind me saying so.
With the greatest of respect, I disagree. Rearward visibility might be less than it was some years ago, but external mirrors have improved greatly. As most of you may be aware I drive an HGV for a living, and have no option but to use my mirrors when reversing. If other drivers did the same,instead of trying to peer through a jumble of childrens' heads and "Baby on Board" stickers, they'd find the job a lot easier.
Further to that, why do people who spend a fair bit of time reversing buy cars which are plainly unsuited to the purpose? Surely the initial test drive should be enough to find this out?
This year's handy gadget soon becomes next year's "can't do without" essential (see mobile phone, satnav, automatic headlights, front fogs, etc) and most of them are no more essential than fluffy dice, pink or otherwise!
A question to finish with; if, as I suspect, a driver on test has to manage without parking sensors and bleepers, why are they essential afterwards?
|
A question to finish with; if, as I suspect, a driver on test has to manage without parking sensors and bleepers, >> why are they essential afterwards?
Fair comment, but I think that these factors need to be considered in relation to the driving test:
1) The cars chosen are usually driving school ones which tend to be chosen to be easier to drive than average.
2) The conditions chosen by the examiner for performing manouvres are less arduous than the test driver will face in the real world.
You are a professional driver and I sincerely tip my hat to you for the driving skills that you need for work like that - but the rest of us need all the help that we can get, and I humbly admit that my own standard of parking has improved a great deal since I got a car with parking sensors.
But all this is only my opinion, of course. It's fun to air it in the forum, but I don't know anything for sure - except that Death and Taxes exist. :-)
|
We've gone competely off-topic of course, but I admit that another thoght's just struck me in relation to this reversing thing....... if a shunt, or worse an injury to a pedestrian, results from a parking sensor's failure to operate correctly, would the driver be at fault?
And would the fault in the sensor (which as we all know could happen at any time) be mitigation against failing to observe properly?
Put not your trust in princes..... or anything else which requires an electrical supply! ;-)
|
Ah! An interesting point, and perhaps worth a thread on its own.
And, Yes, we have drifted off-topic......sorry mods! (embarrased smiley)
|
cant believe people need reversing aids to reverse
maybe they should employ some lower order to walk behind them with a flag
no wonder manufacturers are developing systems where computers run car distance evaluaters
you people should read about can-bus and how it could cause air crashes like i did this week,you would never fly again if you knew a piece of wire with a voltage across it took precedence over an experianced pilot
|
We've gone competely off-topic of course
Well at least it's about blinking motoring !!!
|
cant believe people need reversing aids to reverse maybe they should employ some lower order to walk behind them with a flag
If cars had some glass at the back, there wouldn't be a problem.
I used to drive a 1983 Datsun Sunny estate. Greater rear visibility, no problem reversing.
Same with its successor, a Peugeot 305 estate. I could park it accurately and easily, because like the Sunny it was like a greenhouse t the back: all glass.
But my Almera hatchback has very thick rear pillars, and a relatively narrow rear screen with a high base. It would be hard work to park accurately without the reversing sensors.
|
|
|
|
