WBMT.....What baffled me today

anny appy eturns. Belatedly!
 
Next ouzo I have, I shall dedicate it to you. Mind you, that'll probably be in June!!!
 
Why have we spent £3 billion on a strategic aircraft carrier that can only carry 36 MRCAs and a dozen helicopters over a maximum range of 10,000 miles? "Yes: we'd love to join your emergency response in the Pacific but our oiler's broken down in the South Atlantic and we're running low on fuel". :thinking: :naughty:
 
AndrewFlannigan said:
Why have we spent £3 billion on a strategic aircraft carrier that can only carry 36 MRCAs and a dozen helicopters over a maximum range of 10,000 miles? "Yes: we'd love to join your emergency response in the Pacific but our oiler's broken down in the South Atlantic and we're running low on fuel". :thinking: :naughty:
Click to expand...
Vanity project?
 
I disagree. We can't abdicate every responsibility to the USA and carry on sniping at them. Can we? Oh yes. I forgot. We can.
 
I'm not against building the new carriers. I'm against their wasting money building the wrong carriers. If what we now have indicate the Navy's needs then they should have been nuclear fueled and with a larger air wing capacity. Then again, it might have been a good idea to continue with the development of the Super Harrier instead of buying into the F35 project. That would have kept the money on shore and made for more flexible budgeting.
 
The F35 programme is dogged by problems. Software, 'stealth' paint peeling off to name just a couple. A lot more described if you follow the link below

https://www.flightglobal.com/fixed-wing/lockheed-martin-f-35-has-873-deficiencies/136481.article

The carriers are vulnerable to attack & need a mini task force to protect them & the Royal Navy doesn't have the ships or manpower to crew them.

https://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/royal-navy-does-not-enough-3737440
https://www.forces.net/news/royal-navys-ability-protect-new-aircraft-carriers-doubt
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure about WBMT.

More like seriously? WTF are you doing?
Coming down a single carriageway, through road works on both sides, so narrow lanes and loads of cones, 40mph limit.
(That'll be a slow lane then @nilagin :D )

Its only a couple of miles, sometimes its start stop. sometimes it flows.
Today was a start stop day.

We had stopped, all of a sudden 2 cars pull out from behind me and take off down the outside lane, which of course was for on coming traffic!

The hold up was a dumper truck ( site vehicle) on coming, due to the very narrow part of the road works it was obviously a struggle for it to get through.

The two cars then came face to face with said 20 odd tonne tonne site vehicle.
Now they are panicking and forcing their way back in.... t***ts!

Shortly after the road opens back up to a dual carriageway.
And said 2 cars were crawling along.
Good! I thought, I hope it shook the t***ts up enough to teach them a lesson !

As I went past the first car driver was a West Indian female, the second car was a female in full head dress with just the eyes visible!

It makes you wonder if either of them actually had a licence, or where they got it, if they did!
 
Last edited:
Cobra said:
It makes you wonder if either of them actually had a licence, or where they got it, if they did!
Click to expand...
I imagine some people just switch off in heavy traffic.

This morning I was coming up on the roundabout where Exeter's Bridge Road crosses Topsham Road. From a single lane it opens to 3 which are marked left, ahead and ahead/right. I selected the "ahead/right" lane in order to turn right.

Without any warning a car in the "left" lane pulled right across the "ahead" lane and tried to force himself into the "right/ahead" lane. I (ahem) warned him of my presence and he moved back across the "ahead" lane and into the "left" lane!

The last I saw, he was attempting to push into the "ahead" lane on the roundabout to the audible annoyance of the cars already there. :wideyed:
 
Last edited:
Likely the second one was following the first on autopilot... I see it lots here - esp when I know a right turn filter lane is close by and I overtake queuing cars to get into it - someone inevitably follows me before realising that they are now in the wrong lane.
Cobra said:
I'm not sure about WBMT.

More like seriously? WTF are you doing?
Coming down a single carriageway, through road works on both sides, so narrow lanes and loads of cones, 40mph limit.
(That'll be a slow lane then @nilagin :D )

Its only a couple of miles, sometimes its start stop. sometimes it flows.
Today was a start stop day.

We had stopped, all of a sudden 2 cars pull out from behind me and take off down the outside lane, which of course was for on coming traffic!

The hold up was a dumper truck ( site vehicle) on coming, due to the very narrow part of the road works it was obviously a struggle for it to get through.

The two cars then came face to face with said 20 odd tonne tonne site vehicle.
Now they are panicking and forcing their way back in.... t***ts!

Shortly after the road opens back up to a dual carriageway.
And said 2 cars were crawling along.
Good! I thought, I hope it shook the t***ts up enough to teach them a lesson !

As I went past the first car driver was a West Indian female, the second car was a female in full head dress with just the eyes visible!

It makes you wonder if either of them actually had a licence, or where they got it, if they did!
Click to expand...
 
AndrewFlannigan said:
I imagine some people just switch off in heavy traffic.
Click to expand...
It'd be nice if some people actually switched on when they got in their car!

AndrewFlannigan said:
The last I saw, he was attempting to push into the "ahead" lane on the roundabout to the audible annoyance of the cars already there
Click to expand...
Having so many roundabouts that happens a lot around here,
it wasn't much further down the road when some bright spark was in lane 3 ( 2 or 3 straight on or turn right, dual carriageways on exit) on approach to a large roundabout.. When the lights went green they thought they were turning left!
 
Quoth said:
Likely the second one was following the first on autopilot...
Click to expand...
Quite possibly but it is blindly obvious that was not the thing to do!
Sheep nearly ended up as main course for an earth mover!
 
I had a car driver in the lh lane as we approached a r'bout go all the way round the front of me (I was in lane 2 as I was going straight on) and into the far right hand lane (lane 4, thereby doing a 90deg RH turn in effect) cut me up (or would have if I hadn't been paying attention), the lorry to my right and another car in lane 4.
 
Cobra said:
As I went past the first car driver was a West Indian female, the second car was a female in full head dress with just the eyes visible!

It makes you wonder if either of them actually had a licence, or where they got it, if they did!
Click to expand...
Foreign licence, in the hands of Allah are all things, so they dont care, if they have an accident it's Allah's will.
 
I keep promising to get a dash cam fitted and start a you tube account under the name of look at this f*****g idiot :D
 
Please do... Some dadh cam channels are my favourite waste of time (at work obviously... I can find much better ways of wasting my own time :) ).
Cobra said:
I keep promising to get a dash cam fitted and start a you tube account under the name of look at this f*****g idiot :D
Click to expand...
 
Quoth said:
I can find much better ways of wasting my own time :) ).
Click to expand...
:lol:
I do at least 1000 miles a week, some of the t***ts are funny others I see are just down right dangerous!
 
That's true, I had missed the he was on a 4 lane roundabout. Apologies.

It does seem though that even on 2 lane roundabouts with no signs people often use the right lane to go straight on, and it winds me up a bit. That's why I jumped the gun / didn't read properly the post I was asking about.

I
 
simon ess said:
Unless there were left only arrows in lane 1, why were you in lane 2 to go straight on?
Click to expand...
Lane 1 has Left or Straight on signs, Lane 2 has straight on or Right signs, so I was in Lane 2 going straight on. Lane 2 of the road after the r'bout then has a split which goes right or straight on, I wished to take the righthand split further along the road. Or are you suggesting I should have taken Lane 1 then tried to get over into Lane 2 for the right hand split some 200 yds down the road, good luck with that approach to skillful driving. The roundabout further more is traffic light controlled, so unless I was car 1 in Lane 1 trying to get into Lane 2 further on I would have found it very difficult to get into Lane 2 for the split.

Assuming the apology was to me, accepted. Riding a motorbike I have similar dislike of some car drivers actions at r'bouts, 2 cars collide = dents, car and bike collide = usually more serious (for the motorcyclist at least)
 
Last edited:
simon ess said:
That's true, I had missed the he was on a 4 lane roundabout. Apologies.

It does seem though that even on 2 lane roundabouts with no signs people often use the right lane to go straight on, and it winds me up a bit. That's why I jumped the gun / didn't read properly the post I was asking about.

I
Click to expand...
On a 2 lane roundabout if the exit has two lanes, then either lane should really be used if going straight on, otherwise what is the point in having two lanes in the exit.
 
I will admit I almost came acroppa last week when three or four such roundabouts on a dual carriageway suddenly ended with one that went down to one lane on the exit without a filter.....luckily nice mr hgv was on the ball. Poor driving on my part and in retrospect I probably should gone round the roundabout again.....
 
Mozthecat said:
I will admit I almost came acroppa last week when three or four such roundabouts on a dual carriageway suddenly ended with one that went down to one lane on the exit without a filter.....luckily nice mr hgv was on the ball. Poor driving on my part and in retrospect I probably should gone round the roundabout again.....
Click to expand...

Wasn't the A500 near Crewe was it?
 
For some reason I keep getting sponsored ads on Facebook about finding out about how much state pension I will get on retirement. I have 9.5yrs to go so don't see why it is relevant.
But the comments on these posts are both baffling and entertaining. Most of the comments are from women moaning about having had their retirement age increased without notice. Have these women had their heads buried in the sand for the last 25yrs?
I have just read a comment from a woman, moaning she was never told, she has another 4.5yrs to go until she can retire, working a 50hr week on minimum wage just to pay the bills. How does she envisage paying those Bill's on her state pension then, it will be alot less than what she is getting now.
 
simon ess said:
It does seem though that even on 2 lane roundabouts with no signs people often use the right lane to go straight on, and it winds me up a bit. That's why I jumped the gun / didn't read properly the post I was asking about.
Click to expand...

We have one here that crosses the by pass which isn't a dual carraigeway.
Going onto the roundabput each entray has 2 lanes, going off they are all one lane,
the amount of people that try and use to r/h lane to go straight across and almost collide
with the car in the l/h lane is amazing,.
Just wish the highways department would put arrows on the road
 
There's a lot of roads locally that are marked with right hand lane for straight on or right and left hand lane as left only. They aren't always consistent either. It seems to be a local habit. Some of the roads in Leicester are evil with the left hand lane disappearing after traffic lights rather than the usually merge with the right hand lane disappearing.

Two lane on and off and I'll pick the shortest queue, especially if the left hand lane is full of heavy things. You can be off and away before the first one has even moved.

For two lane approach and exit you can be in either lane for straight over. The merge arrow means you have to blend in with the others. It does not mean barge in and push smaller cars out of the way which is what a lot of folk seem to think!
 
Gremlin said:
Just wish the highways department would put arrows on the road
Click to expand...
Alas: even if they do there'll always be several idiots who reckon they're above such things!
 
The 'normal' merge arrows are treated by all too many drivers like their indicators i.e. a license to to manoeuvre :(

Where they exist the more explicitly instruction of "merge in turn" helps somewhat. Plus something that I first saw many years ago on Guernsey and appreciated since is their 'yellow hatched' junctions where it is obligatory to "Filter in Turn"......I wished they could be brought in on the mainland!
 
nilagin said:
For some reason I keep getting sponsored ads on Facebook about finding out about how much state pension I will get on retirement. I have 9.5yrs to go so don't see why it is relevant.
But the comments on these posts are both baffling and entertaining. Most of the comments are from women moaning about having had their retirement age increased without notice. Have these women had their heads buried in the sand for the last 25yrs?
I have just read a comment from a woman, moaning she was never told, she has another 4.5yrs to go until she can retire, working a 50hr week on minimum wage just to pay the bills. How does she envisage paying those Bill's on her state pension then, it will be alot less than what she is getting now.
Click to expand...

My wife is one of the ladies in that age group, she needs to work till she's 66 instead of 60 to receive her state pension, despite the fact she has paid in well over the 35 years to claim max payment, 60 was the retirement age for women when she first started work.
She never received any info that she'd have to work longer, in addition the Govt also accelerated the deferred age at which she would retire, again there was very little if any notification and in fact misleading information. The public were told, by the coalition government, the most she'd have to work extra was 18 months, the formula for working that out was complex beyond belief and in fact she'll have to work 6 years not 18 months.
I was told I'd have to work 1 year extra and tbh if the pension payments cant match the length of my expected retirement I understand why I will need to work an extra year, 6 years is taking the p***, in effect the "cost" of lost revenue to us is close to £56K.

We have one of the lowest state pensions in the developed world, yet you seem to gloat that your example above will be hard up in old age - not very sympathetic.
 
Our local council has decided to paint solid lane lines around a lot of our roundabouts, which tend to confuse people because it looks like you should never filter left for the exit you require.
If anyone knows it, the lane markings on Brooke Street Roundabout, which is below the M25 and above the A12, really are diabolical. You have the road numbers marked on the road at the entrances to the roundabout, but once you get on the roundabout there is one lane less and causes loads of accidents. The A1306 roundabout below the M25 is even worse, the roundabout is governed by traffic lights, on one section the road is marked for certain exits, but as you progress around the roundabout you find you have to move two lanes to the left with very little warning. Not too much of a problem for regular users, but totally misleading if not used to it.
 
MatBin said:
My wife is one of the ladies in that age group, she needs to work till she's 66 instead of 60 to receive her state pension, despite the fact she has paid in well over the 35 years to claim max payment, 60 was the retirement age for women when she first started work.
She never received any info that she'd have to work longer, in addition the Govt also accelerated the deferred age at which she would retire, again there was very little if any notification and in fact misleading information. The public were told, by the coalition government, the most she'd have to work extra was 18 months, the formula for working that out was complex beyond belief and in fact she'll have to work 6 years not 18 months.
I was told I'd have to work 1 year extra and tbh if the pension payments cant match the length of my expected retirement I understand why I will need to work an extra year, 6 years is taking the p***, in effect the "cost" of lost revenue to us is close to £56K.

We have one of the lowest state pensions in the developed world, yet you seem to gloat that your example above will be hard up in old age - not very sympathetic.
Click to expand...
As I said, the intention to raise womens retirement age was announced in 1995. I was only in my early 30's at the time, so not really of much interest to me but I certainly remember another announcement/reminder being made probably 15-20yrs ago about the womens age being brought in line with mens retirement age. So how your wife was unaware I don't know.
I really can't see the problem with women having to wait until the same age as men before getting state pension. Why should it be lower?
I have over 40yrs of contributions so far and it will be over 50yrs by the time I get to 67, so other than the fact your wife has paid over 35yrs which gives her a maximum entitlement pension, why should she or any other woman for that matter get to claim hers at 60 rather than what was 65 for me, now stands at 67 and could quite possibly increase to 70 by the time I do retire?
As for your claim i was gloating about the woman in my example, if you care to read it again, I was pointing out she will be worse off financially than she is now, she just hasn't twigged that her income is going to halve as soon as she retires.

That woman would be paying in less than £50 a week in NI contributions from her min wage 50hr week and if she has paid in 35yrs, she would get full entitlement. If she was allowed to retire at 60, explain how that is fair compared to me having to work until 65 as it was when I started, so, 49yrs contributions which average at just short of £90 a week and I would get the exact same state pension payment.
If womens retirement age had always been equal there probably wouldn't have been a need to increase it beyond 65.

There was another woman moaning about having to work past 60, she said she is now 62 and has been paying 40% tax for years, but now she has to work on till 66 before getting her state pension. If she is 62, she can retire at anytime she likes, she could have done so, 4yrs ago as if she is on that sort of money, she should have a private or company pension and if she is that desperate for £168 a week she could get herself a part time job for a few hours a day or week.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top