Paul Smith
in [UK Drivers]
|
From: raisethe on 20 Dec 2007 16:13 Ekul Namsob wrote: > raisethe <raisethe(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > >> Farmer John wrote: > > > Have you renamed Steve just to wind him up or did you have a valid > reason? > He's a farmer in the real world. More like a gentle tease than a wind up really. Can't believe he's that strung out, especially with all the money they've made this year. > I, too, don't think that Peter said 'regularly'. I wonder, however, > whether he thought this to be the case when he asks what I, as a car > driver, would do "if there's another lorry closing up from behind" while > I had another lorry overtaking me. How can you 'keep clear of lorries' when there is one passing you, and one approaching your rear? You can't, and that, I presume, is his point. > > I honestly would like to know what Pete would do as it does seem to me > that he thinks the lorry behind me would be driven as though its driver > were auditioning for a key role in a remake of Steven Spielberg's > "Duel". > > He hasn't said that.
From: Ekul Namsob on 20 Dec 2007 16:42 raisethe <raisethe(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > Ekul Namsob wrote: > > raisethe <raisethe(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > > I, too, don't think that Peter said 'regularly'. I wonder, however, > > whether he thought this to be the case when he asks what I, as a car > > driver, would do "if there's another lorry closing up from behind" while > > I had another lorry overtaking me. > > How can you 'keep clear of lorries' when there is one passing you, and > one approaching your rear? You can't, and that, I presume, is his point. So I now believe. As I have pointed out elsewhere, it appeared clear to me that this was advice and not an instruction. > > I honestly would like to know what Pete would do as it does seem to me > > that he thinks the lorry behind me would be driven as though its driver > > were auditioning for a key role in a remake of Steven Spielberg's > > "Duel". > He hasn't said that. Indeed. That's why I neither claimed that he had said that nor implied it but rather invited him to comment. Cheers, Luke -- Red Rose Ramblings, the diary of an Essex boy in exile in Lancashire <http://www.shrimper.org.uk>
From: MrBitsy on 20 Dec 2007 17:02 Clive George wrote: > "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. Walked for a few months then got made redundent. -- MrBitsy
From: MrBitsy on 20 Dec 2007 17:04 Brimstone wrote: > MrBitsy wrote: >> Brimstone wrote: >>> "MrBitsy" <ray(a)nowhere.com> wrote in message >>> news:bbiaj.17296$1j1.14918(a)newsfe7-gui.ntli.net... >> >>>> Going faster than a speed limit is based on what I can see and what >>>> I can reasonably expect to develop. As has been said so often, a >>>> speed limit is a best guess at likely hazzards, but this limit has >>>> to be too high or too low almost all the time. I will drive at a >>>> speed withing the law 90% of the time AND within a safe speed for >>>> the conditions 100% of the time. However, when the road and >>>> conditions allow a faster speed, I will drive faster than the >>>> limit. >>> >>> So why can't or won't you apply the same criteria and methods to a >>> red light? >> >> I think I have given my reasons. >> >> Green light gives a very strong 'its clear' message. >> Drivers will assume other traffic has stopped. >> Observations and anticipation are often dropped on this clear signal. >> Drivers will not expect me to be in their way. > > They are not there in the scenario I'm describing. > >> I think we all agree going faster than the limit where conditions >> allow, is not dangerous. My position on the road is where others >> expect me to be. I am not going into a zone where other drivers will >> drop observations due to a strong 'signal' that another vehicle will >> not be a factor. >> For me personally, The absolute message given by 'clear' and 'danger' >> aspects at traffic lights, are too strong to ignore. I will not cross >> a red aspect until I am sure I am justified in doing so - and this >> will be because of traffic light failure only. >> >> Maybe the signaller/train driver in me is too strong :-) > > I too am a former train driver and signalman. I've also worked on the > P-Way and the S&T. None of them influence my attitude to a road > junction signal. I know - smiley must have been invisible. > So, I'm repeating the question. If you are at or approaching a red > traffic light and can see quite clearly THAT THERE IS NO OTHER > TRAFFIC APPROACHING FROM ANY DIRECTION what is the objection to passing > that signal? I have given my reasons at length and several times. If the signal is faulty then I would pass it with caution. -- MrBitsy
From: MrBitsy on 20 Dec 2007 17:05
Clive George wrote: > "MrBitsy" <ray(a)nowhere.com> wrote in message > news:3Iraj.11977$745.1793(a)newsfe1-win.ntli.net... >> Clive George wrote: >>> "MrBitsy" <ray(a)nowhere.com> wrote in message >>> news:bbiaj.17296$1j1.14918(a)newsfe7-gui.ntli.net... >>>> Brimstone wrote: >>>>> MrBitsy wrote: >>>>>> Brimstone wrote: >>>>>>> MrBitsy wrote: >>>>>>>> Clive George wrote: >>>>>>>>> "MrBitsy" <ray(a)nowhere.com> wrote in message >>>>>>>>> news:OWZ9j.10620$h35.4554(a)newsfe2-gui.ntli.net... >>>>>>>>>> Clive George wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> "MrBitsy" <ray(a)nowhere.com> wrote in message >>>>>>>>>>> news:deZ9j.12144$ov2.11527(a)newsfe5-win.ntli.net... >>>>>>>>>>>> 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? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I can think of cases where it would be safe to not obey red >>>>>>>>>>> traffic lights. If you can't, then you're pretty dim. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Are we talking everyday normal use of traffic controlled >>>>>>>>>> junctions? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Define that a bit better :-) The strict answer is "it >>>>>>>>> depends". (coz I'm not Brimstone, I'll not stop there.) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Red traffic lights don't just happen at traffic controlled >>>>>>>>> junctions - road works and road crossings are the two other >>>>>>>>> ones I can think of. So that's one reason why your question >>>>>>>>> isn't helpful. But here's the main one: >>>>>>>>> Safety when not obeying them isn't an absolute - just as you >>>>>>>>> say safe speed isn't the absolute prescribed figure. It >>>>>>>>> depends on the circumstances - what other vehicles/people are >>>>>>>>> present, how much can you see, how fast are they going. >>>>>>>>> You're very keen on observing the hazards and making an >>>>>>>>> appropriate decision when it comes to speed limits - why not >>>>>>>>> apply this to other laws too? After all, it's easy to provide >>>>>>>>> cases where it is perfectly safe to ignore a red traffic >>>>>>>>> light - and indeed, it's even easy to provide them where it's >>>>>>>>> not only safe, but doesn't even slightly affect other road >>>>>>>>> users. And that applies no matter what your mode of >>>>>>>>> transport. Of course, the fact that it's rather easier when you're >>>>>>>>> small, >>>>>>>>> manoeverable and have better opportunities for observation >>>>>>>>> could be a reason for considering some modes rather more than >>>>>>>>> others (and indeed the law recognises this to an extent). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> When choosing a speed to travel at, all hazzards, road & >>>>>>>> weather conditions are taken into account. I am always going >>>>>>>> to be travelling on the correct side of the road, in a >>>>>>>> direction other road users and pedestrians expect me to be >>>>>>>> going. A 10% difference in speed is not going to catch someone >>>>>>>> out, if the driver has chosen that speed on an accurate >>>>>>>> assesment of those conditions. A red traffic light is an >>>>>>>> absolute message to stop. I know this >>>>>>>> and all other road users are expecting me to comply with it. >>>>>>>> Other road users will be approaching green traffic lights >>>>>>>> expecting the road to be clear. Many motorists will not be >>>>>>>> observing either side of the junction for road users not >>>>>>>> obeying the red. Therefore, not obeying a red traffic signal, >>>>>>>> has far more risks associated with it than going a little >>>>>>>> faster than a posted speed limit - one that has no idea of the >>>>>>>> conditions when I pass it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> What if there are no other road users? >>>>>> >>>>>> What about it? >>>>> >>>>> Quote, "I know this and all other road users are expecting me to >>>>> comply with it. Other road users will be approaching green traffic >>>>> lights expecting the road to be clear." >>>>> >>>>> That's quite true. but what if there are no other road users, why >>>>> shouldn't one drive/ride through a red light? >>>> >>>> Both of you are trying to get a 'because it is the law' answer, >>> >>> Is Brimstone schizophrenic then? I ask because I'm not after a >>> "because it is the law" answer - I'm after you to acknowledge that >>> there are circumstances when it is safe to pass a red light. >>> >>> Is it your fear of giving an answer which you think might be used >>> against you which is preventing you giving the correct one? >> >> See the reply to Brimstone. > > The one which basically gives no reasons why with adequate > observation it can in fact be safe? > > You do hint that it's possibly just you being dogmatic - is that the > real answer? No, see the next reply to Brimstone. -- MrBitsy |