Martin Underwood wrote:
Whinging Courier wrote in message
:


In uk.transport.london, Tim amazed us all with this pearl of wisdom:


As an occasional cyclist, I'd willingly pay a small surcharge for
insurance. Being responsible and considerate, I have never
overtaken a queue of cars on the left (I wait my turn, just like a
car, or else I dismount and walk on the pavement till I get past
the obstruction) and I have never gone through a red traffic light
or across a pedestrian crossing that has people on it. But I think
I'm very much in the minority :-(

Cyclists like you are a PITA. The ones that wait at traffic lights
stop me getting in front and racing away from other stationary
traffic.


Are you being serious?

Quite probably not, I read it as a joke.

I would never try to race ahead of cars, because I know they'll only catch
up with me after a few yards, and I don't want to cause an obstruction to
them.

You sound like a timid and/or weak cyclist. Any reasonably fit cyclist
will be well away from the lights when they change to green before 90%
of motorists have started moving. Why should I delay my journey unnecessarily
just because a motorist *may* eventually catch me up ? At most traffic
lights I encounter when cycling, the motorist won't catch me up
before the next queue of traffic anyway.

Ideally, I'd like to see all cyclists required to use segregated cycle
tracks and be kept totally separate from powered vehicles, but since this
isn't feasable on most roads, the least I can do as a cyclist is to keep out
of the way of cars and not impede them.

If you are cycling legally and correctly positioned (i.e. the primary
position) you are not impeding traffic flow - you are traffic flow.
The best thing you can do as a cyclist is to obey the highway code,
cycle assertively and safely, not to cower timidly at the mere possibility
that a motorist may want to pass you. If it is safe for them to overtake
you can make it easy for them, if it is not safe then stand your ground
and make sure you are safe by making your intentions clear to the motorist.
Some may get upset at being delayed for 2 nanoseconds, but it is better to
be safe than allow them to undertake an unsafe maneuver.

As a motorist and a cyclist I want to see the roads shared responsibly
by all road users. I don't want to be segregated into a cyclist only ghetto,
especially when these are poorly designed, poorly maintained and don't go
where I want. Share the road as it is there for us all.

Be safe,
Douglas

"Tim" wrote in message
...
- compulsory third-party insurance for all cyclists (to cover
injury to
pedestrians and damage to cars ...

Actually, as a cyclist, I do have third party insurance, three times
over. It comes as a free benefit with clubs and things that I belong
to.

It makes a good benefits for organizations to offer free. Cyclists
so rarely cause damage that the premiums are pretty negligible, and
doing it through a national organization means that you don't so much
get the paperwork costs far outweighing all the other costs, as would
be the case if people signed up individually

Jeremy Parker

Douglas Steel wrote in
:

Martin Underwood wrote:
I would never try to race ahead of cars, because I know they'll only
catch up with me after a few yards, and I don't want to cause an
obstruction to them.

You sound like a timid and/or weak cyclist. Any reasonably fit cyclist
will be well away from the lights when they change to green before 90%
of motorists have started moving. Why should I delay my journey
unnecessarily just because a motorist *may* eventually catch me up ?
At most traffic lights I encounter when cycling, the motorist won't
catch me up before the next queue of traffic anyway.

I agree that a fit cyclist probably has a faster 0-15 mph time that a car [*], but after that the car will catch him up and then, if the road isn't
wide enough to overtake, will be impeded from going any faster. Any vehicle
which cannot achieve the legal speed limit for the road (assuming it is safe
to drive at that speed) is likely to cause an obstruction and should in an
ideal world be segregated from the traffic that can achieve that speed.
Where that's not possible, the next best thing is for cyclists to keep
left - except when they want to turn right at a traffic lights, when I agree
that a cyclists' refuge ahead of the car stop line is a good thing.

[*] Assuming that the cyclist hasn't made the elementary mistake that I
still occasionally make, forgetting to change down while approaching the
junction because derailleur gears don't like to be changed when you're
stationary - the complete opposite of driving when advanced driving
techniques say approach in a moderately high gear and then select the
correct gear to accelerate out of the hazard at the point where you decide
which is the appropriate gear. I spent so long training myself to do this
for my IAM test that I sometimes forget not to do it when riding my bike!
Very embarrassing and I'm sure drivers curse me!

On Fri, 3 Feb 2006 16:49:53 -0000, "Martin Underwood"
wrote:

Any vehicle
which cannot achieve the legal speed limit for the road (assuming it is safe
to drive at that speed) is likely to cause an obstruction and should in an
ideal world be segregated from the traffic that can achieve that speed.

That's an interesting presumption! There's an obligation to travel
as fast as possible!

Martin Underwood wrote:
I agree that a fit cyclist probably has a faster 0-15 mph time that a car
[*], but after that the car will catch him up and then, if the road isn't
wide enough to overtake, will be impeded from going any faster. Any vehicle
which cannot achieve the legal speed limit for the road (assuming it is safe
to drive at that speed) is likely to cause an obstruction and should in an
ideal world be segregated from the traffic that can achieve that speed.
Where that's not possible, the next best thing is for cyclists to keep
left - except when they want to turn right at a traffic lights, when I agree
that a cyclists' refuge ahead of the car stop line is a good thing.

A cyclist making progress along a road is *not* an obstruction by
any legal (or imho moral) definition.

There is no obligation to travel at the speed limit even if it is safe
to do so, if you want roads where cycles are not allowed then please
go and visit the nearest motorway.

The highway code does suggest that:

145: Do not hold up a long queue of traffic, especially if
you are driving a large or slow moving vehicle. Check your
mirrors frequently, and if necessary, pull in where it is
safe and let traffic pass.

That is a courtesy only, but one that I comply with when there
is a *long* queue (one or two cars doesn't count as a long queue
but I will move over if they have been behind for a significant time)
and it as safe and appropriate to pull over.

However, in heavy traffic situations I do not class myself
as a slow moving vehicle as I am generally going at least as
fast as most motorised vehicles - so if I am doing 20mph
and a car is doing 15mph what are the chances it would move
over for me ?

Share the road
Douglas

On Fri, 03 Feb 2006 17:48:52 +0000, Douglas Steel
wrote:

145: Do not hold up a long queue of traffic, especially if
you are driving a large or slow moving vehicle. Check your
mirrors frequently, and if necessary, pull in where it is
safe and let traffic pass.

That is a courtesy only, but one that I comply with when there
is a *long* queue (one or two cars doesn't count as a long queue
but I will move over if they have been behind for a significant time)
and it as safe and appropriate to pull over.


Why wouldn't you do it for one?

d wrote:

[snip - discussion about insurance + lorrys]

Shouldn't the driver be looking out for such hazards? There are rules for
drivers, but not for pedestrians? Isn't that the case? (being serious
here - I don't know )


The highway code has a whole section for pedestrians.. read it on
www.highwaycode.gov.uk before you next go for a walk :-)

Martin Underwood wrote:
Where that's not possible, the next best thing is for cyclists to keep
left - except when they want to turn right at a traffic lights

Maybe on a flat road - but Kensington, Fulham and Wandswth are full of
holes down the left of the road. It's not really safe to cycle on the
left then swerve out when you see a big hole - far safer to stay away
from the kerb a bit.

JRS: In article .com
, dated Fri, 3 Feb 2006 12:23:39 remote, seen in
news:uk.transport.london, Chris! posted :

The highway code has a whole section for pedestrians.. read it on
www.highwaycode.gov.uk before you next go for a walk :-)

That URL's all very well; but alas I see no mention of the version by
The Master Singers (Parlophone, 1966).

--
© John Stockton, Surrey, UK. Turnpike v4.00 MIME. ©
Web URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/ - w. FAQish topics, links, acronyms
PAS EXE etc : URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/programs/ - see 00index.htm
Dates - miscdate.htm moredate.htm js-dates.htm pas-time.htm critdate.htm etc.

"Dr John Stockton" wrote
That URL's all very well; but alas I see no mention of the version by
The Master Singers (Parlophone, 1966).

See http://www.batesline.com/archives/000328.html (towards the bottom)