Tom Anderson wrote:
Also, i can echo an observation made in the story about the psycho bus
driver chasing a cyclist down the road, too. A few months ago, i was hit
by a motorbike: he overtook a taxi, and didn't check to see if there was
anything in front of it; there was, and it was me. Luckily, it was all
pretty low-speed, so i just fell off and whacked my arm, rather than
getting properly hurt. Now, in the ensuing conversation, he rather
forcefully expressed the opinion that it was *my* fault, since there was a
cycle lane on the road which i wasn't using (it's a nice lane, but it's a
contraflow one, and rather hard to get into from the wrong side). He is of
course mistaken - there is no obligation on bikes to use a cycle lane, and
no restriction on them using the main lanes if they'd rather. The psycho
bus driver apparently had the same misapprehension; is this common?

I'm trying to visualise the situation but I'm a bit confused: if the
cycle lane is contraflow but you were using the road, weren't you
travelling in the opposite direction to the cycle lane?

--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London

Tom Anderson said:

*snip*

Now, in the ensuing conversation, he rather
forcefully expressed the opinion that it was *my* fault, since there was a
cycle lane on the road which i wasn't using (it's a nice lane, but it's a
contraflow one, and rather hard to get into from the wrong side). He is of
course mistaken - there is no obligation on bikes to use a cycle lane, and
no restriction on them using the main lanes if they'd rather. The psycho
bus driver apparently had the same misapprehension; is this common?

Yep, I get lots of "get on the cycle path" comments here in Lincoln. I
favour the mild retort thought up by someone he "get on the motorway". If
the car driver is clever, it neatly highlights the stupidity of their point
of view (i.e. the cycle lane might not be going where you want to go)
without being too confrontational. If the driver is thick, it is likely they
will merely be puzzled rather than homicidal. Of course, what the impatient
motorcyclist meant was "how dare you be in the way, cyclist scum"! Sadly,
also a common reaction[1].

This morning I noted that Skool Traffic was back again. On my return from
the pool, two roundabouts on my route were totally clogged with twits who'd
entered without being able to get off, and some nitwit in a Rover decided to
try and murder me by entering against the circulating traffic. That
certainly woke me up!

Regards,

-david

[1] ObBusDriverStory. Two weeks ago on my way to the pool, 0650 in the
morning I am whizzing along the Tritton Road (urban dual carriageway, wide &
clear) towards town with nary another vehicle in sight. Mr Bus Driver drives
up behind me and rather than overtake in the completely clear lane to my
right, sits behind me sounding his horn. For the next mile. Through two sets
of lights, at both of which I pointed out there was a whole lane he could
literally get a bus through *right there*. He didn't actually overtake me
until the flyover over the Fossdyke Canal. Peculiar, if not actually
threatening behaviour.

On 2 Sep 2004 16:31:10 GMT, David Nutter
wrote:

If the driver is thick,

Normal for Lincolnshire ............


This morning I noted that Skool Traffic was back again. On my return from
the pool, two roundabouts on my route were totally clogged with twits who'd
entered without being able to get off, and some nitwit in a Rover decided to
try and murder me by entering against the circulating traffic. That
certainly woke me up!

See line above ............

For Sale: Indicator lights, all model vehicles available, all
completely unused, apply; The Lincolnshire Motorist.

I have also noticed the driving / mobile phone ban has had a massive
impact up here ............... everyone is at it now !!! (See 1st
line)

;-)

Jack Ouzzi writes:

On 2 Sep 2004 16:31:10 GMT, David Nutter
wrote:

If the driver is thick,

Normal for Lincolnshire ............


This morning I noted that Skool Traffic was back again. On my return from
the pool, two roundabouts on my route were totally clogged with twits who'd
entered without being able to get off, and some nitwit in a Rover decided to
try and murder me by entering against the circulating traffic. That
certainly woke me up!

See line above ............

For Sale: Indicator lights, all model vehicles available, all
completely unused, apply; The Lincolnshire Motorist.

Ah yes, Flashing Yellow Lights Puzzle BMW Driver:

url:http://www.bbspot.com/News/2003/11/bmw.html

A

On Thu, 2 Sep 2004, Dave Arquati wrote:

Tom Anderson wrote:

Also, i can echo an observation made in the story about the psycho bus
driver chasing a cyclist down the road, too. A few months ago, i was hit
by a motorbike: he overtook a taxi, and didn't check to see if there was
anything in front of it; there was, and it was me. Luckily, it was all
pretty low-speed, so i just fell off and whacked my arm, rather than
getting properly hurt. Now, in the ensuing conversation, he rather
forcefully expressed the opinion that it was *my* fault, since there was a
cycle lane on the road which i wasn't using (it's a nice lane, but it's a
contraflow one, and rather hard to get into from the wrong side). He is of
course mistaken - there is no obligation on bikes to use a cycle lane, and
no restriction on them using the main lanes if they'd rather. The psycho
bus driver apparently had the same misapprehension; is this common?

I'm trying to visualise the situation but I'm a bit confused: if the
cycle lane is contraflow but you were using the road, weren't you
travelling in the opposite direction to the cycle lane?

The cycle lane is bidirectional; sorry, i didn't explain that clearly.
This is the cycle lane along Tavistock Place, in case you know it; i was
heading west. The road looks like this:

---------------
---------------
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
===============

Where - denotes cycle lane, = denotes main lane, and X denotes a physical
barrier (a sort of free-standing kerb). I'd come in from the east, where
the road's bidirectional and there there's a normal cycle lane on each
side; thus, i was at the left edge of the road. The normal cycle lanes
end, and the bidirectional segregated lane begins, when the road becomes
one-way (where it crosses Woburn Place?), but it's a little tricky to get
into the segregated lane there, because it involves crossing the stream of
traffic, plus worrying about the traffic coming in from the north and
south. And i keep forgetting it's there. Anyway, i find it easier to stay
in the main lane, since my turn, off on the right to Gordon St further on,
has a filter lane.

Hmm. I might have got some of that wrong, since the road's bidirectional
where my turn is, which would mean the one-way stretch is only a couple of
hundred metres long. There's definitely a westbound main lane on the south
side the whole way, and an eastbound cycle lane on the north side the
whole way!

Anyway, if you want truly strange cycle lanes, try the back of the British
Museum: given the task of fitting a cycle lane heading west in with a
two-lane one-way street heading east (which, incidentally, is mostly used
by coaches), the road chaps decided that the best place for it was IN
BETWEEN the two lanes of traffic! Getting into that lane in the first
place is an adventure in itself.

tom

--
I don't know what the hell you should do. Try clicking on some **** or somethin'.

Tom Anderson wrote:

On Thu, 2 Sep 2004, Dave Arquati wrote:


Tom Anderson wrote:


Also, i can echo an observation made in the story about the psycho bus
driver chasing a cyclist down the road, too. A few months ago, i was hit
by a motorbike: he overtook a taxi, and didn't check to see if there was
anything in front of it; there was, and it was me. Luckily, it was all
pretty low-speed, so i just fell off and whacked my arm, rather than
getting properly hurt. Now, in the ensuing conversation, he rather
forcefully expressed the opinion that it was *my* fault, since there was a
cycle lane on the road which i wasn't using (it's a nice lane, but it's a
contraflow one, and rather hard to get into from the wrong side). He is of
course mistaken - there is no obligation on bikes to use a cycle lane, and
no restriction on them using the main lanes if they'd rather. The psycho
bus driver apparently had the same misapprehension; is this common?

I'm trying to visualise the situation but I'm a bit confused: if the
cycle lane is contraflow but you were using the road, weren't you
travelling in the opposite direction to the cycle lane?


The cycle lane is bidirectional; sorry, i didn't explain that clearly.
This is the cycle lane along Tavistock Place, in case you know it; i was
heading west. The road looks like this:

---------------
---------------
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
===============

Where - denotes cycle lane, = denotes main lane, and X denotes a physical
barrier (a sort of free-standing kerb). I'd come in from the east, where
the road's bidirectional and there there's a normal cycle lane on each
side; thus, i was at the left edge of the road. The normal cycle lanes
end, and the bidirectional segregated lane begins, when the road becomes
one-way (where it crosses Woburn Place?), but it's a little tricky to get
into the segregated lane there, because it involves crossing the stream of
traffic, plus worrying about the traffic coming in from the north and
south. And i keep forgetting it's there. Anyway, i find it easier to stay
in the main lane, since my turn, off on the right to Gordon St further on,
has a filter lane.

Oh yes, I've seen that lane before; I've never travelled down Tavistock
Place any other way than by foot though.

Hmm. I might have got some of that wrong, since the road's bidirectional
where my turn is, which would mean the one-way stretch is only a couple of
hundred metres long. There's definitely a westbound main lane on the south
side the whole way, and an eastbound cycle lane on the north side the
whole way!

Anyway, if you want truly strange cycle lanes, try the back of the British
Museum: given the task of fitting a cycle lane heading west in with a
two-lane one-way street heading east (which, incidentally, is mostly used
by coaches), the road chaps decided that the best place for it was IN
BETWEEN the two lanes of traffic! Getting into that lane in the first
place is an adventure in itself.

Isn't that how the Blackfriars Bridge accident happened? I don't fancy
cycling between two lanes of traffic; I get worried enough cycling in
London full stop, which is why I generally don't! I did, however,
experience a variety of cycling environments on a trip from South
Kensington to Canary Wharf and back.

I went via the parks, then Westminster Bridge, cycle route near the
South Bank, London Bridge, Aldgate (where I took a wrong turn and ended
up going round the one-way system, which scared the living daylights out
of me), then down to the Wapping ornamental canal, Shadwell, the
riverside, Narrow St and then took another wrong turn to end up walking
around West India Quay DLR with the bike and some difficulty.

Came back via a more direct route along Cable St (partly contraflow
cycle lane, partly on-pavement cycle lane), through the City to Fleet St
(got lost again around Fenchurch St & later was following motor vehicle
signs and almost ended up on the Victoria Embankment which I didn't want
to), then straight along to Trafalgar Square. I wasn't brave enough to
cycle across the Square; afterwards I went up The Mall, Constitution
Hill and back along the South Carriage Drive.

The experience was generally very good (although it was a Sunday!) and
would have encouraged me to cycle more in London. Unfortunately right
after finishing the ride, my bike got nicked, so that put me off again...

--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London

In message , Dave Arquati
writes

then straight along to Trafalgar Square. I wasn't brave enough to cycle
across the Square; afterwards I went up The Mall, Constitution Hill and
back along the South Carriage Drive.

I don't think the re-direction of traffic in Trafalgar Square is at all
beneficial to cyclists. I travel through it twice a day and there are
several points where motor vehicles and cyclists change lanes across
each other.

--
congokid
Good restaurants in London? Number one on Google
http://congokid.com

On Thu, 2 Sep 2004 10:43:38 +0100, Paul Weaver wrote:

Good for them, if they insist of breaking the law while doing that then
they
should get a job where they cant endanger others.

But do bear in mind what I said in my last post. A lot of practises are
institutionalised. To give an example, most couriers get paid by the
number of drops they make. If any driver consistently took longer to make
a journey than the rest of his colleagues, he would in all likelihood lose
his job. Believe me, driving agressively would become second nature to you
if you were working under those conditions. You aren't thinking about it,
you're just doing it.

Also, you need to understand by doing what you want to do you are doing
all other cyclists a disservice. Do you really think that shouting at a
driver or trying to get him disciplined or even fired is going to make him
behave better towards other cyclists? Will it buggery.

What's the difference between a bus driver and a car driver, except a bus
driver should know better?

IME there is a world of difference between a 17 year old driver in a hot
hatch and a bus driver. Teenagers are famed for having a very unrealistic
view of their mortality (look at the number killed walking across roads).
Add to that an intoxicating sense of power that the car gives many new
drivers and the fact that an inexperienced driver will have less actual
driving ability than someone who has driven a bus (a vehicle 20 times the
size of a small car) 8 hours a day for the last 20 years, and I would
certainly say the two are different.

So I stick with what I said yesterday. In this case I personally think you
are in the right, but all the same let it go. It isn't doing anyone any
good.
--
|C|H|R|I|S|@|T|R|I|N|I|T|Y|W|I|L|L|S|.|C|O|M|
Remove the bars to contact me

"Tom Anderson" wrote in message
...
The psycho
bus driver apparently had the same misapprehension; is this common?

Probably. But talking of madmen, bikes and misapprehensions I have heard of
someone who walked into a public library and requestied information on cycle
paths only to be directed to the "True Crime" section for books on
psychopaths!
--
gordon

On Thu, 2 Sep 2004, Dave Arquati wrote:

Tom Anderson wrote:

On Thu, 2 Sep 2004, Dave Arquati wrote:

Anyway, if you want truly strange cycle lanes, try the back of the British
Museum: given the task of fitting a cycle lane heading west in with a
two-lane one-way street heading east (which, incidentally, is mostly used
by coaches), the road chaps decided that the best place for it was IN
BETWEEN the two lanes of traffic! Getting into that lane in the first
place is an adventure in itself.

Isn't that how the Blackfriars Bridge accident happened?

It's nowhere near as bad as Blackfriars bridge, mostly because the
traffic's a hell of a lot lighter. Plus, ISTR that it's physically
segregated, which Blackfriars wasn't. Also, AIUI, the Blackfriars lane was
conflow (or whatever the opposite of contraflow is - Sandinistaflow?),
whereas this is contraflow, which is also safer.

I don't fancy cycling between two lanes of traffic; I get worried enough
cycling in London full stop, which is why I generally don't! I did,
however, experience a variety of cycling environments on a trip from
South Kensington to Canary Wharf and back.

I went via the parks, then Westminster Bridge, cycle route near the
South Bank, London Bridge, Aldgate (where I took a wrong turn and ended
up going round the one-way system, which scared the living daylights out
of me),

Do you mean the big gyratory system thing, which you have to go through to
get from the Whitechapel road to the City? I've been through that a few
times - it's not the best cycling environment, granted. Still, i'd say
it's better than the one at Old Street!

then down to the Wapping ornamental canal, Shadwell, the riverside,
Narrow St and then took another wrong turn to end up walking around West
India Quay DLR with the bike and some difficulty.

Came back via a more direct route along Cable St (partly contraflow
cycle lane, partly on-pavement cycle lane), through the City to Fleet St
(got lost again around Fenchurch St & later was following motor vehicle
signs and almost ended up on the Victoria Embankment which I didn't want
to),

Welcome to the club! I usually have a really hard time getting from the
City onto High Holborn, or in fact getting across the city in any
direction; i'm glad it's so small! I once, coming out of Smithfield and
aiming for work (UCL, Eustonish) ended up going down the Farringdon Road,
and by the time i realised, didn't really have any choice except to carry
on over Blackfriars Bridge (this was after the accident, i think), head
along the south bank and go back over Waterloo bridge, then up through the
west end to work. This was all because i'd agreed to go and pick something
up from Charterhouse Square for a friend; the same friend, in fact, who i
had to traverse Old Street and Aldgate to go and visit. She doesn't live
in London any more, which, frankly, is something of a relief!

then straight along to Trafalgar Square. I wasn't brave enough to
cycle across the Square; afterwards I went up The Mall, Constitution
Hill and back along the South Carriage Drive.

The experience was generally very good (although it was a Sunday!) and
would have encouraged me to cycle more in London. Unfortunately right
after finishing the ride, my bike got nicked, so that put me off
again...

That must have been rather irritating. Still, an old saying about falling
off horses springs to mind!

tom

--
Mathematics is the door and the key to the sciences. -- Roger Bacon