feel like an idiot

[John B]

"Just zis Guy, you know?" wrote:

> On Sat, 22 Feb 2003 14:10:45 -0000, "M Series" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >I do not do the slow down signal but I use right and left signals when there is another road user
> >who may benefit
>
> The only time I've used the "slowing down" signal recently is when I'm moving into a passing place
> to let following traffic past on a single-lane road.

Have you started training to be a Cycling Instructor yet? If not you 'may' have to start using it.

The scheme I am involved in, at its basic level, requires three hand signals to be taught: Turn
left, turn right and the slowing down signal. These are first taught and executed in the playground,
and then older children repeat it on the road.

> And I usually finish it with a forward horizontal flourish, as most drivers seemingly haven't a
> clue what the signal means but understand being "waved past."

I'm not surprised they do not understand it as so few read the Highway Code.

John B

 

[Colin McKenzie]

Call me Bob wrote:
>
> On Sat, 22 Feb 2003 23:08:55 +0000, Colin McKenzie <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >Really? In my experience drivers seem to expect me to ride into the back of the parked car if I
> >don't signal - or at best scrape along in the 3-foot gap they leave between themselves and the
> >parked car.
>
> Colin your posts make me suspect you are riding in quite a nervous, almost apologetic manner.

Not really. I got into the situation I describe a few times, and modified my behaviour as you
describe: move out early, and signal if I expect someone to slow down for me. My complaint is that
all this shouldn't be necessary. I should be able to use the same line on the road, and signal at
the same times, as I would in a car - but I can't.

> Your position and manoeuvering on the road will communicate this to the drivers around you and the
> result will always be the experiences you describe - being squeezed and bullied constantly.

It's all right - I get hooted more often than I get squeezed from behind.

> Most drivers probably don't understand that they are treating you in this way, you need to
> ride purposefully and with more confidence in order to clearly register your presence to other
> road users.
>
> You may even discover that traffic is fun )
>
Nah - it gets in the way.

Colin McKenzie

 

[Pete Biggs]

j-p.s wrote:
> On Sat, 22 Feb 2003 13:55:19 -0000, Danny Colyer scrawled: ) time when you really need both hands
> on the controls - but generally you ) should be safer if your movements are predictable.
>
> My worry is that hand signals from cyclists usually get ignored anyway,

They don't. I notice that drivers give me more room and wait longer before putting their foot down
when I give a bold signal. It also gives me confidence - makes me feel more decisive and assertive,
which can't be a bad thing for safety.

> except by careful drivers who are low risk with or without signals

I disagree. Average drivers respond to signalling as well.

>, and making them doesn't make you any more predictable because most drivers don't see the omens.
>
> I make hand signals rarely, although I understand this is personal preference brought on by
> experience. The worst accident I have ever had happened because, while signalling during a lane
> change, my front wheel hit gravel and I was thrown into the path of oncoming cars. Luckily they
> narrowly missed me, but the impact with the road broke my wrist which required pinning under
> general anaesthetic. But of course, anecdote is not the singular of data, etc. etc.
>
> I don't know how controversial the "to signal or not to signal" debate might get here, so I stress
> that I only signal rarely because that way I simply feel much safer.

I can understand how your experience has put you off, but that doesn't mean you wouldn't actually be
safer if you signalled more now. That kind of accident is unlikely to happen again if you look out
for gravel in advance and signal more skilfully, etc.

/snip
> I think a lot of it depends on both the environment you're in

Signals are not necessary a lot of the time in many situations, but that still leaves plenty of
situations when they are useful - in all kinds of environments.

> - hand signals are pointless during e.g. cycling on one of the busy London arterial roads

Eh?!! Signals are useful on ALL of London's roads, from changing lane on the North Circ to turning
on little City back streets and everything in between. Sure, you can get away without signalling if
you want and are skillful enough, but there is a *point* to it. It provides a greater margin of
safety - and is also an act of courtesy to let other road users (and pedestrians) clearly know what
you're doing.

> and it's best to just have good awareness of cars around you - and what sort of cycling you're
> doing - if you're moving fast as part of the traffic then lane changing without signalling can be
> smoother than wobbling around while you signal.

There is something in between. Look round, wait for the best moment, look round again, then give a
brief-ish but clear signal. No wobbling!!

~PB

 

[Tony W]

"j-p.s" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Sat, 22 Feb 2003 13:55:19 -0000, Danny Colyer scrawled: ) time when you really need both hands
> on the controls - but generally
you
> ) should be safer if your movements are predictable.
>
> My worry is that hand signals from cyclists usually get ignored anyway, except by careful drivers
> who are low risk with or without signals, and making them doesn't make you any more predictable
> because most drivers don't see the omens.

There are times when you really do nead both hands on the handle bars - in traffic these are often
when you are going too fast for the conditions so represent poor cyclint technique.

Hand signals work well -- yes, there are prats that ignore you but the majority will react well to a
assertivly given signal. They are more likely to treat you like a proper vehicle and allow you to
merge into a lane if you tell them clearly what you want to do.

Look at it from the driver's point of view. Case 1: Cyclist cycling sensibly, signalling clearly,
obviously sensible, knows what (s)he is about and where they are going. Easy to relax your speed and
let them fade aacross you (assuming you are doing a right turn).

Case 2: Lycra lout clearly nearly out of control, white knuckling it, weeving in and out. F**king
dangerto everybody, probably runs lights and rides on the pavement. You never know when these
bastards will swing a D lock in your windscrean.

Extreme -- but case 1 shows you are a road user, case 2 sets you as a bit of an urban geurilla.

T

 

[Dave Kahn]

John B <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

> I'm not surprised they do not understand it as so few read the Highway Code.

It seems as though many of them have never read it, yet they must have done at one time in order
to pass their driving tests. There is no excuse for a motorist not to understand the slowing
down signal.

--
Dave...

 

[Peter Clinch]

Dave Kahn wrote:

> It seems as though many of them have never read it, yet they must have done at one time in order
> to pass their driving tests. There is no excuse for a motorist not to understand the slowing
> down signal.

But it is *so* rarely seen it strikes me as foolish to assume people will, just on the grounds that
they ought to. Added to the fact that it doesn't really serve nearly as useful a purpose when
slowing down as, errr, using the front brake lever and holding the handlebars, I really don't see
much point in using it.

I've read the Highway Code *numerous* times, and I drive as well as cycle. I don't have a scooby
what the difference between two yellow kerb marks or three is with respect to unloading, though I've
read it numerous times. Never really applies to me, so I don't really care much.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch University of Dundee Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Medical Physics, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK net [email protected]
http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

 

[Just Zis Guy]

On Sun, 23 Feb 2003 21:58:54 +0000, John B <[email protected]> wrote:

>> The only time I've used the "slowing down" signal recently is when I'm moving into a passing
>> place to let following traffic past on a single-lane road.

>Have you started training to be a Cycling Instructor yet? If not you 'may' have to start using it.

No "may" about it - I will have to teach the little sproggies what the flappy-wavey signal means.

>> And I usually finish it with a forward horizontal flourish, as most drivers seemingly haven't a
>> clue what the signal means but understand being "waved past."

>I'm not surprised they do not understand it as so few read the Highway Code.

Ain't dat de truth.

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]

On Mon, 24 Feb 2003 13:28:39 +0000, Peter Clinch
<[email protected]> wrote:

>I don't have a scooby what the difference between two yellow kerb marks or three is with respect to
>unloading, though I've read it numerous times.

I'd always assumed that one was less than the working day, two was during the working day, and three
more than the working day (essentially the same as the difference between dotted, single & double
yellow lines). But apparently not. The current HC doesn't even show the three splodge variety :-/

http://www.highwaycode.gov.uk/signs09.shtml

It would be much better if Smithy devoted some of the energy he expends on asserting unprovable
links between speed enforcement and accident rates, to promoting better awareness of and adherence
to the Highway Code.

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.

 

[James Hodson]

On Sun, 23 Feb 2003 21:21:33 -0000, "Danny Colyer" <[email protected]> wrote:

>James Hodson (IE ME) wrote:
>> I think its an inbuilt mindset thing: Ah-ha, a bike; it must be going slowly.
>
>And it's not just pedal bikes. I remember my FIL mentioning his experience that a cager who will
>sit quite happily behind a 1500cc motorbike travelling at the speed limit will do just about
>anything to get past a 125 going at the same speed.

Danny

You've lost me: What's a FIL?

James

--
A credit limit is NOT a target.

 

[Sandy Morton]

In article <[email protected]>, James Hodson
<[email protected]> wrote:
> You've lost me: What's a FIL?

Mine is 82 and very fit - but he doesn't have a bike!

--
A T (Sandy) Morton on the Bicycle Island In the Global Village http://www.sandymillport.fsnet.co.uk

 

[James Hodson]

On Tue, 25 Feb 2003 00:29:14 +0000 (GMT), Sandy Morton <[email protected]> wrote:

>> You've lost me: What's a FIL?
>
>Mine is 82 and very fit - but he doesn't have a bike!

Thank you, Sandy.

I do believe I've got it, hopefully. Father in law, yup?

I'm single so don't have a FIL.

James

--
A credit limit is NOT a target.

 

[Dave Kahn]

James Hodson <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...

> You've lost me: What's a FIL?

The SO of a MIL.

--
Dave...

 

[Alan Braggins]

"Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> writes:

> On Sun, 23 Feb 2003 21:58:54 +0000, John B <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >> The only time I've used the "slowing down" signal recently is when I'm moving into a passing
> >> place to let following traffic past on a single-lane road.
>
> >Have you started training to be a Cycling Instructor yet? If not you 'may' have to start
> >using it.
>
> No "may" about it - I will have to teach the little sproggies what the flappy-wavey signal means.

On a bike I usually do it with my left hand, as a combined slowing down and moving left to the side
of the road signal.

I did use both the slowing down and circling left turn hand signals in a car not long ago. I don't
know if the driver behind recognized them, or just spotted I was slowing down even though my
indicators weren't working.

 

[Jeremy Parker]

>> The only time I've used the "slowing down" signal recently is when I'm moving into a passing
>> place to let following traffic past on a single-lane road.

I'm about the same. I must admit that in moments of stress, in pace lines or whatever, I sometimes
gete confused, and use the American hand signal, inner arm horizontal, outer arm vertically
downwards. This raises the question: what are the hand signals in other European countries?

Jeremy Parker

 

[Jeremy Parker]

Guy says:

> It would be much better if Smithy devoted some of the energy he expends on asserting unprovable
> links between speed enforcement and accident rates, to promoting better awareness of and adherence
> to the Highway Code.

I disobey rule 49 as often as possible, on principle.

Does rule 50 include speed limits?

I take little notice of rule 55, in spite of it being a "must" rule

Rules 57 and 58 are good ones. Failure to obey them causes a quarter of London's bike fatalities.

Rule 61 implies (correctly) that it is inadvisable to follow rule 62

At least cyclists have managed to laugh out of existance the old rule 205, "Use cycle lanes and
tracks whereever possible. They can make your journey safer and quicker."

Jeremy Parker

 

[Richard]

Jeremy Parker wrote: and use the American hand
> signal, inner arm horizontal, outer arm vertically downwards.

What on earth are you using to hold on to the handlebars?

R.

 

[Paul Smith]

On Mon, 24 Feb 2003 21:13:50 +0000, "Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> wrote:

>It would be much better if Smithy devoted some of the energy he expends on asserting unprovable
>links between speed enforcement and accident rates, to promoting better awareness of and adherence
>to the Highway Code.

No it wouldn't. Anyone can preach or promote the established views.

I'm much better employed giving the broken bits of the establishment views a good public kicking.
--
Paul Smith Scotland, UK http://www.safespeed.org.uk please remove "XYZ" to reply by email speed
cameras cost lives

 

[David Damerell]

Jeremy Parker <[email protected]> wrote:
>Guy says:
>>It would be much better if Smithy devoted some of the energy he expends on asserting unprovable
>>links between speed enforcement and accident rates, to promoting better awareness of and adherence
>>to the Highway Code.
>I disobey rule 49 as often as possible, on principle.

I score bullet 1 of #45, of course; pedal reflectors on #46; #47.

>Does rule 50 include speed limits?

I suspect not - since it is not an offence to break the speed limit on a pedal cycle, you cannot
disobey a speed limit sign since it does not apply to you.

>Rule 61 implies (correctly) that it is inadvisable to follow rule 62

Quite. Even 62 mentions that its own recommendations are a damned menace.
--
David Damerell <[email protected]> Kill the tomato!

 

[Just Zis Guy]

Paul Smith wrote:

>> It would be much better if Smithy devoted some of the energy he expends on asserting unprovable
>> links between speed enforcement and accident rates, to promoting better awareness of and
>> adherence to the Highway Code.

> No it wouldn't. Anyone can preach or promote the established views.

Like the established view that speeding is perfectly safe, obviously. Oh, right.

> I'm much better employed giving the broken bits of the establishment views a good public kicking.

ROFLMAO! The phrase "savaged by a dead sheep" springs irresistably to mind
:-D

--
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]

Jeremy Parker wrote:

> I disobey rule 49 as often as possible, on principle.

Just so.

> Does rule 50 include speed limits?

No

> I take little notice of rule 55, in spite of it being a "must" rule

Hmmm. I must admit that I have been known to cross the line, but not to enter the junction. I know
that this is naughty, and if caught I would undoubtedly adopt a policy of contrition.

> Rules 57 and 58 are good ones. Failure to obey them causes a quarter of London's bike fatalities.

Absolutely.

> Rule 61 implies (correctly) that it is inadvisable to follow rule 62

Quite so. To be charitable, rule 62 could be read as advising caution in the event that you labour
under the misapprehension that keeping left would be safer.

--
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