Segway in Hyde Park - sighting



G

Gawnsoft

Guest
On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 16:35:06 GMT, Simon Brooke <[email protected]>
wrote (more or less):

>in message <[email protected]>, David Hansen
>('[email protected]') wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 11 Sep 2004 11:16:39 +0100 someone who may be davek
>> <[email protected]> wrote this:-
>>
>>>> I'm curious- on what grounds are they considered motor vehicles?
>>>
>>>They are vehicles. And they have a motor.

>
>In fact, to be precise, two motors.
>
>> So do electric bikes, but they are not classed as motor vehicles in
>> legal terms.

>
>In that case the law is perverse, and an ass.


Not entirely. Electric bikes are only not classed as motor vehicles
as long as the motors provide only assistance to the pedaller, rather
than primary motive force.

And even then if it's kept limited to low power. And low speed.
(less than 15mph)


--
Cheers,
Euan
Gawnsoft: http://www.gawnsoft.co.sr
Symbian/Epoc wiki: http://html.dnsalias.net:1122
Smalltalk links (harvested from comp.lang.smalltalk) http://html.dnsalias.net/gawnsoft/smalltalk
 
G

Gawnsoft

Guest
On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 20:55:18 +0100, "MartinM" <[email protected]>
wrote (more or less):

>
>"Simon Brooke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]
>> in message <[email protected]>, MartinM
>> ('[email protected]') wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > "davek" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> > news:[email protected]
>> >> MartinM wrote:
>> >> > Pedals were not
>> >> > specified. How does the Segway break this law?
>> >>
>> >> I've just cut-and-pasted the below from the dft. Note the mention of
>> >> pedals. It is also specifically listed as a motor vehicle.
>> >
>> > I stand corrected, so that means those battery powered
>> > skateboards/scooters as well. Notice the liberal use of the "not
>> > proven in law" get-out which probably means you could not sue someone
>> > for knocking you down with a Segway, public ropad/path or not.

>>
>> On the contrary, it means you could. All it means that is the court
>> would have to make a decision.

>
>Well ban them anyway, they are from the US; like McDonalds, and Ninja
>turtles ;-)
>(and maybe even Games Workshop which has just opened in town)


Games Workshop are all British...



--
Cheers,
Euan
Gawnsoft: http://www.gawnsoft.co.sr
Symbian/Epoc wiki: http://html.dnsalias.net:1122
Smalltalk links (harvested from comp.lang.smalltalk) http://html.dnsalias.net/gawnsoft/smalltalk
 
N

[Not Responding]

Guest
On Sun, 19 Sep 2004 23:37:56 GMT, Gawnsoft
<[email protected]> wrote:

>On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 16:35:06 GMT, Simon Brooke <[email protected]>
>wrote (more or less):
>
>>in message <[email protected]>, David Hansen
>>('[email protected]') wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, 11 Sep 2004 11:16:39 +0100 someone who may be davek
>>> <[email protected]> wrote this:-
>>>
>>>>> I'm curious- on what grounds are they considered motor vehicles?
>>>>
>>>>They are vehicles. And they have a motor.

>>
>>In fact, to be precise, two motors.
>>
>>> So do electric bikes, but they are not classed as motor vehicles in
>>> legal terms.

>>
>>In that case the law is perverse, and an ass.

>
>Not entirely. Electric bikes are only not classed as motor vehicles
>as long as the motors provide only assistance to the pedaller, rather
>than primary motive force.
>
>And even then if it's kept limited to low power. And low speed.
>(less than 15mph)


The CCN latest newsletter reports a Q asked in Parliament about the
status of Segways. The answer makes it clear that they are motor
vehicles.

I would have cut-and-pasted the text but it's in columnar pdf format
which is a pain for this.
 
T

Tim Henderson

Guest
"[Not Responding]" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
>
> The CCN latest newsletter reports a Q asked in Parliament about the
> status of Segways. The answer makes it clear that they are motor
> vehicles.
>
> I would have cut-and-pasted the text but it's in columnar pdf format
> which is a pain for this.


Thanks for this. The UK Parliament site reports the Q & A :

Segway Human Transporter

Earl Attlee asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether the Segway human transporter should be ridden on the pavement
or in the road; and which option is safer.[HL3879]

Lord Davies of Oldham: Only invalid carriages complying with the Use
of Invalid Carriages on Highways Regulations 1988 can be used on
pavements. Information provided to the Department for Transport
indicates that the Segway human transporter is not such a carriage, so
could be used only on a road.

21 Jul 2004 : Column WA59

To be used on the road the human transporter would have to be
registered with the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency. It would also
be required to comply with the requirements of the Road Traffic Act
1988, including vehicle construction and lighting regulations, in the
same way as any other powered two-wheeled vehicle.
The Government have not carried out any assessment of the relative
safety of its use on the pavement or road.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

I must remember to keep a copy to inform the driver if I spot him
along the Sepentine bike lane . From the above it seems that it is not
legal to drive it in many places !

Tim
 
N

NC

Guest
Tim Henderson wrote:
>
> Thanks for this. The UK Parliament site reports the Q & A :
>
> Segway Human Transporter
>
> Earl Attlee asked Her Majesty's Government:
>
> Whether the Segway human transporter should be ridden on the pavement
> or in the road; and which option is safer.[HL3879]
>
> Lord Davies of Oldham: Only invalid carriages complying with the Use
> of Invalid Carriages on Highways Regulations 1988 can be used on
> pavements. Information provided to the Department for Transport
> indicates that the Segway human transporter is not such a carriage, so
> could be used only on a road.
>
> 21 Jul 2004 : Column WA59
>
> To be used on the road the human transporter would have to be
> registered with the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency. It would also
> be required to comply with the requirements of the Road Traffic Act
> 1988, including vehicle construction and lighting regulations, in the
> same way as any other powered two-wheeled vehicle.
> The Government have not carried out any assessment of the relative
> safety of its use on the pavement or road.
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> I must remember to keep a copy to inform the driver if I spot him
> along the Sepentine bike lane . From the above it seems that it is not
> legal to drive it in many places !




The above would make them illegal on the highway. The only legal place would
be private land with permission of the landowner.

To be legal under the Road Traffic Act as a powered two-wheeled vehicle (ie.
Motorcycle or Moped), it would need to meet the Construction and Use
regulations. I am confident it will fail those; lacking items such as
lights, horn, brake-lights, two independent braking systems, etc. Lights
would need to be marked with appropriate EU (BSI) markings for the vehicle.
Then the vehicle will need a registration plate, for which it will need a EU
type approval certificate (or a SVA exemption test pass result & MOT), plus
appropriate VED duty. The rider would need to be wearing a motorcycle helmet
and be in possession of a driving license with the appropriate motorcycle
components (be it provisional or full).


There is a specific exemption to many of the rules for powered two wheelers
for battery assisted pedal cycles. The rules require that the rider must
pedal to make the vehicle go forwards and the electricity can only assist
(ie. stop pedalling and the vehicle ceases power). As the Segway lacks
pedals, its outside the scope of those regulations. (It used to be that
electrically powered bicycles didn't need to be pedalled, but that changed
fairly recently in a harmonisation of regulations across the EU).


- Nigel


--
NC - Webmaster for http://www.2mm.org.uk/
Replies to newsgroup postings to the newsgroup please.
 
D

davek

Guest
Tim Henderson wrote:
> Lord Davies of Oldham: Only invalid carriages complying with the Use
> of Invalid Carriages on Highways Regulations 1988 can be used on
> pavements.


Invalid carriages!

Has anyone else noticed how fast some of these buggers can go? I was
nearly mown down while picking up my son from school last week as some
old duffer who clearly didn't have a clue where, when or even who he was
ploughed along the pavement with reckless abandon.

Given that their purpose is to do the walking for those that can't walk,
I think it's only fair that they should be restricted to /walking/ pace
- maybe 5mph tops?

15mph on the pavement for any vehicle seems excessively fast.

d.
 
A

anonymous coward

Guest
On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 21:43:06 +0100, NC wrote:

> Tim Henderson wrote:
>>
>> Thanks for this. The UK Parliament site reports the Q & A :
>>
>> Segway Human Transporter
>>
>> Earl Attlee asked Her Majesty's Government:
>>
>> Whether the Segway human transporter should be ridden on the pavement
>> or in the road; and which option is safer.[HL3879]
>>
>> Lord Davies of Oldham: Only invalid carriages complying with the Use
>> of Invalid Carriages on Highways Regulations 1988 can be used on
>> pavements. Information provided to the Department for Transport
>> indicates that the Segway human transporter is not such a carriage, so
>> could be used only on a road.
>>
>> 21 Jul 2004 : Column WA59
>>
>> To be used on the road the human transporter would have to be
>> registered with the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency. It would also
>> be required to comply with the requirements of the Road Traffic Act
>> 1988, including vehicle construction and lighting regulations, in the
>> same way as any other powered two-wheeled vehicle.
>> The Government have not carried out any assessment of the relative
>> safety of its use on the pavement or road.
>>
>> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> I must remember to keep a copy to inform the driver if I spot him
>> along the Sepentine bike lane . From the above it seems that it is not
>> legal to drive it in many places !

>
>
>
> The above would make them illegal on the highway. The only legal place would
> be private land with permission of the landowner.
>
> To be legal under the Road Traffic Act as a powered two-wheeled vehicle (ie.
> Motorcycle or Moped), it would need to meet the Construction and Use
> regulations. I am confident it will fail those; lacking items such as
> lights, horn, brake-lights, two independent braking systems, etc. Lights
> would need to be marked with appropriate EU (BSI) markings for the vehicle.
> Then the vehicle will need a registration plate, for which it will need a EU
> type approval certificate (or a SVA exemption test pass result & MOT), plus
> appropriate VED duty. The rider would need to be wearing a motorcycle helmet
> and be in possession of a driving license with the appropriate motorcycle
> components (be it provisional or full).
>
>
> There is a specific exemption to many of the rules for powered two wheelers
> for battery assisted pedal cycles. The rules require that the rider must
> pedal to make the vehicle go forwards and the electricity can only assist
> (ie. stop pedalling and the vehicle ceases power). As the Segway lacks
> pedals, its outside the scope of those regulations. (It used to be that
> electrically powered bicycles didn't need to be pedalled, but that changed
> fairly recently in a harmonisation of regulations across the EU).


Seems a shame to me - I'd far rather people rode Segways round town than
drove cars about. I look forward to a Segway with an integral
treddle-dynamo...

AC
 
G

Graeme

Guest
anonymous coward <[email protected]> wrote in
news:pan.200[email protected]:

> Seems a shame to me - I'd far rather people rode Segways round town than
> drove cars about.


I'd far rather they stopped being such lazy bastards and walked round town.
That way they are not breaking the law by having these things on the
pavement, they are not creating any increased risk to pedestrians and
they're getting some exercise!

Graeme
 
A

anonymous coward

Guest
On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 03:18:51 +0000, Graeme wrote:

> anonymous coward <[email protected]> wrote in
> news:p[email protected]:
>
>> Seems a shame to me - I'd far rather people rode Segways round town than
>> drove cars about.

>
> I'd far rather they stopped being such lazy bastards and walked round town.


I figure that's up to them. All I really care about is not getting
squashed. If all the lazy people rode round town on Segways rather than in
SUVs I'd be a happy man, and far more people would figure it was safe
enough to cycle.

> That way they are not breaking the law by having these things on the
> pavement, they are not creating any increased risk to pedestrians and
> they're getting some exercise!


I can see a few niches for Segways - e.g. mobility vehicles for people who
can walk short distances, who are scared of getting dishevelled cycling or
who want to take the bus / train. I can run faster than a Segway, so I'm
not sure I necessarily buy the 'danger to pedestrians' thing.

OK I'll come clean - they look fun. Can you put your hand on your
heart and say you would turn down a go on one?

AC
 
N

[Not Responding]

Guest
On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 00:42:42 +0100, davek <[email protected]>
wrote:

>Tim Henderson wrote:
>> Lord Davies of Oldham: Only invalid carriages complying with the Use
>> of Invalid Carriages on Highways Regulations 1988 can be used on
>> pavements.

>
>Invalid carriages!
>
>Has anyone else noticed how fast some of these buggers can go? I was
>nearly mown down while picking up my son from school last week as some
>old duffer who clearly didn't have a clue where, when or even who he was
>ploughed along the pavement with reckless abandon.
>
>Given that their purpose is to do the walking for those that can't walk,
>I think it's only fair that they should be restricted to /walking/ pace
>- maybe 5mph tops?
>
>15mph on the pavement for any vehicle seems excessively fast.
>
>d.


For use on the pavement the law requires a (integral) limit of 4mph.
 
G

Graeme

Guest
anonymous coward <[email protected]> wrote in
news:p[email protected]:

> If all the lazy people rode round town on Segways rather
> than in SUVs I'd be a happy man, and far more people would figure it
> was safe enough to cycle.


It would be good, but I don't think any future increase in Segway use
will be tied in with a reduction in SUV use. More than likely there would
be a small decrease in the number of fair weather cyclists and people
using public transport for short trips.

> I can run faster than a
> Segway, so I'm not sure I necessarily buy the 'danger to pedestrians'
> thing.


That's assuming you know one is coming. How much noise do these things
make?

> OK I'll come clean - they look fun. Can you put your hand on your
> heart and say you would turn down a go on one?


No, but that may be because I have no heart :) They do look fun though. I
also find the technology behind them pretty interesting (although the
wheelchair using similar technology seems more interesting and
potentially more valuable).

Graeme
 
S

Simon Brooke

Guest
in message <[email protected]>, davek
('[email protected]') wrote:

> Tim Henderson wrote:
>> Lord Davies of Oldham: Only invalid carriages complying with the Use
>> of Invalid Carriages on Highways Regulations 1988 can be used on
>> pavements.

>
> Invalid carriages!
>
> Has anyone else noticed how fast some of these buggers can go? I was
> nearly mown down while picking up my son from school last week as some
> old duffer who clearly didn't have a clue where, when or even who he
> was ploughed along the pavement with reckless abandon.
>
> Given that their purpose is to do the walking for those that can't
> walk, I think it's only fair that they should be restricted to
> /walking/ pace - maybe 5mph tops?


They are. 4mph to be precise. And if they don't have a governer which
mechanically restricts them to 4mph then they are not allowed on the
pavement.


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

Morning had broken, and there was nothing left for us to do
but pick up the pieces.
 
C

Chris Malcolm

Guest
anonymous coward <[email protected]> writes:

>On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 03:18:51 +0000, Graeme wrote:


>> anonymous coward <[email protected]> wrote in
>> news:p[email protected]:


>>> Seems a shame to me - I'd far rather people rode Segways round town than
>>> drove cars about.


>> I'd far rather they stopped being such lazy bastards and walked round town.


>I figure that's up to them. All I really care about is not getting
>squashed. If all the lazy people rode round town on Segways rather than in
>SUVs I'd be a happy man, and far more people would figure it was safe
>enough to cycle.


The Segway is supposed to be unconditionally stable, but in testing
how foolproof it was they hadn't looked far enough, as President Bush
demonstrated.
--
Chris Malcolm [email protected] +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/]
 
D

David E. Belcher

Guest
davek <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
>
> Given that their purpose is to do the walking for those that can't walk,
> I think it's only fair that they should be restricted to /walking/ pace
> - maybe 5mph tops?
>
> 15mph on the pavement for any vehicle seems excessively fast.
>


It's always amused me that power-assisted bicycles are restricted to
15mph top speed for legal reasons, given that their pedal-powered
cousins are easily capable of beating that figure. I actually had the
opportunity to test-ride a Powabyke model when I worked in a bike shop
a few years ago - cumbersome thing that weighed a ton.

David E. Belcher
 
D

David E. Belcher

Guest
davek <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
>
> Given that their purpose is to do the walking for those that can't walk,
> I think it's only fair that they should be restricted to /walking/ pace
> - maybe 5mph tops?
>
> 15mph on the pavement for any vehicle seems excessively fast.
>


It's always amused me that power-assisted bicycles are restricted to
15mph top speed for legal reasons, given that their pedal-powered
cousins are easily capable of beating that figure. I actually had the
opportunity to test-ride a Powabyke model when I worked in a bike shop
a few years ago - cumbersome thing that weighed a ton.

David E. Belcher