![]() |
View
New Forum Topics Today's Forum Topics Set as homepage |
|
|||||||
| |
||||
Welcome to CyclingForums.com You are currently viewing our website as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions. You will have to register before you can post to this thread. By joining our free online community you will have access to post new topics, communicate privately with other cyclingforums.com members (PM), respond to polls, upload photos and access other special features like product reviews and classifieds. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
#31 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Peter Clinch <p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk> wrote:
<snip> >So there are some people that can separate image from utility, and >likewise if I have to change into lycra and ride with my arse in the sky >just to pop down into town then to hell with that and I'll just be >confused with a PoaB. Hey ho. I agree with you, however some folks can only afford one motorcycle, which is why you find some commuting on larger machines. You'll not get me on a *50cc* scooter, however, because it would simply cough and die under my immense bulk... :-/ -- Fr. Jack The ex(un)civil servant |
|
|
|
#32 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
"Fr Jack" <sp@m.com> wrote in message news:m9at34tcvke5ic9f0c9k3chheal6e8q8bf@4ax.com... > "burtthebike" <burtthebike@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote: > >> >>"Fr Jack" <sp@m.com> wrote in message >>news:jlur341dh5midd11ua0688mrrb703kel7d@4ax.com... >>> "burtthebike" <burtthebike@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote: >> >>No, almost all of these extremely dangerous people are on motorcycles, >>including the one who deliberately rode at two cyclists but had an >>unregistered bike, so the police couldn't trace him. > > Is that an incident you actually witnessed, or just something > reported? I was one of the cyclists, so yes, I witnessed it at first hand. I still can't quite understand how we managed to avoid him, but we both got his number. |
|
|
|
#33 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
On Wed, 28 May 2008 22:06:15 +0100, "burtthebike"
<burtthebike@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote: > >"Fr Jack" <sp@m.com> wrote in message >news:14uq34t455h37eoha2kouc27448iglnbsa@4ax.com... >> spindrift <newtyres@hotmail.com> wrote: >> >>>and pose a greater risk to cyclists. >> >> Rubbish! > >As someone who regularly is forced to share bus lanes with motorcycles, this >is not rubbish, this is absolutely true. The behaviour of some motorcylists >is almost unbelievable, and my life has been put at risk a number of times >by aggressive and irresponsible motorcyclists, in bus lanes. Here's a thought: you're the hazard if you've had so many near misses. Alternatively, if you're commuting and so are they, it's entirely possible that you're just meeting the same guys. Personally I always give cyclists a wide berth because if there's a coming-together then it's gonna hurt me too, and cyclists aren't necessarily insured. Apart from which, I used to enjoy occasionally cycling fifteen-odd miles to work and am sympathetic. Sadly my commute is now about 24 miles each way and even then only if I travel along about fifteen miles of the A14. We don't have shared bus lanes round here but there's no reason why a motorbike in a cycle lane should present any more of a hazard to cyclists than a bus or taxi. They're narrower, for goodness' sake. I can well recall cycling to work in my yoof and getting the pressure-wave from busses as they overtook and wincing as I saw rows of rivets flashing past my right shoulder. This was on an open road, BTW, not a bus lane. >One of the >problems is that as soon as they are allowed in bus lanes, they >automatically assume that they can use any cycle facility, and do so, >including cycle lanes, ASLs, bicycle parking. Woa there. Only got the one tar brush, have we? It doesn't naturally follow. I'd say the the ones breaking the other rules would've broken them regardless of the status of bus lanes. >There's one particular quad >bike rider in north Bristol who I have difficulty in believing that he is >still alive, or that he hasn't killed someone. So: a sample of one. -- -Pip |
|
|
|
#34 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
On Wed, 28 May 2008 19:20:39 +0100, Colin McKenzie
<news@proof-read.co.uk> wrote: >Nick wrote: >> spindrift wrote: >>> http://www.lcc.org.uk/index.asp?PageID=1145 >>> The evidence seems clear to me, motorbikes are faster moving, heavier, >>> and pose a greater risk to cyclists. > >> I'd sign one to ban buses from bus lanes but I don't have a problem with >> motorbikes. > >The issues are: >- Do you want to promote motorcycling? Not entirely, despite being a motorcyclist - I prefer to be part of an elite. We can't just let anyone in, you know. >Allowing them in bus lanes will increase their numbers throughout London. Really? "Hey, the bus lanes are open, lets nip out and buy a couple of thousand quids' worth of motorbike. Oh, after doing the DAS, of course. And taking the test. And buying a helmet and waterproofs." >- What are bus lanes for? >Buses. >- Why were cycles allowed in them? >Because of the effect of forcing them into the other lane (petrified >cyclists and delayed motorists). These effects do not happen with >motorbikes. So cycles don't delay motorcycles in other lanes? Does this mean that cyclists don't ride far enough out to prevent bikes squeezing past, as you describe below, in bus lanes? >- How much space do you want when overtaken? >In a typical 3-metre bus lane, a cyclist riding far enough out to >prevent a taxi from squeezing past within the lane will leave about >1.6m gap on their right. A motorcyclist would aim at the middle of >this gap, passing within half a metre of the cyclist. At present they >try to encroach as litle as possible on the bus lane. So, cyclists, permitted into bus lanes, hold up the taxis and, presumably, the very vehicles (buses) for which bus lanes were created? Not very civil, I must say. Of course, you could share nicely and, on hearing a motorcycle, just politely shift over a foot or two. It really wouldn't hold you up or cost anything, you know. When I filter through traffic, quite often cars and lorries will move over to make room. It's a polite act that I do appreciate and I will acknowledge with a wave if I can do so safely. >The recommended width for a bus lane is 4.5m. Allowing motorbikes only >in bus lanes this wide would have less direct impact on cyclists' >safety, but would still promote motorcycling. You know, I can't help but detect a mere hint of antipathy towards motorcyclists. It seems to me that your sentiments are more anti-motorcycle than pro-bicycle. Or plain selfishness: you don't want to share more than you can get away with. -- -Pip |
|
|
|
#35 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Pip Luscher wrote:
> Of course, you could share nicely and, on hearing a motorcycle, just > politely shift over a foot or two. It really wouldn't hold you up or > cost anything, you know. > For some reason I can't remember blocking problems with motorbikes. However the reasons bikes don't shift over a couple of foot or two to let cars pass is that experience tells us that this encourages some drivers to pass dangerously close with out reducing speed. > When I filter through traffic, quite often cars and lorries will move > over to make room. It's a polite act that I do appreciate and I will > acknowledge with a wave if I can do so safely. > Yes I do this when I'm in a car. But a motorbike passing close while filtering does not pose the same danger to me in a car as it would on a bike. >> The recommended width for a bus lane is 4.5m. Allowing motorbikes only >> in bus lanes this wide would have less direct impact on cyclists' >> safety, but would still promote motorcycling. > > You know, I can't help but detect a mere hint of antipathy towards > motorcyclists. It seems to me that your sentiments are more > anti-motorcycle than pro-bicycle. Or plain selfishness: you don't want > to share more than you can get away with. > Or it maybe that he is considering his own safety because he knows there are a significant minority of motorcyclists who will have no regard for his well being. |
|
|
|
#36 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Nick writtificated
>> When I filter through traffic, quite often cars and lorries will move >> over to make room. It's a polite act that I do appreciate and I will >> acknowledge with a wave if I can do so safely. >> > > Yes I do this when I'm in a car. But a motorbike passing close while > filtering does not pose the same danger to me in a car as it would on a > bike. We're talking about a cyclist in the bus lane. Cyclist hears a motorcycle, checks behind and moves to from primary to secondary position to let it pass. |
|
|
|
#37 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Pip Luscher <pips.computer@spammers.foad.ntlworld.com> wrote:
>On 30 May 2008 15:05:32 +0100 (BST), David Damerell ><damerell@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote: > >>Quoting Pip Luscher <pips.computer@spammers.foad.ntlworld.com>: >>[drivel] >> >>Note that Pip Luscher's previous posting history consists of 655 posts to >>uk.rec.motorcycles and 34 to uk.rec.motorcycles.classic, of a total of 738 >>Google knows about. > >Gosh, that many? As I made clear, I am first and foremost a >motorcyclist, so the postings to UKRM shouldn't be a surprise. > >So, that was the substance of your post, ws it? Guy sounds like one of those rabid greenie types. You know the ones I mean - knit their own cardigans out of porridge, want to kill all oil users (WTF does it use to lube it's chain, then?), speaks in a really whiny voice, would blow away if a sparrow farted in it's direction... -- Fr. Jack The ex(un)civil servant |
|
|
|
#38 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Pip Luscher wrote:
> On Wed, 28 May 2008 19:20:39 +0100, Colin McKenzie > <news@proof-read.co.uk> wrote: >>Allowing them in bus lanes will increase their numbers throughout London. > Really? "Hey, the bus lanes are open, lets nip out and buy a couple of > thousand quids' worth of motorbike. Oh, after doing the DAS, of > course. And taking the test. And buying a helmet and waterproofs." Yep. Check out what happened to motorcycling levels in London when the congestion charge came in with motorbikes exempt. >>- What are bus lanes for? >>Buses. >>- Why were cycles allowed in them? >>Because of the effect of forcing them into the other lane (petrified >>cyclists and delayed motorists). These effects do not happen with >>motorbikes. > > So cycles don't delay motorcycles in other lanes? Does this mean that > cyclists don't ride far enough out to prevent bikes squeezing past, as > you describe below, in bus lanes? Don't understand this >>- How much space do you want when overtaken? >>In a typical 3-metre bus lane, a cyclist riding far enough out to >>prevent a taxi from squeezing past within the lane will leave about >>1.6m gap on their right. A motorcyclist would aim at the middle of >>this gap, passing within half a metre of the cyclist. At present they >>try to encroach as litle as possible on the bus lane. > > So, cyclists, permitted into bus lanes, hold up the taxis and, > presumably, the very vehicles (buses) for which bus lanes were > created? Not very civil, I must say. Many taxi drivers will overtake dangerously close if not prevented. They are generally caught up at the next queue, so they gain no time saving from passing. If there isn't a next queue, traffic will be light enough for them to change lane to pass. In typical London conditions, few cyclists average slower than buses. So there's generally no point in a bus passing a cyclist - after the next busy stop it will never catch up again. > Of course, you could share nicely and, on hearing a motorcycle, just > politely shift over a foot or two. It really wouldn't hold you up or > cost anything, you know. Unfortunately, by the time you hear a motorbike over all the other traffic it's too late to move over for it. Of course, the motorcyclist could slow down until the cyclist notices him, and then go past if the cyclist moves over, but I have never known this happen. > When I filter through traffic, quite often cars and lorries will move > over to make room. It's a polite act that I do appreciate and I will > acknowledge with a wave if I can do so safely. There's a bit of a difference between filtering speeds and 30+ mph. >>The recommended width for a bus lane is 4.5m. Allowing motorbikes only >>in bus lanes this wide would have less direct impact on cyclists' >>safety, but would still promote motorcycling. > > You know, I can't help but detect a mere hint of antipathy towards > motorcyclists.... I know that allowing motorbikes in bus lanes will make cycling a more frightening experience. I know that one of the main things putting people off cycling is getting frightened. I want more people to cycle. Colin McKenzie -- No-one has ever proved that cycle helmets make cycling any safer at the population level, and anyway cycling is about as safe per mile as walking. Make an informed choice - visit www.cyclehelmets.org. |
|
|
|
#39 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
On Fri, 30 May 2008 20:29:06 +0100, Colin McKenzie
<news@proof-read.co.uk> wrote: >Pip Luscher wrote: >> >> So cycles don't delay motorcycles in other lanes? Does this mean that >> cyclists don't ride far enough out to prevent bikes squeezing past, as >> you describe below, in bus lanes? > >Don't understand this Yes, it was badly put. You said that in bus lanes motorbikes can't get by safely, yet in normal traffic lanes they can. Round here the lanes are of similar width, so what's changed? The main bus lanes near here lead into Cambridge and are virtually empty. The odd bus or cycle passes by. That seems a terrible waste of resources. Sure, it may 'reward' cleaner travellers and thus encourage greater public transport use, but banning motorbikes will not improve that situation. >In typical London conditions, few cyclists average slower than buses. >So there's generally no point in a bus passing a cyclist - after the >next busy stop it will never catch up again. The word is 'average': a bus could well need higher peak speeds to make up for the losses at stops etc and thus deliver a reasonable journey time. >> When I filter through traffic, quite often cars and lorries will move >> over to make room. It's a polite act that I do appreciate and I will >> acknowledge with a wave if I can do so safely. > >There's a bit of a difference between filtering speeds and 30+ mph. What's the speed got to do with it? If I were to see a cyclist in my path that I couldn't get past cleanly (which has never happened, that I can recall) I'd just roll off and hold position until I could overtake. I might get a bit irate if he deliberately sat far enough over to prevent me from passing, though. But it's never happened. >I know that allowing motorbikes in bus lanes will make cycling a more >frightening experience. I know that one of the main things putting >people off cycling is getting frightened. I want more people to cycle. You'r talking about fear, rather than actual risk. Sure, people won't take up cycling if it scares them, but in all honesty when I think of cycling, risks, I worry about vehicles of car size and larger - I know motorbikes are small enough and agile enough to pass safely. Perhaps, instead of scare-mongering, a more positive tack could be taken if, as you say, all you want to do is get more cyclists on the road. -- -Pip |
|
|
|
#40 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
On Fri, 30 May 2008 19:23:46 +0100, Fr Jack <sp@m.com> said in
<iah0449c18b4jdchopf4e80ml2sghm89lc@4ax.com>: >Guy sounds like one of those rabid greenie types. You know the ones I >mean - knit their own cardigans out of porridge, want to kill all oil >users (WTF does it use to lube it's chain, then?), speaks in a really >whiny voice, would blow away if a sparrow farted in it's direction... Assuming that by Guy you mean me, you're either not listening very carefully or your research has been woefully inadequate. I own (or owned, until my neighbour backed into one and wrote it off) two cars, one of which was a 2.5 litre turbocharged Volvo estate. I am certainly aiming to reduce my carbon footprint, I am building two solar panels to go on the roof and am adding a solartube to light our hall, but I am certainly not so "greenie" as to turn off the servers that run 24/7 in my house. I will be replacing the Volvo with a Land-Rover Defender 110, a notoriously eco-friendly vehicle. Not. I think most of the people in this (cycling) newsgroup enjoy cycling for the pleasure of cycling. If you can do it in time you'd otherwise waste sitting in a traffic jam, so much the better. I work in London, it takes me under 40 minutes to get from Paddington to Canary Wharf on the Brompton and only slightly longer to get back - it is very hard to beat that on the Tube and impossible in a car, unless you do it at 3am. I think that most of the people in this (cycling) newsgroup would also be happier if the average driver were to shift the balance of personal priorities away from getting from jam to jam as fast as possible, and towards the danger they pose to other more vulnerable road users. This is a position shared by pedestrians and many motorcyclists, it is hardly radical or extreme. As a group, in as much as we have any kind of groupthink, I suspect most of us have very little sympathy with the militant motorists - the "Provisional ABD" - who come here whining that motorists get fined for speeding. In order to attract a fine, you have to be a fair bit over the limit. That is unlikely to happen if you are driving consciously within the limit; I suspect that most of the whiners are actually driving to the prosecution guidelines, and their "few mph over the limit" equates to a few mph over the limit plus 2mph plus 10% plus a bit for speedo error - and so they drive at not more than an indicated 40mph in a 30 zone and wonder why they get nicked. I use the bus lanes in London when on my bike. I happen to agree that bikes and motorcycles are not well matched in that context. I don't see any need for motorcycles to use the bus lanes anyway, they do not seem to have any trouble reaching and filling the ASL reservoirs without using the bus lanes. This may be different in outer London, but in the centre I see no pressing need. Also, as far as I can tell, no group of road users is characterised by routine obedience of the law in all its points. Anyone who thinks red light jumping is the exclusive preserve of cyclists has never been to Hyde Park Corner on a weekday. Anyone who thinks trespassing on the pavements is the exclusive preserve of cyclists is simply ignorant - why the bollards to keep cars of the pavements? Why do councils complain of the damage motor vehicles do to pavements? How come so many people are killed and injured by cars on pavements? Why the campaigns against parking on pavements? All road users, as far as I can tell, break the laws at the margins to suit their personal convenience. The major difference with motorists is that in doing so they endanger others more than themselves. A car or motorcycle jumping a red light puts me in mortal danger; the number of recorded instances of car drivers being killed by cyclists in crashes that the cyclist then walked away from with life, limb and license intact, is, I believe, very small. So you'll excuse us, I hope, if in this cycling newsgroup we focus rather more on the danger motor traffic poses than on its benefit to us. Guy -- May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting. http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk 85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound |
|
|
|
#41 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
"Just zis Guy, you know?" <uce@ftc.gov> wrote:
> >Assuming that by Guy you mean me, Oh, hell! Absolutely not! Sorry about that, I appear to have missed out "that" and substituted an Americanism <spit> and used the word "guy" instead of "bloke". I'll take my fingers outside and shoot them, now. ;-) -- Fr. Jack The ex(un)civil servant |
|
|
|
#42 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
On Sat, 31 May 2008 12:51:20 +0100, Fr Jack <sp@m.com> said in
<g1e244ls44h86cu76q8vj4jqvt6nuar78f@4ax.com>: >I'll take my fingers outside and shoot them, now. ;-) I'd blame it on the DRINK! if I had the excuse of your nick )Guy -- May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting. http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk 85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound |
|
|
|
#43 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
On May 28, 7:45*pm, Sir Jeremy <pete.a...@virgin.net> wrote:
> On 28 May, 19:20, Colin McKenzie <n...@proof-read.co.uk> wrote: > > > > > Nick wrote: > > > spindrift wrote: > > >>http://www.lcc.org.uk/index.asp?PageID=1145 > > >> The evidence seems clear to me, motorbikes are faster moving, heavier, > > >> and pose a greater risk to cyclists. > > > I'd sign one to ban buses from bus lanes but I don't have a problem with > > > motorbikes. > > > The issues are: > > - Do you want to promote motorcycling? > > Allowing them in bus lanes will increase their numbers throughout London.. > > - What are bus lanes for? > > Buses. > > - Why were cycles allowed in them? > > Because of the effect of forcing them into the other lane (petrified > > cyclists and delayed motorists). These effects do not happen with > > motorbikes. > > - How much space do you want when overtaken? > > In a typical 3-metre bus lane, a cyclist riding far enough out to > > prevent a taxi from squeezing past within the lane will leave about > > 1.6m gap on their right. A motorcyclist would aim at the middle of > > this gap, passing within half a metre of the cyclist. At present they > > try to encroach as litle as possible on the bus lane. > > > The recommended width for a bus lane is 4.5m. Allowing motorbikes only > > in bus lanes this wide would have less direct impact on cyclists' > > safety, but would still promote motorcycling. > > > Colin McKenzie > > > -- > > No-one has ever proved that cycle helmets make cycling any safer at > > the population level, and anyway cycling is about as safe per mile as > > walking. > > Make an informed choice - visitwww.cyclehelmets.org. > > What's wrong with promoting motor bikes? *They certainly reduce > congestion No-one's allowed powered private transport. Everyone's got to use public transport and then walk/cycle the rest of the way, no matter how inconvenient, expensive, unpleasant and unfeasible it is. And while cycling, everyone's got to be a complete twat towards car drivers, because cycling is morally superior to driving. We've seen from the trolls' stubborn support of speed cameras that their crusade against powered private transport is more important to them than safety. Therefore, they would rather keep motorcycles out of bus lanes, despite the safety benefits that it brings. More people dying is OK as long as driving and motorcycling are discouraged. And now, instead of just fantasising on forums about killing road users like he usually does, Spindrift is trying to make sure that he and his fellow trolls make a real contribution to the death toll with this petition. Luckily, Boris won't listen, because he's aware of these militant cyclists and their extremist, killer agendas. Being a decent- minded cyclist himself, he must detest the way that cyclists' reputations are tarnished by these idiot trolls and their misanthropic hatred. If (by any slim chance) anyone here is thinking of signing the petition because they really think it will save lives, please be aware that Spindrift is using you to further his anti-powered private transport agenda, and the statistics show that allowing motorcycles into bus lanes is safer for all road users. In other words, anyone who signs this petition will have BLOOD ON THEIR HANDS. Thanks Mike |
|
|
|
#44 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
On May 31, 8:34*am, "Just zis Guy, you know?" <u...@ftc.gov> wrote:
> more lies Give it up eh? |
|
|
|
#45 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
"Just zis Guy, you know?" <uce@ftc.gov> wrote:
>On Sat, 31 May 2008 12:51:20 +0100, Fr Jack <sp@m.com> said in ><g1e244ls44h86cu76q8vj4jqvt6nuar78f@4ax.com>: > >>I'll take my fingers outside and shoot them, now. ;-) > >I'd blame it on the DRINK! if I had the excuse of your nick )That would be an ecumenical matter! -- Fr. Jack |
|