robert gift

I used the term, FAKE. Is it a REAL response to a fire or emergency? No? Then it is a FAKE. I also used "Joy Ride". You expose the public to NEEDLESS risks and annoyance. You impose taking right of way from others. (obligating others to "give" you right of way) You force others to stop and yield and move out of your way. (making others "volunteer" to give way) You blare noise into homes and businesses. As MedicRN stated, you may desensitize the public to sirens. If there or here, it is still wrong. Matters not if some unenlightened bureaucrats made it "legal". My English acquaintances, who had no idea such is done, oppose the imposition. Perhaps they will start an effort to get this "malpractice" stopped. We do need to practice on closed courses to learn vehicle clearances and maneuvering, etc. (We use parking lots and cones.) But emergent driving proficiency can all be gained driving normally and using just a little imagination and thought. And now you also have videos from which to learn.

FAKE runs should NEVER be done. There is no need. We practiced emergent driving just by imagining what we would do at various intersections, congestion, interstate on and off ramps, etc., as we encountered them. So easy. Every drive was a rehearsal. We would NEVER do fake emergent runs, even when participating in MCI exercises and transporting PTs to hospitals. If I ever encountered a fake emergent run, I'd sign a complaint and have a ticket issued to the driver. Years ago, I actually did witness such and the police went to the volunteer firefighter's home and cited him. Just before the court appearance, the DA kindly called and suggested I not make the trip to court. He said he believed every word of my complaint. But the driver and his passenger would lie that he did no such thing and two against one would win. One can overcome their adrenalin just by discussing and being aware of it.

Most drivers are very good and try to help the EV. But at higher speeds with road and wind noise, and stereo playing, they will not hear the siren. Reporting egregious cases and signing a complaint will get a ticket issued to them. Then you must appear in court. If they show up in court claiming a passenger, it will be two against two and they will win unless you have a dash cam. Nonetheless, their receiving the ticket and going to court may get the point across to them. Since I am always paranoid about blowouts or something, I also often create a safety margin by placing the left tires in the right wheel track of lane one and right wheels in the left tire track of lane two. Although when lane 1 is less worn, I stay on the smoother pavement. Why called "kamikaze"?

Another occasion, We came onto I-270 with vehicles backed-up in both lanes moving about 10 mph. Several vehicles in lane 1 moved left, so I had no choice but to go around them on their right. This placed me straddling the lane line. This started other vehicles ahead in the left lane moving left, and those in the right lane moving right. This became an advantageous situation for the EV because I am always concerned about damaging tires from nails and debris on shoulders. Since Hi-Lo is so much more pleasant and less "demanding" than Wail, I used it just as needed all tha way.

No crash, but almost. Clear sunny afternoon years ago. I'm eastbound in lane #2 of three-lane eastbound one-way street. Approaching two-lane northbound one-way street against red signal. Several vehicles in lane 2 of northbound have stopped. They can easily see/hear EV approaching from their left. Guy in van behind those stopped vehicles moves into vacant left lane and passes the vehicles. I'm right in front of him as he accelerates towards me. Am I invisible? I accelerate and avoid his hitting my rear. If possible, I would have called police on him suspecting drunk/drugs. Thought about all that could have happened. (But I always think about all the terrible things that can happen in everything I do.)

They SHOULD NOT fly over civilian areas if possible. But now there are fewer open areas and they cannot avoid it because housing has spread everywhere. Then the new residents have the audacity to complain about the decades-old airfield they moved next to. Did not a crash recently occur north of San Diego? But that may have been unavoidable because the houses were on final approach. Both to avoid needless noise pollution and crashes in populated areas, they should get (fly) away from populated areas as soon as possible.

I would assume dehydration causing elevated BGL and lower BP. Did not know ED is 1 hour. But would have started rehydration en route ground with O2 and recheck all. If one can already have a head start en route vs waiting for helicopter arrival, assessment, packaging, loading and take off, what is the actual difference in ED arrival?

I would never have thought to recheck. I would have trusted my glucometer. Though would doubt family could cause such a rise in BGL from injesting jelly beans. Don't they need time to digest? Why not transport by ambulance rather than helluvaexpensivecopter?

You are quite correct about chasing tornadoes! I chase tornadoes because the voices in my head tell me to! (I have never met a red-blooded American who would not like to do it. Even my Chinese wife likes it.) But in chasing tornadoes I am not needlessly -endangering others by speeding, -barging through red signals taking right of way from deserving others, -inconveniencing drivers to move onto shoulders or up curbs where their tires can be damaged, (Imagine that truck getting a flat tire from a nail for nothing!) -disrupting traffic flow, -possibly causing minor collisions between others' vehicles, -annoying citizens with noise forced into their homes and businesses, etc. When I was learning to fly, I stayed over open farmland. (When chasing, for the safest and best views, I stay southwest of tornadoes.) Would be interesting to knowhat other English citizens think if they knew about these moronic joy rides. So that particular ambulance was not in England? What does it matter? The principle remains the same. It is needless, hazardous, "malpractice".

No. Military aircraft should NOT practice above populated areas. Likewise EV's should not practice in public. What do borders matter? It is wrong here and wrong there. You can easily rehearse, figure out, practice what to do through normal driving. My English friends resent these "Joy Rides", as would I.

The speed limit is already high enough in the tunnel and not worth creating greater risk. The is no passing in the tunnel. BUT, on one occasion traffic was much slower and I would not have minded drivers in lane 1 changing lanes into lane 2. I never want anyone to pull over and stop. Just move over into another lane and keep going. Felt bad when a semi in lane 2 of I-25 pulled onto the shoulder and stopped. On the long gradual upgrade, it would take him a long time for him to get up to speed, expending a lot of fuel and making pollution.

I didn't either until I got into an argument with a firefighter in England.

This is one of two YouTube videos of these fire appliance "practice" runs. This is an ambulance practice run: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oEP0Gvulc-E

Firefighters will practice driving with lights and sirens by doing it on public streets. They are NOT en route to any fire or emergency. Just joy rides in public. My English friends had no idea this is being done. They always assumed a fire truck with its lights and siren operating is on the way to a fire or emergency. Ruffems, I like your concept about purchasing offsets for noise pollution. The city of Denver, whose City and County Building tower bells I play, should be required to make such purchases. (My bell playing is not nearly so bad as it sounds.)

Thanks for the link, Richard. It does not work. Is there another way to read the story? Thank you, Robert

Even my English friends are appalled. They never suspected - how would they know? They had no idea that a fire truck, ambulances, too?, may be speeding down a street with lights and sirens operating, taking right of way from drivers and pedestrians, going through red traffic signals, passing in opposing lanes, imposing noise pollution, on FAKE emergent runs. Do any other countries allow such moronic nonsense?

Interesting that Florida states either shoulder. What does California say? Because of nails and debris, I am always concerned about traveling on a shoulder. Hate to cause others to go onto the shoulder, but the EV certainly can't afford to have a flat. So on crowded, slowed interstates or highways I often find straddling lanes one and two allows best progress and on clean surface. When exiting an interstate, I have sometimes shut down all lights as I signal right and change lanes to the off-ramp. At that time I am below the speed limit, so lights are not required, and I am not causing vehicles ahead to slow and pull over onto the off-ramp. (On I-70, the Eisenhower Tunnel administration wants EVs to turn off emergency lights in the tunnel!)

What about vehicles which pull left? Many do.

On Interstates and multiple-lane divided highways, is it best to travel in lane :2: , or straddle the line between lanes |1 :2: ? Lanes are numbered from inside (center or median) out. |1 :2:3:4| In the US, the law requests that vehicles move right. So I try to travel in |1 : But frequently, |1 : vehicles will move left onto the median shoulder. This is understandable because those drivers can easily see how far over they can go and it is easier than changing lanes right, possibly into other vehicles. (Changing lanes, especially to the right, is the most feared driving maneuver. Parallel parking is the second most feared maneuver.) The EV benefits by not travelling on possible shoulder debris to pass |1 : vehicles which are trying to move right. |1 : vehicles on the shoulder force me to move right. :2: vehicles will usually move right towards :3: So rather than |1 : vehicles changing an entire lane to :2:, they move towards the median and:2: vehicles move right. This opens a path for the EV much more quickly since no one needs to find an opening to change into the other lane. Any thoughts? Thank you.

Is (was) the radio tower too close and would be better located further away? Any news as to why the tail hit the tower? Thanks.

NO patient on board. If you cannot see that the pavement is clear and cannot see potholes or debris, you are driving too fast. Tire manufacturers rated tires at 106 mph, sustained speeds. Rarely can one travel that fast for any length of time. Vehicles are well engineered and can handle such speeds on smooth straight road surfaces. One should NOT be looking at the speedometer to make sure one is not going more than 10 mph over the posted speed limit. One should be paying attention to the road. When you are driving 10 to 15 miles in the middle of nowhere, these speeds are not uncommon.

Yes, in such circumstances, we travel slower just in case something like that ever happens. Aurora, CO Fire Department engine hit a vehicle which ran a red signal. Engine had green signal. Entire family was killed: driver, wife and two children(?). I believe it was found that the driver was drunk. We think of such worst case scenarios and drive accordingly.

NOT AT NIGHT! There may be deer or elk. Plus 100 mph is far out-running the headlights. Bright daytime with excellent visibility. Getting to a patient. No patient on board. Only 25 mph over the posted speed limit. In Montana, there were no speed limits!

Close. Common practice in Colorado, Wyoming, Montana. Most vehicles are engineered for that speed. And tires ARE rated over that speed. But you do want to be gentle on the rig, engine, drive-train and suspension. So none of this on rough roads.

In CA, motorcyclists may travel on the lane markings between other vehicles stopped on the roadway.