Paul Smith
in [UK Drivers]
|
From: DavidR on 20 Dec 2007 13:41 "MrBitsy" <ray(a)nowhere.com> wrote > DavidR wrote: >> "MrBitsy" <ray(a)nowhere.com> wrote >>> DavidR wrote: >>>> "MrBitsy" <ray(a)nowhere.com> wrote >>>>> >>>>> Many cyclists, like pedestrians, seem oblivious in very simple ways >>>>> to keep themselves safe - not obeying red lights for instance. >>>> >>>> Is this dangerous? Are there any figures to bear it out? >>> >>> Are you seriously suggestion it is safe to pass red traffic lights >>> under normal conditions? >> >> The question makes no such suggestion. I am asking you - is it >> dangerous? And please give reasons. Then I will offer my opinion. > > You don't know why it would be dangerous to not obey red traffic lights? You make rather a habit of evading questions by asking another. There is no point. Well, things have moved and I agree with Clive George. The classic action of running a red light is go blasting through with no regard for traffic on the green channel. I accept that is dangerous. I don't accept it is necessarily dangerous to treat the red channels in the same way as any other non-light controlled junction. Less than 10% (or possibly 5%) of junctions are light controlled and we cope pretty well with the remaining 90%. So I don't see any fundamental difference and, if treated carefully, crossing on red can easily be risk neutral. The particular problem with a car is that many light controlled junctions have poor visibility and just rolling a car into position to see is usually obstructive. So the lack of visibilty means the rule for a motor vehicle is inevitably stop on red and, out of necessity, trust the green. Traffic lights are the ultimate dumb down devices for drivers. On a bike the situation is different. The view is not obstructed and size avoids physical obstruction. The other contrast to a car is that green means go with care - I don't trust it in th same way as driving. As for pedestrians - well, if there are no motor vehicles to clear the way, it makes absolutely no difference which phase the lights are on. I said above that red can be risk neutral; but actually if the road ahead is clear, it doesn't take much leap of faith to suggest that it is actually safer to go on red to avoid being in a melee. As for pedestrians and lights, just watch how most people deal with this; the green man is a secondary indicator because most people watch the main traffic lights and the traffic. (I don't share your opinion that peds don't know what to do - the success that most have in crossing the road has very little to do with driver skill.) Button controlled lights don't work properly because of stupid delays.
From: Ekul Namsob on 20 Dec 2007 13:53 Conor <conor_turton(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > In article <1i9a4ji.1k2k7rz6kh6wlN% > notmyaddress.1.ekulnamsob(a)wronghead.com>, Ekul Namsob says... > > > > >> If he's turning right, he should be on the right hand side of the > > > >> lane. Now who's stupid? > > > >> > > > > You, because apparently you haven't noticed how wide and high trucks > > > > are. > > > > > > Wriggle, wriggle, wriggle all you like. You're wrong, he's wrong. > > > > Go and look at a lorry. Notice its size. > > > Go take a cycling proficiency test. Note where they tell you to place > yourself when turning right. I took CPT in 1983 (or was it 1982, it was a long while ago). Remind me where I'm going wrong by generally positioning myself on the right. > > As a lorry driver, I'd rather have you on the right than hidden down > the left. Who said anything about being hidden down the left? I'm sorry if I've missed something here but it seems as though we may be writing at cross purposes. For instance, in your comment "You're wrong, he's wrong", who is he? Cheers, Luke -- Red Rose Ramblings, the diary of an Essex boy in exile in Lancashire <http://www.shrimper.org.uk>
From: Clive George on 20 Dec 2007 13:54 "DavidR" <curedham(a)4bidden.org.uk> wrote in message news:5svra9F1b72pnU1(a)mid.individual.net... > "MrBitsy" <ray(a)nowhere.com> wrote >> DavidR wrote: >>> "MrBitsy" <ray(a)nowhere.com> wrote >>>> DavidR wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I offered some alternatives to be used according to circumstance. >>>>> You recommended an action to be used irrespective of circumstance. >>>>> BTW when did you last get on a bike? >>>> >>>> When did you last drive a lorry, bus or coach? >>> >>> I haven't attempted to instruct the operators of such conveyances how >>> to drive or even given any opinion about their behaviour, unlike >>> yourself,. so your question is completely irrelevant. Tell me, how >>> long since you last got on a bike? >> >> Until 18 months ago, I cycled to work and back for eight years. > > OK. If you are going to offer advice/opinion it seems a bit strange to > evade questions about your qualifications. It would be easier to answer > straight away. IIRC he cycled along the bike paths, tending to avoid the roads. His bike got nicked, and he didn't bother replacing it. clive
From: Steve Firth on 20 Dec 2007 13:52 Ekul Namsob <notmyaddress.1.ekulnamsob(a)wronghead.com> wrote: > In this circumstance, I find it can be helpful to show my intention to > change line by using my indicator. Usually, a lorry driver will let me > pull out. It helps, too, that I very rarely travel in a hurry. It's that last bit that's key IMO. I often have to travel long distances by car to get somewhere on schedule. I never do any of it in a hurry because that leads to accidents. On most journeys I arrive within a few minutes of people who were in a hurry. I once accepted a lift off someone who had a new Toyotoa Celica Turbo something or other. He obviously wanted to show off and drove like a complete nutter through rush hour traffic on the M1. I reckon he shaved about 10 minutes off my journey time for the same route. When we got to the hell-hole that is Bedford he insisted on stopping at a "Little Chef" for breakast and we ended up 20 minutes late for the meeting. The way I drive I'd have been on time with 10 minutes or so in hand. True I would have missed out on the lukewarm coffee and shaved pig slices but I don't see that as a negative. Never took a lift off him again, I value my skin too highly. Over longer distances rushing pays fewer dividends. I sometimes drive 1000 miles plus. I've left the ferry port in the company of people treating it like a F1 start, by the time I've got to the Italian border. I can see the same people two cars ahead of me at the toll booth. Hardly worth the effort on their part.
From: Peter Clinch on 20 Dec 2007 14:29
Brimstone wrote: > "Keep clear" to a person of average intelligence means doing what is within > your power to give yourself and the lorry enough space to do what you both > want to do. It means "keep clear". Keeping clear means staying away from. Not "doing one's best to stay away from". And in any case, there are numerous cases where i'll go close and be happy in the knowledge that I'll be safe. There are so many possible scenarios for beign interaction that a simple "keep clear" is quite obviously ridiculous, at least to anyone that's bothered to think about it and has experience odf actually using the roads. Pete. -- Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK net p.j.clinch(a)dundee.ac.uk http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/ |