Feed aggregator

Re: Pedestrian pushes cyclist off bike and into traffic

CTC Forum - On the road - 28 August 2015 - 2:49pm
kuba wrote:Yes it it true the HC states....

Because its not against UK law for a pedestrian to ignore the advice offered by the display of the red man at a pedestrian road crossing:
if safe to do so, they can legally cross when it is showing. I presume the HC glosses over this due to a car centric viewpoint/ desire to control pedestrians/ the modern trend for over-simplifying information to the point of uselessness etc. If it was a legal requirement the HC would say pedestrians MUST wait at the red figure.

Of course if they step out in front of a vehicle without allowing it time to stop or even looking, and a collision ensues, I don't think a court would view them as 0% negligent in the apportioning of blame.

I say +1 to what Vorpal said.

Re: Pedestrian pushes cyclist off bike and into traffic

CTC Forum - On the road - 28 August 2015 - 1:50pm
As a pedestrian I sometimes cross the road on a red man. But only when there is no traffic. If I choose to cross on a red man, it's up to me to find a safe gap, it is not up to the traffic to stop for me. It really is that simple.

And to go back to the OP, I'm pretty damned certain that pedestrian would not have either tried to cross in front of the bike, or assaulted the cyclist, had the cyclist been one of the cyclists round our local army base, who tend to be big powerful blokes in combat uniforms. So it isn't about someone losing it, it's about a cowardly bully who would only 'lose it' very selectively, i.e., with someone weaker than himself.

Rear lights are driving me mad

CTC Forum - Touring & Expedition - 28 August 2015 - 1:34pm
It's that time of year again when a cyclist's mind turns to thoughts of lights. I want a rechargeable rear light with option to have it steady or flashing. Trouble is that buying on the internet it's hard to see what kind of bracket it comes with. Most just use a rubber ring to fit around the seatpost. Useless if you use a seat pack. I want to fit it to the seat stays but of course with a simple wrap around rubber thing it points mostly up in the air. I want to be able to adjust the direction of the beam to hit those motorists right in the eye. Tell me about your favourite and most powerful lights on your seat stays.

Re: Bike provision on Beeston tram route and a question

CTC Forum - On the road - 28 August 2015 - 12:40pm
Cyclists largely forgotten or made to feel very much like second class citizens, and this whole project cost £570 million . I'm just glad that I live on the east side of Nottingham and don't have to deal with tram lines.

Nottingham City Council pride themselves on being cycle friendly, but in practice they are not. I suggest you contact Councillor Jane Urqhart with your concerns, though I don't see what can be done now the whole thing is finished.

Re: Shoreham air crash

CTC Forum - On the road - 28 August 2015 - 12:24pm
1gunsalute wrote: I do object to people doing things that put third parties' lives at risk. Commercial flights really don't do that (at least not directly, let's not get onto climate change).

fair point about third party risk and that is what the recent policy changes are intended to address. But that is a matter more of perception than actual numbers.

Despite the risks being vanishingly small, commercial flights have killed far more innocent bystanders than air displays have (or ever will), and that is before you get into all the collateral damage that commercial aviation causes, which is plentiful and includes many things other than climate change.

If you wanted not to endanger others you wouldn't fly, drive a car, go out in public if you thought you might have any infectious virus, or any one of a hundred other everyday things.

Remember the law of unintended consequences? Well, I think that if vintage jets are banned from aerobatic manoeuvres, the whole attitude to maintaining and operating them is liable to become more lax. I don't care what the rules say, that is just human nature....

cheers

Re: Shoreham air crash

CTC Forum - On the road - 28 August 2015 - 12:05pm
Brucey wrote:I daresay an airshow that comprised entirely of 'safe manoeuvres' would be a pretty dull event. Similar issues surround the Isle Of Man TT races, and to some extent any motorsport event, for participants and spectators.

cheers
Do any of the Shoreham crowd not wish that the show had been a bit duller? I dare any of them to say so.
I have no objection to airshows/TTracers/cyclists/anyone doing things that put at risk their own lives, or indeed the lives of spectators who can choose whether or not the risk is worthwhile (in view of the enjoyment they get from watching/participating).
I do object to people doing things that put third parties' lives at risk. Commercial flights really don't do that (at least not directly, let's not get onto climate change).
That doesn't mean that you can't make arrangements to stage risky events. I assume that for the TT they close the roads, deciding that the disruption is worthwhile because of tradition, tourism revenue, etc. You could do the same for an airshow if you can make a good enough case.

Re: Pedestrian pushes cyclist off bike and into traffic

CTC Forum - On the road - 28 August 2015 - 12:04pm
Yes it it true the HC states cyclists should wear helmets, and she seems to wear one. Not sure what your point is here.

As for rule 147 well, if you're on a highway then all HC rules are of relevance and apply to everyone equally so again fail to see your point.

Re: Home made electrolyte solution

CTC Forum - On the road - 28 August 2015 - 11:46am
I started making my own drink mix about two years ago. It was supposed to be isotonic from what I read, it seems to work for me as well as the expensive high-5, SIS drinks etc. I used Aldi double concentrate orange juice in water to give a nice orange+pineapple taste, then add about 1/2 teaspoon of sea salt, then about 1/2-1 teaspoon of bicarbonate of soda. This gives it some fizz but may also enhance its transport to the necessary areas of your muscles. I find for me it's very palatable and the ingredients sourced from aldi and lidl for small cost, 500g sea salt about 80p, bicarb about 60p and the concentrate was about £1 for a litre. Two years on and I've still loads of both the salt and bicarb so I think a good move away from expensive sports drinks. The other thing with this is I could make say a 500ml bottle of pure concentrate+salt+bicarb in the right proportion and take it on a longer trip to simply add to water bottles topped up on route with mineral water bought at local shops.

Re: Shoreham air crash

CTC Forum - On the road - 28 August 2015 - 11:43am
1gunsalute wrote:....And yes, it would be better if a dozen people didn't need to be killed to demonstrate that this manoeuvre wasn't safe. Obviously it wasn't safe, it's hard to believe that the airshow organisers approved it....

nothing is 'safe', there is no such thing.

Those deaths were tragic enough but the chances of being killed by an aircraft falling from the sky are vanishingly small; you are many times more likely to be killed taking commercial flights in the normal way.

There's actual risk, perceived risk, unnecessary risk, avoidable risk, and statistical likelihood of harm. People (and NB policy makers are people too....) are very, very bad about making rational choices in regard to this.

I think that any aerobatic manoeuvres contain an element of risk, and perhaps you can argue that if some of that risk is 'avoidable', you should take reasonable steps to avoid it. But if you follow that argument to its logical conclusion, you would ban all 'unnecessary flying' and therefore 'nearly all flying' since most of it (including most passenger flights) is optional, not essential.

[I digress, but policies that are intended to improve public safety are always subject to the law of unintended consequences; for example the introduction of seatbelts in cars in the US improved the death rate but only for a couple of years; people 'felt safer' so took more risks behind the wheel and had more, higher speed accidents. The guy that developed them (and later, the airbag) suggested that the best safety measure in a car would be an 8" steel spike mounted in the middle of the steering wheel; in his view making the driver more acutely aware of his own mortality would prevent most 'accidents'.]

I daresay an airshow that comprised entirely of 'safe manoeuvres' would be a pretty dull event. Similar issues surround the Isle Of Man TT races, and to some extent any motorsport event, for participants and spectators.

cheers

Re: New Route Planner

CTC Forum - Touring & Expedition - 28 August 2015 - 11:22am
Let me know if not - really keen to get this nailed. (And to nail Garmin's programmers to something.)

Re: Pedestrian pushes cyclist off bike and into traffic

CTC Forum - On the road - 28 August 2015 - 11:16am
kuba wrote:I agree with almost everything you say but multiple HC rules state otherwise.
They also tell us to wear helmets and also to wear hi-vis when walking at night
There's also this rule of relevance to at least one of the people involved in this incident:
147: Be considerate. Be careful of and considerate towards all types of road users, especially those requiring extra care:

try to be understanding if other road users cause problems; they may be inexperienced or not know the area well.
be patient; remember that anyone can make a mistake.
do not allow yourself to become agitated or involved if someone is behaving badly on the road. This will only make the situation worse. Pull over, calm down and, when you feel relaxed, continue your journey.
Slow down and hold back if a road user pulls out into your path at a junction. Allow them to get clear. Do not over-react by driving too close behind to intimidate them.

Re: Pedestrian pushes cyclist off bike and into traffic

CTC Forum - On the road - 28 August 2015 - 11:05am
reohn2 wrote:On the one hand I agree that if she'd done a shoulder check and saw him coming after her she could've escaped.
OTOH should people in a so called civilised society need to keep looking over their shoulder to see if anyone's about to assault them over such trivia?
The incident says more about UK society than we're prepared to consider IMHO.

I agree. But that is where we are. I've personally three times had to shoulder check and swerve across the road to avoid potential attacks from pedestrians in Glasgow while commuting late at night.

Being aware of your surroundings is a safety issue and for me includes what everyone in the immediate area is doing not just vehicles.

Re: Pre-ride (or pre-drive) checks.

CTC Forum - On the road - 28 August 2015 - 10:56am
I always check that the car is there before I get in it. I have however, some time ago, forgotten to check that I went to work in the car before walking home.

Re: Pedestrian pushes cyclist off bike and into traffic

CTC Forum - On the road - 28 August 2015 - 10:55am
Vorpal wrote:irc wrote:Everyone agrees the attack was unjustified. What we are talking about is whether or not any reasonable alternative actions could have avoided the attack.
Yes. He could have not pushed her.

Everyone agrees the attack was unjustified.

Re: Pedestrian pushes cyclist off bike and into traffic

CTC Forum - On the road - 28 August 2015 - 10:54am
broadway wrote:irc wrote:If I'm riding in a straight line along a road and an overtaking car hits me I'm completely blameless but the accident is still avoidable if I look in my mirror, see it coming and swerve to my nearside.

Easy enough to say, however who's to say what the consequence of your sudden swerve is?

I am. That's why I ride 1m from the kerb. Enough space to make close overtakes into comfortable ones. In one case I have had to ride off the road onto a dirt/gravel shoulder. As I was on a stable touring bike with relatively wide tyres I stayed upright. But in any case a crash on gravel would have been better than being hit by a camper van at 60mph which was the alternative.

Re: Shoreham air crash

CTC Forum - On the road - 28 August 2015 - 10:36am
661-Pete wrote:Well, certainly this is not the time to argue, you have a point (though to me a narrow shared-use path doesn't constitute a cycling route ). Much of the A27 is fast D/C and I wouldn't contemplate cycling on those sections myself nor advising others to, partly because there are perfectly good parallel routes (the A259 and the 'old' A27 through Brighton and Shoreham now re-numbered the A270), and partly because part of it (the Southwick Hill tunnel section) is banned to cyclists anyway.
Not arguing, just pointing out that with the upgraded shared use path (October last year, IIRC: still with crap junction treatments, though), North Lancing to Shoreham airport along the A27 no longer involves sharing a 70mph dual carriageway (although IME it's OK westbound when it's clogged up). As such it's another reason for using the Coombes Road as a route north from the coast if you are coming from Worthing on other than an MTB (or without a strong wish to climb over the Downs on the Bostal Road).

And yes, airshows, especially with fast jets, are worrying - speaking as a mechanical engineer.

Re: Pedestrian pushes cyclist off bike and into traffic

CTC Forum - On the road - 28 August 2015 - 10:19am
kwackers wrote:Firstly the 'red man' is a 'red herring'. Pedestrians are under no obligation to wait for the red man, might be advisable and in this case he most certainly should have waited - but he didn't.

Presume you mean "wait for the green man" otherwise it makes no sense? If so, rule 21 states "At traffic lights. There may be special signals for pedestrians. You should only start to cross the road when the green figure shows." We'll probably never agree, but just for the record.

So the only red herring here is the discussion of the cyclist's behaviour, it's irrelevant and also really inappropriate.Interesting gender dynamics though.

Vorpal wrote:I know that a pedestrian has no obligation to stop for a red man. Although conventions like that are what makes things easier for everyone, he certainly has the right to walk out into traffic, and that's exactly what he does.

I agree with almost everything you say but multiple HC rules state otherwise. You should definitely not walk into traffic but wait for a gap big enough to cross, and wait for the green if applicable. But otherwise you're bang on right, and the only person who could have acted to avoid the assault was its perpetrator.

Re: Shoreham air crash

CTC Forum - On the road - 28 August 2015 - 10:09am
Ellieb wrote:The conclusion of the review will be that aircraft can do these manoeuvres over an empty field so that no-one on the ground will get killed if/when something goes wrong. Not over a busy road, houses, etc.
Similarly they had the "knee jerk" reaction to ban manoeuvres too close to airshow spectators after the Farnborough disaster.
& this has what to do with grounding Hunters?
Your previous post was that if this had happened over an empty field there would be no problem. I was agreeing with you, just formalising the process.

And yes, it would be better if a dozen people didn't need to be killed to demonstrate that this manoeuvre wasn't safe. Obviously it wasn't safe, it's hard to believe that the airshow organisers approved it. But as at Farnborough, it seems easier for society to learn these things afterwards.

Re: Netherlands Tour - Rig Statistics

CTC Forum - Touring & Expedition - 28 August 2015 - 9:56am
For added geekiness, you could also split your body weight front and rear, in your normal riding position

Re: Pedestrian pushes cyclist off bike and into traffic

CTC Forum - On the road - 28 August 2015 - 9:23am
irc wrote:If I'm riding in a straight line along a road and an overtaking car hits me I'm completely blameless but the accident is still avoidable if I look in my mirror, see it coming and swerve to my nearside.

Easy enough to say in hindsight, however who's to say what the consequence of your sudden swerve is.
Syndicate content

Archive

  • Patron: Her Majesty The Queen
  • President: Jon Snow
  • Chief Executive: Paul Tuohy
  • Cyclists' Touring Club (CTC): A company limited by guarantee, registered in England no.25185. Registered as a charity in England and Wales No 1147607 and in Scotland No SC042541

Copyright © CTC 2015

Terms and Conditions