On 23 Oct, 10:44, Boltar wrote:
On Oct 23, 10:29 am, MIG wrote:

If the cement truck was indicating, I might hold back in that
situation, but otherwise I'd try to get to the front. *So indicating

Whats the point of going to the front of a queue anyway? Unless its
really busy traffic they'll all overtake you in seconds as soon as the
light changes so what have you gained?

So that you can get past the junction before they all turn left into
you, or veer towards the kerb etc etc.

On 23 Oct, 10:42, Adrian wrote:
MIG gurgled happily, sounding much like they
were saying:





A left turning cement truck killed a cyclist in Cambridge. There was
disputed evidence about whether he was even indicating.
To be honest, I'm not sure that indicating or not actually matters.

If the wagon overtook the cyclist immediately before turning left, then
the indicators are irrelevant - the HGV driver is absolutely bang-to-
rights guilty.

If the cyclist was undertaking the wagon as the wagon slowed down with
a junction or entrance coming up on the left, then the indicators are
irrelevant - the cyclist made a monumentally ****ing stupid manouvre,
basically committing suicide.

Same applies if they were both stationary at lights. If the wagon
pulled up next to a cyclist already there, then the driver is utterly
to blame. If the cyclist went up the inside of a stationary wagon, then
the cyclist is utterly to blame.
The best survival tactic for the cyclist is to get to the front, or else
they are bound to be on the inside of something when the queue moves.
Sometimes due to bad luck

Bad luck, my arse. If you've not JUST seen them go red, assume they're
about to go green, and be on the defensive.

Same applies t'other way round - as long as you've not JUST seen 'em go
green, you should assume they're about to go red, and be prepared to stop.

the lights change just as you are trying to get to the front.

So stay behind the wagon. Then it doesn't matter WHEN the lights change.

And then you are stuck on the inside of a queue of vehicles that may
be turning left and whose drivers may not have seen you. That's why
you need to get to the front.


If the cement truck was indicating, I might hold back in that situation,
but otherwise I'd try to get to the front.

Why the impatience?

What I said. You get to the front to help you survive, nothing to do
with impatience.


So indicating does make a difference (whether that was the situation in
Cambridge I don't know).

What ever happened to "discretion is the better part of valour"? "He who
runs away lives to fight another day"?

Why not, indeed, go past the wagon on the RIGHT? Y'know, the side that
you're meant to overtake stuff...?

Not at a queue at a junction. That's totally irrelevant. How would
you squeeze between the bumpers to get to the right anyway? Would it
be safe to pop out from between vehicles into the middle of the road?

On Oct 23, 10:52 am, MIG wrote:
So that you can get past the junction before they all turn left into
you, or veer towards the kerb etc etc.

Why would they turn left into you if you stay behind them? And if
you're really in such a hurry to cross the lights why not just get off
the bike , wheel it across the pedestrian crossing and get on again
the other side before the traffic has had the green light?

B2003

MIG gurgled happily, sounding much like they
were saying:

the lights change just as you are trying to get to the front.

So stay behind the wagon. Then it doesn't matter WHEN the lights
change.

And then you are stuck on the inside of a queue of vehicles

No, you're between two vehicles in the normal position in the road.

that may be turning left and whose drivers may not have seen you.
That's why you need to get to the front.

Umm, no. The vehicles behind you can see you - because you're in front
of them. Not in a potential blind spot in the gutter. The vehicles in
front of you don't need to know you're there, because you're behind them
and not overtaking them.

If the cement truck was indicating, I might hold back in that
situation, but otherwise I'd try to get to the front.

Why the impatience?

What I said. You get to the front to help you survive, nothing to do
with impatience.

********.

Why not, indeed, go past the wagon on the RIGHT? Y'know, the side that
you're meant to overtake stuff...?

Not at a queue at a junction.

Well, no, you're not actually MEANT to overtake queues at junctions
anyway.

That's totally irrelevant.

Clearly.

How would you squeeze between the bumpers to get to the right anyway?

Why do you need to "squeeze between the bumpers"?

Would it be safe to pop out from between vehicles into the middle of
the road?

Of course it wouldn't. But why would you be doing that, anyway?

Seems to me like you don't have the first clue about defensive cycling
and basic road positioning.

On 23 Oct, 11:10, Adrian wrote:
MIG gurgled happily, sounding much like they
were saying:

the lights change just as you are trying to get to the front.
So stay behind the wagon. Then it doesn't matter WHEN the lights
change.
And then you are stuck on the inside of a queue of vehicles

No, you're between two vehicles in the normal position in the road.

that may be turning left and whose drivers may not have seen you. *
That's why you need to get to the front.

Umm, no. *The vehicles behind you can see you - because you're in front
of them. Not in a potential blind spot in the gutter. The vehicles in
front of you don't need to know you're there, because you're behind them
and not overtaking them.

If the cement truck was indicating, I might hold back in that
situation, but otherwise I'd try to get to the front.
Why the impatience?
What I said. *You get to the front to help you survive, nothing to do
with impatience.

********.

Obviously the people who designed those green areas at the front don't
agree with you.


Why not, indeed, go past the wagon on the RIGHT? Y'know, the side that
you're meant to overtake stuff...?
Not at a queue at a junction.

Well, no, you're not actually MEANT to overtake queues at junctions
anyway.

That's totally irrelevant.

Clearly.

How would you squeeze between the bumpers to get to the right anyway?

Why do you need to "squeeze between the bumpers"?

Either that or leapfrog over the vehicles. I can't imagine what you
have in mind.


Would it be safe to pop out from between vehicles into the middle of
the road?

Of course it wouldn't. But why would you be doing that, anyway?

By taking a fairly rigid bicycle through a two-foot gap at right
angles to the direction of traffic.


Seems to me like you don't have the first clue about defensive cycling
and basic road positioning.

It seems to me that you've never seen a road. Maybe you've seen one
described in a book and misunderstood.

On 23 Oct, 11:03, Boltar wrote:
On Oct 23, 10:52 am, MIG wrote:

So that you can get past the junction before they all turn left into
you, or veer towards the kerb etc etc.

Why would they turn left into you if you stay behind them?

Because the queue continues to build up and many of the drivers in it
won't have seen you. Or do you suggest scooting backwards till you
are at the back of any possible queue?


And if
you're really in such a hurry to cross the lights why not just get off
the bike , wheel it across the pedestrian crossing and get on again
the other side before the traffic has had the green light?

Like I said, nothing to do with hurry.

MIG gurgled happily, sounding much like they
were saying:

What I said. Â*You get to the front to help you survive, nothing to do
with impatience.

********.

Obviously the people who designed those green areas at the front don't
agree with you.

No, they're to help the impatient survive despite their best efforts.

How would you squeeze between the bumpers to get to the right anyway?

Why do you need to "squeeze between the bumpers"?

Either that or leapfrog over the vehicles. I can't imagine what you
have in mind.

Fairly straightforward, I'd have thought.

Would it be safe to pop out from between vehicles into the middle of
the road?

Of course it wouldn't. But why would you be doing that, anyway?

By taking a fairly rigid bicycle through a two-foot gap at right angles
to the direction of traffic.

Umm, why are you putting yourself into the position where you have to DO
that?

Seems to me like you don't have the first clue about defensive cycling
and basic road positioning.

It seems to me that you've never seen a road. Maybe you've seen one
described in a book and misunderstood.

Are you talking to yourself again? Because I well understand that, for
cyclists, there's rather more to the road than the gutter and "the bit
for cars".

On 23 Oct, 12:56, Adrian wrote:
MIG gurgled happily, sounding much like they
were saying:

What I said. *You get to the front to help you survive, nothing to do
with impatience.
********.
Obviously the people who designed those green areas at the front don't
agree with you.

No, they're to help the impatient survive despite their best efforts.

How would you squeeze between the bumpers to get to the right anyway?
Why do you need to "squeeze between the bumpers"?
Either that or leapfrog over the vehicles. *I can't imagine what you
have in mind.

Fairly straightforward, I'd have thought.

Would it be safe to pop out from between vehicles into the middle of
the road?
Of course it wouldn't. But why would you be doing that, anyway?
By taking a fairly rigid bicycle through a two-foot gap at right angles
to the direction of traffic.

Umm, why are you putting yourself into the position where you have to DO
that?

Seems to me like you don't have the first clue about defensive cycling
and basic road positioning.
It seems to me that you've never seen a road. *Maybe you've seen one
described in a book and misunderstood.

Are you talking to yourself again? Because I well understand that, for
cyclists, there's rather more to the road than the gutter and "the bit
for cars".

I made a perfectly reasonable point about when use of indicators might
make a difference to a cyclist.

Your and Boltar's responses have basically been on the lines of
cyclists shouldn't be on the road, and if they weren't then it
wouldn't make any difference to them whether anyone indicated. No
doubt that would work.

I won't waste any more time on this.

On Oct 23, 12:51 pm, MIG wrote:
On 23 Oct, 11:03, Boltar wrote:

On Oct 23, 10:52 am, MIG wrote:

So that you can get past the junction before they all turn left into
you, or veer towards the kerb etc etc.

Why would they turn left into you if you stay behind them?

Because the queue continues to build up and many of the drivers in it
won't have seen you. Or do you suggest scooting backwards till you
are at the back of any possible queue?

Err no, you act like any other vehicle and stand in the middle of the
lane so cars can't pass you while in the queue or head up the right
hand side to the end of the queue then sit at the head of it so
everyone has seen you including the vehicles at the front.

Like I said, nothing to do with hurry.

Then why bother?

B2003

MIG gurgled happily, sounding much like they
were saying:

I made a perfectly reasonable point about when use of indicators might
make a difference to a cyclist.

Which revealed more about your incompetence than your insight.

Your and Boltar's responses have basically been on the lines of cyclists
shouldn't be on the road

Boltar's may have been - I wouldn't know, he's a long-term resident of my
killfile - but if you really think that's what I've been saying, then
your comprehension skills are on a par with your cycling skills.

I won't waste any more time on this.

shrug Your loss. Let's hope it's not your life that you lose when you
continue to insist on hugging the gutter and riding up the inside of HGVs
at traffic lights because you MUST be at the front of the queue.