More cyclists getting in the way

On Mar 31, 2:12*pm, Simon Weaseltemper
wrote:
I can see the problem. Car drivers will overtake given any opportunity
and the one following will do so too, so will the one following that.
Also, as successive cars pass they get closer and closer. It’s not
surprising that cyclists get hit at these hotspots. The only way to stop
it happening is to get right out away from the edge. In these situations
a metre out is not enough.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

My solution is to avoid it altogether by using another route, as
riding in the middle of the road is a red rag to some drivers, as Bod
will testify.

--
Simon Mason

On 31/03/2011 14:40, Simon Mason wrote:
On Mar 31, 2:12 pm, Simon Weaseltemper
wrote:
I can see the problem. Car drivers will overtake given any opportunity
and the one following will do so too, so will the one following that.
Also, as successive cars pass they get closer and closer. It’s not
surprising that cyclists get hit at these hotspots. The only way to stop
it happening is to get right out away from the edge. In these situations
a metre out is not enough.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

My solution is to avoid it altogether by using another route, as
riding in the middle of the road is a red rag to some drivers, as Bod
will testify.

I do the same. There are however some roads difficult to avoid, and if
you are on a journey with unfamiliar roads you have little choice.

JNugent wrote:
On 31/03/2011 10:34, JNugent wrote:

Google Maps confirms it. Thurloe Street and Thurloe Square each have
one way
working. So does the eastern end of Thurloe Place itself:

http://tinyurl.com/5vjgqp2

Street view shows the No Entry signs at the western end of that section
(looking east).

Disregard that last sentence, please. I was looking in the wrong
direction in Street View.

Its all changed anyway from last August so Google is out of date:

"The Council is removing the outdated one-way traffic system around
South Kensington Underground Station in order to create large pavement
areas and improve conditions for both drivers and pedestrians.

In order to implement these changes, starting this Sunday 16 August,
traffic flow along Cromwell Place north of the junction with Thurloe
Place will change from two-way to one-way northbound. On Thurloe Place
the section between Cromwell Place and Exhibition Road is switching from
its previous one way eastbound set up to a two-way traffic flow.
Exhibition Road, south of Thurloe Place will be restricted to access
only and Thurloe Street will be closed to traffic at its junction with
Thurloe Place, providing a welcome new space for the large number of
pedestrians coming out of the northern exit of the underground station."

Tony

On 31/03/2011 10:34, Simon Weaseltemper wrote:
On 31/03/2011 09:15, Peter Keller wrote:
On Wed, 30 Mar 2011 19:24:47 +0100, The Medway Handyman wrote:



If cyclists will insist on trying to use a child's toy as a form of
transport its going to be dangerous.

it is not a child's toy.


Perhaps the problem lies in the perception that a bicycle *is* a child’s
toy. I certainly do not think it is a good idea to let people play with
them on the roads without proper training and/or supervision.

Indeed. I think they should be fitted with stabilizers until the
cyclist passes a test.

--
Dave - The Medway Handyman www.medwayhandyman.co.uk

On Thu, 31 Mar 2011 05:16:10 -0700 (PDT), Simon Mason wrote:

On Mar 31, 1:04*pm, Simon Weaseltemper
wrote:

The main problem arises where there is not enough space to safely be in
the same lane as another vehicle. Such as places where the road narrows,
passing parked cars or in other places where two vehicles cannot safely
share the same lane. Therefore it is important that cyclist in front
claims the space, to deter close and unsafe overtaking by the driver behind.


This road is a case in point. I avoid it like the plague and have been
hit 4 times down there.


Oh dear - looks like cycling is quite dangerous in Hull.


--
Stopping distances for bicycles do not appear in the HC ... and so
cannot be of any consequence.
(Simon Mason - who cycles at 25mph in 20 mph limits - and thinks it's clever)

On 31/03/2011 19:15, The Medway Handyman wrote:
On 31/03/2011 10:34, Simon Weaseltemper wrote:
On 31/03/2011 09:15, Peter Keller wrote:
On Wed, 30 Mar 2011 19:24:47 +0100, The Medway Handyman wrote:



If cyclists will insist on trying to use a child's toy as a form of
transport its going to be dangerous.

it is not a child's toy.


Perhaps the problem lies in the perception that a bicycle *is* a child’s
toy. I certainly do not think it is a good idea to let people play with
them on the roads without proper training and/or supervision.

Indeed. I think they should be fitted with stabilizers until the cyclist
passes a test.


Good point, perhaps they should also be fitted with an amber flashing
light and a neon sign saying “please give plenty of space� until they
pass a test.

On 31/03/2011 21:01, Simon Weaseltemper wrote:
On 31/03/2011 19:15, The Medway Handyman wrote:
On 31/03/2011 10:34, Simon Weaseltemper wrote:
On 31/03/2011 09:15, Peter Keller wrote:
On Wed, 30 Mar 2011 19:24:47 +0100, The Medway Handyman wrote:



If cyclists will insist on trying to use a child's toy as a form of
transport its going to be dangerous.

it is not a child's toy.


Perhaps the problem lies in the perception that a bicycle *is* a child’s
toy. I certainly do not think it is a good idea to let people play with
them on the roads without proper training and/or supervision.

Indeed. I think they should be fitted with stabilizers until the cyclist
passes a test.


Good point, perhaps they should also be fitted with an amber flashing
light and a neon sign saying “please give plenty of space� until they
pass a test.

Now you are being plain silly. Stabilizers would be fine. Cyclists
look rediculous enough as it is.

--
Dave - The Medway Handyman www.medwayhandyman.co.uk

On Thu, 31 Mar 2011 09:42:02 +0100, Judith wrote:



Ho, ho ho, - what a tosser.

From the arithmetic lady. You add trouble, subtract pleasure, divide
attention, and multiply ignorance.



--
67.4% of statistics are made up.

On 30 mrt, 10:13, "Mrcheerful" wrote:
Doug wrote:
On Mar 30, 8:04 am, "Mrcheerful" wrote:
http://www.hippyshopper.com/2011/03/..._cyclists.html

why don't cyclists campaign for cyclists to be trained?, they are
the ones causing the problems. If cyclists will just stop putting
themselves into stupid positions then they will not get run over.

Your source starts by saying...

"If you've ever traversed your way around London's streets you know it
can be a daunting and dangerous task - both on foot and on bike!.."

So why do you think this is and what makes it so dangerous? I'll tell
you, DRIVERS!

Doug.

when I went to central London recently the endangerment and injury to
pedestrians that I saw all came from cyclists. *If all cycling in London
was banned there would be zero cyclists squashed or injured and far fewer
pedestrian injuries. *Drivers would be able to more attentive to the
remaining traffic/pedestrians and so would have fewer accidents too.

And if pedestrians were banned there would be very few pedestrians run
over. If using Japan as a country were banned there would be less
people killed by earthquakes. You are, as ever, a ****ing idiot.