Large Scale Central

A tale of two houses

Dave.
That North - South rail link was proposed more than 100 years ago. It even got started South from Darwin and then abandoned many eons ago.

Part of the “hype” used to sell the necessity of building it when it was built, during the rule of the last federal Government, was that, when combined with a greatly expanded deep water port located in Darwin, shipping of goods into and out of Australia from the West, South East and East of Australia would be much faster and less expensive than making the current shipping carriers go right around Australia to deliver and pick up goods.

If that was really a fact that was actually going to happen, then why is it that our Victorian State Government is hell bent on destroying the ecology of Port Phillip Bay by dredging the shipping channels, so that bigger container ships can access Melbourne? Especially when all they will do is further choke the road network in and around our (once) fair city.

Gee, Dave, you mean that we might actually have a debate? I’ve been told for so long that the debate was over, and here you are, suggesting, in a rational manner, that we actually have one.

Thanks for the background, Tony. I was working in the US from late '99 to mid-2003, and was unaware of the (ostensible) motivation for the project.

Do you know if it’s true that US firm Halliburton helped both to finance and manage the construction of the railway?

Steve, we’ve owned six Daihatsus, little Japanese cars no longer marketed here (the tooling’s all been sold to the Chinese). If you add up the engine capacity of all six, you’d get around 5500 cc. There were American V8s bigger than that!

Does having owned this fleet of environmentally-friendly vehicles give me green credentials? Of course not - that’s not why I bought them! They saved us money, money we spent on school uniforms, music lessons, vacations and other good things for kids to have growing up. There’s even a bit left over for Grandpa to pay for trains now that he’s growing senile, but there sure as blazes weren’t any trains around when the kids were growing up.

My guess is I’m hardly the only bloke on this web site who behaved in environmentally-conscious ways long before it became fashionable to do so, for reasons very similar to my own. Anyone who’s shared these experiences will understand why I hold it’s imperative for governments to weigh up BOTH environmental and economic factors when making public policy decisions.

I can live with taxes that pay for a desalination plant and a commuter railroad. I want my kids and grandkids to care about our environment, and I want them to have the kinds of economic opportunities I had. However, I’m disinclined to be spooked into precipitous action by fear campaigns, and I have an aversion to fanaticism of any sort. That includes both environmental Osamas and those who repeat “she’ll be right, mate” like some blind-faith religious mantra whenever an environmental question is raised. With either, debate is impossible, and that’s a worry.

Dave, I think it was easier for you to make a choice to find a more energy efficent vehicle “before it was fashionable”, just because fuel has been consistently higher on that side of the pond. Vehicle manufacturers over there make it a “real” selling point. While over here they say that 30+ is great, but wait I had a Mercury LN7 back in 1990 that got 30 MPG, you tell me 18 years later that there aren’t any ways to make a 4 cylinder engine more effecient?? It’s complete BS… No maybe it’s impossible, however most other technologies - gas/oil furnaces and such are being improved upon, hmmm, makes me wonder if there are any patents out there involving engine designs owned by a 2 or 3 rd party OIL COMPANY!!!

There is also a good reason for some of us to feel screwed with the higher gas prices. Many of us older folks just cannot fold up and squeeze ourselves into these sardine cans they want us to drive and there are some of us that also need more room than that for a driver and 2 bags of groceries.

Warren Mumpower said:
There is also a good reason for some of us to feel screwed with the higher gas prices. Many of us older folks just cannot fold up and squeeze ourselves into these sardine cans they want us to drive and there are some of us that also need more room than that for a driver and 2 bags of groceries.
Good point, Warren. My wife has a Dodge Stratus and I don't even fit in that......and it's considered a mid-size......;)
Ken Brunt said:
Warren Mumpower said:
There is also a good reason for some of us to feel screwed with the higher gas prices. Many of us older folks just cannot fold up and squeeze ourselves into these sardine cans they want us to drive and there are some of us that also need more room than that for a driver and 2 bags of groceries.
Good point, Warren. My wife has a Dodge Stratus and I don't even fit in that......and it's considered a mid-size......;)
Yeah, Mark, I remember. Back in summer 1970, a friend and I did a swing out west (Grand Canyon, Yellowstone, Custer Memorial, etc.) in his new 6-cyl Dodge Dart, which had been marketed as an ECONOMY car! We knew it was time to stop for the day when the engine overheated, which it did regularly.

Believe it or not, even with our high fuel prices (actually, the fuel is cheap, but the taxes are crazy) there’s still a lot of advertising for 4-wheel drive town cars and the like. Hard to believe, with petrol pushing six bucks US per gallon.

Four of the 6 Daihatsus in our fleet were around when we had kids at home, and the two we have now are essentially one-person vehicles. We bought 'em because they were the cheapest way to do what we needed to do - no special virtue in that.

I hear you guys for whom size is an issue. Don’t even think about flying to Australia in an economy-class seat - it’ll make the worst of the Spanish Inquisition seem like party time!

Fat chance I’ll ever get to Australia…though I would like to. But I refuse to cram myself into a flying sardine can. I took my last flight in '02 and I have sworn I would never set foot in an airplane again. To put it bluntly, my bus ride out to Marty’s in '06 was a better experience than flying…and that sucked!

For me, the size of the car isn’t the problem. It’s cars in general. They sit too low. If I’m in a vehicle where my butt is lower than my knees, I can’t get back out…without a lot of effort and agony. Thus I drive a minivan and an F150. Soft cushy couches and easy chairs give me the same fits.

Warren Mumpower said:
Fat chance I'll ever get to Australia..though I would like to. But I refuse to cram myself into a flying sardine can. I took my last flight in '02 and I have sworn I would never set foot in an airplane again. To put it bluntly, my bus ride out to Marty's in '06 was a better experience than flying..and that sucked!

For me, the size of the car isn’t the problem. It’s cars in general. They sit too low. If I’m in a vehicle where my butt is lower than my knees, I can’t get back out…without a lot of effort and agony. Thus I drive a minivan and an F150. Soft cushy couches and easy chairs give me the same fits.


Warren,

You need a vehicle with an ejection seat, push the button and exit! :stuck_out_tongue: :stuck_out_tongue: :smiley:

Warren Mumpower said:
... It's cars in general. They sit too low. ...
Amen, brother. As for HJ's ejection seat ... that's for the mother-in-law ...
Hans-Joerg Mueller said:
Warren Mumpower said:
Fat chance I'll ever get to Australia..though I would like to. But I refuse to cram myself into a flying sardine can. I took my last flight in '02 and I have sworn I would never set foot in an airplane again. To put it bluntly, my bus ride out to Marty's in '06 was a better experience than flying..and that sucked!

For me, the size of the car isn’t the problem. It’s cars in general. They sit too low. If I’m in a vehicle where my butt is lower than my knees, I can’t get back out…without a lot of effort and agony. Thus I drive a minivan and an F150. Soft cushy couches and easy chairs give me the same fits.


Warren,

You need a vehicle with an ejection seat, push the button and exit! :stuck_out_tongue: :stuck_out_tongue: :smiley:


Please post design for ejection seat, preferably with an electrical alternative in case the eject button doesn’t work.

Mythbusters built and tested an ejector seat a while back…

and these sad cases managed to fly 200 feet before ejecting… Zubi
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/US/01/26/airstrip.car.crash/index.html

Zbigniew Struzik said:
and these sad cases managed to fly 200 feet before ejecting... Zubi http://edition.cnn.com/2008/US/01/26/airstrip.car.crash/index.html
No sympathy whatsoever, ya get what you deserve when you F*** with Stupidity!!

my sympathy goes to those who had to collect the bits, and to the families and friends of course, learning to fly has never been easy. Zubi

I couild agree on the workers who have to siff through the wreckage, as for the family, well I don’t believe it’s responsible to give a kid a car like a BMW, Ferrari (local crash by 18 yr old kills passenger). Can’t wait to see how much the parents that bought that car get sued for.

Dave Healy said:
Thanks for the background, Tony. I was working in the US from late '99 to mid-2003, and was unaware of the (ostensible) motivation for the project.

Do you know if it’s true that US firm Halliburton helped both to finance and manage the construction of the railway?

Steve, we’ve owned six Daihatsus, little Japanese cars no longer marketed here (the tooling’s all been sold to the Chinese). If you add up the engine capacity of all six, you’d get around 5500 cc. There were American V8s bigger than that!

Does having owned this fleet of environmentally-friendly vehicles give me green credentials? Of course not - that’s not why I bought them! They saved us money, money we spent on school uniforms, music lessons, vacations and other good things for kids to have growing up. There’s even a bit left over for Grandpa to pay for trains now that he’s growing senile, but there sure as blazes weren’t any trains around when the kids were growing up.

My guess is I’m hardly the only bloke on this web site who behaved in environmentally-conscious ways long before it became fashionable to do so, for reasons very similar to my own. Anyone who’s shared these experiences will understand why I hold it’s imperative for governments to weigh up BOTH environmental and economic factors when making public policy decisions.

I can live with taxes that pay for a desalination plant and a commuter railroad. I want my kids and grandkids to care about our environment, and I want them to have the kinds of economic opportunities I had. However, I’m disinclined to be spooked into precipitous action by fear campaigns, and I have an aversion to fanaticism of any sort. That includes both environmental Osamas and those who repeat “she’ll be right, mate” like some blind-faith religious mantra whenever an environmental question is raised. With either, debate is impossible, and that’s a worry.


I am generally quite quick with the trigger finger when I see this, but I shall back up, take a deep breath, and then let loose, eh?

I LOVE it when someone says how great a motor vehicle is…followed by "I’ve owned six (or a dozen, or more).

I bought this Ford over 38 years ago, the pickup about 18.

Saving money by buying new cars?
I don’t think so.

Did have a local picked up a used Daihatsu, heater core gone.
As in, one tube missing, hoses bypassed.

Nearest one was in Ireland…MAYBE.
Car wasn’t worth putting air in the tyres.

TOC

TOC,

It’s all because of your climate! :lol: :lol:

Curmudgeon said:
I LOVE it when someone says how great a motor vehicle is....followed by "I've owned six (or a dozen, or more).

I bought this Ford over 38 years ago, the pickup about 18.

Saving money by buying new cars?
I don’t think so.

Did have a local picked up a used Daihatsu, heater core gone.
As in, one tube missing, hoses bypassed.

Nearest one was in Ireland…MAYBE.
Car wasn’t worth putting air in the tyres.

TOC


Eh? Where do I say “how great” Daihatsus are? I said “environmentally-friendly”, and that’s because they all got (and get) over 40 mpg when driven sensibly. Around town, 50 mpg is not impossible.

Out of the six, I didn’t mind the two 2-seaters, but the van and the three Charades didn’t (and don’t) work for me. Working the stick shift on a Charade is like changing gears with a pogo stick. However, the Charades were for my wife and our kids, and my wife and two of the four kids still love 'em. Unlike other E-W engines (e.g., early Honda Civics), the 2- and 3-pot Daihatsu engines were easy to work on.

The other two kids see it Dad’s way. These days I drive a Mitsubishi Colt. It would get around 40 mpg, too, except for my driving style, and it’s a much bigger car than the Charade. There’s something to be said for the fuel efficiency of modern 4-cylinder engines.

If you’re saying you got by with a car and a truck while you were married and raising four kids, I take my hat off to you. We couldn’t do that because we felt a responsibility to take care of the kids’ education (all four are college grads). That meant tuition (a lot more affordable here than in the US), textbooks, computers, cars and anything else they needed to finish their studies and face the world debt-free. We bought new Daihatsus instead of 2nd-hand cars because both my wife and I loathe any smell of cigarettes, and Daihatsu was the cheapest new car around.

All the kids worked, which helped, but we shouldered primary responsibility for their education. Whether that was smart or stupid, right or wrong, I neither know nor care. If we had to do it again, and the cheapest new car on the market was a Hindustani Bumbleshoot made in Uttar Pradesh, that’s probably what we’d buy.

I reckon it’s great you’re getting 38 years out of a car. Beats the best I know of by a year, and that was a Datsun 120Y, 300,000+ miles, original gearbox and motor but not much of the original paint. That was a couple of years ago - for all I know, it’s on the road today. The best we could do with the Daihatsus was 14 years for one Charade (the other two are still going) and twelve years for one of the two-seaters.

When I worked in the US from late '99 to mid-2003, I first drove a Chevy GEO (i.e., a Toyota Corolla), then a Chevy Cavalier. I was amazed at the value-for-money of the Cav - less than 12 grand on the road. For a similar-spec car in Oz, change the one to a two and add a few grand. Fair enough, that’s Aussie dollars, but the point is Americans get a much better deal on new cars than Australians do.

I can understand why someone like yourself, hanging on to cars for decades, would be in the minority in a country where new cars are so affordable. What’s wrong with an Impala?

Anything I can fit into in this country new is 30K plus…:frowning: I don’t call that cheap or affordable. I imagine the Caravan will be gone in a year or two, but the F150 will have to be “until death do us part”. And the supposed KIA as an affordable car…is the biggest pile of junk there is on the roads.