Riding to work

Nobody Here said:

You truly are a stupid, sanctimonious [censored], aren't you? Sounds like
you need to go on a not sounding like a [censored] course specially aimed
at those who've not yet learned to masturbate.

Nobody could accuse me of being Matt B's number one fan, but I do
believe he is in the right on this occasion.

d.

davek said:

Nobody Here said:

You truly are a stupid, sanctimonious [censored], aren't you? Sounds like
you need to go on a not sounding like a [censored] course specially aimed
at those who've not yet learned to masturbate.

Nobody could accuse me of being Matt B's number one fan, but I do
believe he is in the right on this occasion.

Matt B does occasionally make a good point, but (at least as far as relating the
incident to the HWC is concerned), I don't think this is one of them.

After all, there *was* no accident.

All that happened was someone walked into the OP's path whilst looking at him.

You'll always be able to find a situation where you are too close and fast to
stop for an object moving in an unexpected way across your path (after all, POF
could have stopped, accelerated or stepped back).

The free movement of traffic relies upon people being able to assume that other
road users are going to do something at least reasonably sensible, especially
when you *know* that they are aware of you.

If MattB's assertion was correct, everyone would be slamming on the anchors
every time they saw anyone standing on the edge of the pavement (even if they
(pavement occupier) were looking right at them) in case they steped out into
their path.

Steven said:

Matt B said:

"Steven" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 17:00:34 +0100, "Matt B" <[email hidden]>
wrote:

>> No, I think he disagrees with your simplistic, and, to all intents and
>> purposes
>> utterly wrong, interpretation of it.
>
>Please explain your "correct" interpretation of those two rules then.

There is no "correct" interpretation.

They are, to all intents and purposes, meaningless.

Or at least, their meaning is limited to "try not to have accidents".

How would you reconcile the OP's phrase "I was too fast and close to stop"
with the HC instruction "You should drive with the safety of children in
mind at a speed suitable for the conditions"?

I know one should not answer a question with a question, but:

If you were in a car, doing 20mph on a clear, straight road, and just as you
were about to pass the only person on the footway (a child) and it
lurched out into the road, and you hit it, how would you reconcise *that*
accident with the same rule?

There are no absolutes and unless everyone moved at 1 mph or less there will
always be accidents.

Not in MattB world, where, when he's old enough to get a license, he will
never be a risk to anyone and never have an accident either his fault,
someone else's or somehwere in between. That's because noone else lives
in PrattB world except for MattB.

--
Nobby

Quoted message said:

I know one should not answer a question with a question, but:

If you were in a car, doing 20mph on a clear, straight road, and just as you
were about to pass the only person on the footway (a child) and it
lurched out into the road, and you hit it, how would you reconcise *that*
accident with the same rule?

There are no absolutes and unless everyone moved at 1 mph or less there will
always be accidents.

Couldn't agree more; You can be the best rider / driver in the world and
still fall foul of someone else's completely unexpected behaviour.
Being a cyclist / motorcyclist you tend to develop a good defensive riding
attitude and try and make allowances for others' mistakes; After all we
all make mistakes and hopefully when I do / have done, someone will be
making an allowance for me!
Still can't guarantee someone will not just walk in the road right in
front of you, just like a car pulling out of a junction with only 10 yards
before impact; you could have previously adjusted your speed, position,
sounded a bell and if he/she lurches out into you or your path what can
you do? At the end of the day you just do what you can.

To answer the OP's question, I have had pedestrians step into the road
before (once or twice) when they are walking with the flow of traffic on a
dual carriageway, because they hear a lull in traffic and don't think
about cycles. FWIW I try and anticipate this and cycle a bit further out
in the lane, which in turn gives me more time to react; I'm not saying
it'll always work but it's better than slowing to a crawl. I suppose
thinking about it, a good session of bell ringing on approach wouldn't be
out of place....

Regards
Wayne.

Peewiglet wrote:
<snip>

Quoted message said:

This evening, though, a young woman walked across the road in front of
me and I think she'd have walked right into my bike if I'd not shouted
to her to watch out. (I was too fast and close to stop, and couldn't
swerve to avoid as there were cars in the way.) Is this common?

Yes.

Seems to be in London anyway.

Pete

Matt B said:

"Peewiglet" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I've started riding to work and back a couple of times a week. It's
about 15 miles each way, and it's not too bad.

This evening, though, a young woman walked across the road in front of
me and I think she'd have walked right into my bike if I'd not shouted
to her to watch out. (I was too fast and close to stop, and couldn't
swerve to avoid as there were cars in the way.) Is this common?

Sounds like you need to go on a "cycling proficiency" type course. You
should not be riding too fast to stop. Have you read the highway code
recently?

Try rule 181:
In urban areas there is a risk of pedestrians, especially children, stepping
unexpectedly into the road. You should drive with the safety of children in
mind at a speed suitable for the conditions.

or 182:
Drive carefully and slowly when
- in crowded shopping streets or residential areas
...

I have learned to look out locally for the "scissors" routine. This
happens when I approach a cross-roads which is near a busy railway
station and shopping centre. A pedestrian will walk out from the
central island on my right to cross the road in front of my bike,
despite the lights being against him. I adjust my line to head over to
the left a bit, whereupon another pedestrian, probably seeing the first
one crossing, assumes that it is safe to cross (not looking in my
direction at all) and proceeds to cross from my left. I am thus faced
with the exciting choice of three gaps to aim for. The one in between
them is decreasing fast, and though it does have the appeal of being
educational, I usually avoid it. This leaves me to go either further to
the left or to zig back to the right, to go behind one of the
pedestrians. This can be further complicated by the risk of further
pedestrians coming out.

The "modified scissors" routine involves one of the pedestrians pushing
a pushchair.

Moderating speed helps in one way, obviously, but it also encourages
more pedestrians to walk out in front of me, despite the traffic
lights.

Quoted message said:

I have learned to look out locally for the "scissors" routine. This
happens when I approach a cross-roads which is near a busy railway
station and shopping centre. A pedestrian will walk out from the
central island on my right to cross the road in front of my bike,
despite the lights being against him. I adjust my line to head over to
the left a bit, whereupon another pedestrian, probably seeing the first
one crossing, assumes that it is safe to cross (not looking in my
direction at all) and proceeds to cross from my left. I am thus faced
with the exciting choice of three gaps to aim for. The one in between
them is decreasing fast, and though it does have the appeal of being
educational, I usually avoid it. This leaves me to go either further to
the left or to zig back to the right, to go behind one of the
pedestrians. This can be further complicated by the risk of further
pedestrians coming out.

The "modified scissors" routine involves one of the pedestrians pushing
a pushchair.

Moderating speed helps in one way, obviously, but it also encourages
more pedestrians to walk out in front of me, despite the traffic
lights.

This definitely seems to be a case for an air horn.

Whilst POF are quite entitled to cross agaist a red light, it really does behove
them to look *very* carefully for traffic.

Of course, they (we) should always do that anyway before stepping onto the
carriageway.

On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 08:18:48 +0100, Tony Raven <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Peewiglet said:

(I was too fast and close to stop, and couldn't
swerve to avoid as there were cars in the way.)

and later added

Quoted message said:

What I didn't make clear in my original post, incidentally, was that
this young woman came from my right, and not from the left. She didn't
just step off the kerb without noticing me - she actually crossed the
whole road looking in my direction and just kept walking. Bizarre! 🙂

Sommat doesn't add up here.

No, not really. It's just that I didn't want to have to write a whole
essay. However....

I'd just crossed a roundabout onto a busy B road. There was traffic
accelerating towards me from my rear, which had also just entered the
road from the roundabout behind me. When I entered the road the woman
was some distance in front of me and to my right, on the pavement at
the other side of the road. She stepped off the kerb and began to
cross the road, looking towards me but probably focussing on the cars
behind me and presumably trying to get across before they caught her
up. As she got to the middle of the road she didn't stop, and just
walked straight on as though I wasn't there. It may be that she was
distracted by the music playing in the headphones in her ears.

Quoted message said:

How did she walk across the whole road when
there were cars around there that stopped you swerving

The cars were behind me, accelerating towards me from the roundabout,
as described above.

Quoted message said:

and if she
crossed the whole road without looking how did you not see her

I did see her - I'm not blind...

Quoted message said:

and
adjust your speed and direction to avoid the conflict?

I couldn't stop as there were cars accelerating behind me.

I couldn't swerve to the right because there were cars accelerating
behind me, and probably preparing to overtake me.

I couldn't swerve to the left because I'd have collided with the kerb
and fallen off.

The whole thing probably took less than 10 seconds.

Quoted message said:

I am beginning
to think Simonb might have been right.

It seems to me that you make some rather sweeping assumptions!

Best wishes,
--
,,
(**)PeeWiglet~~
/ \ / \ pee AT [guessthisbit].co.uk

On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 09:54:41 +0100, Tony Raven <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Jeremy Collins wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

This happens to me quite often on a broad stretch of road in my home
town. I don't know what's special aboutt his bit of road, but people
sometime cross from the opposite side of the road (which is clear of
traffic), and walk right in front of me.

But if you've seen them then there is no excuse for coming anywhere
close to an accident even if their inattention has created the situation.

Sorry, but that's a really daft thing to say. If we all took avoiding
action the moment we saw the potential for collision with a negligent
pedestrian - or other cyclist or driver - we'd have to get off our
bikes and walk instead.

Best wishes,
--
,,
(**)PeeWiglet~~
/ \ / \ pee AT [guessthisbit].co.uk

On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 07:27:20 GMT, [email hidden] (Steven)

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

What I didn't make clear in my original post, incidentally, was that
this young woman came from my right, and not from the left. She didn't
just step off the kerb without noticing me - she actually crossed the
whole road looking in my direction and just kept walking. Bizarre! 🙂

Ah, now we're getting to the crux of the matter.

She obviously thought she was a white van/artic/BMW 4x4.

Which 'she' is which? I'm confused now...

Best wishes,
--
,,
(**)PeeWiglet~~
/ \ / \ pee AT [guessthisbit].co.uk

Matt B said:

Quoted message said:

This evening, though, a young woman walked across the road in front of
me and I think she'd have walked right into my bike if I'd not shouted
to her to watch out. (I was too fast and close to stop, and couldn't
swerve to avoid as there were cars in the way.) Is this common?

Sounds like you need to go on a "cycling proficiency" type course. You
should not be riding too fast to stop.

Ok, thanks. That's very constructive.

Quoted message said:

Have you read the highway code
recently?

Not recently, but I've read it frequently.

Quoted message said:

Try rule 181:
In urban areas there is a risk of pedestrians, especially children, stepping
unexpectedly into the road. You should drive with the safety of children in
mind at a speed suitable for the conditions.

That makes good sense, but it's not relevant to the situation I
described.

Quoted message said:

or 182:
Drive carefully and slowly when
- in crowded shopping streets or residential areas

That's not really relevant either.

Best wishes,
--
,,
(**)PeeWiglet~~
/ \ / \ pee AT [guessthisbit].co.uk

Peewiglet said:

On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 07:27:20 GMT, [email hidden] (Steven)

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

What I didn't make clear in my original post, incidentally, was that
this young woman came from my right, and not from the left. She didn't
just step off the kerb without noticing me - she actually crossed the
whole road looking in my direction and just kept walking. Bizarre! 🙂

Ah, now we're getting to the crux of the matter.

She obviously thought she was a white van/artic/BMW 4x4.

Which 'she' is which? I'm confused now...

Well, I was refering to the POF who looked straight at you and kept on coming
anyway.

Sounds like white van/artic/BMW 4x4 behaviour to me.

On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 19:17:38 GMT, Wayne <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

To answer the OP's question, I have had pedestrians step into the road
before (once or twice) when they are walking with the flow of traffic on a
dual carriageway, because they hear a lull in traffic and don't think
about cycles. FWIW I try and anticipate this and cycle a bit further out
in the lane, which in turn gives me more time to react; I'm not saying
it'll always work but it's better than slowing to a crawl. I suppose
thinking about it, a good session of bell ringing on approach wouldn't be
out of place....

Thanks for the tips- I'll certainly bear them in mind 🙂 I think a
more effective bell is a good starting point!

Best wishes,
--
,,
(**)PeeWiglet~~
/ \ / \ pee AT [guessthisbit].co.uk

On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 21:42:30 GMT, [email hidden] (Steven)

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>What I didn't make clear in my original post, incidentally, was that
>this young woman came from my right, and not from the left. She didn't
>just step off the kerb without noticing me - she actually crossed the
>whole road looking in my direction and just kept walking. Bizarre! 🙂

Ah, now we're getting to the crux of the matter.

She obviously thought she was a white van/artic/BMW 4x4.

Which 'she' is which? I'm confused now...

Well, I was refering to the POF who looked straight at you and kept on coming
anyway.

Sounds like white van/artic/BMW 4x4 behaviour to me.

Ahaa.... that's a relief, thanks!

Best wishes,
--
,,
(**)PeeWiglet~~
/ \ / \ pee AT [guessthisbit].co.uk

"Peewiglet" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I couldn't stop as there were cars accelerating behind me.

I couldn't swerve to the right because there were cars accelerating
behind me, and probably preparing to overtake me.

I couldn't swerve to the left because I'd have collided with the kerb
and fallen off.

The whole thing probably took less than 10 seconds.

Sounds like the best course of action was to use the primary position, aka
be on the right. This may well have prevented cars overtaking - that's the
general idea, if there was somebody crossing, it may well not have been safe
for them to do so.

Note - this is not 'swerve to the right' - doing sudden things is bad. It's
also important to make your move positive - if you look like you know what
you're doing, you won't have problems with the people behind.

And this is all with the benefit of hindsight - you'll just be better
prepared next time.

cheers,
clive

Clive George said:

Quoted message said:

I couldn't stop as there were cars accelerating behind me.

I couldn't swerve to the right because there were cars accelerating
behind me, and probably preparing to overtake me.

I couldn't swerve to the left because I'd have collided with the kerb
and fallen off.

The whole thing probably took less than 10 seconds.

Sounds like the best course of action was to use the primary position, aka
be on the right. This may well have prevented cars overtaking - that's the
general idea, if there was somebody crossing, it may well not have been safe
for them to do so.

Note - this is not 'swerve to the right' - doing sudden things is bad. It's
also important to make your move positive - if you look like you know what
you're doing, you won't have problems with the people behind.

And this is all with the benefit of hindsight - you'll just be better
prepared next time.

Thanks Clive - that's helpful. Live and learn, etc!

Best wishes,
--
,,
(**)PeeWiglet~~
/ \ / \ pee AT [guessthisbit].co.uk

Peewiglet said:

I've started riding to work and back a couple of times a week. It's
about 15 miles each way, and it's not too bad.

This evening, though, a young woman walked across the road in front of
me and I think she'd have walked right into my bike if I'd not shouted
to her to watch out. (I was too fast and close to stop, and couldn't
swerve to avoid as there were cars in the way.) Is this common?

Yes, because bikes are invisible to most road users. Well, if you assume
that then you should reduce the risk of accidents! Don't worry, after a
few weeks your powers of anticipation will been honed to perfection.

Biggles

(Steven) said:

On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 22:36:27 +0100, Peewiglet <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 07:27:20 GMT, [email hidden] (Steven)

Quoted message said:

>What I didn't make clear in my original post, incidentally, was that
>this young woman came from my right, and not from the left. She didn't
>just step off the kerb without noticing me - she actually crossed the
>whole road looking in my direction and just kept walking. Bizarre! 🙂

Ah, now we're getting to the crux of the matter.

She obviously thought she was a white van/artic/BMW 4x4.

Which 'she' is which? I'm confused now...

Quoted message said:

Well, I was refering to the POF who looked straight at you and kept on coming
anyway.

Quoted message said:

Sounds like white van/artic/BMW 4x4 behaviour to me.

Some pedestrians clearly do operate with the white-van model of
cyclists in mind, i.e. "It's only a bike, it can get out of my way".

--
Chris Malcolm [email hidden] +44 (0)131 651 3445 DoD #205
IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]

"Peewiglet" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Thanks for the tips- I'll certainly bear them in mind 🙂 I think a
more effective bell is a good starting point!

Defo get an AirZound - they're only £20 and very very effective. They'll
affect most people either on foot or in a vehicle..

Peewiglet said:

Thanks for the tips- I'll certainly bear them in mind 🙂 I think a
more effective bell is a good starting point!

Bells are of minimal use in traffic. They /are/ very handy on shared
use paths, nosing through no motor vehicle "pedestrianised" areas where
bikes are allowed and the like. But amongst motor traffic, even if the
"target" is a ped, they don't really cut it. Either shout or, as Simon
suggested yesterday, an Air Zound. See...
http://www.biketrax.co.uk/products.php?plid=m2b20s140p23
Hear... something like an artic truck carries!

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