sorted by: new top controversial old
[-] ZJBlank@lemmy.world 8 points 3 weeks ago

You’re right, it’s intended to compensate for extra sag of the rear suspension, but if I don’t need them aimed up then I might as well keep them down so as not to dazzle any oncoming drivers

[-] ZJBlank@lemmy.world 12 points 3 weeks ago

I fucking wish, we rarely get that here in North America. I had that on my old Mazda 3, and fucking loved it. I’d always keep them angled all the way down in the city with well-lit streets and only angle them up on the highway

[-] ZJBlank@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago

A mirror? How about a licence

[-] ZJBlank@lemmy.world 24 points 3 months ago

I love how the millennial has a beard and man bun lol

[-] ZJBlank@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago

Fuck that was good

[-] ZJBlank@lemmy.world 8 points 7 months ago

This right here is a big part of why I wholeheartedly support the message of this community. There are way too many people behind the wheel who have no business there, are frightfully inept as drivers, but they’ll tell you that they need a car. And they’re probably right. But with more walkable and bikeable cities and better transit, that excuse evaporates, and a drivers licence can be a privilege, and not a necessity.

For what it’s worth, I like my car. I like driving my car. I also drive a truck for a living. But god damn, I’d drive my car a whole lot less if I had better alternatives. My commute is 15 minutes by car or 1.5 hours by bus. The bridge I have to cross on my way to work is car only, no bikes or pedestrians. Working days that can push 14 hours, another three hours of commute by transit is a no go, and I literally can’t bike to work. I like driving, but I don’t want to have to drive.

[-] ZJBlank@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago

I thought this was NCD at first

[-] ZJBlank@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

You're probably right, I’m being too quick to jump to conclusions.

As an aside, I find it a little ironic that most of the world follows ICAO phraseology, yet Canada, home to ICAO’s headquarters, does not.

[-] ZJBlank@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago

That makes a lot of sense, because like I said in another comment, I’d be more likely to interpret that as “taxi into [takeoff] position and hold”, not “taxi to threshold.” Hopefully the change that comes of this is US/Canadian aviation starts using the ICAO standard phraseology.

[-] ZJBlank@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

Interesting, we the same sort of language as the US up here in Canada too, but I always assumed it was the same thing the world over. Is there a website or handbook containing ICAO standard language available somewhere? I’m curious what other differences there are

[-] ZJBlank@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

I couldn’t make sense of anything in that recording, but if you’re right about the tower call, then that sounds a lot more like “taxi into position and hold” than “taxi and hold short of runway.”

[-] ZJBlank@lemmy.world 9 points 9 months ago

Best I have is an old Midland Gun Company double barrel shotgun that belonged to my great-grandfather. Passed through the Birmingham Proof House and bears 1904-1925 proof marks, but doesn’t actually have a date stamp, my understanding is that they didn’t start date stamping until 1921. The company was bought by Parker-Hale and the records were subsequently destroyed in a fire, so I’ve never been able to find out exactly how old the thing is.

view more: next ›

ZJBlank

joined 1 year ago