Never again

soup said:

At least not on a "Y" framed bike .
Cue tyrade against using the wrong sort of bike
for any specific activity.

Cycled 66 miles yesterday (not ultra far in the big scheme
of things but an epic for me).From Edinburgh (Balerno)to
The Falkirk Wheel.
www.thefalkirkwheel.co.uk

Thanks for the link, this device looks awesome I've got togo to see it.

On Mon, 06 Sep 2004 11:09:42 GMT someone who may be "soup"
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

Decided to go on my own so
I wouldn't let anyone in a group down.

It's unlikely you would go slower or less far then me.

Quoted message said:

(3hours [and that
included sorting a flat due to the good graces of
the p*nct*r* fairy] to get there 5 hours to get home)

Perhaps you are not 100% well.

Quoted message said:

luckily 50 miles of the route was on a canal towpath
so as flat as can be.

One of the disadvantages of many canals, including the Union Canal,
is that they follow the contours and so take long routes to cover
little ground. The sweep of the canal through Winchburgh is an
example.

Quoted message said:

there are a couple
of places where cyclists must dismount (the aqueduct over
the river Avon and a tunnel just before the Falkirk Wheel
possibly four depending on where you join the canal,
aqueduct over The Water of Leith aqueduct over the Almond)

I have seen people cycle all of them. It depends on their confidence
and skills.

--
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.

David Hansen popped their head over the parapet saw what was going on
and said

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

there are a couple
of places where cyclists must dismount (the aqueduct over
the river Avon and a tunnel just before the Falkirk Wheel
possibly four depending on where you join the canal,
aqueduct over The Water of Leith aqueduct over the Almond)

Quoted message said:

I have seen people cycle all of them. It depends on their confidence
and skills.

OK maybe I used the wrong word saying MUST maybe the
words should be are ordered too . There are "cyclists dismount signs"
at all of these locations.

--
yours S

Nihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione

"soup" <[email hidden]>typed

Quoted message said:

OK maybe I used the wrong word saying MUST maybe the
words should be are ordered too . There are "cyclists dismount signs"
at all of these locations.

<Pedant>

Mebbe that's the answer.
Cyclists should dismount the signs...

--
Helen D. Vecht: [email hidden]
Edgware.

On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 07:25:54 GMT someone who may be "soup"
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

OK maybe I used the wrong word saying MUST maybe the
words should be are ordered too . There are "cyclists dismount signs"
at all of these locations.

That is not an order, it is a suggestion. An order would involve a
round sign with a red ring around it.

--
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.

David Hansen said:

On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 07:25:54 GMT someone who may be "soup"
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

OK maybe I used the wrong word saying MUST maybe the
words should be are ordered too . There are "cyclists dismount signs"
at all of these locations.

That is not an order, it is a suggestion. An order would involve a
round sign with a red ring around it.

Not so - there are plenty of compulsion signs which are not round and
red.

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|

David Hansen vaguely muttered something like ...

Quoted message said:

On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 07:25:54 GMT someone who may be "soup"
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

OK maybe I used the wrong word saying MUST maybe the
words should be are ordered too . There are "cyclists dismount signs"
at all of these locations.

That is not an order, it is a suggestion. An order would involve a
round sign with a red ring around it.

And a Keep Left/Right sign is what colour ?

--
Paul ...

(8(|) ... Homer Rocks

"A [censored] is a [censored], no matter what mode of transport they're using."

"Paul - [censored]" <[email hidden]>typed

Quoted message said:

David Hansen vaguely muttered something like ...

Quoted message said:

On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 07:25:54 GMT someone who may be "soup"
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

OK maybe I used the wrong word saying MUST maybe the
words should be are ordered too . There are "cyclists dismount signs"
at all of these locations.

That is not an order, it is a suggestion. An order would involve a
round sign with a red ring around it.

Quoted message said:

And a Keep Left/Right sign is what colour ?

Orders are in blue circles, prohibitions are in red rings...

--
Helen D. Vecht: [email hidden]
Edgware.

David Hansen popped their head over the parapet saw what was going on
and said

Quoted message said:

On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 07:25:54 GMT someone who may be "soup"
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

OK maybe I used the wrong word saying MUST maybe the
words should be are ordered too . There are "cyclists dismount
signs" at all of these locations.

That is not an order, it is a suggestion. An order would involve a
round sign with a red ring around it.

And a black square with white writing ?

Anyway have been led to believe that the canal towpath is not
actually a right of way or a public highway but private land
owned by "British Waterways" and cyclists are supposed to
have a permit to ride on them .

IANAL .

--
yours S

Nihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione

Helen Deborah Vecht said:

"Paul - [censored]" <[email hidden]>typed

Quoted message said:

David Hansen vaguely muttered something like ...

Quoted message said:

That is not an order, it is a suggestion. An order would involve a
round sign with a red ring around it.

Quoted message said:

And a Keep Left/Right sign is what colour ?

Orders are in blue circles, prohibitions are in red rings...

There are numerous mandatory non-circular signs - like waiting /
parking / loading restrictions, motorway matrix signs, level crossing
lights (arguably not a sign, admittedly), give way, stop, bus lanes,
cycle lanes.

It's not true that only circular signs give orders.

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|

in message <[email hidden]>, soup

(') said:

David Hansen popped their head over the parapet saw what was going on
and said

Quoted message said:

On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 07:25:54 GMT someone who may be "soup"
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

OK maybe I used the wrong word saying MUST maybe the
words should be are ordered too . There are "cyclists dismount
signs" at all of these locations.

That is not an order, it is a suggestion. An order would involve a
round sign with a red ring around it.

And a black square with white writing ?

Anyway have been led to believe that the canal towpath is not
actually a right of way or a public highway but private land
owned by "British Waterways" and cyclists are supposed to
have a permit to ride on them .

Not in Scotland, brother. See the Land Reform Act 2003. You can walk or
cycle anywhere you want, with only a few caveats. Read it: it's a very
well written, very clear piece of legislation, easy to read and
understand. And very useful to quote to people who say 'you can't do
that here'. Oh yes you can, and furthermore if they try to stop you
*they* are breaking the law.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

Iraq war: it's time for regime change...
... go now, Tony, while you can still go with dignity.

On 7/9/04 8:25 pm, in article [email hidden], "Ian

Smith said:

There are numerous mandatory non-circular signs - like waiting /
parking / loading restrictions,

red circle, blue background, red line or two across the circle. Often placed
on a yellow rectangular background but that doesn't stop the symbol being
circular.

Quoted message said:

motorway matrix signs,

Not found on your average cycle route but point taken.

Quoted message said:

level crossing lights (arguably not a sign, admittedly), give way, stop,

All non circular.

Quoted message said:

bus lanes,

Bus lanes are marked with road markings. The blue signs are informational,
not instructional.

Quoted message said:

cycle lanes.

informational when square, instructional when round (ie the one showing a
divided pavement is round, the one showing a shared use path is square
(IIRC)

Quoted message said:

It's not true that only circular signs give orders.

Indeed but in most cases it is true. (the only exceptions being Stop and
give way for fixed road signs. (Not including flashing ones.)

...d

On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 18:14:39 GMT someone who may be "soup"
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

That is not an order, it is a suggestion. An order would involve a
round sign with a red ring around it.

And a black square with white writing ?

I can't recall any such signs, but might recognise one if I saw it.

Quoted message said:

Anyway have been led to believe that the canal towpath is not
actually a right of way or a public highway but private land
owned by "British Waterways"

That better describes the situation in the south.

Quoted message said:

and cyclists are supposed to
have a permit to ride on them .

They dropped that idea some time ago ISTR from discussions here.

--
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.

David Martin said:

On 7/9/04 8:25 pm, in article [email hidden], "Ian

Smith said:

There are numerous mandatory non-circular signs - like waiting /
parking / loading restrictions,

red circle, blue background, red line or two across the circle. Often placed
on a yellow rectangular background but that doesn't stop the symbol being
circular.

Except teh ones that aren't - like red route signs, and some
waiting / loading / parking restrictions.

And you can't argue that the ones that don't have a circle are merely
informational, highlighting the existence of road markings, because
there are cases where the non-circular sign gives information not
deducible from teh markings. That is, there can be identical road
markings, but teh accompanying non-circular signs differ and specify
different (compulsory) restrictions.

I stand by my statement that these are mandatory non-circular signs.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

cycle lanes.

informational when square, instructional when round (ie the one showing a
divided pavement is round, the one showing a shared use path is square
(IIRC)

Same comment as for parking restrictions etc. applies.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

It's not true that only circular signs give orders.

Indeed but in most cases it is true. (the only exceptions being Stop and
give way for fixed road signs. (Not including flashing ones.)

And the parking / waiting / restrictions signs. The OP asserted that
cyclists dismount _cannot_ be mandatory _because_ it was not circular.
Since there are non-circular mandatory signs, this is not true.

The statement that it might not be mandatory because some signs aren't
(which seems to be your argument) would have been more accurate, but
not particularly useful.

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|

On 8/9/04 12:24 pm, in article [email hidden], "Ian

Smith said:

David Martin said:

On 7/9/04 8:25 pm, in article [email hidden], "Ian

Smith said:

There are numerous mandatory non-circular signs - like waiting /
parking / loading restrictions,

red circle, blue background, red line or two across the circle. Often placed
on a yellow rectangular background but that doesn't stop the symbol being
circular.

Except teh ones that aren't - like red route signs, and some
waiting / loading / parking restrictions.

Redroute signs have no legal power in themselves. It is the road markings
which are teh appropriate thing. The signs are really to wake up the dozy so
and sos tot eh fact that it is a red route.

Quoted message said:

And you can't argue that the ones that don't have a circle are merely
informational, highlighting the existence of road markings, because
there are cases where the non-circular sign gives information not
deducible from teh markings. That is, there can be identical road
markings, but teh accompanying non-circular signs differ and specify
different (compulsory) restrictions.

But the sign itself is only informational. Without the road markings (for
waiting restrictions) or other appropriate signage, the informational part
is moot.

Quoted message said:

I stand by my statement that these are mandatory non-circular signs.

And I have not disagreed with that. I have pointedout that many of the signs
you are considering are not mandatory but informational.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

cycle lanes.

informational when square, instructional when round (ie the one showing a
divided pavement is round, the one showing a shared use path is square
(IIRC)

Same comment as for parking restrictions etc. applies.

No it doesn't. Round are mandatory (you must stay in your part of the
pavement). Square are informational (this path is shared by cyclists and
pedestrians).

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

It's not true that only circular signs give orders.

Indeed but in most cases it is true. (the only exceptions being Stop and
give way for fixed road signs. (Not including flashing ones.)

And the parking / waiting / restrictions signs.

Example please. I see many little square ones that have the appropriate
round sign incorporated as part of the whole thing.

Quoted message said:

The OP asserted that
cyclists dismount _cannot_ be mandatory _because_ it was not circular.
Since there are non-circular mandatory signs, this is not true.

The only mandatory cyclists dismount is a no cycling sign (round red circle
with a cycle on a white background). Square cyclists dismount are advisory
only.

Quoted message said:

The statement that it might not be mandatory because some signs aren't
(which seems to be your argument) would have been more accurate, but
not particularly useful.

...d

David Martin said:

On 8/9/04 12:24 pm, in article [email hidden], "Ian

Smith said:

David Martin said:

On 7/9/04 8:25 pm, in article [email hidden], "Ian
Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote:

> There are numerous mandatory non-circular signs - like waiting /
> parking / loading restrictions,

But the sign itself is only informational. Without the road markings (for
waiting restrictions) or other appropriate signage, the informational part
is moot.

Quoted message said:

I stand by my statement that these are mandatory non-circular signs.

And I have not disagreed with that. I have pointedout that many of the signs
you are considering are not mandatory but informational.

Depends how you define it - the parking signs, for example, are the
only way by which certain mandatory restrictions are communicated to
teh driver. You could define these as informational - but the same
definition would have to make circular 'no right turn' signs not
mandatory but informational - they're simply informing you of teh
existence of a traffic order prohibiting right turns at that location.

Quoted message said:

No it doesn't. Round are mandatory (you must stay in your part of the
pavement). Square are informational (this path is shared by cyclists and
pedestrians).

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> It's not true that only circular signs give orders.

Indeed but in most cases it is true. (the only exceptions being Stop and
give way for fixed road signs. (Not including flashing ones.)

And the parking / waiting / restrictions signs.

Example please. I see many little square ones that have the appropriate
round sign incorporated as part of the whole thing.

White background, black border, blue square with white 'P', black
lettering "Permit holders only", or black lettering "Mon-Sat 7am-7pm
20 mins No return within 40 mins".

On a red route by a marked bay: White background, red border, blue
square with white 'P', black text "RED ROUTE" and "Mon-Sat 7am-7pm
1 hour".

That's teh first three examples that come to hand from teh back of my
highway code.

How about single yellow band on a kerb, and adjacent rectangular sign
devoid of all circles saying "No loading Mon-Sat 8:30am-6:30pm".
That no-circular sign is the only way a mandatory restriction is
communicated to a driver.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The OP asserted that
cyclists dismount _cannot_ be mandatory _because_ it was not circular.
Since there are non-circular mandatory signs, this is not true.

The only mandatory cyclists dismount is a no cycling sign (round red circle
with a cycle on a white background). Square cyclists dismount are advisory
only.

On what basis do you make this assertion?

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|

David Hansen popped their head over the parapet saw what was going on
and said

Quoted message said:

On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 18:14:39 GMT someone who may be "soup"
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

And a black square with white writing ?

I can't recall any such signs, but might recognise one if I saw it.

Here's one of the ones on the Union canal, looks more and more
like an advisory than a 'proper' lawfull sign.
http://www.sidtech.co.uk/iu/soup2761000708.JPG

--
yours S

Nihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione

soup said:

Here's one of the ones on the Union canal, looks more and more
like an advisory than a 'proper' lawfull sign.
http://www.sidtech.co.uk/iu/soup2761000708.JPG

So how come permits are available in Scotland if you can cycle
wherever you want without them?

--
Dave...

Get a bicycle. You will not regret it. If you live. - Mark Twain

Dave Kahn popped their head over the parapet saw what was going on and
said

Quoted message said:

So how come permits are available in Scotland if you can cycle
wherever you want without them?

It was Dave Hansen that said the permits idea had been dropped not me.
and Simon Brooke that said you can cycle anywhere.

Personaly I think that sign/permit issue has no standing in law but
90% of people will act as if they are legal a bit like the "poliTe
notice
no parking" signs on private property. People just glance at the sign
and see "poliCe notice no parking" so they comply although the sign
has no actual legal standing.

--
yours S

Nihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione