Riding to work

Steven said:

After all, there *was* no accident.

....except by any normal definition of the word accident. (I don't know
which definition you are using.)

Quoted message said:

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

Yes, as per the incident I was involved in, described above - I took
what I thought were reasonable precautions but still there was a
collision.

But as SimonB rightly pointed out, the fact that I had taken
precautions meant that the effects of the incident were lessened.

Quoted message said:

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,

The avoidance of accidents often relies upon the knowledge (ie
something a bit more concrete than an assumption) that in the real
world there are lots of idiots out there who don't behave sensibly on
the road.

Quoted message said:

If MattB's assertion was correct,

which it is

everyone would be slamming on the anchors

Quoted message said:

every time they saw anyone standing on the edge of the pavement

Not if they were driving at a sensible speed.

Assuming the pedestrian that is standing on the edge of the pavement is
there legitimately, you're most likely in a 30mph zone anyway, so
shouldn't be going too fast to be able to stop quickly and safely when
the pedestrian does step off the pavement.

(even if they

Quoted message said:

(pavement occupier) were looking right at them) in case they steped out into
their path.

It happens. It's a nuisance, sure, but I'd rather drive slower and not
be forever wiping the remains of pedestrians off my bonnet.

d.

On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 23:07:10 +0100, "Clive George"
<[email hidden]> wrote:

<snip>

Quoted message said:

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.

Riding in the primary position also gives you somewhere to go if it
all goes pear shaped. For example: "I couldn't swerve to the left
because I'd have collided with the kerb and fallen off." Riding
further out gives you that space.

Tim

Peter Clinch said:

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.

Especially if, like Peewiglet's new friend, the ped is wearing headphones...

--
Dave Larrington - <http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/>
The best way to confuse a Daily Mail reader is to tell it that
paedophiles form the staple diet of asylum seekers.

[email hidden] wrote:

[Scissor Wossname]

An interesting variation on this theme is the one whereby the ped is in the
central reservation when the ped lights turn red. This, one might opine,
would surely indicate that the vehicle lights are on the point of turning
green and thus that the white vans and psychopathic motorcycle couriers
making up the front row of the grid will soon be under way in a manner that
makes a Grand Prix Renault seem positively slothful.

Our hero, however, pauses a second or three, adjusts his or her personal
force field and then, at the very instant that WVM in the left-hand lane has
dumped the clutch, starts to amble across the road...

--
Dave Larrington - <http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/>
The best way to confuse a Daily Mail reader is to tell it that
paedophiles form the staple diet of asylum seekers.

davek said:

Steven said:

After all, there *was* no accident.

...except by any normal definition of the word accident. (I don't know
which definition you are using.)

From the OP

|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.

That to me implies that there was no accident. (As far as I'm aware, there must
be some unwanted collison for something to be considered an accident on the
road.)

Any more than there would be an accident if a motorists saw someone about to
step off the footway into his path too close for him to swerve and stop, and by
judicious use of the horn, averted a collision.

Are we talking at cross purposes here?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

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

Yes, as per the incident I was involved in, described above - I took
what I thought were reasonable precautions but still there was a
collision.

Ah, yes, but that is a different sub thread to this one. I am refering to the OP
for the thread.

Quoted message said:

But as SimonB rightly pointed out, the fact that I had taken
precautions meant that the effects of the incident were lessened.

True. And in the OP's case, the precaution of shouting averted an accident
altogether.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

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,

The avoidance of accidents often relies upon the knowledge (ie
something a bit more concrete than an assumption) that in the real
world there are lots of idiots out there who don't behave sensibly on
the road.

This is getting back to the "do you slow down and look for conflicting traffic
before/as/after you cross a green light".

Yes, you are correct, but just how much allowance do you make?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

If MattB's assertion was correct,

which it is

everyone would be slamming on the anchors

Quoted message said:

every time they saw anyone standing on the edge of the pavement

Not if they were driving at a sensible speed.

Rubbish (well, rubbish unless you think 3 mph is a sensible speed).

At 20 mph, the HWC says your stopping distance (in a car) is 40 feet.

Which would mean that you'd need to slow down if you saw someone standing on the
footway *apparantly* waiting to cross the road 40 feet away.

As you got closer and closer you would have to slow down more and more.

In fact, there will never be *no* risk of collision unless you stop.

Quoted message said:

Assuming the pedestrian that is standing on the edge of the pavement is
there legitimately, you're most likely in a 30mph zone anyway, so
shouldn't be going too fast to be able to stop quickly and safely when
the pedestrian does step off the pavement.

What utter nonsense!

The HWC gives the typical stopping distance for a car as 75' at 30 mph.

How the hell are you going to stop in time if a POF launches themselves off the
footway when you're 30 feet away?

Quoted message said:

(even if they

Quoted message said:

(pavement occupier) were looking right at them) in case they steped out into
their path.

It happens. It's a nuisance, sure, but I'd rather drive slower and not
be forever wiping the remains of pedestrians off my bonnet.

As I've shown above, you cannot drive slowly enough to avert *any* possibility
of a collision.

If we all assumed that POF were going to behave as stupidly as the one in the OP
we'd either all travel at (say) 3 mph or end up as nervous wrecks.

In fact, even driving at 30 mph through busy streets, the incidence of POF being
hit by cars is really quite small. (Although, I personaly think 30 mph is too
fast for crowded streets).

Dave Larrington said:

[email hidden] wrote:

[Scissor Wossname]

An interesting variation on this theme is the one whereby the ped is in the
central reservation when the ped lights turn red. This, one might opine,
would surely indicate that the vehicle lights are on the point of turning
green and thus that the white vans and psychopathic motorcycle couriers
making up the front row of the grid will soon be under way in a manner that
makes a Grand Prix Renault seem positively slothful.

Our hero, however, pauses a second or three, adjusts his or her personal
force field and then, at the very instant that WVM in the left-hand lane has
dumped the clutch, starts to amble across the road...

[TIC]
Yes, if you reach the central reservation *just* as the light turns red, the
correct procedure is to run like buggary for the other side.

And then, only if it's a single lane carriageway.
[/TIC]

Steven said:

That to me implies that there was no accident.

OK, working from memory (rather than checking the facts) I
misremembered what actually happened to the OP. Sorry, my bad.

Quoted message said:

This is getting back to the "do you slow down and look for conflicting traffic
before/as/after you cross a green light".

It is, isn't it.

Quoted message said:

Yes, you are correct, but just how much allowance do you make?

I've never hit a ped yet, so I'm probably doing OK. (Don't want to get
lulled into a false sense of security, though.)

Quoted message said:

Rubbish (well, rubbish unless you think 3 mph is a sensible speed).

Depends on the precise circumstances. I can easily envisage many
real-life situations where anything more than 3mph would be crazy. What
does driving faster achieve anyway? It only gets you to the back of the
next queue a second or two sooner.

Quoted message said:

At 20 mph, the HWC says your stopping distance (in a car) is 40 feet.

Which would mean that you'd need to slow down if you saw someone standing on the
footway *apparantly* waiting to cross the road 40 feet away.

40 feet isn't a long way - if a pedestrian steps out in front of you
when you are that close, you can be forgiven for not being able to
avoid them. And even more so if you are only travelling at 20mph
because the impact is a /lot/ less likely to be fatal or even "serious"
(in the medical sense) than if you were travelling at, say, 30mph.

Quoted message said:

As you got closer and closer you would have to slow down more and more.

In fact, there will never be *no* risk of collision unless you stop.

You seem to be interpreting what I'm saying too rigidly. In fact, we
most probably agree on more than we disagree on - eg that the erratic
nature of pedestrians means it is impossible to avoid /all/ collisions.
I've never advocated taking such extreme measures as you seem to think
my position entails. Likewise, I suspect you aren't really advocating
driving as recklessly as it might appear from what you say.

Quoted message said:

The HWC gives the typical stopping distance for a car as 75' at 30 mph.

How the hell are you going to stop in time if a POF launches themselves off the
footway when you're 30 feet away?

Who says I was going at 30mph? In a 30mph zone, that is the /maximum
permissible/ speed, not an indication of the speed you should be
travelling at - conditions (such as the presence of pedestrians) often
dictate that you should be going much slower.

Quoted message said:

In fact, even driving at 30 mph through busy streets

....should be grounds for a charge of murder in the event of a fatal
collision.

Quoted message said:

(Although, I personaly think 30 mph is too
fast for crowded streets).

See, I told you we agreed.

d.

davek said:

See, I told you we agreed.

I knew we agreed about how to drive/cycle (in principle at least), it's just the
expression of it that gets difficult.

In essence, I think, one makes a judgement for any given set of circumstances
that allows one to proceed at a reasonable pace allowing for all but the most
egregious errors on the part of other road users.

"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?

Yes, it is very common. Cyclists frequently ride too fast to be able to
stop should an emergency occur in front of them. Not helped by the penchant
for riding with [censored] up in the air and head right down so all they can see
is the front wheel.

And should the audible warning equipment not consist of a bell? Yelling
"Watch out" doesn't comply with the Pedal Bicycles (Safety) Regulations
2003.

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

Quoted message said:

Simon Brooke said:

Sorry - following up a second time - an effective solution to this
problem is the 'air zound' horn which is light, easy to use, and ear
splittingly loud. If you use one there is no possibility of the
pedestrian remaining unaware of your presence.

I'll look out for one of those, then. Thanks 🙂

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! 🙂

If she crossed the whole road looking in your direction, then you were
obviously looking in her direction whilst she was doing it. (skimpily
dressed, was she?)

But that does mean that there is no excuse for you almost hitting her - you
had plenty of time to take avoiding action (slow down?)

Typical cyclist.

"Jeremy Collins" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:op.ss4flqmh4al0tm@office...

Quoted message said:

On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 06:36:30 +0100, Peewiglet <[email hidden]>

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! 🙂

Yep, I get people doing this quite often. I admit that sometime I do
the childish thing and speed past them as close as possible shouting
"watch where you're f****** going!".

And how clever you would feel when she replied "I would if I could, but I am
blind"

At Thu, 30 Jun 2005 20:25:28 GMT, message
<[email hidden]> was posted by "ian henden"
<[email hidden]>, including some, all or none of the following:

Quoted message said:

Cyclists frequently ride too fast to be able to
stop should an emergency occur in front of them. Not helped by the penchant
for riding with [censored] up in the air and head right down so all they can see
is the front wheel.

Since you have evidently never ridden a drop-handlebar bike, your
opinion on this is clearly worthless. And only one of my five bikes
has drop bars anyway.

I am amused by your contention that cyclists ride to fast to stop in
the available distance, a behaviour characteristic of aggressive urban
drivers.

Quoted message said:

And should the audible warning equipment not consist of a bell? Yelling
"Watch out" doesn't comply with the Pedal Bicycles (Safety) Regulations
2003.

Which do not apply once the bike has left the shop. The requirement
for an audible warning on the road is satisfied by the rider's voice.

Guy
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

"To every complex problem there is a solution which is
simple, neat and wrong" - HL Mencken

ian henden said:

Yes, it is very common. Cyclists frequently ride too fast to be able to
stop should an emergency occur in front of them. Not helped by the penchant
for riding with [censored] up in the air and head right down so all they can see
is the front wheel.

Whereas bus drivers never do and would never miss seeing something as
big as another bus:

http://www.henden.co.uk/117and303.jpg
http://www.henden.co.uk/303and117.jpg

Yeah, right.

--
Tony

"I did make a mistake once - I thought I'd made a mistake but I hadn't"
Anon

Tony Raven said:

ian henden said:

Yes, it is very common. Cyclists frequently ride too fast to be able to
stop should an emergency occur in front of them. Not helped by the penchant
for riding with [censored] up in the air and head right down so all they can see
is the front wheel.

Whereas bus drivers never do and would never miss seeing something as
big as another bus:

http://www.henden.co.uk/117and303.jpg
http://www.henden.co.uk/303and117.jpg

Yeah, right.

LOL.

Its not only other buses that bus drivers cannot see.
Last week a bus driver demolished Winchester Bus Station, putting it out
of operation as the roof is in danger of collapse.

John B

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

Quoted message said:

Tony Raven said:

ian henden said:

Yes, it is very common. Cyclists frequently ride too fast to be able
to
stop should an emergency occur in front of them. Not helped by the
penchant
for riding with [censored] up in the air and head right down so all they can
see
is the front wheel.

Whereas bus drivers never do and would never miss seeing something as
big as another bus:

http://www.henden.co.uk/117and303.jpg
http://www.henden.co.uk/303and117.jpg

Yeah, right.

It wasn't me, guv!!! (I do know who it was ......)

Quoted message said:

LOL.

Its not only other buses that bus drivers cannot see.
Last week a bus driver demolished Winchester Bus Station, putting it out
of operation as the roof is in danger of collapse.

Actually he *did* see the bus station.

It's just that he forgot where the front of his bus was.

:o)

--
IanH

"Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

At Thu, 30 Jun 2005 20:25:28 GMT, message
<[email hidden]> was posted by "ian henden"
<[email hidden]>, including some, all or none of the following:

Quoted message said:

Cyclists frequently ride too fast to be able to
stop should an emergency occur in front of them. Not helped by the
penchant
for riding with [censored] up in the air and head right down so all they can see
is the front wheel.

Since you have evidently never ridden a drop-handlebar bike, your
opinion on this is clearly worthless. And only one of my five bikes
has drop bars anyway.

I am amused by your contention that cyclists ride to fast to stop in
the available distance, a behaviour characteristic of aggressive urban
drivers.

Perhaps you could explain why a very senior Royal Navy officer on a bike
(wearing all the standard clown outfit that cyclists do, and riding quite an
expensive bike) managed to ride into the back of my wifes Vectra which had
been waiting at a junction for some 20 seconds? [censored] up in the air. Hardly
looking where he was going.

(AND she took him to hospital, close by, because he had cut himself badly.
AND, to be fair, he paid for the damage to the Vectra, as well as his own
bike.)

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

And should the audible warning equipment not consist of a bell? Yelling
"Watch out" doesn't comply with the Pedal Bicycles (Safety) Regulations
2003.

Which do not apply once the bike has left the shop. The requirement
for an audible warning on the road is satisfied by the rider's voice.

Then the law is an ass. Why bother fitting them if they are an optional
extra?
But then again, many cyclists also consider the Highway Code to be an
optional extra.

ian henden said:

..... my wifes Vectra which had been waiting at a junction for some 20 seconds? [censored] up in the air.

Your wife or the Vectra?

--
Tony

"I did make a mistake once - I thought I'd made a mistake but I hadn't"
Anon

ian henden said:

"Jeremy Collins" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:op.ss4flqmh4al0tm@office...

Quoted message said:

On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 06:36:30 +0100, Peewiglet <[email hidden]>

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! 🙂

Yep, I get people doing this quite often. I admit that sometime I do
the childish thing and speed past them as close as possible shouting
"watch where you're f****** going!".

And how clever you would feel when she replied "I would if I could, but I am
blind"

I doubt that she'd have lived this long if she was in the habit of crossing
roads without being able to see (and without taking the appropriate precautions
that do allow blind people to cross the road in relative safety).

ian henden said:

If she crossed the whole road looking in your direction, then you were
obviously looking in her direction whilst she was doing it. (skimpily
dressed, was she?)

But that does mean that there is no excuse for you almost hitting her - you
had plenty of time to take avoiding action (slow down?)

Typical cyclist.

So, when you're driving along the road, you slow down for anyone who you see
crosssing the opposite carriage way towards you, do you?

And do you just do that, or lean on your horn and shout a few choice words at
them.

Actually, I doubt that you do. Because you're in a metal box, you assume they
won't get in your way, but for some reason you think the rules should be
different for a cycle.

Typical [censored].

in message <[email hidden]>, ian henden

(') 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?

Yes, it is very common. Cyclists frequently ride too fast to be able
to
stop should an emergency occur in front of them. Not helped by the
penchant for riding with [censored] up in the air and head right down so all
they can see is the front wheel.

And should the audible warning equipment not consist of a bell?
Yelling "Watch out" doesn't comply with the Pedal Bicycles (Safety)
Regulations 2003.

Have you ever used a bicycle bell in traffic? Have you ever /heard/ a
bicycle bell in traffic? There are two solutions to this problem: (1)
yelling - undignified and not particularly effective; (2) Air Zound. As
someone else has pointed out upthread, the ped leaps ten feet in the
air and you cycle past underneath unimpeded. A most wonderful piece of
kit.

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

---===***<<< This space to let! >>>***===---
Yes! You, too, can SPAM in the Famous Brooke Rotating .sig!
---===***<<< Only $300 per line >>>***===---