Cyclists are a Perverted Pestulance [Times Article 18/02]

[Just Zis Guy]

On Sat, 21 Feb 2004 10:16:58 -0000, "Tony Raven"
<[email protected]> wrote in message
<[email protected]>:

>At 45mph that's about 50m or 11 car lengths stopping distance according to the Highway Code. I
>reckon my dipped beams and those of most of the cars I've looked at are about a third of that

Hmmm. A valid point. I will go out and check - I have to say that the headlights of Volvos seem to
be better than most, but you may be right.

Guy
===
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://chapmancentral.demon.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University

 

[Graeme]

"Tony Raven" <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> At 45mph that's about 50m or 11 car lengths stopping distance according to the Highway Code. I
> reckon my dipped beams and those of most of the cars I've looked at are about a third of that

Is that a third as measured at ground level? Because of the shape of the beam as soon as you get
above ground level the distance increases considerably. The optimum will be roughly the height of
the lights themselves. Even the height of a fwuffy wittle bunnikins will add a metre or two to the
distance (so you have more time to get them right between the eyes). ;o)

Graeme

 

[Tony Raven]

Graeme wrote:
>
> Is that a third as measured at ground level? Because of the shape of the beam as soon as you get
> above ground level the distance increases considerably. The optimum will be roughly the height of
> the lights themselves. Even the height of a fwuffy wittle bunnikins will add a metre or two to the
> distance (so you have more time to get them right between the eyes). ;o)
>

No it doesn't. The light travels from the headlamp down to the road and the rays with the lowest
downward slope hit the ground at the furtherst distance from the car and is the headlamp cut off. It
doesn't matter how tall your bunny is beyond that cut off, the lights hit the ground before it gets
near him. The RVLR 1989 even specify the mimimum downward angle.

Tony

 

[Vincent Wilcox]

W K wrote:
>
> Its also stirring up and legitimising londoner's antipathy to each other.
>

Having just got back from south london I would say it was legitimate, what a shite hole.

 

[Simian]

Tony Raven wrote:
> Graeme wrote:
>>
>> Is that a third as measured at ground level? Because of the shape of the beam as soon as you get
>> above ground level the distance increases considerably. The optimum will be roughly the height of
>> the lights themselves. Even the height of a fwuffy wittle bunnikins will add a metre or two to
>> the distance (so you have more time to get them right between the eyes). ;o)
>>
>
> No it doesn't. The light travels from the headlamp down to the road and the rays with the lowest
> downward slope hit the ground at the furtherst distance from the car and is the headlamp cut off.
> It doesn't matter how tall your bunny is beyond that cut off, the lights hit the ground before it
> gets near him. The RVLR 1989 even specify the mimimum downward angle.

There's always some spill over, cat-eyes light up well beyond where the beam ends on the road -
maybe badger stripes do too. The alternatives being badly adjusted headlights, wildly optimistic
speedo, mistaken application of full beam, senility...

 

[Colin Blackburn]

On 20 Feb 2004 00:59:46 -0800, David Off <[email protected]> wrote:

> http://www.timesonline.co.uk/printFriendly/0,,1-7-1005150,00.html

From whiich I like this line:

"As a pedestrian I have never been hit by a car. But in recent weeks I have escaped a collision with
numerous demented cyclists only because of my own evasive action."

Which could so easily be re-written as:

"As a pedestrian I have never been hit by either a car or a bicyle."

Colin
--

 

[Alan Braggins]

In article <[email protected]>, Tony Raven wrote:
>Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
>>
>> These are the reasons why one should drive drive so one can stop "well within the distance you
>> can see to be clear" (Highway Code).
>>
>
>I've been thinking about that Guy and assume you must rarely drive above 20mph after dark based on
>the average throw of a dipped car headlight. Is this true?

Often either other cars' lights contribute to what you can see or you can use full beam.

 

[David Hansen]

On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 10:09:55 -0000 someone who may be Colin
Blackburn <[email protected]> wrote this:-

>"As a pedestrian I have never been hit by a car. But in recent weeks I have escaped a collision
>with numerous demented cyclists only because of my own evasive action."
>
>Which could so easily be re-written as:
>
>"As a pedestrian I have never been hit by either a car or a bicyle."

Indeed.

If the article wants personal anecdotes then as a pedestrian I have never been hit by a bicycle. I
have been hit by cars on two occasions though.

--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E I will always explain revoked
keys, unless the UK government prevents me using the RIP Act 2000.

 

[Just zis Guy]

On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 21:54:40 +0000, David Hansen
<[email protected]> wrote in message
<[email protected]>:

>If the article wants personal anecdotes then as a pedestrian I have never been hit by a bicycle. I
>have been hit by cars on two occasions though.

As a pedestrian I have never been hit by either. As a cyclist I have been hit by three car drivers,
one of whom came nearer to killing me than I hope anyone will ever get again. I have also been run
off the road by a car driver.

Guy
===
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://chapmancentral.demon.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University

 

[Pk]

Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 21:54:40 +0000, David Hansen <[email protected]> wrote in
> message <[email protected]>:
>
>> If the article wants personal anecdotes then as a pedestrian I have never been hit by a bicycle.
>> I have been hit by cars on two occasions though.
>
> As a pedestrian I have never been hit by either. As a cyclist I have been hit by three car
> drivers, one of whom came nearer to killing me than I hope anyone will ever get again. I have also
> been run off the road by a car driver.
>

I've never been hit by car or cycle, but have twice in recent months had to take evasive action
while on a pavement to avoid being hit by a cyclist.

pk

 

[Just zis Guy]

On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 19:51:23 +0000 (UTC), "PK"
<[email protected]> wrote in message
<[email protected]>:

>I've never been hit by car or cycle, but have twice in recent months had to take evasive action
>while on a pavement to avoid being hit by a cyclist.

So you've not been hit by a bike, then. Thought not.

Although it does happen. About sixty people a year are injured by cyclists on the pavement. That's
slightly less than the number who are *killed* by motor vehicles on the pavement.

Guy
===
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://chapmancentral.demon.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University

 

[Gonzalez]

On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 19:51:23 +0000 (UTC), "PK"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
>> On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 21:54:40 +0000, David Hansen <[email protected]> wrote in
>> message <[email protected]>:
>>
>>> If the article wants personal anecdotes then as a pedestrian I have never been hit by a bicycle.
>>> I have been hit by cars on two occasions though.
>>
>> As a pedestrian I have never been hit by either. As a cyclist I have been hit by three car
>> drivers, one of whom came nearer to killing me than I hope anyone will ever get again. I have
>> also been run off the road by a car driver.
>>
>
>
>I've never been hit by car or cycle, but have twice in recent months had to take evasive action
>while on a pavement to avoid being hit by a cyclist.

How often have you had to delay a planned route on a public right of way because of cars?