Congestion Charge



Status
Not open for further replies.
"Paul Smith" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

>>> How did you first learn [you go where you look]?
>>Riding a bicycle, of course! It is an inescapable conclusion.

> Does that translate to a car in an emergency? Have you ever been unlucky enough to try it out?

Unlucky? UNLUCKY? Cheek! It's pure skill that keeps me out of danger :p

As a learned response it seems to be pretty transferrable. I am told that the mums in their 4x4s who
drive along the middle of the road up to Kidmore End stare fixedly at my car while they are failing
to slow down or move over, whereas I am always looking at the eascape route and braking so I never
see this. I've not been in a situation where I've been called on to use it to save my life, other
than on a bike.

> Did you have a reason for picking environment based examples?

Yes. Behaviour-based messages, at least to start with, are likely to be dismissed as being for the
average-skill driver, and as you know I am firmly of the opinion that most drivers overestimate
their own skill. Certainly they mostly believe they are of above average skill. If the information
is presented in a blame-neutral way, focussing on an environmental factor, they are more likely (in
my view) to accept its relevance to them. Same information, same target, different hook.

A really effective campaign would probably use both methods, and others I haven't thought of.
And would get people like Stirling Moss, Nigel Mansell, Paul Ripley and even the dreaded
Cl*rks*n on board.

All middle-aged you note. It's people aged 30+ for whom the driving test and the Highway Code are
but a dim memory who I think wuoold benefit from this kind of education. Boy racers are a separate
problem and need a different approach. Maybe we could bribe the ladies to keep their knickers on
until the boys have proved they can drive within the law for a month?

--
Guy
===
I wonder if you wouldn't mind piecing out our imperfections with your thoughts; and while you're
about it perhaps you could think when we talk of bicycles, that you see them printing their proud
wheels i' the receiving earth; thanks awfully.

http://www.highwaycode.gov.uk/09.shtml#103 http://www.highwaycode.gov.uk/09.shtml#104
 
On Wed, 26 Feb 2003 17:15:38 -0000, "Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> wrote:

>>>> How did you first learn [you go where you look]?
>>>Riding a bicycle, of course! It is an inescapable conclusion.

>> Does that translate to a car in an emergency? Have you ever been unlucky enough to try it out?

>Unlucky? UNLUCKY? Cheek! It's pure skill that keeps me out of danger :p

And I was trying to be kind again in case you had made a big mistake.
:)

>As a learned response it seems to be pretty transferrable. I am told that the mums in their 4x4s
>who drive along the middle of the road up to Kidmore End stare fixedly at my car while they are
>failing to slow down or move over, whereas I am always looking at the eascape route and braking so
>I never see this. I've not been in a situation where I've been called on to use it to save my life,
>other than on a bike.

I take one extra step in that I try and plan escape routes before anything goes wrong. I get so
little practice at emergency evasion that I worry that I might not have the "look away" skill if
it's ever called upon. That's a toughie. In the US they teach an emergency lane change manoeuver
where you have to chose to swerve into another lane on a test track as signalled by lights at the
last second. I'd like to be able to practice that. It might help.

>> Did you have a reason for picking environment based examples?

>Yes. Behaviour-based messages, at least to start with, are likely to be dismissed as being for the
>average-skill driver, and as you know I am firmly of the opinion that most drivers overestimate
>their own skill. Certainly they mostly believe they are of above average skill. If the information
>is presented in a blame-neutral way, focussing on an environmental factor, they are more likely (in
>my view) to accept its relevance to them. Same information, same target, different hook.

>A really effective campaign would probably use both methods, and others I haven't thought of.
>And would get people like Stirling Moss, Nigel Mansell, Paul Ripley and even the dreaded
>Cl*rks*n on board.

>All middle-aged you note. It's people aged 30+ for whom the driving test and the Highway Code are
>but a dim memory who I think wuoold benefit from this kind of education. Boy racers are a separate
>problem and need a different approach. Maybe we could bribe the ladies to keep their knickers on
>until the boys have proved they can drive within the law for a month?

Oh, yes, we're really close on all this. One exception I'd make right at the start would be with a
learn from your mistakes advert:

voiceover: Has this ever happened to you?

video: emergency braking

or this

video: driver extremely startled to see another vehicle where he thought there was none

voicover: "All these drivers made mistakes. If you learn from your mistakes and about your mistakes
you can stop the same thing happening again..."

And I think we'd meet all our shared criteria. Perhaps I should really write the script and send it
to the Think people?
--
Paul Smith Scotland, UK http://www.safespeed.org.uk please remove "XYZ" to reply by email speed
cameras cost lives
 
"Dave Plowman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> Paul Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >> But the accident rate of motorcycles is so much greater than that of cars that in practice
> > >> any such effect you describe is would be swamped.
>
> > >And how many of those fatalities occur round town rather than on the open road (the classic
> > >motorcyclists' single vheicle crash)?
>
> > From memory about 2/3rds by number. More than that by vehicle km.
>
> I do wonder just how many motor cycle fatalities are down to pure dangerous driving by the
> motorcyclists themselves - remember those pizza delivery types who drive like maniacs and are all
> learners would be part of the statistics.
>
> I'd love to know just how much more dangerous a bike is if driven sensibly with due regard to the
> driver's safety.

I would suggest that motorcycles don't have more accidents pro rata than cars, but that they are
more serious, for obvious reasons and more likely to be fatal.

Motorcyclists tend to be more skilled drivers but this I would say is as a result of natural
selection rather than a motorcyclist type being a better driver.
 
On Wed, 26 Feb 2003 17:59:29 -0000, "Andy Long" <[email protected]> wrote:

>> > >> But the accident rate of motorcycles is so much greater than that of cars that in practice
>> > >> any such effect you describe is would be swamped.

>> > >And how many of those fatalities occur round town rather than on the open road (the classic
>> > >motorcyclists' single vheicle crash)?

>> > From memory about 2/3rds by number. More than that by vehicle km.

>> I do wonder just how many motor cycle fatalities are down to pure dangerous driving by the
>> motorcyclists themselves - remember those pizza delivery types who drive like maniacs and are
>> all learners would be part of the statistics.

>> I'd love to know just how much more dangerous a bike is if driven sensibly with due regard to the
>> driver's safety.

>I would suggest that motorcycles don't have more accidents pro rata than cars, but that they are
>more serious, for obvious reasons and more likely to be fatal.

Sure they have more. Cars don't fall over, and they are better seen.

>Motorcyclists tend to be more skilled drivers but this I would say is as a result of natural
>selection rather than a motorcyclist type being a better driver.

I think it's the fear myself.
--
Paul Smith Scotland, UK http://www.safespeed.org.uk please remove "XYZ" to reply by email speed
cameras cost lives
 
Paul Smith wrote:

> I take one extra step in that I try and plan escape routes before anything goes wrong.

That is part of the normal routine when cycling, because we get loads of practice at emergency
evasion - you can never predict how crass an individual driver will be :-/

> In the US they teach an emergency lane change manoeuver where you have to chose to swerve into
> another lane on a test track as signalled by lights at the last second. I'd like to be able to
> practice that. It might help.

Nah, that's a Darwin awards thing to weed out the 4x4 drivers ;-)

> Perhaps I should really write the script and send it to the Think people?

Along with my script: "This is Wayne Kerr. He thinks he's a brilliant driver. Look how fast he can
drive along this narrow road! Whoops! Never mind, Wayne, they'll give your licence back a couple of
years after you get out."

--
Guy
===
I wonder if you wouldn't mind piecing out our imperfections with your thoughts; and while you're
about it perhaps you could think when we talk of bicycles, that you see them printing their proud
wheels i' the receiving earth; thanks awfully.

http://www.highwaycode.gov.uk/09.shtml#103 http://www.highwaycode.gov.uk/09.shtml#104
 
Paul Smith wrote:
> Sure they have more. Cars don't fall over, and they are better seen.

Ask yourself who's doing the not seeing and who's doing the dying before pinning the blame too
firmly on the motorbike, though.

--
Guy
===
I wonder if you wouldn't mind piecing out our imperfections with your thoughts; and while you're
about it perhaps you could think when we talk of bicycles, that you see them printing their proud
wheels i' the receiving earth; thanks awfully.

http://www.highwaycode.gov.uk/09.shtml#103 http://www.highwaycode.gov.uk/09.shtml#104
 
Just zis Guy, you know? wrote in message ...
>Maybe we could bribe the ladies to keep their knickers on until the boys have proved they can drive
>within the law for a month?

Well, you seem to think most drivers are wankers anyway, so they'd probably take you at your word.

--
http://www.speedlimit.org.uk "If laws are to be respected, they must be worthy of respect."
 
On Wed, 26 Feb 2003 18:39:58 -0000, "Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> wrote:

>Paul Smith wrote:

>> Sure they have more. Cars don't fall over, and they are better seen.

>Ask yourself who's doing the not seeing and who's doing the dying before pinning the blame too
>firmly on the motorbike, though.

I pinned no blame. Wasn't even thinking about doing so.
--
Paul Smith Scotland, UK http://www.safespeed.org.uk please remove "XYZ" to reply by email speed
cameras cost lives
 
PeterE wrote:
>> Maybe we could bribe the ladies to keep their knickers on until the boys have proved they can
>> drive within the law for a month?

> Well, you seem to think most drivers are wankers anyway, so they'd probably take you at your word.

Another high quality piece of analysis there, I see :-/

--
Guy
===
I wonder if you wouldn't mind piecing out our imperfections with your thoughts; and while you're
about it perhaps you could think when we talk of bicycles, that you see them printing their proud
wheels i' the receiving earth; thanks awfully.

http://www.highwaycode.gov.uk/09.shtml#103 http://www.highwaycode.gov.uk/09.shtml#104
 
Just zis Guy, you know? wrote in message ...
>PeterE wrote:
>>> Maybe we could bribe the ladies to keep their knickers on until the boys have proved they can
>>> drive within the law for a month?
>
>> Well, you seem to think most drivers are wankers anyway, so they'd probably take you at
>> your word.
>
>Another high quality piece of analysis there, I see :-/

You yourself referred to "Wayne Kerr" in a post only a couple of minutes before :p

--
http://www.speedlimit.org.uk "If laws are to be respected, they must be worthy of respect."
 
In article <[email protected]>,
Paul Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
> >But powered two wheelers just aren't driven with the same level of care as cars. Per km, PTW are
> >5.2 times more likely to kill a pedestrian and
> >1.86 times more likely to kill a cyclist than a car.

> Interesting figures, but distorting wording there.

> We don't know that it isn't pedestrians and cyclists failing to see motorbikes.

Are you of this world? Stand by the side of any road and count the percentage of PTWs being driven
with care. Less than even white vans.

--
*You! Off my planet!

Dave Plowman [email protected] London SW 12 RIP Acorn
 
On Wed, 26 Feb 2003 19:10:38 -0000, "PeterE" <[email protected]> wrote:

>You yourself referred to "Wayne Kerr" in a post only a couple of minutes before :p

OIC. I was trying to come up with a scenario which would make boy racers realise what
eejits they are.

Guy
===
** WARNING ** This posting may contain traces of irony. http://www.chapmancentral.com (BT ADSL and
dynamic DNS permitting)
NOTE: BT Openworld have now blocked port 25 (without notice), so old mail addresses may no longer
work. Apologies.
 
"Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Wed, 26 Feb 2003 19:10:38 -0000, "PeterE" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >You yourself referred to "Wayne Kerr" in a post only a couple of minutes before :p
>
> OIC. I was trying to come up with a scenario which would make boy racers realise what eejits
> they are.

A good hard slap?

I strongly suspect most boy racers find that women keep their knickers on anyway - what else could
they be compensating for?

Regards, Zack
 
"Zack Evans" <[email protected]> writes:

> "Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > On Thu, 20 Feb 2003 19:54:10 -0000, "Zack Evans" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > >> you have to pay income tax. You don't have to drive your car.
> >
> > >YES YOU DO, in some cases.
> >
> > Interesting. Please describe the situation where you have absolutely no alternative but to drive
> > your car into central London. Be careful to exclude any circumstances where walking, cycling,
> > motorcycling, a bus, taxi or tube would do.
>
> Any time you are carrying trade goods.
>
Good one. I work up near Broadgate, and seldom see anything except Mercs, taxis, buses, and vehicles
obviously being used for commercial purposes. You'd be hard put to get a window cleaner's ladder
onto a bus, but I've seen one chap driving a Smart with a ladder on a rack bolted to the roof. On
the other hand, five quid a day is nothing compared to the parking charges.
--
Sherilyn
 
On Wed, 26 Feb 2003 18:39:58 -0000, "Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> wrote:

>Paul Smith wrote:
>> Sure they have more. Cars don't fall over, and they are better seen.
>
>Ask yourself who's doing the not seeing and who's doing the dying before pinning the blame too
>firmly on the motorbike, though.

[AO|NT]L to that brother :)

Not only that but bikes don't just "fall over" [1]. On a decent dry day its actually not that easy
to make a bike crash, unless you are into taking country lanes and bottling out mid corner.

BTW I have seen cars that have rolled in a crash more on several occasions, which is pretty much
"fall over".

[1] Unless its a parked Ducati in a strong wind.
--
This post does not reflect the opinions of all saggy cloth cats be the a bit loose at the seams or
not GSX600F - Matilda the (now) two eared teapot, complete with white gaffer tape, though no
rectal chainsaw
 
Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:

> Interesting. Please describe the situation where you have absolutely no alternative but to drive
> your car into central London. Be careful to exclude any circumstances where walking, cycling,
> motorcycling, a bus, taxi or tube would do.

Travelling from, for example, Liverpool to a LAN party in central london.
 
Just zis Guy, you know? wrote in message ...
>On Wed, 26 Feb 2003 22:02:13 -0000, "Zack Evans" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>> Interesting. Please describe the situation where you have absolutely no alternative but to drive
>>> your car into central London. Be careful to exclude any circumstances where walking, cycling,
>>> motorcycling, a bus, taxi or tube would do.
>
>>Any time you are carrying trade goods.
>
>And that can't be done in a taxi?

Presumably at a cost any private car movement in central London could be done in a taxi, but if
anything that would actually increase the level of congestion as many journeys would be duplicated.

--
http://www.speedlimit.org.uk "If laws are to be respected, they must be worthy of respect."
 
"Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> >Any time you are carrying trade goods.
>
> And that can't be done in a taxi?
>

You've obviously never had to contemplate getting from the train to a taxi with an exhibition stand,
10 boxes of promotional literature. a couple of bags of bits, your overnight bag and demo equipment.
In theory it can be done, in practice its about as practical as requiring all cyclists to unicycle
in central London. You could of course ask the taxi to duplicate what you would do with your car
i.e. pick you up at your departure point and take you to your destination but that doubles the road
usage - there and back to pick you up, there and back to return you afterwards - compared to using
your own car. Ditto using a delivery van.

Tony
 
"Tony Raven" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> You've obviously never had to contemplate getting from the train to a taxi with an exhibition
> stand, 10 boxes of promotional literature. a couple of bags of bits, your overnight bag and demo
> equipment. In theory it can be done, in practice its about as practical as requiring all cyclists
> to unicycle in central London. You could of course ask the taxi to duplicate what you would do
> with your car i.e. pick you up at your departure point
and
> take you to your destination but that doubles the road usage - there and back to pick you up,
> there and back to return you afterwards - compared to using your own car. Ditto using a
> delivery van.

Though if you were doing an exhibition abroad you may well fly, possibly sending the stuff ahead by
UPS or similar.

Surely it is a question of planning. While I agree with you that a van is the best method for the
example you quote it is not the only possibility.

Of course if you shipped the stuff ahead you could pack the Brommie and dispense with the taxi :)

T
 
Tony W <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Though if you were doing an exhibition abroad you may well fly, possibly sending the stuff ahead
> by UPS or similar.
>

I'm not saying it can't be done but is it effective in reducing road miles or are you actually
increasing road miles?

> Surely it is a question of planning. While I agree with you that a van is the best method for the
> example you quote it is not the only possibility.
>
> Of course if you shipped the stuff ahead you could pack the Brommie and dispense with the taxi :)
>

But the point is that shipping does not necessarily reduce the traffic and probably increases it.
You can run all sorts of hub and spoke scenarios for parcel delivery but if you take the simplest
they drive from the depot to your office, pick up the stuff, drive to the destination, drop off,
drive back to depot. Result twice the mileage against putting it in the car and driving there plus
you've just replaced a car journey with a dreaded white van journey ;-) More efficient delivery
courier services can reduce that but its not necessarily achieving the objective of using less road
miles than taking your own car. You need to consider the whole process not simplistically assume
that because you are using public transport rather than your car it must be better.

Tony
 
Status
Not open for further replies.