HDTV is a sick joke
I could not agree more that HD Television is being wasted in
this country (Publisher’s Letter, September 2008). I am sure that I am not the
only one who is fed up with the unprofessionalism of our so-called "free-to-air"
I note that there is still no HD programming in any newspaper
guides. The people who print the guides probably have good reason though, when
you consider that the networks consistently change programs at the last minute,
making guides useless anyway. The networks can’t even get their own EPGs right
half the time, so what chance do we have?
The Government does not appear to give a toss about this
appalling situation. It will continue unless people get off their butts and
demand change. If not, HDTV will go nowhere as the networks will only put in the
minimum money and time that they need to. The Government is going to cop a
beating if they don’t wake up. When they switch the analog system off we will be
left with a substandard service and they are the ones that will pay the price of
Macquarie Fields, NSW.
Return shot on fuel consumption conversion
As one who has supposedly "shot himself in the foot" (Mailbag,
September 2008, page 4), I would like to make a further comment.
While I concur that Allan Hornsby has performed the maths
correctly, 81 litres is the absolute minimum quantity of fuel required. To make
the maths simple, I rounded the figure up to 100 litres; the additional 19
litres is my reserve.
Perhaps I should have been more explicit in my previous letter
on the subject. It is highly unlikely that either a journey would be exactly
900km or that the fuel consumption be exactly 9L/100km! The aim was to show how
simple it was to use the "fuel consumption" figure. If either mpg or km/L values
are used then the more difficult division process is required (900 divided by 11
). If Allan fills up with exactly 81 litres for his journey, then I
foresee him walking with "can in hand" to the nearest fuel
Hoppers Crossing, Vic.