Only poor countries with no Defence experience would consider buying it.
We prefer to build our own, for job creation / protection, and to ensure we have control of the technology and the mission systems.
And other things like build quality, correct materials used, true traceability of all the parts etc. etc.

A very interesting letter in the Times last week.

It said that all motorway planning and building had been based on a speed limit of 70 mph. That is to say sight lines, bend angles etc.

I wish I could afford to travel above 70 mph anyway. Fuel is too expensive for me to go dashing around at high speed.

This is another good point. Some of the bends and exit angles on continental roads are clearly wrong for the 80 limit, as are some of the other ergonomics like the signage and also the actual Surface. Have to admit, the British motorway system for this sort of thing is probably the best in the world.

Nashio, yes, you are one of the few. Me too. Because my driving is pootling for a short period then a 500 miler in one day I check my tires regularly, and absolutely before the long trips. One trip on an under/over inflated tyre means new tyre, and mine aint cheap.

The thread is on the behaviour, the performance of the team is another matter.

John G, can’t agree. Just because the players may have an education and good schooling does not render it downwards into horseplay. Getting sh*tfaced in a public bar, jumping off a ferry, ignoring Union rules on sponsorship adverts are not OK for the representatives of any national squad. OK, the latter is minor but it still shows the younguns that laws are made to be broken not respected.

No, if a scally-no-mark did it, then it would be hi spirits.

These Rugby players are role models to a lot of people young and old and they should behave as such. Footballers are of course far worse, and considering the origins of Cricket – some of todays Cricket players are barely above the footballers on a Brainless Yob scale.
If the press ignored it, then some other international press wouldn’t and it would get round You tube etc. anyway.

There is no evidence to believe that will be the case. Actually, the most likely scenario is that they would continue to work under the current guidelines of 10% + 2mph before considering a prosecution. 70+10%+2=79mph btw, and so 80+10%+2 would mean prosecution would be considered at 90mph and above.

I’ve no idea how much Motorway driving you do PPP but I can assure you 85 is a very common benchmark for most fast-lane drivers. Likely scenario is that the Police will book foolish driving at 71mph.
Police seem to ignore 85 unless you are an idiot…tailgating, lane swapping, flashing lights etc.
If the Law was 80, and the rule-o-thumb becomes 90, Police will enforce it because they (And I too) believe it is too fast for a significant amount of drivers, including most males under 24 and anybody over 65. The reaction times are also greatly reduced. Stopping distance at 80 is about 650 feet. At 90 about 800 feet. The reaction time (Say 1 second) will advance 15 feet between 80 and 90.
And most people do not even check tyre pressures regularly, or even the wear until it’s MoT time. Cheaper budget tyres with a rating of R are only rated to 106mph. 90 is too close to that. And, even though Standards are Standards, the very cheap tyres made in China are like most things made in China…absolute rubbish.
This coming weekend I will be driving approximately 1,000 miles; 90% of that will be motorway and all of it will be at early morning or late night. I can happily stick cruise control on at 80 or 85 and be on the inside lane at these times, occasionally overtaking a truck or a caravan. At 90, even my 2 ton car starts to feel light on the steering so what it must be like for the average family car beggars belief. And yes, I do check tyres and lights etc. weekly, even though I could wait to get a Gong when one of the sensors tells me so.

The wet / dry rule as per the continent may or may not work in UK. I’ve driven through Rain for 1 minutes or less. I do think most people actually do slow down in rain anyway though.

Care to explain why?

A random speed, chosen nearly fifty years back. What relevance does this have to anything?

Moggy

You asked me the same question pages back and I answered it.

I don’t think 70 was random, I recall reading somewhere (Or on that BBC4 prog. about the history of motorways) it was related to the stopping distances of vehicles at the time. OK, we can stop in a shorter distance now, but that doesn’t justify an increase. What actually does justify it, 43 minutes in 5 hours? Bear in mind my earlier answer – presently 80 is possibly ignored on M/way if safely driven….but if 80 was law they will Police it with an Iron fist.
30 and 40 mph are equally up for debate (On here). 30 is clearly too fast for shopping / housing areas even with todays better brakes. Some housing streets have a a 20mph sign on them, as I understand it these are a neighbourhood request – not enforceable by Courts? Somebody will know this I’m sure.

I read a remark….
Three Apples changed the World: –
Adam and Eve’s, Isaac Newton’s and Steve Jobs’s.
Indeed, he set the pace for others to follow and will do for some time. “Never give the customer what he wants – give him what he never expected”.
Luckily, as he had several months warning of the end, he literally emptied his mind of the ideas and plans for Apple’s future products into the Enginners. The next suspected breakthrough is a Telly.

On a personal note,
I don’t use a Mac as I learned PC in 1981 and have been stuck with it due to laziness. But every mac owner tells me I’d never go back, once tried.
I don’t have an Ipod because I tested Ipod versus Sony for quality and Sony won (By a long way actually).
I don’t own an Iphone (I get a standard phone for free from work) and I don’t see a need for an Ipod in my life.