Safe Speed Forums

I think in any kind of "shared use" facility one has to proceed extremely slowly and carefully with any kind of wheeled vehicle if there are pedestrians about.

This may be OK in "home zones" but where A-to-B transport is a major function such facilities are a bad idea, in my view.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

Hmm I was still 15mph under the limit, and don't expect pedestrians to step out in front of me on a busy road, we'll have to leave that issue there, because we are unlikely to agree on it. Both of our arguments have merit, and there is truth in each [/quote]

As driver - do not expect people to just step out! But they do! One of the reasons why Green Cross Code Man needs to make a come back.! Hedgehogs are useless.



That is true. My lad has completed skid pan and braking lessons. He spent a day on the motorway with me on a quiet Sunday about a fortnight after passing his test to acclimatise to m/way driving.

Drummed it into him to evaluate himself and always seek to improve as well. I want to sleep at night (or as far as am able to with a baby in the house!).

Hmm.. I slow up, use my bell and my voice. You can hear a car engine but you cannot hear a pedal bike. Thus, if sharing space with pedestrian - I tend to warn of my presence by whatever means available. Hmm! 38mph? A470? Was this in the 30 mph bit? You "speedster" you!

Hmm.. I slow up, use my bell and my voice. You can hear a car engine but you cannot hear a pedal bike. Thus, if sharing space with pedestrian - I tend to warn of my presence by whatever means available. Hmm! 38mph? A470? Was this in the 30 mph bit? You "speedster" you! [/quote]

Gosh..me...speed....no Actually it was the bit going down from Storey Arms to the 2nd ice cream van stop, a 60mph zone
Looking at this, I'm wondering to myself if I am more care free on my bike than I should be. Perhaps its all that lycra and rippling muscle that puts me into a sort of 'Top Gun' mode .
Seriously you've all got me thinking now

_________________
'Detritus, get yer stoney arse over ere'

I'm with you Neil. If we slowed down for EVERY pedestrian standing on the edge of the road we would rarely be able to move at all and the pedestrian would probably have to wait forever to find a gap between all the slow moving cars.

Sorry, but bugger the pedestrian in this instance. I see no fault in the speed Neil was travelling and the only person I would feel sorry for, had a collision occurred, would be Neil.

_________________
Ross

Yes I'm a hoon, but only on the track!!!!

Looks like you could be heading for a nasty case of road rash...
Take it easy.

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills

Perhaps he needs to take heed of this article :

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/health ... ory=596428

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

I have to say that shared use paths are pants peds just jaywalk across the bike path and accidents happen all the time, its safer with the traffic.

question for the bobbies How do you determine the furious pedalling bit , ? because I ride fixedwheel I can look like a hotpoint washing machine going downhill and my cadence usually hits around 180rpm

99 times out of a hundred there's a perfect "space and pace" compromise. If you can move out a bit and pass less closely then maybe you can and should maintain speed. In the example in question, 38mph on a bike within a foot or two of moving pedestrians isn't the best plan.

I don't agree with: "bugger the pedestrian", but amazingly it makes little or no difference to any decision that one would properly make. It's pefectly safe and effective to plan not to crash for your own sake.

Hitting a pedestrian at 38mph on a bike is definitely going to hurt. So we do whatever we can to avoid it...

Yes. There's a difficult balance between the likelihood of crashing and a suitable speed. We don't want to slow down to a crawl every time we see a pedestrian within ten feet of the curb, and especially so if the pedestrian appears to be on a steady non-conflicting path. What we do have to be able to do is guarantee to stop in good time for any event that could reasonably be anticipated.

As the "event" tends towards totally inconceivable, we take less and less action to make something imrobable safe. One example I quote is that we don't slow down to a safe speed for a tree that might fall into our path, because a falling tree (under most conditions) is extremely improbable.

But pedestrians near the road side are always a hazard to some degree and the frst best thing to do is provide "lateral" separation. Especiially so on a bike since bikes are close to silent.

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

So it's basically a case of being very careful out there, and if I hit a Ped on my bike it's probably going to be my fault. I can understand this, it's a bit like "steam" giving way to "sail" on water.

Shame motorists* don't do the same for cyclists (ducks, and runs for cover!)

Anyways, in the future I think I'll stick to avoiding cycle lanes, pavements and anywhere else I'm liable to get tangled up in someones legs, the roads seem safer, easier to predict and quicker.

*thought I'd better put a qualifier in - "some motorists"!

Looks like you could be heading for a nasty case of road rash...
Take it easy. [/quote]
Perhaps he needs to take heed of this article :

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/health ... ory=596428[/quote]

I'm glad to say I have an italia saddle that has a central groove for the old wotssits.
Can't say I've ever had problems in this department. A bumpy ride on a bus can set off a reaction

edited for typos

_________________
'Detritus, get yer stoney arse over ere'

But pedestrians near the road side are always a hazard to some degree and the frst best thing to do is provide "lateral" separation. Especiially so on a bike since bikes are close to silent.[/quote]

I totally agree with you, but in this instance, as in many others, giving a bit of lateral separarion is downright dangerous. I'm only on this bit of road for 4 miles, during which my heart is in my mouth The motorists give me NO separation at all . The comment I made earlier about motorbikes was spot on. I love these machines, they look and sound great, but trully terrify me. Mmmm all that leather and power does appeal, but I'm not that brave This road is a godsend for motorists, especially bikers, who absolutely blitz allong on it. So going out a bit is suicide. In a car its a great road. Runs from Penderyn, onto the A470 and down to brecon, as I've said before it was the road Top Gear tested the Focus RS on.

_________________
'Detritus, get yer stoney arse over ere'

Well - most drivers are fairly safe. But, yobs on wheels . .. on bikes, in cars - that needs addressing. Only real way is to invest in REAL policemen.

And a constant nagging about COAST.

My wife once passed a comment to me in a little tiff we had - (she sang it - so think it is from a song... I'll type it as she says it and as she types herself )

"If you were a weapon - I think you'd be a gun
Lethal at close range I guess - mit silencer und stun

But I feel more like a needle - always pulling on the thread
Always making the same point again und vundrin if you heard vot I just said"

Judgement - you can tell when cyclists are having a race or deliberately harrassing by just watching the antics.

Hotpoint washing machine - eh! I still ache after that bicycle course. Fancy trying to make a bloke my age try to ride the darned thing UP the steps......And going down again afterwards - good job it had the right kind of saddle - else my wife would have been in for a shock!

But ... we found out a thing or two about how to pedal furiously ....

Go on give it a go...you get as big a thrill at 50 as you do at 70...

Go for you CBT, they will have you doing 65 on a dual cariage way on a saddle the size of a nan bread....

Plus you get 100mpg and £15 per year VED so it is soooo cheap to start with.

I tried it...have been hooked ever since.

Now I ride the BIG stuff, still cheap though.

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills

Just dug these out for use elsewhere and thought they might be of interest here:

Cyclists killed per annum by other cyclists 1992 - 1996: 5, 4, 6, 9, 5.

Pedestrians killed each year by cyclists 1992 - 2000: 3, 4, 4, 4, 2, 2, 2, 5, 1.

Oh, and most, if not all, of these figures are for the roads and pavements.

Cyclepaths aren't included!

_________________
http://www.itsyourduty.org.uk

I presume your use of the word ‘furious’ is from the much quoted but rarely used offence of wanton and furious driving (includes cycling).
Wanton and furious cycling comes under the Offences against the person act of 1861. This particular part of the act has largely been superceded by the 1988 RTA.and the amended 1991 Act. The offence of wanton and furious driving has to incorporate the occasioning of bodily harm.

It would usually only be used if the other cycling offences under sections 28 RTA 1988 (dangerous cycling) and 29 RTA 1988 (careless / inconsiderate cycling) are not suitable. These offences are only applicable to a ‘road’ so if the incident was not on a ‘road’ and injury was caused, then the ‘furious’ offence could be considered. It could also be considered in cases where serious injury was caused to another person although there was no contact with the vehicle or bike, ie someone injuring themselves by taking necessary avoiding action.

I’ve never had occasion to use it myself, although I’ve had a few for careless/inconsiderate cycling and cycling whilst unfit. All dealt with under the RTA 88 legislation. Careless and dangerous cycling would have the same proof requirement as for the mpv definition under Section 1 to 3 of the road traffic act.

Pedalling 'furiously' ie fast does not come into it, unless wilst doing so you impersonate Djamolidine Abdoujaparov with 400 to go to the line.

_________________
Fixed ideas are like cramp, for instance in the foot, yet the best remedy is to step on them.

Ian

GIZMO WROTE




Don't get me wrong, I've been considering getting a motorbike for a while. A LOT of the lads in work have them and are allways bragging about them. They truly are wonderfull machines, but very unforgiving I could I suppose go for the next best thing - an Arial Attom (as on top ger totally pantsing a motorbike). Still I must say one of the lads has an hayabusa (i think that's how you spell it). It's quite funny actually, this bike is enormous, and he's about 9 stone soaking wet

_________________
'Detritus, get yer stoney arse over ere'

The figures are interesting, but do not represent a real picture without comparison.

I believe that more people are killed each year by individual statistical groups of motorists than by cyclists.
One source actually quoted that more pedeatrians are killed by cars on pavements than cyclists!
Another quotes that more pedestrians are killed by Police vehicles than cyclists!


What is needed is to remember that many of these individuals are drivers AND cyclists. Why is it offensive to ride a bicycle on the pavement whjen you can park your car on the same pavement as it is now "neccessary", and fining a vehicle for "nipping to the shop" is persecution!

If a child or teenager wayches their father (or mother) park on the pavement every day then why should you expect them to have any qualms about cycling on the same pavement?

There need to be clampdowns on this inappropriate behaviour for all users, not just a single group.

That claim is interesting, but does not represent a real picture without comparison.

You'd have to compare the individual statistical groups of motorists with individual statistical groups of cyclists



So why have speed limits and traffic "calming" on the roads?


So why should the police pick on civilian drivers?



AND?


Because cyclists kill pedestrians, remember "Speed Kills".

A parked car has no speed, so can't kill.

Surely the object is to get all cars parked on the pavement, rather than driving on the roads, allowing pedestrians to reclaim the streets in safety?



Yup!

I see lots of nice wide roads which have been reduced so much you can hardly get two bendy road-blockages past each other.

Just so that the pavements can be made as wide as a lane plus a parking bay.

Despite hardly having any pedestrian traffic.



True again.



I could have sworn I'd covered this earlier!

Parking on the pavement is the considerate thing to do:

It allows the bendy road blockages to squeeze down the traffic lane.

And creates a physical safety barrier between the nasty traffic and the dozen double pushchairs and wheelchairs zooming up and down the pavement line-abreast.

Should they all suddenly decide to congretate on that one bit of pavement.


Yup:

Curb those baby carriages and battery powered wheelchairs.

Don't they realise speed kills?

_________________
http://www.itsyourduty.org.uk