Cycling on pavements

The cop car's facing traffic on a one way street is it not ?


Fritz Von Well hidden though innit

quote:

Originally posted by Berlin Fritz:
The cop car's facing traffic on a one way street is it not ?

no, there's footpaths on both sides

(it really is a 2 way street, look at the right side of the hump)

quote:

Originally posted by marvin the paranoid android:
What comfort ios there in putting an untested 'fashion accessory' on your head?

If you think a bike helmet is just a fashion accessory then either you've been looking at the wrong kind or it hasn't fitted you properly. There is absolutely no question that a decent quality, properly fitting bike helmet is a useful bit of safety kit. I live near Glentress and Innerleithen (or Innerlethal as it's known locally) and I know many people who've been spared serious head injuries because they've been wearing a properly fitting bike helmet.

I have to say that to hear someone who alleges to have worked in mountain rescue dismissing the use of safety equipment is quite odd, especially as the mountain rescue people I know use safety helmets where appropriate. In the same way you'd raise the eyebrows when someone is airlifted off Ben Nevis having been caught out with no map/compass etc., I also raise the eyebrows when I hear of someone being airlifted to hospital from the Seven Stanes to receive treatment for a serious injury to their helmetless head...

Marvin

quote:

Cycling on a sidewalk is sometimes the only way that safe progress can be made.

What about actually obeying the law and getting off your bike out of respect for the pedestrians?

This type of argument illustrates to me purely selfish reasoning i.e I'm not safe/happy on the road so I will ride on the pavement and if I annoy/injure a pedestrian it's not my problem.

Doug

To those of you who can't understand cycling on the pavement I say go back and look at the third photo posted by John Sheridan above. Typical of many UK High Streets don't you think?

No imagine cycling through it - people stepping into the road because they can't hear you coming, motorists overtaking you unnervingly close because they's rather hit you than the oncoming traffic, people flinging doors open in your path, people double-parking to drop off kids. In short a veritable arsenal of hazards that anyone on a bike has to face. Would you want your teenage child cycling along there?

Now imagine that the lane where the car is parked has been turned into a dedicated and segregated cycle-lane. Result is that cyclists aren't tempted to use the pavement, the pedestrians are happy, in fact everyone is happy because the high street has less smelly exhaust fumes. The motorist can park and walk, it would be good for them.

It wouldn't have cost as much to do as putting in the fancy tiled parking area I'm sure but it would make a huge difference to everyone so why won't local authorities do it? Why all the hot air and bluster about reducing traffic congestion but so little action? I have recently written to both Runnymede and Windsor council on these very issues, I am waiting to see if I receive the courtesy of a reply. I'm sick of hearing politicians talk about this and do so little. Painting short stretches of cycleway on the road which end after 100 yards and calling it a national cycle network just isn't on!

It really peeves me!

Jonathan

quote:

Originally posted by Tarquin Maynard-Portly:

Third Picture - cars parked in a parking spot - FFS thats a disgrace..

It's not particularily clear from that picture but I think where the car is parked is part of the pavement and not an official parking bay. If those were parking bays I don't think there would be a single yellow line outside of them.

quote:

Originally posted by andy c:
Hey Dom,
You have a certain amount of angst flying around at the mo!

Damn right - I'm like this EVERY summer - a) 'cos I can't handle heat over 16 degrees C (high metabolism) and b) 'cos I'm stuck in this dive with recirculated air, and too much heat, while the sun's out outside. Grrrrrrrrr!

Seriously though, any cyclist who moans about the roads being unsafe, and thinking it's their god-given right to hog up the pavement needs shooting. When it's too cold to cycle I walk, and have to deal with those celfish sunts on a regular basis.

You'd be amazed what a folded-up guide cane lobbed through someone's front wheel will do to their ride. Been there done that - and don't feel guilty!

Maybe they should allow bikes to play along Heathrows runways as well, it's about as logical, innit.


Fritz Von Helmets for helmuts

Fritz,

They wouldn't to do that with me landing there!

Jonathan

Maybe Narita would be better ?

quote:

Originally posted by Tarquin Maynard-Portly:

So, at least your argument has evolved: "Its OK to cycle on the pavement because some cars park there."

Actually, I've never said it was ok to cycle on the footpath, only that I understand why people do it (and in case you're wondering, no I don't do it myself, and yes I do obey all road rules while cycling).

quote:

Errr, the point here??

the point is that the cars pictured taking up far more footpath space than a single, 'selfish' cyclist and yet you are now defending their right to block the footpath - just remember not all 'legitimate' footpath users are on foot, what about people in wheelchairs, and parents with strollers? Still I guess like motorists running red lights (only saw 4 today), I guess it must be ok because everyone does it.

All you people whining about a few cyclists on the footpath have obviously never been in Paris when the Metro is on strike. Pedestrians have to try to avoid being mown down by Motor Bikes driving on the pavement.

In case you want to know, I was based at RAF Valley, in North wales for 5 years and RAF Leuchars for 4 years. RAF Valley was the location of the first search and rescue teams in the UK, and when i was there in the late '70s and mid 80's we celebrated our 40th aniversary. Unfortunately the team was disbanded when Valley was effectively privatised. RAF Leuchars is the south of scotland MRT, and is responsible for the area south of the great glen, sharing most of the best climbing areas with RAF Kinloss.
I've spent many a day and night searching for people on mountains all over the uk and have never critised anyone for being on the hill when the press have held up their hands in horror.

For the record, I have ridden 'rough stuff' for many years without a helmet, have fallen off many times and have never banged my head, certainly before mountain bikes came on the scene. I climb up to E2 5c, on an outcrop I will not wear a climbing helmet as it is uncomfortable and the objective dangers are minimal. On a big mountain route, such as sassenach or the bat on the Ben, or such as the needle on the sticilShelter stone crag for the unaware) in the cairngorms, I have worn a 'bonnet', especially if other parties are on the route before me. I will always wear a helmet ice climbing, as the objective dangers - falling rocks, ice screws or your mates ice tools on your head not to mention getting a constant stream of snow, ice and melt water down the back of your neck - are so much greater.

That is the rub of it, it is down to experience and judging and reacting to objective dangers. Cycling has very few, especially as if you can slow down a bit and regain control then there is no need for the bit of plastic on the bonce. Even less on the road, a nice bit of coloured plastic is hardly going to do you much good if you bounce of the front - or back - of a heavy metal object, too much energy to absorb I'm afraid.
If anyone wishes to wear such an object then that fine, just as if someone wants to approach Ston corrie nan lochan from a meeting of three waters (Glen Coe, part of Bidean nan bian the highest mountain in Argyll), because it looks nice from there, wearing the clothes and shoes they have just driven there in. Oops, the white stuff really is slippery isn't it.
However, I object most strongly when I'm told to wear such an object. Until recently the BMA were against compulsion, and hopefully the CTC and other groups will keep it so. After all, where will it stop? Will all those who insist on compulsion be up for wearing knee and arm sheilds next? When I look at the state of my knees from last weekends unsoliceted stoppie perhaps we should be wearing full body armour. Oh, what about walking down the street, tripping over a kerb or falling over a crack in the pavement, and with all these claims for compensation, perhaps you'll be getting arrested for stepping out of your bed not wearing your styrofoam protective body armour.

And don't get me started on smokers and drug addicts.

If anyone is still awake after this, perhaps the message is to mind your own business, let other people get on with their life and get on with your own. After all, part of the enjoyment of the outdoors is the risk, appreciate the hazard and reduce the leven of risk to what is personally acceptable.

See you on the hill, if you're lost.........

Born to climb, forced to work

A busy high street may be full of potential hazards but one simply rides appropriately. Meaning you ride on the "high side". You take your rightful place on your side of the crown of the road. Any car wanting to overtake you would be travelling too fast for the conditions. So you simply ignore those following you and ride at a safe speed.

You are now well away from the odd suicidal pedestrian and suddenly-opening car door. You can safely avoid vehicles approaching head-on who take your side of the road as their own. You simply drift nearer the gutter out of their way. But only temporarily. As soon as the moron is out of your way you can resume the safe position on your side of the central white line.

As soon as you have ecaped from the hazardous area you quickly return to the usual position on the side of the road and proceed at your normal pace. Any following cars can then increase their speed and pass you with enormous relief that they haven't lost more than 32.0107564392 seconds on their daily journey from A-B that just happens to involve their usual High Street rat-run. Which saves them 47.17432 yards and one set of lights. But then there isn't usually a madman on a bicycle hindering their normal speedy progress through the high street chaos.

Any cyclist who sees another cyclist riding illegally and dangerously on the pavement amongst pedestrians can use their pump to bring the offender down with a wallop. Just in case there's any doubt you stick the pump through their front spokes just behind the forks. Not the back wheel, which would only lock the wheel and cause a minor skid. Which would be a complete waste of a pump. Be very careful not to inflict injuries with the cartwheeling bicycle and rider on innocent pedestrains.

Nime

quote:

if the cars where fully in the road, it would be totally blocked

then perhaps they should find somewhere else to park?

quote:

a badly parked car in a street devoid of pedestrians.

so that's ok then because you can guarantee that nobody will walk down that street for the duration of the parking. Next you'll be telling me it's ok to park in a disabled spot as long as you can't see any disabled people around.

quote:

Originally posted by Tarquin Maynard-Portly:
I think even the most myopic of us would agree that would tend to lead to, err, deaths if it was to be done by cars?

ah yes, of course, silly me. Nobody has ever been killed by a car in the UK. I should have realised. That van that sailed through the crossing inches in front of me, driver happily conversing to his passenger, was just a figment of my imagination. That same crossing - outside my work - constantly has cars running through well of the red as people seem unable to tell the difference between a right turn arrow and a straight ahead one.

The ones I mentioned above were waiting to turn right but they were BEHIND the white line when light turned red - ie several cars ahead of them had already turned on the amber/red and yet they still went through.

Yes, I have a fixation with running red lights as it is the single most dangerous thing you can do in a car and yet it seems to be the national English sport - I've nearly been killed by a few of them suddenly deciding to run a light when I'm halfway through an intersection on a green and I can assure you that I do not accelerate particularly quickly while on a bike. Running a red light is running a red light however its done. There's no justification for it from bike or car. I know exactly why you're pretending otherwise - exactly how many red lights have you "just slipped through" before coming on here to start berating cyclists for doing the same thing?

The next cyclist I see approaching a red light will be me and I'll be stopping. The last cyclist that wasn't me I saw approaching a red light also stopped. The one before that wasn't going to - until I yelled at him. The majority I see actually do stop but then I'm in the wrong area for spotting psychotic cyclists.

quote:

Originally posted by John Sheridan:
Running a red light is running a red light however its done. There's no justification for it from bike or car.

Indeed - anyone jumping a red light is an idiot.

The majority of motorists don't jump red lights and neither to the majority of cyclists. A visible minority do however and it amazes me that anyone could be that selfish and stupid. Yes there are cyclists out there that think the traffic laws don't apply to them, but probably an equal percentage of car drivers are the same.

I've seen a motorcyclist killed by a car driver jumping a red light - a clear demonstration of the dangers.

quote:

Originally posted by Tarquin Maynard-Portly:
Nime

How do the figures stack up for cyclists sailing through red lights /pedestrian crossings?

Regards

Mike

That's a good idea! Stack up the dead cyclists on the side of the road as a warning to others? Bit smelly in the summer?

The local TV News decided to film a busy city-centre traffic light to show the common illegal driving behaviour. The poor film technician must have spent hours blocking out all the registration plates of motorists going through red lights. It's a national sport in Denmark to go through the lights right up until the last possible moment, or even after they change to red. Thus completely blocking traffic which has been waited patiently to turn at the lights. Often only one or perhaps two cars turning across the traffic can get through the lights legally. Followed by four or five going through red just to escape from the endless queue.

The Danes aren't strong on roundabouts. If they had more than the present few it would be complete mayhem! The poor souls haven't a clue how to negotiate them, when and how to use their indicators, or who has right of way. I kid you not.
The Brits have had city roundabouts for decades and know them backwards. And some have used that route too. (when it suited them)

Bikes are very well behaved when it comes to traffic lights over here except for indicating their intended direction. Pedestrians are unbelievably well disciplined. A throwback to their being handcuffed to prams and force-marched round the town or village (regardless of weather conditions) at kindergarten. They will stand in huge mobs waiting for the lights to change in completely traffic deserted city-centre streets! They don't half stare at foreigners who amble cheerfully across the empty road against the lights. I expect it's against the law to walk through a red light. But is so common an occurance in a car as to be quite unworthy of comment.

Nime

quote:

Originally posted by Nime:
Just in case there's any doubt you stick the pump through their front spokes just behind the forks. Not the back wheel, which would only lock the wheel and cause a minor skid. Which would be a complete waste of a pump. Be very careful not to inflict injuries with the cartwheeling bicycle and rider on innocent pedestrains.

Nime - back "in the day" when I didn't have a bike, but had a skateboard, I was attempting to learn to use aforementioned skateboard. A group of janners* came past on bikes and took the p1ss, so I thought "you'll get yours". Went into town (on foot), and while walking back from the bus (on the same bit of path) one of the janners (the most highly-vocal one) came past on his bike and made another flippant comment.

If you've ever seen what happens when you put a folded-up symbol cane (a short white guide cane, rather than a totally-blind "shephard's crook" cane) through the front spokes of a bike, it's even more impressive than a pump (as it's metal, and 3 times as thick, when folded up). The janner flew about 10 feet and landed hard on his arse. The front wheel lost about 4 spokes.

Funny how he never took the pee out of me again, and neither did his mates. I guess using your bum as a brake on solid tarmac during the hot summer of 1988 leaves quite an impression on you... Either way, I've often thought it's a shame he didn't land on his head - I'd had months of agro off that sod.

BTW - I always stop at red traffic lights. Shame drivers who tailgate others onto roundabouts don't look out for cyclists with the right of way though - if that **** had hit me yesterday, I'd be rich now.

*Janner = Plymouthian term for chav - in existence LONG before chav became a common word.

quote:

Originally posted by Tarquin Maynard-Portly:
John

I would reply but I have some important fluff to pick out of my belly button.

yes, I guess you should stick to what you're good at.

quote:

Originally posted by domfjbrown
Shame drivers who tailgate others onto roundabouts don't look out for cyclists with the right of way though - if that **** had hit me yesterday, I'd be rich now.

trust me, for the pissy amount of money you end up with it's not worth either the pain or the mental scarring.

quote:

Originally posted by domfjbrown:
BTW - I always stop at red traffic lights.

Nice to see that you obey some laws and it's only assault and GBH you're partial to.

I wish some politicians would read some of the threads on this forum - 'cos they would have a better idea what to target policing resources at!

andy c!

quote:

Originally posted by andy c:
I wish some politicians would read some of the threads on this forum - 'cos they would have a better idea what to target policing resources at!

don't be silly, nothing mentioned here would make them anywhere near as much money as speed cameras.

John,
LOL!

But it just shows that what I think (from a professional point of view) people care about law and order wise is sometimes way off the mark.

I remember years ago a university did a survey of what people wanted to police to deal with the most. I recall dwelling burglary came about 8th. The 1st two were care with no tax and dogs shitting on pavements/public places!

you can make surveys read what you want, but it still made me smile!

andy c!

Now I know what's missing from speed cameras!

The credit card slot and somewhere safe for the idiots to queue out of the rain.

Nime

Cycling on the pavement is a real pain. They are bumpy, have frquent irritating junctions and drive ways, littered with broken glass and pedestrians. Why would anyone choose to cycle on them when the roads are smoother, wider and free from clutter?
Perhaps because about ten percent of drivers have an insane compulsion to overtake any cyclist, regardless of speed, road-width or any other safety issues. If every driver who deliberately put a cyclist in danger was prosecuted there would be no more cyclists on the pavement.
Funny how it is lardy car drivers sitting in jams who get most upset by cyclists, not pedestrians.