A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » Regional Cycling » UK
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Classifying Pedestrians, Bicycles and Motor Vehicles



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old February 23rd 13, 07:32 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Bret Cahill[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 290
Default Classifying Pedestrians, Bicycles and Motor Vehicles

It's easy to separate motor vehicles from bicycles and pedestrians --
just use those spikes like in gated communities. Cyclists can slip
between the spikes or stop and step over them as can pedestrians. A
motor vehicle will get 4 damaged tires.

Separating cyclists from pedestrians is trickier. The first obvious
solution would be to install parallel bars like on cattle stops on
sidewalks/pavements. A good wheelman, however, will just hit these at
an angle like he does oblique railroad tracks. Maybe some combination
of patches of ice and grates would work but that would be expensive to
install and maintain and dangerous to pedestrians as well.

Moreover the weight of a cyclist + bicycle averages about that of a
pedestrian, both an order of magnitude less massive than a motor
vehicle. Even more compelling a motor vehicle often represents 2
orders of magnitude more kinetic energy.

As a practical matter, is there really any reason not to reclassify
cyclists as pedestrians as far as cycling on the sidewalk/pavement is
concerned?


Bret Cahill






Ads
  #2  
Old February 23rd 13, 07:45 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Mrcheerful[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,662
Default Classifying Pedestrians, Bicycles and Motor Vehicles

Bret Cahill wrote:
It's easy to separate motor vehicles from bicycles and pedestrians --
just use those spikes like in gated communities. Cyclists can slip
between the spikes or stop and step over them as can pedestrians. A
motor vehicle will get 4 damaged tires.

Separating cyclists from pedestrians is trickier. The first obvious
solution would be to install parallel bars like on cattle stops on
sidewalks/pavements. A good wheelman, however, will just hit these at
an angle like he does oblique railroad tracks. Maybe some combination
of patches of ice and grates would work but that would be expensive to
install and maintain and dangerous to pedestrians as well.

Moreover the weight of a cyclist + bicycle averages about that of a
pedestrian, both an order of magnitude less massive than a motor
vehicle. Even more compelling a motor vehicle often represents 2
orders of magnitude more kinetic energy.

As a practical matter, is there really any reason not to reclassify
cyclists as pedestrians as far as cycling on the sidewalk/pavement is
concerned?


Bret Cahill


wheeled traffic on the road, foot traffic on the footpath. The main reason
to keep wheeled traffic separate from foot traffic is the speed
differential, which is the same reason that car and bicycle traffic is
incompatible.


  #3  
Old February 23rd 13, 08:16 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Tony Dragon
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,715
Default Classifying Pedestrians, Bicycles and Motor Vehicles

On 23/02/2013 19:32, Bret Cahill wrote:
It's easy to separate motor vehicles from bicycles and pedestrians --
just use those spikes like in gated communities. Cyclists can slip
between the spikes or stop and step over them as can pedestrians. A
motor vehicle will get 4 damaged tires.

Separating cyclists from pedestrians is trickier. The first obvious
solution would be to install parallel bars like on cattle stops on
sidewalks/pavements. A good wheelman, however, will just hit these at
an angle like he does oblique railroad tracks. Maybe some combination
of patches of ice and grates would work but that would be expensive to
install and maintain and dangerous to pedestrians as well.


People riding cycles are cyclists.

Pedestrians are not riding cycles.

Moreover the weight of a cyclist + bicycle averages about that of a
pedestrian, both an order of magnitude less massive than a motor
vehicle. Even more compelling a motor vehicle often represents 2
orders of magnitude more kinetic energy.

As a practical matter, is there really any reason not to reclassify
cyclists as pedestrians as far as cycling on the sidewalk/pavement is
concerned?


Bret Cahill




Yes, most pedestrians do not want to constantly dodge cyclists on the
pavement/footway.

  #4  
Old February 23rd 13, 11:09 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Bret Cahill[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 290
Default Classifying Pedestrians, Bicycles and Motor Vehicles

It's easy to separate motor vehicles from bicycles and pedestrians --
just use those spikes like in gated communities. *Cyclists can slip
between the spikes or stop and step over them as can pedestrians. *A
motor vehicle will get 4 damaged tires.


Separating cyclists from pedestrians is trickier. *The first obvious
solution would be to install parallel bars like on cattle stops on
sidewalks/pavements. *A good wheelman, however, will just hit these at
an angle like he does oblique railroad tracks. *Maybe some combination
of patches of ice and grates would work but that would be expensive to
install and maintain and dangerous to pedestrians as well.


Moreover the weight of a cyclist + bicycle averages about that of a
pedestrian, both an order of magnitude less massive than a motor
vehicle. *Even more compelling a motor vehicle often represents 2
orders of magnitude more kinetic energy.


As a practical matter, is there really any reason not to reclassify
cyclists as pedestrians as far as cycling on the sidewalk/pavement is
concerned?


Bret Cahill


wheeled traffic on the road, foot traffic on the footpath. *The main reason
to keep wheeled traffic separate from foot traffic is the speed
differential, which is the same reason that car and bicycle traffic is
incompatible.


The issue is avoiding injuries from collisions. After all, who cares
about a collision where no one gets hurt?

Injuries from collisions comes from 2 major sources:

1. the relative kinetic energies of 2 objects during impacts, and,

2. the crushing weight of one object as it falls or rolls over the
other.

In the first the kinetic energy is often 2 orders of magnitude higher
with a motor vehicle than a bicycle.

In the second the crushing force is an order of magnitude higher with
a motor vehicle than a bicycle.


Bret Cahill

  #5  
Old February 23rd 13, 11:15 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Bret Cahill[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 290
Default Classifying Pedestrians, Bicycles and Motor Vehicles

It's easy to separate motor vehicles from bicycles and pedestrians --
just use those spikes like in gated communities. *Cyclists can slip
between the spikes or stop and step over them as can pedestrians. *A
motor vehicle will get 4 damaged tires.


Separating cyclists from pedestrians is trickier. *The first obvious
solution would be to install parallel bars like on cattle stops on
sidewalks/pavements. *A good wheelman, however, will just hit these at
an angle like he does oblique railroad tracks. *Maybe some combination
of patches of ice and grates would work but that would be expensive to
install and maintain and dangerous to pedestrians as well.


People riding cycles are cyclists.


Pedestrians are not riding cycles.


I wouldn't try to do this with case law, i.e., arguing against that in
traffic court.

Moreover the weight of a cyclist + bicycle averages about that of a
pedestrian, both an order of magnitude less massive than a motor
vehicle. *Even more compelling a motor vehicle often represents 2
orders of magnitude more kinetic energy.


As a practical matter, is there really any reason not to reclassify
cyclists as pedestrians as far as cycling on the sidewalk/pavement is
concerned?


Yes, most pedestrians do not want to constantly dodge cyclists on the
pavement/footway.


In Palm Springs they have dual use paths: golf carts and cyclists.
Throw in various motorcycles and a categorization scheme could get
messy really fast.


Bret Cahill


  #6  
Old February 23rd 13, 11:22 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
jnugent
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,602
Default Classifying Pedestrians, Bicycles and Motor Vehicles

On 23/02/2013 19:32, Bret Cahill wrote:

It's easy to separate motor vehicles from bicycles and pedestrians --
just use those spikes like in gated communities. Cyclists can slip
between the spikes or stop and step over them as can pedestrians. A
motor vehicle will get 4 damaged tires.

Separating cyclists from pedestrians is trickier. The first obvious
solution would be to install parallel bars like on cattle stops on
sidewalks/pavements. A good wheelman, however, will just hit these at
an angle like he does oblique railroad tracks. Maybe some combination
of patches of ice and grates would work but that would be expensive to
install and maintain and dangerous to pedestrians as well.

Moreover the weight of a cyclist + bicycle averages about that of a
pedestrian,


What?

What distinction are you drawing between a cyclist and a pedestrian?

More to the point, why?

both an order of magnitude less massive than a motor
vehicle. Even more compelling a motor vehicle often represents 2
orders of magnitude more kinetic energy.

As a practical matter, is there really any reason not to reclassify
cyclists as pedestrians as far as cycling on the sidewalk/pavement is
concerned?


Yes.

A bicycle is a vehicle, not a pair of feet.
  #7  
Old February 24th 13, 03:39 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Bret Cahill[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 290
Default Classifying Pedestrians, Bicycles and Motor Vehicles

It's easy to separate motor vehicles from bicycles and pedestrians --
just use those spikes like in gated communities. *Cyclists can slip
between the spikes or stop and step over them as can pedestrians. *A
motor vehicle will get 4 damaged tires.


Separating cyclists from pedestrians is trickier. *The first obvious
solution would be to install parallel bars like on cattle stops on
sidewalks/pavements. *A good wheelman, however, will just hit these at
an angle like he does oblique railroad tracks. *Maybe some combination
of patches of ice and grates would work but that would be expensive to
install and maintain and dangerous to pedestrians as well.


Moreover the weight of a cyclist + bicycle averages about that of a
pedestrian,


What?

What distinction are you drawing between a cyclist and a pedestrian?

More to the point, why?

both an order of magnitude less massive than a motor
vehicle. *Even more compelling a motor vehicle often represents 2
orders of magnitude more kinetic energy.


As a practical matter, is there really any reason not to reclassify
cyclists as pedestrians as far as cycling on the sidewalk/pavement is
concerned?


Yes.

A bicycle is a vehicle, not a pair of feet.


Some kids' shoes have small wheels in the heels.

It needs to be pointed out that something as successful in industry as
ball bearings is never ever found in nature. It probably has
something to do with feeding nutrients to spinning objects.

DARPA has done a lot with wheeless vehicles, things that can crawl
over rugged terrain like insects. But bad knees are proof positive
that this approach is inferior to the wheel.


Bret Cahill




  #8  
Old February 24th 13, 08:29 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Mrcheerful[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,662
Default Classifying Pedestrians, Bicycles and Motor Vehicles

Bret Cahill wrote:
It's easy to separate motor vehicles from bicycles and pedestrians
-- just use those spikes like in gated communities. Cyclists can
slip between the spikes or stop and step over them as can
pedestrians. A motor vehicle will get 4 damaged tires.


Separating cyclists from pedestrians is trickier. The first obvious
solution would be to install parallel bars like on cattle stops on
sidewalks/pavements. A good wheelman, however, will just hit these
at an angle like he does oblique railroad tracks. Maybe some
combination of patches of ice and grates would work but that would
be expensive to install and maintain and dangerous to pedestrians
as well.


Moreover the weight of a cyclist + bicycle averages about that of a
pedestrian, both an order of magnitude less massive than a motor
vehicle. Even more compelling a motor vehicle often represents 2
orders of magnitude more kinetic energy.


As a practical matter, is there really any reason not to reclassify
cyclists as pedestrians as far as cycling on the sidewalk/pavement
is concerned?


Bret Cahill


wheeled traffic on the road, foot traffic on the footpath. The main
reason to keep wheeled traffic separate from foot traffic is the
speed differential, which is the same reason that car and bicycle
traffic is incompatible.


The issue is avoiding injuries from collisions. After all, who cares
about a collision where no one gets hurt?

Injuries from collisions comes from 2 major sources:

1. the relative kinetic energies of 2 objects during impacts, and,

2. the crushing weight of one object as it falls or rolls over the
other.

In the first the kinetic energy is often 2 orders of magnitude higher
with a motor vehicle than a bicycle.

In the second the crushing force is an order of magnitude higher with
a motor vehicle than a bicycle.


Bret Cahill


if there were no forces involved then there would be no collision. Any
collision (even the very slightest) with a pedestrian may be sufficient to
kill the pedestrian. Any collision of pedestrian with a wheeled vehicle on
the pavement is unacceptable. Bicycles are the most common wheeled vehicle
making journeys on footpaths.


  #9  
Old February 24th 13, 08:33 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Mrcheerful[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,662
Default Classifying Pedestrians, Bicycles and Motor Vehicles

Bret Cahill wrote:

People riding cycles are cyclists.


Pedestrians are not riding cycles.


I wouldn't try to do this with case law, i.e., arguing against that in
traffic court.


Case law has established that a person riding a bicycle is not a pedestrian.



  #10  
Old February 24th 13, 08:53 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Tony Dragon
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,715
Default Classifying Pedestrians, Bicycles and Motor Vehicles

On 23/02/2013 23:15, Bret Cahill wrote:
It's easy to separate motor vehicles from bicycles and pedestrians --
just use those spikes like in gated communities. Cyclists can slip
between the spikes or stop and step over them as can pedestrians. A
motor vehicle will get 4 damaged tires.


Separating cyclists from pedestrians is trickier. The first obvious
solution would be to install parallel bars like on cattle stops on
sidewalks/pavements. A good wheelman, however, will just hit these at
an angle like he does oblique railroad tracks. Maybe some combination
of patches of ice and grates would work but that would be expensive to
install and maintain and dangerous to pedestrians as well.


People riding cycles are cyclists.


Pedestrians are not riding cycles.


I wouldn't try to do this with case law, i.e., arguing against that in
traffic court.


Cite .

Moreover the weight of a cyclist + bicycle averages about that of a
pedestrian, both an order of magnitude less massive than a motor
vehicle. Even more compelling a motor vehicle often represents 2
orders of magnitude more kinetic energy.


As a practical matter, is there really any reason not to reclassify
cyclists as pedestrians as far as cycling on the sidewalk/pavement is
concerned?


Yes, most pedestrians do not want to constantly dodge cyclists on the
pavement/footway.


In Palm Springs they have dual use paths: golf carts and cyclists.
Throw in various motorcycles and a categorization scheme could get
messy really fast.


Bret Cahill



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Bye bye motor vehicles Bertie Wooster[_2_] UK 5 September 27th 12 10:22 AM
More pedestrians complaining just because they think the pavement isfor pedestrians Marie UK 25 January 9th 12 01:33 AM
Another pollution from motor vehicles warning. Doug[_10_] UK 43 April 29th 11 09:51 AM
IMBA Uses 50+ Motor Vehicles to Put on Its "Environmentally Friendly" Epic Ride! Mike Vandeman Mountain Biking 0 May 7th 07 04:15 PM
IMBA Uses 50+ Motor Vehicles to Put on Its "Environmentally Friendly" Epic Ride! Mike Vandeman Social Issues 0 May 7th 07 04:15 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:40 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2019 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.