Inane ramblings to avoid thread jacking

[toolfan]

hhmm

how to get through to the big educated dummy that I am not talking about engine braking and a quick/emergency/oh shit stop...




I see your bridge comment and raise you a driveway comment

Do you think they should add an excercise titled "how to make a lazy stop for a red light on a secondary road"?  Do you think that the program should be dumbed down to the level, or do you think that is a sufficiently hard skill to master that it needs to be included even for the stronger students?

[jdubbs32584]

Why is it a "lazy stop"?

[Mother]

Do you think they should add an excercise titled "how to make a lazy stop for a red light on a secondary road"?  Do you think that the program should be dumbed down to the level, or do you think that is a sufficiently hard skill to master that it needs to be included even for the stronger students?

No no and no

I am an instructor here at the FD not at Team Oregon so i am not even going to approach policy in that arena

what I do think is that to eliminate the idea of engine braking by teaching a student that to stop is Clutch In/Brakes on

as I believe we are in agreement is Code's technique

is short sheeting the principal operation of a motorcycle

now

it is perfectly acceptable to teach that in an emergency stop

that is a different operation than a regular lackadaisical complacent stop

[Visolara]

its easy.

To stop in the shortest amount of distance possible, pull in the clutch, grab your front brake (not all at once, gradually increasing pressure till you are at your maximum without flipping the bike), and apply some rear brake.  Period.  No re-engagement of the clutch at all, it will only cause you more distractions.

Each and every encounter may have 5 different and just as correct ways of stopping your bike.  You need to figure out which works for you.

Where are we drinking again?

and you all owe me .25

[Mother]

Each and every encounter may have 5 different and just as correct ways of stopping your bike.  You need to figure out which works for you.

sheer brilliance out of the big hairy man monkey

[Visolara]

!

This is actually a pretty cool, and somewhat on recent topic.

[toolfan]

its easy.

To stop in the shortest amount of distance possible, pull in the clutch, grab your front brake (not all at once, gradually increasing pressure till you are at your maximum without flipping the bike), and apply some rear brake.  Period.  No re-engagement of the clutch at all, it will only cause you more distractions.

Each and every encounter may have 5 different and just as correct ways of stopping your bike.  You need to figure out which works for you.

Where are we drinking again?

and you all owe me .25

Spot make the beast with two backsing on.

But - when we teach people new skills, and we ask them to practice -

do we ask them to practice 5 variations, or do we ask them to practice the best way?

A budding motorcyclist will have plenty of time to figure out how to roll to a stop at a light, but before they hit the busy streets - they NEED TO KNOW how to stop quickly, and this is the thing they should practice, or else the skill won't be there when they need it.

[ryandalling]

DO NOT EVER MAKE ME WIKI THINGS!
<quote>
Occam's razor (sometimes spelled Ockham's razor) is a principle attributed to the 14th-century English logician and Franciscan friar, William of Ockham. The principle states that the explanation of any phenomenon should make as few assumptions as possible, eliminating those that make no difference in the observable predictions of the explanatory hypothesis or theory. The principle is often expressed in Latin as the lex parsimoniae ("law of parsimony" or "law of succinctness"): "entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem", roughly translated as "entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity". An alternative version "Pluralitas non est ponenda sine necessitate" translates "plurality should not be posited without necessity".

This is often paraphrased as "All other things being equal, the simplest solution is the best." In other words, when multiple competing theories are equal in other respects, the principle recommends selecting the theory that introduces the fewest assumptions and postulates the fewest entities. It is in this sense that Occam's razor is usually understood. This is, however, incorrect. Occam's razor is not concerned with the simplicity or complexity of a good explanation as such, it only demands that the explanation be free of elements that have nothing to do with the phenomenon (and the explanation).

Originally a tenet of the reductionist philosophy of nominalism, it is more often taken today as an heuristic maxim (rule of thumb) that advises economy, parsimony, or simplicity, often or especially in scientific theories. Here the same caveat applies to confounding topicality with mere simplicity. (A superficially simple phenomenon may have a complex mechanism behind it. A simple explanation would be simplistic if it failed to capture all the essential and relevant parts.) </quote>

On  a side note... Julie came rumbling into the drive a little fast... she gripped a handfull of front brake and a handfull of throttle.... except she forgot to get a handfull of clutch... the result? The back end shot to the left and the front end stayed where it was. Bike on the ground. Nobody hurt... but a lesson learned.

[toolfan]

Why is it a "lazy stop"?

Seriously? 

How about this - define a lazy stop, and an active stop - we'll assume those are opposites... and then we'll work towards how to accomplish each, if you wish.

[desmosome]

Just to stir up the pot a bit....or to add a point....

Czysz told Mo and I once in a "tip session" not to rely on engine braking.

His reasoning.

As conditions change (rpm, gear, speed, etc) engine braking changes.

So for consistency don't rely on engine braking.

seems logical

but I still engine brake

Perhaps as one gets faster this may be a thing one has to unlearn

idk






 

[jdubbs32584]

Seriously? 

How about this - define a lazy stop, and an active stop - we'll assume those are opposites... and then we'll work towards how to accomplish each, if you wish.

You know what, nevermind. I'll go ask to someone else. Thanks anyways.

[toolfan]

You know what, nevermind. I'll go ask to someone else. Thanks anyways.

You are offended by my attempt to start with the basics, but how can we have a discussion, when there is a very real possibility that we have differing definitions?

[krolik]

Where's Krolik?  Victor!  Jump in on this heated debate!!

At work, being productive, unlike the rest of you slackers.

[Mother]

Just to stir up the pot a bit....or to add a point....

Czysz told Mo and I once in a "tip session" not to rely on engine braking.

His reasoning.

As conditions change (rpm, gear, speed, etc) engine braking changes.

So for consistency don't rely on engine braking.

seems logical

but I still engine brake

Perhaps as one gets faster this may be a thing one has to unlearn

idk






 

Czysz is an idea-ist

so as an idea it sounds like a good idea

but

practical application

Spot make the beast with two backsing on.

But - when we teach people new skills, and we ask them to practice -

do we ask them to practice 5 variations, or do we ask them to practice the best way?

A budding motorcyclist will have plenty of time to figure out how to roll to a stop at a light, but before they hit the busy streets - they NEED TO KNOW how to stop quickly, and this is the thing they should practice, or else the skill won't be there when they need it.

ok once again

everyone pay attention

THE IDEA OF ENGINE BRAKING IN THIS SCENARIO IS NOT BEING APPLIED TO AN EMERGENCY STOP

[Betty Rage]