 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / UK Car Forums / Driving (UK group) / April 2004Fogs
My son took his first driving lesson a few days ago and we got into a discussion about anticipation and observation. I was trying to get across to him how small clues can help him with a driving plan. We talked about excessive fog light users. 1.. They think it looks good. Just what else will they do on the road to look good - heavy braking, sudden swerving, fast around corners, rash overtakes? Are they aware of whats around them as they are spending so much time trying to look good and impress people? Also, they do not know the highway code or chose not to follow it - what else don't they know? 2.. They forgot to turn them off. This suggests a person who doesn't check the car before moving off. They are not judging the road conditions and setting lights as appropriate. Anyone who drives the car completely unaware of how their controls are set is a possible danger. 3.. Turn them on at the first sign of rain or light mist. Again, they are not aware of the HC, the dazzling effect of fogs (esp. rear) or why they have got fog lights. If a driver is this bad at judging road conditions, they need to be watched. Any more? MrBitsy > My son took his first driving lesson a few days ago and we got into a > discussion about anticipation and observation. I was trying to get across [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > impress people? Also, they do not know the highway code or chose not to > follow it - what else don't they know? Not necessarily. As a general rule, a large amount of people do think cars look "better" with front fogs on - its exactly why adverts on the tv often show the cars in such a way. This doesnt mean they are then a danger - I know a girl who drives with her front fogs on cuz she thinks it looks cool, but asides from that she is actually a fairly good driver! > 2.. They forgot to turn them off. > > This suggests a person who doesn't check the car before moving off. They > are not judging the road conditions and setting lights as appropriate. > Anyone who drives the car completely unaware of how their controls are set > is a possible danger. Perhaps... There is a lot to be said for switches like the one in my car that automatically shut off the fogs when you turn the lights off. Not sure how some people forget as often when overtaking I can see the orange light on the dash from my own car! > 3.. Turn them on at the first sign of rain or light mist. > > Again, they are not aware of the HC, the dazzling effect of fogs (esp. > rear) or why they have got fog lights. If a driver is this bad at judging > road conditions, they need to be watched. I see these a lot in mist/light fog. People seem to think they must turn on their rear fog at the slightest sign of haze... that does annoy me. Rear fogs I find *very* irritating, but I must confess that fronts dont cause me any problem at all. I've never been dazzled by them. <shrugs> > > My son took his first driving lesson a few days ago and we got into a > > discussion about anticipation and observation. I was trying to get across [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] > fogs I find *very* irritating, but I must confess that fronts dont cause me > any problem at all. I've never been dazzled by them. <shrugs> Likewise, I generally don't find the use of front fogs to be too hazardous with the exception of wet conditions where the reflected light from the surface water can dazzle. -- TP <Snipp-Ex> > Likewise, I generally don't find the use of front fogs to be too hazardous > with the exception of wet conditions where the reflected light from the > surface water can dazzle. I find the use of front fog lights very annoying and distracting in the wet and at night - it is disorientating to have two pairs of lights, which logic tells me must be two cars, and then find it is only one car. I firmly believe that turning on front fog lights should automagically engage a 25mph speed limiter in the engine :-) Conversely, I don't rear fog lights as much of a nuisance, especially as high-level brake lights are becoming more common. Either way, using fog lights when there is no need to is plain dumb and discourteous.  SignatureStevie D \\\\\ ///// Bringing dating agencies to the \\\\\\\__X__/////// common hedgehog since 2001 - "HedgeHugs" ___\\\\\\\'/ \'///////_____________________________________________ > Likewise, I generally don't find the use of front fogs to be too hazardous > with the exception of wet conditions where the reflected light from the > surface water can dazzle. I find them quite useful in fact. A signal that says "Twat Driver Approaching", fantastic! > Perhaps... There is a lot to be said for switches like the one in my car > that automatically shut off the fogs when you turn the lights off. Not sure > how some people forget as often when overtaking I can see the orange light > on the dash from my own car! Sounds like a newish Ford. Same with the Fiesta I drive. It's impossible to have the fogs on without having the main lights on as well, due to the design of the all in one sidelight/headlight/foglight switch. And again my car has a bright orange foglight indicator right by the speedo. SignatureMichael Turner Email (ROT13) zvxr.gheare1963@ivetva.arg > > My son took his first driving lesson a few days ago and we got into a > > discussion about anticipation and observation. I was trying to get across [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] > fogs I find *very* irritating, but I must confess that fronts dont cause me > any problem at all. I've never been dazzled by them. <shrugs> I have found front fogs to be dazzling sometimes. It annoys me mostly because people are getting away with breaking the law. The highway code does also talk about dazling though and even the 'normal' headlights can dazzle in some conditions. It's usually conditions where it's just getting dark, where headlights can dazzle and fogs make matters worse. In these conditions I usually have all of my lights off until I can see no further than around 100m. Some people may argue that it's getting dark, but it's more legal to have them off than it is to dazzle people with them on. in these conditions I usually have all of my > lights off until I can see no further than around 100m. Some people > may argue that it's getting dark, but it's more legal to have them off > than it is to dazzle people with them on. Make sure you use them outside the "official lighting up times" as posted in local papers as you can be prosecuted. Steve > in these conditions I usually have all of my > > lights off until I can see no further than around 100m. Some people [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Steve Oh :-o. What papers? Any paper? It doesn't mention this in the Highwaycode. Peter <petermcmillan_uk@yahoo.com> wrote on 16 Apr 2004 04:33:54 -0700: >> in these conditions I usually have all of my >> > lights off until I can see no further than around 100m. Some people [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Oh :-o. What papers? Any paper? It doesn't mention this in the Highwaycode. The highway code is unlikely to list lighting up times, as it depends on the time of year... SignatureDavid Taylor davidt-news@yadt.co.uk "The future just ain't what it used to be." > Peter <petermcmillan_uk@yahoo.com> wrote on 16 Apr 2004 04:33:54 -0700: > >> in these conditions I usually have all of my [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > The highway code is unlikely to list lighting up times, as it depends on > the time of year... Yes, but it could at least say that there is such thing as 'lighting up times'. > > My son took his first driving lesson a few days ago and we got into a > > discussion about anticipation and observation. I was trying to get across [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > know a girl who drives with her front fogs on cuz she thinks it looks cool, > but asides from that she is actually a fairly good driver! She's breaking the law, is that good driving? > > 2.. They forgot to turn them off. > > [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > fogs I find *very* irritating, but I must confess that fronts dont cause me > any problem at all. I've never been dazzled by them. <shrugs> > I > know a girl who drives with her front fogs on cuz she thinks it looks cool, > but asides from that she is actually a fairly good driver! She may well be, but she's not exactly doing the drivers around her any favours! Stupid cow! > My son took his first driving lesson a few days ago and we got into a > discussion about anticipation and observation. I was trying to get across [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > rear) or why they have got fog lights. If a driver is this bad at judging > road conditions, they need to be watched. Yup the Highway Code is very clear on this matter: (note the use of the word MUST rather than 'may'). ---oOo--- Laws RVLR regs 24 & 25 & RV(R&L)R reg 19 94. You MUST NOT Use any lights in a way which would dazzle or cause discomfort to other road users Use front or rear fog lights unless visibility is seriously reduced. You MUST switch them off when visibility improves to avoid dazzling other road users. SignatureMichael Turner Email (ROT13) zvxr.gheare1963@ivetva.arg >Yup the Highway Code is very clear on this matter: (note the use of the >word MUST rather than 'may'). [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >Use any lights in a way which would dazzle or cause discomfort to other >road users The New Fiesta high rear lights do exactly that SignatureZaax http://www.ukgatsos.com > [...] > We talked about excessive fog light users. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > 3.. Turn them on at the first sign of rain or light mist. > [...] The arrogant, the incompetent and the ignorant. Matt B -- >> [...] >> We talked about excessive fog light users. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > The arrogant, the incompetent and the ignorant. Well summed up! Cheers Dave P SignatureDavid Precious http://www.preshweb.co.uk/ > My son took his first driving lesson a few days ago and we got into a > discussion about anticipation and observation. I was trying to get across [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > > MrBitsy Why didn't you give him his lesson, or did you? I'd quite like to be a driving instructor, although it'd be a big waste of my qualifications. I'll probably become an observer one day, I'll hopefully join the IAM as an associate (I think that's what they're called) later this year. <snip> > Why didn't you give him his lesson, or did you? I consider it irresponsible to take a complete beginner out in a non duel control vehicle. I want him to take about 4 lessons with an instructor and then I will take him out. He will pay the extra £85 on my insurance, but he will save in the long run by needing fewer lessons. MrBitsy > <snip> > > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > duel control vehicle. I want him to take about 4 lessons with an > instructor and then I will take him out. I think it's irresponsible to take a complete beginner out on the road full stop. Take him to an empty car park and teach him basic clutch control etc then take him out on the road. > He will pay the extra £85 on my insurance, but he will save in the > long run by needing fewer lessons. I assume it's something you'll enjoy doing or your time might well cost more than the driving instructor's! I found the most important thing was just time in the seat. After he's read the book (the official DSA driving test manual whatever it's called), he'll know what he's meant to be doing, it's just a case of practising with the odd comment from yourself when he forgets/doesn't know something. Good luck! > > <snip> > > > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > stop. Take him to an empty car park and teach him basic clutch control etc > then take him out on the road. I understand what Bitsy was saying, but I think you're right in what you're saying. An empty carpark would be a good place to practice in. After he's mastered pulling away and simple manouvres you could probably get up to 2nd or 3rd gear speeds. Some carparks also have some tight junctions etc which will be good to practice on. It'll give him an idea how to steer etc, and if the carpark's empty then it'll be pretty safe. £85 is very cheap to add him on your insurance, my mums cost about an extra £300 I think, that was a 1.0 metro and then a KA. > > He will pay the extra £85 on my insurance, but he will save in the > > long run by needing fewer lessons. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > just a case of practising with the odd comment from yourself when he > forgets/doesn't know something. When I was learning to drive my instructor told me everything, I didn't know the highway code. > Good luck! > "scott" <spam@spam.com> wrote in message > > I assume it's something you'll enjoy doing or your time might well [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > When I was learning to drive my instructor told me everything, I > didn't know the highway code. I was always interested in cars before I was 17 and my dad always used to let me have a go in car-parks etc and I had been reversing the car round the corner into the garage since I was about 14. I had always paid quite a lot attention to how people drove etc and been really geeky and read the highway code so when I was 17 I just had to put it all into practise on the public roads! The thing I found hardest was getting the hang of steering smoothly, I had been used to driving karts a lot so I never steered enough to start with and then always had to correct with a quick jerk of the wheel. Resulted in some funny lines around rounadabouts etc for the first couple of weeks! > > "scott" <spam@spam.com> wrote in message > > > I assume it's something you'll enjoy doing or your time might well [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > code so when I was 17 I just had to put it all into practise on the public > roads! I was never interested in cars before I was 17, it was my mum that wanted me to learn to drive and paid for my lessons etc. (I didn't have a job to pay for them). I find it quite strange that teenagers (younger than 17) are interested in cars. If you've never driven one how do you know you'll like them. Upto the time I passed my test I was a 'normal' learner, but after that it's become an obession. My mum was trying very hard to teach me bad habits so I had to decide what was right and what was wrong. She never liked the way I was taught, she wants me to drive over mini-roundabouts and cut across junctions so that I don't have to turn so sharply. The funniest thing was that my mum used to say I was too slow and my instructor said that I was too fast. This is my main reason for wanting to be come a better/advanced driver, so that I know what's right and wrong. Actually another big reason is safety, I don't want to crash! Before I had driven I was really put off by the pictures in Learner driving books. You see pictures with crossings, parked cars, blind junctions, traffic lights, children and people about to open their car doors (all in one picture). This really scared me, I couldn't understand how you could drive safely down there faster than walking pace. However, driving is never like that and if you ever were in that situation you would be driving VERY slow. Before I started driving this did make me think that I'd never be a safe driver. It's weird now though, 5 years ago I didn't think I new any bad drivers. Although now I think I know a lot of bad drivers, it's almost every driver I know. I don't know any that I'd consider to be good. > The thing I found hardest was getting the hang of steering smoothly, I had > been used to driving karts a lot so I never steered enough to start with and > then always had to correct with a quick jerk of the wheel. Resulted in some > funny lines around rounadabouts etc for the first couple of weeks! I had problems trying to drive in a straight line. It probably sounds stupid, but when we drive we make quite a few small alterations to the steering. If these alterations are too big then the car isn't going to go straight. > I find it quite strange that teenagers > (younger than 17) are interested in cars. If you've never driven one > how do you know you'll like them. I take it where you come from there's some law stopping anyone under 17 from being a passenger in a car? SignatureConor If you're not on somebody's sh.t list, you're not doing anything worthwhile. > > I find it quite strange that teenagers > > (younger than 17) are interested in cars. If you've never driven one > > how do you know you'll like them. > > I take it where you come from there's some law stopping anyone under 17 > from being a passenger in a car? Although I was, I never became interested in cars until I started driving. I too am surprised at kids who get "into" cars at 15/16. SignatureScott Where are we going and why am I in this handbasket? >>> I find it quite strange that teenagers >>> (younger than 17) are interested in cars. If you've never driven [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Although I was, I never became interested in cars until I started > driving. I too am surprised at kids who get "into" cars at 15/16. A lot of kids (well, boys, anyway) are interested in things like military aircraft that they will never get the chance to fly. I don't see why you have to be able to drive a car to be interested in them. I can remember avidly reading "The Observer's Book of Automobiles" when I was about 8. -- http://www.speedlimit.org.uk "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." (William Pitt, 1783) > >>> I find it quite strange that teenagers > >>> (younger than 17) are interested in cars. If you've never driven [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Although I was, I never became interested in cars until I started > > driving. I too am surprised at kids who get "into" cars at 15/16. I was going to say that I was into cars long before I started driving but I suppose that really only applies to driving "on the road". I have been "driving" ever since I could reach the pedals really. The first thing that I drove regularly, on my own, was a 4-axle rigid ford tipper when I was about 11 or 12. It had to be push started every morning with the digger and woe betide me if I stalled it and my dad had to track right across site to push me again :-( Ahhh... them were the days :-) SignatureMark Foster, IT Services, University of Sussex, Falmer, UK. BN1 9QJ E-mail: m.e.foster@sussex.ac.uk - VOICE/FAX: +44 1273 678902/873135 PGP Fingerprint: 3342 C02C 7BE8 3FE4 AAC5 8BB2 03B7 9263 DDF2 04C1 -------------------------------------------------- "There are no such useless words as...'I didn't have a chance.'" [Driving, HMSO] > > > "scott" <spam@spam.com> wrote in message > > > > I assume it's something you'll enjoy doing or your time might [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > how do you know you'll like them. Upto the time I passed my test I > was a 'normal' learner, but after that it's become an obession. Well from about the age of 5 my dad had let me steer the car around car parks etc, then I started doing karting, then my dad let me do the pedals too around car parks (wow that was exciting!) I loved watching car racing, playing car computer games, by the time I was 16 I just couldn't wait to be able to drive properly out on the roads! I guess it comes from being brought up in a car environment, with parents who like cars, and so lots of their friends that like cars too, I had to talk to lots of people at race meetings etc that were car obsessed! I helped my dad (a bit) build his Caterham when I was about 15, that probably added to my love of cars. Being a mechanical engineer I'm also very interested in how cars work and why they work the way they do. I did quite a few modules at university to do with car and tyre dynamics, it's just a shame I don't have a job (yet) that incorporates this! > My mum was trying very hard to teach me bad habits so I had to decide > what was right and what was wrong. She never liked the way I was > taught, she wants me to drive over mini-roundabouts and cut across > junctions so that I don't have to turn so sharply. The funniest thing > was that my mum used to say I was too slow and my instructor said that > I was too fast. Haha, the day of my test my dad told me I should probably slow down a bit for test as I was driving at "normal" speeds rather than "driving test" speeds. I think I slowed down a bit too much (the examiner commented on this), but fortunately I still passed as he said he could clearly see I was confident to go faster. > Before I had driven I was really put off by the pictures in Learner > driving books. You see pictures with crossings, parked cars, blind [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > that situation you would be driving VERY slow. Before I started > driving this did make me think that I'd never be a safe driver. I was very scared of driving in areas like you say, I would always try and find a different route to avoid narrow busy roads or having to pull in to let other drivers past. But it's just practise and your confidence grows and then you don't even think about it. > It's weird now though, 5 years ago I didn't think I new any bad > drivers. Although now I think I know a lot of bad drivers, it's > almost every driver I know. I don't know any that I'd consider to be > good. Well, I doubt the actual drivers have got any worse, just your perception of them. I would probably call drivers who were better than average "good", and the rest bad. Calling everyone bad is a bit pointless, it's like giving all females 1 or 2 out of 10 :-) > > The thing I found hardest was getting the hang of steering > > smoothly, I had been used to driving karts a lot so I never steered [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > steering. If these alterations are too big then the car isn't going > to go straight. Indeed, I was also scared of driving along narrow straight SC roads at 60mph, there is one near us where it is quite narrow and trees down both sides, quite scary when you're learning! Especially if you're not entirely sure how far over to the left you can move. > > > > "scott" <spam@spam.com> wrote in message > > > > > I assume it's something you'll enjoy doing or your time might [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > car and tyre dynamics, it's just a shame I don't have a job (yet) that > incorporates this! From my current experience, I think uni's a big waste of time! > > My mum was trying very hard to teach me bad habits so I had to decide > > what was right and what was wrong. She never liked the way I was [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > this), but fortunately I still passed as he said he could clearly see I was > confident to go faster. Yeah, I think that's what my driving instructor was trying to do. I think it worked out well in the end, I think I drove at a 'confident speed'. I think it made the examiner feel safe and relaxed. > > Before I had driven I was really put off by the pictures in Learner > > driving books. You see pictures with crossings, parked cars, blind [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > let other drivers past. But it's just practise and your confidence grows > and then you don't even think about it. They're never as bad as the pictures, but there are very few roads that I try to avoid for this reason. I do sometimes try to avoid going up steep hills because I have an 899cc engine. One thing I do try to avoid though is blind bends/junctions. I have one at work and you have to take a chance, there's no way to be sure that no traffic's comming. > > It's weird now though, 5 years ago I didn't think I new any bad > > drivers. Although now I think I know a lot of bad drivers, it's [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > and the rest bad. Calling everyone bad is a bit pointless, it's like giving > all females 1 or 2 out of 10 :-) I'm not sure whether they've got worse, it really does seem like they've got worse, but it probably is just my perception. "Good" drivers are rare, I quite often wonder whether I'd ever consider somebody to be a good driver and think that maybe drivers aren't as bad as I think. However, I have on occasions seen some good driving and thought to myself 'that's a good driver'. I find that good driving tends to stand out quite noticably. There have been a few drivers that I've considered to be OK though. I saw a girl once with green L-plates, who seemed to drive really well. The strange thing was that it felt wrong because I've hardly ever seensome of the things she had done. One thing was stopping before a junction and not blocking it off. I may seem silly, but it's the only time I can remember it happening on this particular road. She also seemed to pull away smoothly etc. I really was impressed. > > > The thing I found hardest was getting the hang of steering > > > smoothly, I had been used to driving karts a lot so I never steered [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > sides, quite scary when you're learning! Especially if you're not entirely > sure how far over to the left you can move. > > > > > "scott" <spam@spam.com> wrote in message > > > > > > I assume it's something you'll enjoy doing or your time [quoted text clipped - 41 lines] > > From my current experience, I think uni's a big waste of time! Planning to work at McDonalds or something when you drop-out then? ;-) Getting a good degree is an opportunity to show to future employers that you are capable of learning and understanding *lots* of new information and ideas. If I'm looking at your CV, I wouldn't know or care if you're the cleverest person in the world, if someone else has a good degree and you haven't, your CV is going in the bin. 95% of what I do at work I didn't learn at uni, and presumably my employer chose me for the job because they believed I would be best at learning the skills required. Your choice, but I recommend you finish uni and understand why you should do! > > > My mum was trying very hard to teach me bad habits so I had to > > > decide what was right and what was wrong. She never liked the [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > think it worked out well in the end, I think I drove at a 'confident > speed'. I think it made the examiner feel safe and relaxed. Yep, I think the examiner can tell quite easily whether you're a confident driver or not, no matter what speed you are going. A couple of my friends (who have been driving for almost 5 years too) still seem to drive very unnaturally and it seems to me as if they are never in control and always about to crash into something. > > > Before I had driven I was really put off by the pictures in > > > Learner driving books. You see pictures with crossings, parked [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] > remember it happening on this particular road. She also seemed to > pull away smoothly etc. I really was impressed. I guess it depends on what you mean by good. You could mean safe, courteous, fast, slow, etc IMO a good driver is one who drives with a reasonable level of safety, although not too slow that is causing other people to get delayed. Of course a good driver has to be able to drive technically well too, like being able to get the minimum 0-60 time out of his car :-) haha only half joking. In fact, driving in a way that makes nobody else notice you is probably quite good, although that doesn't mean driving at night with no lights :-) > > > > > > "scott" <spam@spam.com> wrote in message > > > > > > > I assume it's something you'll enjoy doing or your time [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] > > Planning to work at McDonalds or something when you drop-out then? ;-) No, I'm probably going to finish my degree, I've done more than half of it so I may as well finish it. > Getting a good degree is an opportunity to show to future employers that you > are capable of learning and understanding *lots* of new information and [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > believed I would be best at learning the skills required. Your choice, but > I recommend you finish uni and understand why you should do! Nope, it's just a piece of paper, or a qualification. When I started uni I thought I'd lean lots of new information and ideas, but I haven't. My A-levels demonstrate this, but at uni I've hardly learnt anything. A lot of my degree I already knew from A-levels etc. There's very little that I've learnt, the pace usually feels pretty slow and it's quite boring. If I went through the books on my own and learned everything by myself then I think it would show a lot more skills than sitting in lectures. You may dissagree, but a lot of our lecture notes are straight from the books anyway. > > > > My mum was trying very hard to teach me bad habits so I had to > > > > decide what was right and what was wrong. She never liked the [quoted text clipped - 74 lines] > nobody else notice you is probably quite good, although that doesn't mean > driving at night with no lights :-) Good, is what I'd consider following the highway code and being safe. In fact just being what I'd consider to be safe would be nice to see. > Nope, it's just a piece of paper, or a qualification. Wrong - or rather, if it's just that, then you're not getting the full value of it. > When I started > uni I thought I'd lean lots of new information and ideas, but I [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > skills than sitting in lectures. You may dissagree, but a lot of our > lecture notes are straight from the books anyway. (which course, which uni?) Have you spoken to your tutors about this? They may be able to help you by giving you some more challenging work. Obviously just going faster through the course isn't really helpful, since you're then not fitting in with the rest of the people, but you should be able to do some stuff off at a tangent - more detail of an existing topic, or even try studying a topic that's not covered at all. How about doing some hard maths instead - it should be pretty quick to get to something very challenging. (cryptography?) BTW, the lectures aren't where the learning happens - you're not at school any more. They're merely the basis for further study, which you do on your own. (fwiw, despite being in IT, I still probably wouldn't study compsci at uni if I was given my time again - I'd rather learn something interesting!) cheers, clive > > Nope, it's just a piece of paper, or a qualification. > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > (which course, which uni?) Computer Science at Reading uni. > Have you spoken to your tutors about this? They may be able to help you by > giving you some more challenging work. Obviously just going faster through [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > that's not covered at all. How about doing some hard maths instead - it > should be pretty quick to get to something very challenging. (cryptography?) We get loads of rubbish coursework to do though which usually takes up a lot of time. My main problem isn't really the content, it's the poor quality lectures. Most of this terms lectures are foreign and some are very hard to understand. They also manage to make it sound really boring too. On top of these lectures we also have coursework, some of which is a waste of time. With a part-time job, plus upto 1 hour of travel to get to uni, there really isn't a huge amount of time to do any extra stuff. Having said that I'm starting to wish that I did. I do find maths interesting though, I did two A levels in maths and then repeated some of it when I went to uni :-( I have had some interesting lecutres, but they're very rare. > BTW, the lectures aren't where the learning happens - you're not at school > any more. They're merely the basis for further study, which you do on your > own. Why can't I just stay at home and do it then? I could learn a lot more on my own. A lot of the lecture notes are coppied from books anyway, well they're usually re-worded slightly. > (fwiw, despite being in IT, I still probably wouldn't study compsci at uni > if I was given my time again - I'd rather learn something interesting!) I thought compsci would be interesting, I should've done something like maths or nothing at all. What uni were you at? > cheers, > clive > Why can't I just stay at home and do it then? I could learn a lot > more on my own. A lot of the lecture notes are coppied from books > anyway, well they're usually re-worded slightly. How compulsory are lectures? The coursework will be, but if the lectures are a waste of time, can't you just ignore them? (obviously care needs to be taken to ensure that they genuinely are a waste of time...) > I thought compsci would be interesting, I should've done something > like maths or nothing at all. If you're up to it, I reckon uni is definitely worthwhile. As mentioned before, living at home isn't the best way to do it :-) (especially not while losing an hour a day sitting in a car). > What uni were you at? Cambridge. cheers, clive > > Why can't I just stay at home and do it then? I could learn a lot > > more on my own. A lot of the lecture notes are coppied from books [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > cheers, > clive Read my reply to scott's message, it answers all of these questions. >>> Nope, it's just a piece of paper, or a qualification. >> [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > Computer Science at Reading uni. What do they teach you that you've already done at A-level??? I had several friends who were doing CompSci and most of it went straight over my head, things like machine learning, logic and proof, lots of fourier and wavelet transforms, image processing etc etc not to mention all the theory stuff to do with networking etc etc. They seemed to do just as much maths, if not more than us engineers did. >> Have you spoken to your tutors about this? They may be able to help >> you by giving you some more challenging work. Obviously just going [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > some are very hard to understand. They also manage to make it sound > really boring too. Ah, boring lectures, I think most people find this :-) > On top of these lectures we also have coursework, > some of which is a waste of time. [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > more on my own. A lot of the lecture notes are coppied from books > anyway, well they're usually re-worded slightly. None of our lectures were compulsory, work by yourself if you wanted, so long as you turned up for lab work and the exam you could get full marks. Does anyone actually check if you go to lectures or not? Get a mate to pick up the handouts for you, or even go and speak to the lecturers and ask for a copy, are they not online? Are there not sylabuses and recommended reading lists? >> (fwiw, despite being in IT, I still probably wouldn't study compsci >> at uni if I was given my time again - I'd rather learn something >> interesting!) > > I thought compsci would be interesting, I should've done something > like maths or nothing at all. What uni were you at? Ha! I like computers and programming etc, but CompSci did appear to be massively boring, apart from the bits I'm interested in like 3D graphics and image processing. But then that's because I like engineering :-) > >>> Nope, it's just a piece of paper, or a qualification. > >> [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > do with networking etc etc. They seemed to do just as much maths, if not > more than us engineers did. That's a LOT more than what we've done! The first year was OK and we did machine learning, logic and proof, but not those other things what ever they are. Logic was the only part of maths that I didn't already know, but I knew parts of the logic module. We've just had a database module and we did it at A level, but we went through it a lot quicker. In the database module there were slides telling us how to open and close MS Access. Honestly, there was a whole slide telling us to click the cross at the top right to close the window. In one of these lectures there were 6 people out of well over 100. > >> Have you spoken to your tutors about this? They may be able to help > >> you by giving you some more challenging work. Obviously just going [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Ah, boring lectures, I think most people find this :-) Not all lectures are boring, at least not when you're playing a multiplayer game of Worms on somebodys laptop ;-). > > On top of these lectures we also have coursework, > > some of which is a waste of time. [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > copy, are they not online? Are there not sylabuses and recommended reading > lists? I always go just in case something important happens, eg. coursework is given out and they tell us something about it. > >> (fwiw, despite being in IT, I still probably wouldn't study compsci > >> at uni if I was given my time again - I'd rather learn something [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > massively boring, apart from the bits I'm interested in like 3D graphics and > image processing. But then that's because I like engineering :-) Yeah, I like programming. I spent easter programming for a company and reallise how pointless uni actually is. Our C++ module was a joke, we were only taught the very basics. Fortunately I've had experience outside of uni. I thought knowing programming languages would make uni a bit easier, but it makes some modules pointless and far too easy. There are supposed to be some good modules next year, like computer graphics. I'm starting to really wish that I was doing an interesting course. I think a different degree, or maybe uni, may have been better. Maths would always have been interesting. If I was at a different uni though I wouldn't have a car, I would've never found this news group, I wouldn't have had a part time job, and I'd be a few £thousand less well off. Living at home's a lot cheaper, although a job full time job would've probably been over £20,000 cheaper. <some stuff> Peter - sounds like you _really_ need to go and talk to somebody in your dept - tutor or equivalent. If it's too easy, or desperately dull, it isn't doing you any good. One thing you could do is start writing some proper software. Find an interesting open source project, and join in. Come the end of uni, if you've got that sort of experience, you've got a real advantage - especially if a prospective employer happens to be involved with the same thing. clive > <some stuff> > > Peter - sounds like you _really_ need to go and talk to somebody in your > dept - tutor or equivalent. If it's too easy, or desperately dull, it isn't > doing you any good. I can't understand my tutor, he's chineese :-( > One thing you could do is start writing some proper software. Find an > interesting open source project, and join in. Come the end of uni, if you've > got that sort of experience, you've got a real advantage - especially if a > prospective employer happens to be involved with the same thing. > > clive Yeah, that's what I would do if I had the time, but I haven't at the moment. I'm just starting to revise for this terms exams and then I'll probably be working for about 15 months and then I'll do my final year which will hopefully be more interesting. > > > > > Nope, it's just a piece of paper, or a qualification. > > > > [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > did machine learning, logic and proof, but not those other things what > ever they are. You *must* do fourier theory (and discrete fourier, wavelet etc) by the end of your course. It is *absolutely* crucial to so many things, like JPEG, MP3, MPEG etc for a start. I guess you did set theory as well, you won't have done (much) of that at a-level. Also, what about different programming languages, functional, procedural etc, then there's optimising compilers, digital comms, computer graphics and image processing (my favourite!), artificial intelligence?? I can't believe your course consists mostly of stuff you've already done. Sorry, but one of my girlfriends in 1st year was compsci and I kinda picked up on the lingo :-) > Logic was the only part of maths that I didn't already > know, but I knew parts of the logic module. We've just had a database [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > click the cross at the top right to close the window. In one of these > lectures there were 6 people out of well over 100. My that does sound very bad, why are they teaching you how to open and close access in a databases course? (I don't really know) but surely you should be learning how to write something similar to Access, ie how all the interesting bits work like searching and sorting algorithms? Or is that covered somewhere else? I remember some of my compsci friends telling me about what they had learned about how massive databases work, like google, that seemed really interesting, even if I didn't understand most of it :-) > > > > Have you spoken to your tutors about this? They may be able to > > > > help you by giving you some more challenging work. Obviously [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > Not all lectures are boring, at least not when you're playing a > multiplayer game of Worms on somebodys laptop ;-). I found catching up on sleep was inevitable. > > > On top of these lectures we also have coursework, > > > some of which is a waste of time. [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > I always go just in case something important happens, eg. coursework > is given out and they tell us something about it. Fair point, that's one of the risks you take by not going to lectures. You may even get hints for the exam too, as chances are the lecturers are writing the exam. > > > > (fwiw, despite being in IT, I still probably wouldn't study > > > > compsci at uni if I was given my time again - I'd rather learn [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > would make uni a bit easier, but it makes some modules pointless and > far too easy. I wouldn't worry about not learning a programming language, they're pretty easy to pick up whatever job you do as you seem to have found out. IMHO you needn't learn any specific language at uni, just what your choices are, how they work and which are better for different situations. Learning C++ probably will help you get a job when you leave though. > There are supposed to be some good modules next year, like computer > graphics. I'm starting to really wish that I was doing an interesting [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > this news group, I wouldn't have had a part time job, and I'd be a few > £thousand less well off. Well yes, if you had gone to Cambridge you would have learned more maths and (apparently) more interesting stuff doing CompSci: http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/DeptInfo/CST/node1.html but you wouldn't have been able to have a job, live at home, or have your car there (unless you had a good reason :-) I don't see why you wouldn't have still found this ng though! > Living at home's a lot cheaper, although a > job full time job would've probably been over £20,000 cheaper. I think that on average you are likely to be earning a fair whack more having done a degree than not having done one, although obviously there are exceptions. Just don't work for the government when you leave if you're concerned about money! Two of my friends, both did exactly the same course (compsci), finished the same year with the same grade, one started off with £30k, the other is earning £17k, guess which one works for the government (and no, neither work in London either). > > > > > > Nope, it's just a piece of paper, or a qualification. > > > > > [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > of your course. It is *absolutely* crucial to so many things, like JPEG, > MP3, MPEG etc for a start. No, never heard of it :-( It sounds interesting though. We've learnt a bit about jpeg etc, but never heard of fourier theory. > I guess you did set theory as well, you won't have done (much) of that at I did quite a bit of this at A level, but I still found this interesting. > a-level. Also, what about different programming languages, functional, Functional was OK. > procedural etc, then there's optimising compilers, digital comms, computer compilers was fairly interesting. I've never done digital comms or computer graphics etc, this comes next year as an option. > graphics and image processing (my favourite!), artificial intelligence?? I I didn't understand much of the AI, I didn't like the was it was taught. I understand the theory, but can't do it in practise, although if I had an AI book then maybe I could. > can't believe your course consists mostly of stuff you've already done. Nah, it's really rubbish this year :-( > Sorry, but one of my girlfriends in 1st year was compsci and I kinda picked > up on the lingo :-) [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > about what they had learned about how massive databases work, like google, > that seemed really interesting, even if I didn't understand most of it :-) Sorting algorithms etc is covered in other modules. It's be nice to know about google etc. What we've learnt about databases is a little more than what we did at A-level, but they spent about twice as long teaching it. Actually, we all gave up trying to understand the lecturer after a couple of lectures. > > > > > Have you spoken to your tutors about this? They may be able to > > > > > help you by giving you some more challenging work. Obviously [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > I found catching up on sleep was inevitable. I have never fallen a sleep (yet). > > > > On top of these lectures we also have coursework, > > > > some of which is a waste of time. [quoted text clipped - 53 lines] > they work and which are better for different situations. Learning C++ > probably will help you get a job when you leave though. C# and .NET seems to becomming popular. > > There are supposed to be some good modules next year, like computer > > graphics. I'm starting to really wish that I was doing an interesting [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > £30k, the other is earning £17k, guess which one works for the government > (and no, neither work in London either). My sister's a qualified accountant and she didn't got to uni. She's probably got the potential to earn as much as me though. I can see myself doing further study after uni, this course seems completely different to the course at Cambridge etc. I'd really like to learn more than the basics of comp sci. > "scott" <spam@spam.com> wrote in message >> You *must* do fourier theory (and discrete fourier, wavelet etc) by [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > No, never heard of it :-( It sounds interesting though. We've learnt > a bit about jpeg etc, but never heard of fourier theory. From the sounds of it you would be very interested in it. Do some googling for fourier and wavelet transforms, and use google to try and find out how jpeg compression actually works - I found it very interesting. >>> Not all lectures are boring, at least not when you're playing a >>> multiplayer game of Worms on somebodys laptop ;-). >> >> I found catching up on sleep was inevitable. > > I have never fallen a sleep (yet). That's probably because you're living at home :-) >> I wouldn't worry about not learning a programming language, they're >> pretty easy to pick up whatever job you do as you seem to have found [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > C# and .NET seems to becomming popular. Yes, they certainly seem to be. I wouldn't worry though, most sensible employers would rather employ someone who has potential to learn different langauges quickly rather than someone who has done an 8 lecture course on a specific language that they use. >> more having done a degree than not having done one, although >> obviously there are exceptions. Just don't work for the government [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > My sister's a qualified accountant and she didn't got to uni. She's > probably got the potential to earn as much as me though. Ah yes - finance :-) Lots of people who did Engineering went to finance, because they do get lots of money. If all you're interested in is money then go and work in London for a bank, but I suspect you will find it *very* boring. I suspect you would have potential to earn more going into finance with a degree than without one though. > I can see myself doing further study after uni, this course seems > completely different to the course at Cambridge etc. I'd really like > to learn more than the basics of comp sci. The good thing about CompSci as a subject is that there is massive amounts of information on the internet. Read up on it, start coding some software that you can show future employers to demonstrate what you can do - they will like that a lot. Also bear in mind that most employers won't know what exactly is covered in your degree. > "scott" <spam@spam.com> wrote in message > > Planning to work at McDonalds or something when you drop-out then? > > ;-) [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > There's very little that I've learnt, the pace usually feels pretty > slow and it's quite boring. That sounds very very wrong, what course you doing, what university, how long you been there? In my first year at uni (general engineering) the only bits I had done before were bipolar transistors and moments of inertia. The rest was new and that majority of people found a lot of the work pretty taxing. I doubt you'd find anyone on my course at the end of the first year who would say "they'd hardly learnt anything". Most (me included) were saying it was "ba****d hard" and were having trouble understanding things like using complex numbers in circuit analysis, calculating power factors, using virtual work to find out forces in structures, being able to derive the equations of motion for a 3D body, all of thermodynamics(!) etc etc > > "scott" <spam@spam.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > That sounds very very wrong, what course you doing, what university, how > long you been there? Computer Science at Reading Uni. > In my first year at uni (general engineering) the only bits I had done > before were bipolar transistors and moments of inertia. The rest was new [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > virtual work to find out forces in structures, being able to derive the > equations of motion for a 3D body, all of thermodynamics(!) etc etc I did quite a bit in my A-levels. The main problem is that the lecutures are rubbish, a lot of our lecturers are foriegn and hard to understand. A lot of it's also coppied straight from books and I can read the stuff quicker. I could learn a lot more by not going to the lectures. >>> "scott" <spam@spam.com> wrote in message >> [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] > read the stuff quicker. I could learn a lot more by not going to the > lectures. I suspect you might be right, I didn't learn *that* much in lectures compared to supervisions or when I was revising for exams. However, as I'm quite lazy, I would just stay in bed or go to the pub instead of working, so lectures were a good way of forcing me to listen for an hour and even if I only understood 25% of it it was worth it. Some of the electronics lectures I would skip because it was all about bipolar transistors and I knew what was coming in the following lectures (we were given hand-outs for 3 or 4 lectures at a time). All of our notes were pretty good though, I don't remember having to get a text book ever to understand anything. >>>> "scott" <spam@spam.com> wrote in message >>> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >>>>> Getting a good degree is an opportunity to show to future employers >>>>> that you are capable of learning agreed > and understanding debatable *lots* of new (1,2 10e8?) >>>>> information and ideas. Info agreed - ideas, maybe not so many. > If I'm looking at your CV, I wouldn't know >>>>> or care if you're the cleverest person in the world, well you may not know, but you should care (ie be able to recongise, greatness. Maybe that asking a lot of you/anyone though). >>> if someone >>>>> else has a good degree and you haven't, your CV is going in the >>>>> bin. Bad judgment capabilities. There are other factors too. >>>>> 95% of what I do at work I didn't learn at uni, poor uni or good job? >>>>> presumably my employer chose me for the job because they believed I >>>>> would be best at learning the skills required. Perhaps no-one else would take such low pay :-) >>>>> Your choice, but I >>>>> recommend you finish uni and understand why you should do! >>>> >>>> Nope, it's just a piece of paper, Stupid comment! So is a banknote "just a piece of paper". >>>>> or a qualification. When I >>>> started uni I thought I'd lean lots of new information and ideas, >>>> but I haven't. My A-levels demonstrate this, but at uni I've >>>> hardly learnt anything. How can your A level possibly demonstrate that you "thought I'd lean lots of new information and ideas"! >>>> A lot of my degree I already knew from >>>> A-levels etc. There's very little that I've learnt, the pace >>>> usually feels pretty slow and it's quite boring. Pathetic degree then. >>> That sounds very very wrong, what course you doing, what university, >>> how long you been there? >> >> Computer Science at Reading Uni. Say no more squire. Try Cnere Parcs nex time. >>> In my first year at uni (general engineering) mmmmmm >>> the only bits I had >>> done before were bipolar transistors and moments of inertia. "bits" - you don't sound that educated even now. >>> The >>> rest was new and that majority of people found a lot of the work >>> pretty taxing. I take it back - you sound like someone who knows how to work and learn - just don't use "bits" like that again :-) >>> I doubt you'd find anyone on my course at the end of >>> the first year who would say "they'd hardly learnt anything". Most >>> (me included) were saying it was "ba****d hard" and were having >>> trouble understanding things like using complex numbers in circuit >>> analysis, calculating power factors, COmplex number are beautifully elegant - but power factor are boring (important but boring). Just remember capacitive i leads and inductive <go on fill in the word here> an that's it <big grin> >>> using virtual work to find out >>> forces in structures, being able to derive the equations of motion >>> for a 3D body, all of thermodynamics(!) etc etc Now thermodynamocs IS boring. >> I did quite a bit in my A-levels. That bit word again! >Some of the electronics lectures >I would skip because it was all about bipolar transistors and I knew what >was coming in the following lectures (we were given hand-outs for 3 or 4 >lectures at a time). All of our notes were pretty good though, I don't >remember having to get a text book ever to understand anything. Just do some FET analysis - that'll challenge you. zzzzzzzzzz ps I *probably* have more *real* science degrees than both of you but I still stack shelves as I'm over 50 and can't even get an interview let alone a real job. There - feel free to give me a good kicking chaps. >>>>> "scott" <spam@spam.com> wrote in message >>>> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > (1,2 10e8?) Can you really put a number on how much information you have learnt? >>>>>> information and ideas. > > Info agreed - ideas, maybe not so many. Fair enough, I guess with each idea you learn a lot of information, so there's always going to be more info than ideas. >> If I'm looking at your CV, I wouldn't know >>>>>> or care if you're the cleverest person in the world, > > well you may not know, but you should care (ie be able to recongise, > greatness. Maybe that asking a lot of you/anyone though). Well you would have to balance up how many people you can interview and how long you are going to spend interrogating each candidate (whether that be test, interview, chat etc etc). Obviously interviewing 1000 people for 10 seconds each won't work very well, nor will interviewing the first person only for several hours. Taking into account their degree performance is a *quick* way of measuring how good they are (maybe not very well), but it is quick, it allows you to interview more potential candidates. >>>> if someone >>>>>> else has a good degree and you haven't, your CV is going in the >>>>>> bin. > > Bad judgment capabilities. There are other factors too. I (as an employer) can't afford to actually talk to everyone who sends me a CV. I need a quick way to get rid of most of them. I'll take the chance that I lose the cleverest person there, but I can't afford to not take that chance. >>>>>> 95% of what I do at work I didn't learn at uni, > > poor uni or good job? Pretty good job, although my degree was Engineering and although my job is technically a mechanical design engineer, it is heavily based around optics, which I only had A-level physics experience of. My degree probably helped with the mechanical design work I do, but a lot of the other bits and pieces I do (software, optics, structural analysis) I didn't do at uni. I doubt I'd ever find a use in my current job for most of what I learned in my degree though. >>>>>> presumably my employer chose me for the job because they >>>>>> believed I would be best at learning the skills required. > > Perhaps no-one else would take such low pay :-) :-) I suspect I was earning above average for a graduate when I started. >>>>> A lot of my degree I already knew from >>>>> A-levels etc. There's very little that I've learnt, the pace >>>>> usually feels pretty slow and it's quite boring. > > Pathetic degree then. Sounds like it, but how else are the government going to get whatever% of people to get degrees? People aren't going to suddenly get cleverer. >>>> That sounds very very wrong, what course you doing, what >>>> university, how long you been there? >>> >>> Computer Science at Reading Uni. > > Say no more squire. Try Cnere Parcs nex time. :-) >>>> In my first year at uni (general engineering) > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > "bits" - you don't sound that educated even now. I say "bits", because they were very small parts of our overall course. We had about 16 different lecture courses over the first year, and bipolar transistors were only part of the linear circuits course, and moments of inertia were only part of the mechanics course. >>>> The >>>> rest was new and that majority of people found a lot of the work >>>> pretty taxing. > > I take it back - you sound like someone who knows how to work and > learn - just don't use "bits" like that again :-) Sorry :-) >>>> I doubt you'd find anyone on my course at the end of >>>> the first year who would say "they'd hardly learnt anything". Most [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > (important but boring). Just remember capacitive i leads and > inductive <go on fill in the word here> an that's it <big grin> lags? I don't remember much, did it in the 2nd year and didn't do any electrical modules in 3rd or 4th year. I just remember having to do power factor correction and why it's useful. I quite liked power electronics actually, it was nice working out the currents when they were in thousands of amps :-) >>>> using virtual work to find out >>>> forces in structures, being able to derive the equations of motion >>>> for a 3D body, all of thermodynamics(!) etc etc > > Now thermodynamocs IS boring. A lot of people on my course felt the same way. The practicals with gas engines and diesel engines were good fun though! >> Some of the electronics lectures >> I would skip because it was all about bipolar transistors and I knew [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Just do some FET analysis - that'll challenge you. We did FETs in the 1st year at uni (before we did bipolars actually), I had done a small "amount" of work with them in my A-level electronics course so I had a little head start. But as usual with our courses, they soon accelerated way past A-level and way past what most people were happy keeping up with! I quite enjoyed analysing the transistor circuits though, I guess because I found it quite easy. > ps I *probably* have more *real* science degrees than both of you but > I still stack shelves as I'm over 50 and can't even get an interview > let alone a real job. There - feel free to give me a good kicking > chaps. What jobs have you done for the rest of your life? Don't you have some technical experience that an employer would be interested in? IME the older you are the more employers look for experience rather than academic ability. >> I think it's irresponsible to take a complete beginner out on the >> road full stop. Take him to an empty car park and teach him basic >> clutch control etc then take him out on the road. > I understand what Bitsy was saying, but I think you're right in what > you're saying. An empty carpark would be a good place to practice in. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > give him an idea how to steer etc, and if the carpark's empty then > it'll be pretty safe. When I was 15, in Sheffield, there was an off-road "early driving centre" on an old airfield (at Norton, for anybody round the area). You could go along, pay a small fee, and drive your parent's car around with them supervising. The road layout was complete - roundabouts, parking bays, give way lines (although I don't recall traffic lights). They also ran a course on saturday mornings - three hour sessions, three kids to a car with an instructor, alternating between back seat and driving, so you not only learned from your own mistakes but from those of others. No kid of mine would first drive a car on the road - it's downright irresponsible, unfair to both other traffic and the poor kid. > When I was 15, in Sheffield, there was an off-road "early driving > centre" on an old airfield (at Norton, for anybody round the area). [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > No kid of mine would first drive a car on the road - it's downright > irresponsible, unfair to both other traffic and the poor kid. Always a good option. I was driving at Tockwith driving centre (near York) from the age of 13 - similar to Norton, they had full road layouts, so I was able to drive relatively competantly on my 17th birthday on real roads, passing my test 3 weeks later. John. > Again, they are not aware of the HC, the dazzling effect of fogs (esp. > rear) or why they have got fog lights. If a driver is this bad at judging > road conditions, they need to be watched. I can't say I've ever been dazzled by front fog. > > Again, they are not aware of the HC, the dazzling effect of fogs (esp. > > rear) or why they have got fog lights. If a driver is this bad at judging > > road conditions, they need to be watched. > > I can't say I've ever been dazzled by front fog. Peugeot 406's have big & bright front fogs, they're annoying. > Peugeot 406's have big & bright front fogs, they're annoying. I used to have one of those. Never used the fog lights and that was after 100,000 miles and 2 years. I had to replace one of them after it was hit by a stone; cost me 45 quid. I'd have been better off without them. :-( > > Peugeot 406's have big & bright front fogs, they're annoying. > > I used to have one of those. Never used the fog lights and that was > after 100,000 miles and 2 years. I had to replace one of them after it > was hit by a stone; cost me 45 quid. I'd have been better off without > them. :-( £45, that's nowt, Toyota wanted £165 for a new foglight for my car. Got a 2nd hand one but it's never been installed yet cos I have no chance of getting the rusted screws out!! Will need drilling out... > > > Again, they are not aware of the HC, the dazzling effect of fogs (esp. > > > rear) or why they have got fog lights. If a driver is this bad at [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Peugeot 406's have big & bright front fogs, they're annoying. On our Peugeot 406 the front fog lamp switch can be left permanently in the 'ON' position, which means that they will automatically come on as soon as you switch on the sidelamps, even if you did not intend to use the fog lamps. To my mind this is a bad arrangement but Peugeot have (typically) shown no willingness to take the point on board for future design purposes. Best wishes all. Dave - alias TripleS. SignatureAny opinions expressed are the author's personal ones only and do not represent the official position of MDK Consultancy Ltd. > On our Peugeot 406 the front fog lamp switch can be left permanently in the > 'ON' position, which means that they will automatically come on as soon as > you switch on the sidelamps, even if you did not intend to use the fog > lamps. To my mind this is a bad arrangement but Peugeot have (typically) > shown no willingness to take the point on board for future design purposes. Not on my 02 model they didn't. They were also disabled if auto lights were enabled. From what I remember it was one twist for front and another twist for front and rear, the opposite to turn them off. Reset when the main lights were turned off. I'm pretty sure almost all new cars these days reset the fogs when the main lights are turned off. All the one's I've had do. > > On our Peugeot 406 the front fog lamp switch can be left permanently in the > > 'ON' position, which means that they will automatically come on as soon as [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > another twist for front and rear, the opposite to turn them off. Reset > when the main lights were turned off. Our W reg. 406 has sidelights and headlights controlled by the outer ring, and fog lights controlled by an inner ring on the stalk. The inner ring three positions are off, front fogs, front and rear fogs. Switching off the sidelights only takes the fog light ring back to the front fogs position, and that is the fault to my mind. > I'm pretty sure almost all new cars these days reset the fogs when the > main lights are turned off. All the one's I've had do. Well that is good, and it should help to cut out some of this incorrect fog lamp usage. By the way Mr Silk, what model of 406 did you have? Take care all, Dave - alias TripleS. SignatureAny opinions expressed are the author's personal ones only and do not represent the official position of MDK Consultancy Ltd. > By the way Mr Silk, what model of 406 did you have? HDi 110 GLX. > > By the way Mr Silk, what model of 406 did you have? > > HDi 110 GLX. OK, thanks for that. Apparently the HDi 110 engine was not available in our Rapier, which is a pity, as there seemed to be no penalty in terms of fuel consumption compared with the HDi 90. Best wishes all, Dave - alias TripleS. SignatureAny opinions expressed are the author's personal ones only and do not represent the official position of MDK Consultancy Ltd. > > On our Peugeot 406 the front fog lamp switch can be left permanently in the > > 'ON' position, which means that they will automatically come on as soon as [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > I'm pretty sure almost all new cars these days reset the fogs when the > main lights are turned off. All the one's I've had do. My latest shape Honda Accord doesnt reset the front fog lights automatically. Forget to turn them off at the end of a foggy journey and they're back on again the next time you turn the headlamps on. You do get a light on the dashboard though so it's pretty easy to spot. > My son took his first driving lesson a few days ago and we got into a > discussion about anticipation and observation. I was trying to get > across to him how small clues can help him with a driving plan. We > talked about excessive fog light users. Gawd help us, I hope you've learned how to prioritise risks before talking to him! > 1.. They think it looks good. > [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > rear) or why they have got fog lights. If a driver is this bad at > judging road conditions, they need to be watched. I see far more people driving dangerously with no fog lights than I do with fog lights. Therefore getting your son to pay special attention to fog light abusers is a bit silly. Get him to look out for the way they're driving and road positioning etc etc, not which lights they've got turned on! <snip> > I see far more people driving dangerously with no fog lights than I do > with fog lights. Therefore getting your son to pay special attention > to fog light abusers is a bit silly. Get him to look out for the way > they're driving and road positioning etc etc, not which lights they've > got turned on! Driving with fogs on in good weather is a great clue to the type of driver in the car. A good driver will take clues like this into account when coming up with a driving plan. MrBitsy > <snip> > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > in the car. A good driver will take clues like this into account when > coming up with a driving plan. Thats a rather gross generalisation... >> <snip> >> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Thats a rather gross generalisation... Your point being? I see a driver with fogs on, in good weather - thats good enough for me to give them a little more attention. MrBitsy. > I see a driver with fogs on, in good weather - thats good enough for me to > give them a little more attention. That's almost, but not quite, entirely wrong. At least someone who thinks fog lights are trendy will be awake and probably interested in driving. What about the numpties who couldn't even find the fog-light switch or who have more important things to do stare at their fingernails or muse over what they want for dinner? SignatureScott Where are we going and why am I in this handbasket? Oddly enough in my Ford the fog lamps are on a rotary switch that you can also pull out one notch to put the front fogs on (once the headlights are on) and another notch to put the rear fogs on as well. This switch below the steering wheel out of the line of sight and at night there are several lit up emblems around the circumference to show the various positions of the switch. With front fogs on, you have six lit up similar symbols around the switch instead of five and you would probably not notice the extra one on. It is only when you put the rear fogs on that you get the orange warning light in the console. With this rather poor design it would be easy to forget the front fogs are on, although I haven't actually done it. > Oddly enough in my Ford the fog lamps are on a rotary switch that you can > also pull out one notch to put the front fogs on (once the headlights are > on) and another notch to put the rear fogs on as well. This switch below [snip] On 'er indoors P-reg Escort both front & rear fogs are controlled by two latching push switches, again, hidden by the steering wheel and down low. The switches have lights in, but you've got to crane your neck to see them. Twice now the switches have been presumably knocked by a passing knee as one of us has got in resulting in fogs coming on next time the lights do. Ruddy stoopid design. I only spotted the rear being on last time as I happened to be glancing in the mirror at a receeding road sign and wondered where that brighter than normal red light was coming from. SignatureScott Where are we going and why am I in this handbasket? > Oddly enough in my Ford the fog lamps are on a rotary switch that you can > also pull out one notch to put the front fogs on (once the headlights are [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > light in the console. With this rather poor design it would be easy to > forget the front fogs are on, although I haven't actually done it. Sounds like you might have a light out. I've got a Mondeo, with exactly the same switch arrangement. When you pull it out to one notch (front fogs), there's a huge green light that comes on in the dash. The second notch (rear fogs) has a big orange light that comes on. Pete. SignatureNOTE! Email address is spamtrapped. Any email will be bounced to you Remove the news and underscore from my address to reply by mail > > Oddly enough in my Ford the fog lamps are on a rotary switch that you can > > also pull out one notch to put the front fogs on (once the headlights are [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > in the dash. The second notch (rear fogs) has a big orange light that comes > on. No there is nothing for fogs (not even a blank) on the console and on checking, the warning next to the switch is even worse, it is half illuminated when the car lights are on and full when the fogs are on. Now that is daft. I am tempted to swap the fogs switch wires around so first notch is rears plus warning, second is fronts. I can think of more times when I want the rears on than the fronts. >> I see a driver with fogs on, in good weather - thats good enough for >> me to give them a little more attention. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > even find the fog-light switch or who have more important things to do > stare at their fingernails or muse over what they want for dinner? Short of a flashing sign with, 'Trendy pillock, but otherwise a good driver', on the roof, I will regard all of em as suspicious! MrBitsy > Short of a flashing sign with, 'Trendy pillock, but otherwise a good > driver', on the roof, I will regard all of em as suspicious! :-) SignatureScott Where are we going and why am I in this handbasket? > At least someone who thinks fog lights are trendy will be awake and > probably interested in driving... ... as fast as they can, while looking cool and showing off how loud their stereo can go. But not actually giving a toss about safety. SignatureStevie D \\\\\ ///// Bringing dating agencies to the \\\\\\\__X__/////// common hedgehog since 2001 - "HedgeHugs" ___\\\\\\\'/ \'///////_____________________________________________ > >> <snip> > >> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > MrBitsy. From a safety point of view I would want drivers coming the other way to give me a good level of attention. Especialy if they're about to make a right turn, overtake or could otherise be fiddling with their radios, looking at the countryside etc. Perhaps I should keep my front fog lights on? <snip> > Therefore getting your son to pay special attention > to fog light abusers is a bit silly. Get him to look out for the way > they're driving and road positioning etc etc, not which lights they've > got turned on! Indeed, road positioning is an excellent clue to take - as are fog lights. I gave many reasons why fogs could be on in good weather and why they are useful clues. Of course, fog light usage will be lower on the scale of things I will teach my son - anticcipation and observation will be at the top. MrBitsy. > <snip> > > Therefore getting your son to pay special attention [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Of course, fog light usage will be lower on the scale of things I will > teach my son - anticcipation and observation will be at the top. Ah good, just make sure you don't teach him to specifically look out for too many things right down the bottom of the scale, eg people hiding in ditches :-) There must become a point where something down the bottom of the scale isn't worth mentioning. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.