Feed aggregator

Re: CAMS (Cycle Accident Management Service - Help!

CTC Forum - On the road - 25 February 2015 - 8:14pm
In my thankfully limited experience of accident claims solicitors, the quality of the service you get depends more on the individual handling your claim than the name above the door. I've had both outstanding and appalling service from the same company. If I'm ever unfortunate enough to require one again, I'll choose someone local with a good reputation.

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

CTC Forum - On the road - 25 February 2015 - 8:11pm
horizon wrote:I can't help thinking that some people on this forum think that it is a lorry firm's right to deliver goods in a patently unsafe vehicle without any degree of skill or care.

Not at all. But as we don't live in a perfect world the better skilled that cyclists are the fewer accidents they will be involved in. It isn't a difficult concept.

Re: faroe islands anyone toured there, how did you get there

CTC Forum - Touring & Expedition - 25 February 2015 - 8:10pm
I'll start by saying that I have a conflict of interest as I am originally from the Faroe Islands

Hopefully someone else might be able to help you with some specific advice but I can try to give you some.

The main ferry to the Faroe Islands goes from Hirtshals in Denmark and from Iceland (http://www.smyrilline.com/). Unfortunately the Harwich-Esbjerg ferry stopped running last year which means you cant get to Denmark to get onto the Faroe Islands ferry. I guess the alternative would be to go by ferry/train via the Netherlands to Hirtshals and shouldn't be too bad.

An alternative that I have used is to ship things ahead using these guys (http://eimskip.is/fo/Pages/default.aspx). They have a cargo ship sailing from Grimsby and might be able to help you out. I once got a motorbike shipped and they let me ride it onto the cargo ship and secure it. I then flew to the Faroe Islands and collected the bike at their warehouse.

Anyway, I am more than happy to help you out if you want advice or any other help on your trip. I might be able to sort you out some accommodation if you need it.

Re: New Forest Tour

CTC Forum - Touring & Expedition - 25 February 2015 - 7:54pm
Deevoy88 wrote:simonhill wrote:I don't understand this post. It says tour in the New Forest for two weeks. For me touring is essentially about moving on.

I would have thought you would need far less time 'to tour' the NF.



Isle of Wight is good for a few days, but that stil leaves plenty of time to continue the tour. Are you moving on or looking for a static base?

Hi
Yes i do agree that two weeks is a long time for the new forest however this would be my first tour after being hit by a lorry two years ago. I have a artificial knee, 4 fused vertebrae in my back and also metal holding my right arm together from wrist to elbow. I am in no hurry trust me
I will be starting in Ashurst and "moving on" from there. If i do run out of miles then the I.O.W would be a option for me.

Hey! Respect for being back on the saddle. Enjoy your tour. Have you got a back up plan/escape route in case the aches and pains kick in?

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

CTC Forum - On the road - 25 February 2015 - 7:40pm
horizon wrote:I'm presuming here that we have all agreed that the problem is the lorry (i.e. we have all said that cyclists should not cycle up the left hand side of a lorry).

The problem is AFAIK that the cyclist rode up the inside of a left indicating lorry which had started it's manoeuvre.
What we don't know is if the driver checked his mirrors and or camera(s) before turning and having check(presuming he did)signalled then began the manoeuvre.
If the lorry had to stop mid manoeuvre,is it then reasonable for the driver to carry one driving without checking again.
If the lorry didn't stop should the driver continually keep checking his mirrors and or camera(s) or should his/her focus be to the front of the vehicle,considering there's more chance of pedestrians or other vehicles being in that direction.

FWIW,I see the argument for a banksman or co driver,but also think realistically the chances of such a law being implemented to be slim in the extreme if at all.
I also agree that the lorry driver should as all drivers should, be vigilant and careful of other road users,however is it reasonable under the present system that at some point the driver after satisfying himself it is safe to carry out the manoeuvre to continue?
There comes a time when the driver has to commit to continuing and after satisfying him/herself it's safe carries on.
If in the meantime someone cycles upto the inside of such a left turning and left indicating lorry,questions need to be asked of that cyclist's capability of using the road IMO.
I take the points raised that pedestrians and licence free vehicles have,for want of a better word, priority and that motor vehicles are only licensed,but we can't have a situation where pedestrians and cyclists have no responsibilities both to themselves and others IMHO that is reasonable.

Cyclists need to be careful and obey the rules of the road (such as they are). Where we disagree is in seeing the moral equivalence between a lorry (even when following the rules) and a cyclist (even when not). The point at issue is not the following of the rules but the imbalanced consequence of not doing so. We need to create rules that demand that lorries take into account the mistakes of others. That's fair, not because lorry drivers should have to follow rules and cyclists not, but because the consequences are different.
The problem here is AFAICS that we have human beings operating such machines that can cause those consequences,and whilst we do there will be mistakes made by either party,the problem is then one of fault.
If a driver of such a vehicle has made all necessary checks,is conforming to all the rules,is diligent and careful in his/her driving duties and conforming to the letter and spirit of the law,if someone should step out into and under the wheels of their vehicle.
Would it then be the driver who was at fault?

Re: New Forest Tour

CTC Forum - Touring & Expedition - 25 February 2015 - 7:01pm
simonhill wrote:I don't understand this post. It says tour in the New Forest for two weeks. For me touring is essentially about moving on.

I would have thought you would need far less time 'to tour' the NF.



Isle of Wight is good for a few days, but that stil leaves plenty of time to continue the tour. Are you moving on or looking for a static base?

Hi
Yes i do agree that two weeks is a long time for the new forest however this would be my first tour after being hit by a lorry two years ago. I have a artificial knee, 4 fused vertebrae in my back and also metal holding my right arm together from wrist to elbow. I am in no hurry trust me
I will be starting in Ashurst and "moving on" from there. If i do run out of miles then the I.O.W would be a option for me.

Re: Flying with German Wings

CTC Forum - Touring & Expedition - 25 February 2015 - 6:58pm
Suggest you speak to the airline to confirm their requirements.

Do you need to go to Koln? If you are headed there for a rail head or booked accommodation that's one thing but you can get a bus from the airport to Bonn Hauptbahnhof quite cheaply, an altogether more pleasant experience with a bike, they run @ every 15 mins, the coach into Koln is less bike friendly! Any cycle route from the airport into Koln will not be very pleasant taking you through lots of industry and if you are heading to the centre, a very traffic busy and less than bike friendly environment. Central Koln really isn't somewhere to take a bike unless you need to.

Re: CAMS (Cycle Accident Management Service - Help!

CTC Forum - On the road - 25 February 2015 - 6:55pm
We loathe and detest these claims management companies who have for the last few years been a royal pain in the neck with unsolicited calls following a minor bump my wife had in her car. We keep telling them that everything has been settled and not to phone us back or pass our details on but they still do. On a few occasions I have taken to be very rude to them as polite reasoned requests seem to fall on deaf ears - pox on the lot of them.

Re: Rotterdam > Istanbul - Which bike?

CTC Forum - Touring & Expedition - 25 February 2015 - 6:52pm
Ordered the Genesis Tour de Fer 2015 Touring Bike, looking forward to trying it out even though I have to wait until March 16th.

Been told by EBC that I can try out the Croix de Fer for sizing, but from what I understand the TDF has had some fairly fundamental updates from the CDF so not sure if there's much point in that.

I just want to get going, looking for a bike takes ages!

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

CTC Forum - On the road - 25 February 2015 - 6:51pm
danhopgood wrote:
So how are those revised rules going to work then Horizon? All lorry drivers to face jail any time they are involved in an injury accident to a cyclist or pedestrian, regardless of the circumstances? All van drivers? All car drivers?

Lorry drivers would be prosecuted if:

They drove without an assistant in a built-up area
They drove a vehicle more than x feet long/wide/high in a built-up area
They drove without the required safety equipment such as mirrors etc

I'm presuming here that we have all agreed that the problem is the lorry (i.e. we have all said that cyclists should not cycle up the left hand side of a lorry).

Re: North Germany to Berlin

CTC Forum - Touring & Expedition - 25 February 2015 - 6:49pm
Thanks

The plan is to be on D2 from Luebeck - stay in the Youth Hostel at Warnemuende - and then go southto catch up with the D11 South of Rostock.

Lokking atthe map it seems to be a bit unclear how this bit is done. The map seems to show D11 as being the ferry from Denmark.

butthere also seems to be a cycle way to the West of Rostock from the YH to the centre of Rostock where it looks as if we can pick up D11

Hope this avoids ther oad you were talking about.

Maybe it would be better to take the train to Rostock HBf from Warnemuende - and pick up the D11 from there.

Anyone got any precise details please ?

Thanks

David

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

CTC Forum - On the road - 25 February 2015 - 6:47pm
danhopgood wrote:kwackers wrote:danhopgood wrote:Have you read the Highway Code?!

https://www.gov.uk/rules-pedestrians-1-to-35 is not talking about prohibited areas.
As a pedestrian I long for the days drivers obey the rules. Rule 170 would be a good start.

And as a vehicle user I like pedestrians who obey Rule 7D.
Moral equivalence again (please look it up). Have you read the HC? How many of those rules for pedestrians say MUST? Do you understand the significance of this omission?

Re: North Germany to Berlin

CTC Forum - Touring & Expedition - 25 February 2015 - 6:44pm
If you get the chance, the brewery in Wismar is very good for food and of course brewed in the building beer!

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

CTC Forum - On the road - 25 February 2015 - 6:37pm
danhopgood wrote:Have you read the Highway Code?!

https://www.gov.uk/rules-pedestrians-1-to-35 is not talking about prohibited areas.
Most of these rules do not have the force of legislation behind them. When they do, it will list the particular legislation that applies, such as 16

Moving vehicles. You MUST NOT get onto or hold onto a moving vehicle.
Law RTA 1988 sect 26

Many of the rules for motor vehicles, on the other hand, do have the force of legislation behind them.

Roads are, for the most, parts rights of way established for the passage of people. Pedestrians and cyclists have a clear and defined right to be there. Motor vehicles are only there by licence.

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

CTC Forum - On the road - 25 February 2015 - 6:35pm
horizon wrote:pwa wrote:Beardy

I don't know how many billion people there are on the planet, but there's too many for us all to move about without a bit of regulation. We all have to conform to some agreed standards of behaviour to make our movements safe and practical. And I do mean all: cyclists, lorry drivers, pedestrians .....

pwa: we agree on this. Cyclists need to be careful and obey the rules of the road (such as they are). Where we disagree is in seeing the moral equivalence between a lorry (even when following the rules) and a cyclist (even when not). The point at issue is not the following of the rules but the imbalanced consequence of not doing so. We need to create rules that demand that lorries take into account the mistakes of others. That's fair, not because lorry drivers should have to follow rules and cyclists not, but because the consequences are different.

So how are those revised rules going to work then Horizon? All lorry drivers to face jail any time they are involved in an injury accident to a cyclist or pedestrian, regardless of the circumstances? All van drivers? All car drivers?

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

CTC Forum - On the road - 25 February 2015 - 6:32pm
Horizon

I suspect that if we worked on it we would find that we kind of agree on lots of things. I'm not against guards on the sides of lorries, better infrastructure at busy junctions and anything that makes things safer without stopping people going about their daily business. Things can and should be improved. But if one of my teenage kids said they were cycling around a busy city tomorrow I would want them to be 100% sure in their own minds that trying to pass any vehicle on the left when it is indicating left and has started turning left is an absolute no no.

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

CTC Forum - On the road - 25 February 2015 - 6:18pm
kwackers wrote:danhopgood wrote:Have you read the Highway Code?!

https://www.gov.uk/rules-pedestrians-1-to-35 is not talking about prohibited areas.
As a pedestrian I long for the days drivers obey the rules. Rule 170 would be a good start.

And as a vehicle user I like pedestrians who obey Rule 7D.

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

CTC Forum - On the road - 25 February 2015 - 6:11pm
pwa wrote:Beardy

I don't know how many billion people there are on the planet, but there's too many for us all to move about without a bit of regulation. We all have to conform to some agreed standards of behaviour to make our movements safe and practical. And I do mean all: cyclists, lorry drivers, pedestrians .....

pwa: we agree on this. Cyclists need to be careful and obey the rules of the road (such as they are). Where we disagree is in seeing the moral equivalence between a lorry (even when following the rules) and a cyclist (even when not). The point at issue is not the following of the rules but the imbalanced consequence of not doing so. We need to create rules that demand that lorries take into account the mistakes of others. That's fair, not because lorry drivers should have to follow rules and cyclists not, but because the consequences are different.

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

CTC Forum - On the road - 25 February 2015 - 5:57pm
Beardy

I don't know how many billion people there are on the planet, but there's too many for us all to move about without a bit of regulation. We all have to conform to some agreed standards of behaviour to make our movements safe and practical. And I do mean all: cyclists, lorry drivers, pedestrians .....

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

CTC Forum - On the road - 25 February 2015 - 5:55pm
danhopgood wrote:Have you read the Highway Code?!

https://www.gov.uk/rules-pedestrians-1-to-35 is not talking about prohibited areas.
As a pedestrian I long for the days drivers obey the rules. Rule 170 would be a good start.
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