Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Wed Jul 08, 2020 23:49

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 64 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Sep 01, 2005 15:21 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 13:55
Posts: 2247
Location: middlish
and there was me hoping for 2 pages of constructive discussion on cycling safely :roll:

bit much to hope i suppose


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Sep 01, 2005 16:22 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 00:04
Posts: 2311
ed_m wrote:
and there was me hoping for 2 pages of constructive discussion on cycling safely

#1 tip: Speed limits only apply to MOTOR vehicles (with a few exceptions). So find yourself a nice downhill bit of road with a camera on it and see how often you can set it off. This is not necessarily safe, but it is fun :D especially when you find yourself near one of those motorists who feels obliged to pass you because "you're on a bike so you must be going slowly".


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Sep 01, 2005 20:26 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2005 23:28
Posts: 1940
Capri2.8i wrote:
Until yesterday I was very indifferent towards cyclists but the other day was very much an eye-opener. There were 2 occasions which shocked me. The first was on the A574 heading towards Blackburn where I rounded the corner and found a group of about 25 cyclists riding 3/4 abreast


Sounds like a "critical mass" gathering. These militants see it as pedla power - I see it as deliberate obstruction - und withoout BiB permission - would imagine to be agains law. Perhaps IG or Ian may comment on this point?


Quote:
. Now I don't particularly like it when cyclist ride abreast, but normally its no problem, I just treat them like a car and overtake were I can. However, this group positioned themselves, perhaps on purpose but I'll say accidentally to give them the benefit of the doubt, in a way that meant their total length was about 1 and half times the length of a HGV. They were spaced out, but as they were 3/4 abreast there was no way you could pull back in if you tried to overtake individually. Effectively they created a rolling road block, doing 10mph at best up the hills


:yesyes: sound very much like a critical mass type "protest" They had cheek to criticise M4 protest too :roll:


Quote:
. Now I can appriciate tractors and the like doing this, as they are earning a living and pay tax but to do so as a leisure activity seems to me to be a bit anti-social. I'm not saying people shouldn't enjoy cycling, but the militants give it a bad name who seem to enjoy holding people up.


definitely sound like our muesli munchers. :yesyes:

Quote:
The second occasion was someone who was riding close to the pavement, then suddenly, without a hand signal, a sholder check, or even positioning himself to the centre, turned right, immidiatly in front of me. I was planning, and could so no reason why I couldn't, to overtake him :o .


A very dangerous thing to do. Always indicate and give the over shoulder look. I do so on push bike und on motor bike.

It ist co-operation with other road use and on bike in particular - we make eye contact with others and smile. It work wonders.

There are some very unpleasant individuals on bicycles same as some unpleasant drivers. Ist thos police should concentrate on but :banghead: - we have not enough officer to do this.. :roll:

_________________
Nicht ganz im Lot!
Ich setze mich immer wieder in die Nesseln! Der Mad Doc ist mein Mann! Und ich benutzte seinen PC!

UND OUR SMILEYS? Smile ... und the the world smiles with you.
Smiley guy seen when you read
Fine me for Safe Speed
(& other good causes..)

Greatest love & Greatest Achievements Require Greatest Risk
But if you lose the driving plan - don't lose the COAST lesson.
Me?
Je ne regrette rien
!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Sep 01, 2005 20:45 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2005 13:54
Posts: 134
Location: Hemel Hempstead -
johnsher wrote:
#1 tip: Speed limits only apply to MOTOR vehicles (with a few exceptions). So find yourself a nice downhill bit of road with a camera on it and see how often you can set it off. This is not necessarily safe, but it is fun :D especially when you find yourself near one of those motorists who feels obliged to pass you because "you're on a bike so you must be going slowly".


And I'm being slated for mentioning something I do which is not unsafe, just a bit inconsiderate and then I read that! :roll:

_________________
www.clubrwd.com - For all things rear wheel drive


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Sep 01, 2005 21:53 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 00:04
Posts: 2311
daveyboy wrote:
And I'm being slated for mentioning something I do which is not unsafe, just a bit inconsiderate and then I read that! :roll:


ok, let me rephrase: it's not necessarily safe for the cyclist concerned, not because you're endangering others. On the other hand, if you mistime your swerve into the gutter then you're going to have a cyclist coming through your back window at 20+mph, something that is definitely endangering others rather than yourself.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Sep 01, 2005 22:06 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 13:55
Posts: 2247
Location: middlish
johnsher wrote:
if you mistime your swerve into the gutter then you're going to have a cyclist coming through your back window at 20+mph, something that is definitely endangering others rather than yourself.


something like this?

Image

(note the crease in the froof, thats a write off btw)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Sep 01, 2005 22:37 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Thu May 19, 2005 22:21
Posts: 925
Some good points WildCat. However I would like to think that they are the minority, and certainly in my expierence they are so I won't let it influence my judgement on the majority of responsible cyclists.

Johnsher - Sorry if you thought I was unfairly targetting cyclists, but since it's a thread about cycling it seems appropriate to mention it. I agree with you that there are irresponsible motorists as well, and it should be the police should assist in tackling the small minority of all road usersthat endanger other people's safety as well as their own.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Sep 01, 2005 22:47 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 00:04
Posts: 2311
ed_m wrote:

something like this?


ouch, that had to hurt. Was it a cyclist or a pedestrian? Are they still with us?

Anyway, wrong end of the car.

Capri2.8i wrote:
Sorry if you thought I was unfairly targetting cyclists,


that's ok, it just that it becomes a touchy subject when you have several people try to kill you every day - and then turn around and tell you that you're a menace.

Capri2.8i wrote:
and it should be the police should assist in tackling the small minority of all road usersthat endanger other people's safety as well as their own.

well that would involve police actually being on the roads...
and even if they're on the roads they don't seem to care. I once had Mr Old Duffer try to turn left across me. Miraculously he heard me shout and stopped, leaving me just enough room to squeeze past him. That done, the very next car to come past me was the BiB... now, shouldn't they really have been stopping the old boy and giving him a lecture?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2005 08:38 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 13:55
Posts: 2247
Location: middlish
johnsher wrote:
ed_m wrote:

something like this?


ouch, that had to hurt. Was it a cyclist or a pedestrian? Are they still with us?

Anyway, wrong end of the car.



that was a cyclist.... and that's where the car was parked when he hit it,
(ahem.. in a cycle lane... not that that appears to be illegal)
made a bit of a mess of him too... but back up and pedalling now.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2005 09:23 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 00:04
Posts: 2311
good to hear his ok. Do you know how he managed to ride into a parked car at speed?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2005 10:58 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2005 14:00
Posts: 1272
Location: Near Telford, UK / Barcelona, Spain
johnsher wrote:
good to hear his ok. Do you know how he managed to ride into a parked car at speed?

May one venture to suggest that he was "AST"ing rather than "COAST"ing..?

_________________
"Politicians are the same the world over... We build bridges where there aren't any rivers." - Nikita Kruschev


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2005 11:26 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 13:55
Posts: 2247
Location: middlish
pogo wrote:
johnsher wrote:
good to hear his ok. Do you know how he managed to ride into a parked car at speed?

May one venture to suggest that he was "AST"ing rather than "COAST"ing..?


well i hesitate to admit this due to the resultant backlash:

this was in a race (triathlon) .. so yes obviously he wasn't being as observant as he should have been.
he's a nippy cyclist so knowing him was probably cruising at at well over 20mph.

i'm sure the organisers will have had to answer both to the police and the sanctioning organisation (british triathlon) regards the choice of route, risk assesment, competitor briefing etc.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2005 11:57 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 00:04
Posts: 2311
ed_m wrote:
this was in a race (triathlon) .. so yes obviously he wasn't being as observant as he should have been.
he's a nippy cyclist so knowing him was probably cruising at at well over 20mph.

being a race is not really an excuse, even if it was being run on a closed road you'd still want to be looking where you were going.
As for his speed, it was probably more like 25-30mph. Most of us who do a bit of riding are doing around 20mph just on a normal training ride.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2005 12:01 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 13:55
Posts: 2247
Location: middlish
johnsher wrote:
being a race is not really an excuse, even if it was being run on a closed road you'd still want to be looking where you were going.


don't think i said it was.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2005 12:03 
Offline
User

Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2005 16:12
Posts: 1040
Location: West Midlands
I don't consider this to be a backlash, but we often have what appears to be cycle races on the public roads in our area - they sometimes put up a little sign indicating that a race is taking place, but that is it.

Now I watched the Tour de France on telly (my company sponsors a team) and all roads used for that race are closed while the race is in the vicinity. If a hazard exists in the path of the race (such as an island in the middle of the road) then a marshall will be placed in front of it with a waved flag to warn the racers, and obviously dangerous hardware is padded. If a race is going on, then the competitors are obviously going to be racing with each other, and are going to take a rather liberal interpretation of the road regulations.

My personal opinion is that if an organised race is going to take place on public roads, then proper precautions should take place right up to closing the roads, or at least coning of the sections affected. Racing is illegal on public roads for motor vehicles, and I really cannot see why the same doesn't apply to cycling or running races to. Competitors that are racing cannot possibly be paying the required amount of attention to other road users, and it is therefore inherently dangerous.

The local race route included a busy double carriageway with a U turn on the roundabout at one end, but I haven't seen them since the traffic lights were installed, because even they cannot justify just riding through red lights, and presumably because having a 1 minute lead turned into a 20 second loss because the leader was stopped at a red and second place timed it perfectly for the green light really does ruin the race.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2005 12:15 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2005 13:54
Posts: 134
Location: Hemel Hempstead -
johnsher wrote:
ok, let me rephrase: it's not necessarily safe for the cyclist concerned, not because you're endangering others.


Of course this is endangering others, a motorist may have to take evasive action and could in theory mow down a pedestrian or crash into a lamp post and seriously injure themselves or someone else. What about if you come of your bike and go flying into some old lady walking her dog, she has a heart attack and dies? You've got to remember that you having got the stopping ability of a car plus you're harder to see/hear because 1) You're smaller and 2) You don't have an engine making a noise. Please don't justify unsafe behaviour on the road to me "because its on a bicycle". Its this sort of talk that doesn't talk me out of hating cyclists, it increases the hatred, well done! :roll:

johnsher wrote:
On the other hand, if you mistime your swerve into the gutter then you're going to have a cyclist coming through your back window at 20+mph, something that is definitely endangering others rather than yourself.


You say if I mis-time it, well, I don't, never have and I doubt I ever will, if in doubt, I wouldn't do it, in the same way if in doubt I don't pull onto a main road with a truck coming the other way. I'm far more cautious of cyclists than I am of other situations anyway because 1) Accidents are presumed to be the fault of the motorist by the Police, 2) Cyclists don't generally have insurance, so who would pay for my mashed bumper? 3) No matter who is at fault, I'd still feel guilty about injuring a cyclist 4) The general misbehaviour and loutish behaviour of cyclists warrants extra caution anyway. Remember though, cautiousness and courteous are two different things, like I said, I'm always cautious, and if I'm shown courtesay, I give it back. ;)

_________________
www.clubrwd.com - For all things rear wheel drive


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2005 12:15 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 13:55
Posts: 2247
Location: middlish
Rewolf wrote:
My personal opinion is that if an organised race is going to take place on public roads, then proper precautions should take place right up to closing the roads, or at least coning of the sections affected. Racing is illegal on public roads for motor vehicles, and I really cannot see why the same doesn't apply to cycling or running races to. Competitors that are racing cannot possibly be paying the required amount of attention to other road users, and it is therefore inherently dangerous.


My understanding is that time trials are allowed (even in the RTA?) on the basis of it being solo riders at set intervals.... i.e. no 2 abreast, no bunches. triathlon also gets through on this basis being a solo event with no drafting allowed on the bike.

Road races are much trickier to organise and local ones round here have marshalled junctions & rolling road closures.

edit: ah yes here we go
Quote:
http://www.cyclingtimetrials.org.uk/forms/GN16.doc
Under the current requirements of the Road Traffic Act, riders in time trials must be set off no less than one minute apart. If riders are set off at shorter intervals than one minute the event ceases to meet the legal definition of a time trial and becomes a road race.
Time trials are approved by 28 days notification to the police authorities, whereas road races require police approval.


and...

Quote:
http://www.britishtriathlon.org/index.php?pid=14
Triathlon and the Police
The Police attitude towards triathlon, although improving, is not consistent. It is not clear from the relevant sections of the Road Traffic Act (RTA) how our particular sport should be viewed. Triathlon is neither a cycle road race nor a time trial as defined in the RTA. The implications of this for both mass start and pool based events can cause problems.

Within the RTA there is a clause that allows Chief Constables discretion as to which other events they allow on public roads. Triathlon operates under this clause. Currently the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) recognises the BTA as the governing body of triathlon and duathlon. They recommend to their members that any events not sanctioned by the BTA should not be allowed to proceed on the public highway.

It is since these guidelines were adopted that there has been a significant improvement in the relationship between triathlon and the local police forces. For this improvement to continue it is imperative that all within the sport only organise and/ or take part in safe events that will cause minimum disruption to other road users. The whole BTA sanction procedure is designed to meet this aim.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2005 12:40 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2004 15:43
Posts: 2416
daveyboy wrote:
johnsher wrote:
ok, let me rephrase: it's not necessarily safe for the cyclist concerned, not because you're endangering others.


Of course this is endangering others, a motorist may have to take evasive action and could in theory mow down a pedestrian or crash into a lamp post and seriously injure themselves or someone else. What about if you come of your bike and go flying into some old lady walking her dog, she has a heart attack and dies?

Could just be the way I read johnsher's post, but I thought the implication was that no-one else would be about. It's just about picking the right moment, and AFAIC if it's going to make the Gatso waste a couple of frames each time he can do it all day long and I'd bring him sandwiches :) . Could be I'm wrong and that he does this in traffic and with old ladies around, but by saying it isn't endangering anyone other than the cyclist it sounded to me like this was because there wasn't anyone other than the cyclist.

OTOH cutting sharply in front of a cyclist after overtaking by definiton means that there's a cyclist there. Don't take this the wrong way, but I'd go along with those who feel this isn't such a great idea - and having had a cyclist cost me a few hundred quid in car repairs I'd have more reason than most to do it. Even if you get the timing right every single time and never create any real danger perceived danger might be something else - at worst he might take avoiding action and come off or hit a pedestrian as a result. Not likely perhaps, but much more probably it creates for the cyclist the sort of unnecessary distraction that we bitch about scameras doing for us. If we want to criticize cameras as unwanted distractions it's worth avoiding this sort of thing for that alone IMO.

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2005 12:46 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2005 13:54
Posts: 134
Location: Hemel Hempstead -
Well Gatsobait, you talk much sense, and I suppose you're right about it being an uneccessary distraction to them and point noted.

I laughed about the film being wasted, but I'd personally rather that we got rid of Gatso's by Political campainging or an organisation such as MAD destroying them, but hey.

_________________
www.clubrwd.com - For all things rear wheel drive


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2005 12:59 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
All this motorists are worse than cyclists / cyclists are worse than motorists nonsense really depresses me.

Firstly. Since bad road users are bad road users because of their attitudes and cyclists and motorists are draw from the same population we should expect the proportions of 'bad road users' to be equal unless there's some sort of 'attitude filter' applying to either group. I see no credible or significant attitude filter in operation. It's hard even to come up with a idea for anything that might be a functional attitude filter. Perhaps it's a shame we don't test attitude before granting a driving licence?

Secondly. The one thing that has set motorists and cyclists against one another more than anything else is government policy. It might have been a deliberate strategy to 'divide and conquer', but it was probably just an accident.

So road users should be pulling together for improved road safety policy and better co-operation between all road users groups. And of course we need proper roads policing to deal with those bad attitudes. There's no alternative...

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 64 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.303s | 14 Queries | GZIP : Off ]