Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
And pedestrians should be treating cyclists as vehicles and not as “oh, its just a cyclist”.
Nobody here is invoking ‘victim blaming’. The closer analogy might be if a group of cyclists were cycling along a narrow lane (so, a road, not just some little bridleway/green lane, presumably) filling the entire roadway such that a car (or, indeed, another cyclist) couldn’t get past, and then complained that the driver didn’t use their horn or the cyclist their bell to let the club know they were there.
I know plenty of pedestrians who listen for a car then happily step out into the road – without looking – if they don’t hear one.
But I don’t know any cyclists that speed close and silent past a group of pedestrians.
Everyone I know would ring a bell or call out, and slow down if there were children or animals wandering around (I do wonder why the OP is happy to let them wander about on a road anyway…? That is a completely separate issue from walking facing or with the expected traffic flow).
I probably didn’t word my thoughts very well – but your analogy is a good one: if a cyclist who had been in a group taking up most of a quiet country lane was on here complaining about a car (let’s say an electric one, so no noise) that had zipped past them without warning, I doubt many of the denizons of this group would have started suggesting that the fault lay with the cyclists not leaving enough room. That is exactly what, it seems to me, a lot of posters are suggesting about the OP’s walking group.
Everyone I know would also ring a bell or call out and additionally slow down. Anyone who doesn’t is an @sshat – I’m simply suggesting that deflecting criticism to the walking group is disingenuous.
I think you’re conflating two different issues. A group of cyclists using a country lane are generally following the Highway Code (as long as they’re not more than two abreast) and are treated as vehicles. Pedestrians not facing the traffic are not following the Highway Code and are not considered as vehicles. Thus, the situation is different.
In general, the public roads are a shared resource, so we should be considerate and actually share them with other users. This means that as pedestrians, we should use pavements when available and walk facing the traffic when there are none. Not being in control of your dog/children is inconsiderate and dangerous – especially if you’re on the “wrong” side of the road. It’s not victim blaming – it’s simply pointing out which parties are being inconsiderate and not actually sharing the roads.
Incidentally, the bold
Incidentally, the bold warning text should read “PEDESTRIAN SAFETY ALERT” as this should be a warning for pedestrians to follow the highway code, especially when there’s no pavement.
All of the above!
All of the above!
If there’s no pavement, you should be facing oncoming traffic (i.e. on the right hand side) and ideally go single file when there’s traffic. Relying on being able to hear traffic behind you might become more problematic when electric cars become commonplace, so it’s best to use your eyes especially if you have hearing problems (I would have thought a deaf person would definitely want to keep to the right to avoid getting startled all the time).
You’re right about horses though as they can get startled easily. I always slow down and overtake carefully giving as much room as possible (I typically encounter them on two lane roads, so I wait until I can use the oncoming lane). I usually smile and wave/nod at the horse riders (as if they’re other cyclists) and it’s mostly reciprocated.
As long as parties abide by the highway code and there’s decent visibility, I don’t see why we shouldn’t be able to race/train along narrow country roads.
The more things change, the
The more things change, the more they stay the same.
Back in the day, it used to be adults complaining about skateboarding corrupting the youth and destroying society and how watching cartoons on TV destroyed their (the kids) attention spans. People don’t change – have a look at this list: http://mentalfloss.com/article/52209/15-historical-complaints-about-young-people-ruining-everything
CXR94Di2 wrote:
It makes you irresistible to women with toned legs and glutes:DWhich is great if you like women with toned legs and glutes.
I agree with @Davel – for
I agree with @Davel – for (utilitarian) cycling to damatically increase society needs to change its perception of the safety of cycling.
I’ve just come back from a holiday in Munich and (like other European cities) there is really nice cycling infrastructure. There’s cycle lanes on both pavements although you do get two-way traffic on them. As a pedestrian, you get used to checking the cycle lane as you cross it as there’s so much traffic. I saw loads of bikes and the vast majority of them were relaxed style (not racing) bikes (maybe like Boris bikes). Almost everyone was cycling in usual clothes – they didn’t look like “cyclists” they just looked like ordinary people that happened to be on bikes.
The missus and I hired a couple of bikes and had a brilliant day cycling round Munich and we were just astonished as to how much better it was than cycling round Bristol. The biggest difference was that cars, cyclists and pedestrians all seemed to be friendly towards the other modes of transport.
Hawkinspete, police forces have to be extremely vigilant about IT security issues because of the amount of confidential data they hold. I know my force will not allow officers access to online storage services such as OneDrive and Dropbox purely due to the tiny potential for something going wrong.It is inconvenient but posting the officer a burned DVD or small capacity memory stick should only cost a quid or two.
I was able to chop the clip down to a relevant 5 seconds (watching the traffic light turn red, then turning round to catch the car trying to jump the light until I motioned to cross which forced him to stop) and emailed it to them. Thus, they could use whatever email solution they want to – I was not encouraging them to use any kind of cloud storage.
Now, I work in I.T. and am aware of issues with email attachments, but they are not insurmountable (a decent O.S. understands the difference between executables and data).
That makes sense. I wish it
That makes sense. I wish it was easier to submit evidence though. A while ago I wanted to submit clear evidence of a car driver trying to jump a red light (he managed to screech to a halt over the ASL), but the Bristol police wouldn’t accept it unless I physically brought it in. As it’s not convenient for me to visit the police station during the week, I didn’t bother.
The forces involved in rim braking don’t involve transmitting torque from/to the hub. Yes to other forces, and the hub flange needs to be designed (read stronger) for a radial spoke pattern…[/quote]
Surely braking involves stopping a rotational force (rim and tyre in contact with the road) to which the mass of the bike/rider is attached by means of spokes. If a disc brake doesnt do that please explain to me how it does stop my 70kg mass from moving forwards.
i am not being funny, i really cant see how stopping a (spoked) wheel rotating does not rely on the spokes to do transmit the same forces.
[/quote]I believe the difference with rim brakes is that the braking forces are transmitted through the rim (which should easily be strong enough) and then through the brake blockes to the front fork. The spokes shouldn’t have anything to do with it.
If you like, a rim-braked wheel could be built without a hub or spokes (e.g. http://bicycledesign.net/2010/03/a-hubless-wheel-from-the-past-the-black-hole/) and the forces would be the same. However, as you know, having the braking transferred to the hub (and brake disc) would necessitate the forces going through the spokes. I would guess that the manufacturer would figure that into the design, so it depends on whether you trust your wheel builder or not.
If I were you, I’d go for a different wheel so that you can feel confident. It’s tricky to push yourself if you don’t have faith in your steed even if everyone else has had no problems with disk brakes and fewer spokes.
Looks like they’ve installed
Looks like they’ve installed it backwards – facing towards the wall rather than away from the wall.
(Do I win a prize if I got the right answer?)
Sounds to me like the cable
Sounds to me like the cable slipping (e.g. at the rear derailleur) or getting frayed and worn through. Like cqexbesd, I had a similar problem and in the end, the cable snapped in the shifter (I had to tie up the cable to shift it to a sensible gear to get home).
I wouldn’t think that a 10-speed would be compatible with 7-speed, but have never tried it so I don’t know for sure.
I decided to sign it anyway
I decided to sign it anyway as I think a discussion on safe passing is worthwhile.
Not signed. Nice idea but totally unenforceable and actually counterproductive. The onus would now be on the prosecution to ascertain the exact passing distance i.e. 99cm rather than 102cm … so who is going to bring the tape measure?I agree (which surprises me – it is L.Willo after all).
I’d rather have presumed liability introduced. That would shift the onus onto the less vulnerable road users to prove that it was the cyclist/pedestrian that was to blame. It makes sense as it’s easier to install a dashcam in a car (there’s a power supply and it wouldn’t need to be waterproof or shockproof) than on a helmet. As for the cost, I imagine it wouldn’t be too difficult for insurance companies to reduce premiums for people who use a dashcam all the time – it would save them money if liability can be determined by watching a video rather than heading to court.
I usually nod or raise my
I usually nod or raise my hand in acknowledgement to cyclists going the opposite direction. However, I don’t bother doing so in bigger cities (Bristol mainly) as there’s too many people.
Most people respond, but I think that I’d rather be the bloke waving and not getting a response than being the bloke waved at and not responding.
When passing someone on the same side of the road I normally say “Hi” or a similar greeting.
Be fair lads, Janet faces a lot of competition from younger, better looking and brighter women. She is trying bravely to hold on to her place in the journalistic firmament and it gets harder every year. Her tactic is to be more radical, more outspoken and more bigoted than the rest, and up to a point it’s working. She seems to pop up regularly on TV and has somehow maintained her connections at the Indie.I don’t think for one moment she believes the guff in her article, she is too intelligent for that. No, she’s just putting herself out there, which is all part and parcel of living in her world. Give the old bat a break.
I don’t see why we should give her a break just because she’s writing rubbish. If she wants to write non-rubbish then we’ll judge her on that, but in the meantime, it’s only fair to take her at her word (i.e. she’s a moron).