|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
Talkback one eyed lunatics.
In aus.bicycle on Sat, 16 May 2015 10:30:27 +1000
F Murtz wrote: To me, the reason for that (and I AM assuming here) is that motorcycles can keep up with the flow of traffic whereas a bicycle generally cannot. I think that that it was not to do with speed but the practicable bit. Zebee Johnstone touched on it in an earlier post where she said, "The reason it doesn't apply to motorcyclists is due to some court cases about safety and the meaning of the word practicable. (I was involved in motorcycle lobbying in SA at the time the SA law was changed before the national road rules came in and helped with the defence of one of the riders.) I expect that should a cyclist be prosecuted for it they'll be playng the practical card. I certainly take the lane when it is not safe to stay left such as in a lane too narrow for safe passing and with no escape route for me if a car does crowd me." To add to that, see the British govt advice to cyclists at http://think.direct.gov.uk/cycling.html which includes riding in the centre of narrow lanes. The poms have Bikeability which is a teaching setup for bicycle safety at schools and elsewhere. (all Oz states should import it forthwith and provide it in schools and regular classes for adults. Should be a requirement for a driver's licence in my opinion. ) http://bikeability.org.uk/wp-content...very_Guide.pdf The instruction for on road includes "Where the road is narrow and two-way traffic would make it hazardous for the trainee to be overtaken by a following vehicle they must be observed to ride in the primary position" where the primary position is in the middle of the lane. They also note that riders should not ride in the gutter, that the normal riding position is "secondary position" which is about 1m from the curb. That's far enough left that a car can perform a proper passing manouvere on a normal road if nothing is coming the other way, and far enough right for the cyclist to have good vision, to be easy to see, and for cars to be encouraged to wait until it is safe to pass instead of thinking "I can squeeze past" and endangering the cyclist. There's more on that in https://www.britishcycling.org.uk/in...iding-part-1-0 Basically the Brits have done more thinking on this than the Oz mob have. Eventually the rules will catch up with proper road safety although given the mess the pollies (and the money grabbers at certain privately owned standards organisations) have made of motorcycle helmets, I wouldn't bet on it till the courts make them. So should a zealous policeperson nab a cyclist for not riding in the gutter and the cyclist fights the ticket the courts will get to decide on the word "practicable" and as there is scads and scads of information about safe cycling from all over the world I have no doubt what the result of that case would be. Zebee |
Ads |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
Talkback one eyed lunatics.
Stuart Longland wrote
Rod Speed wrote Mate, there's no freaking 'bicycle lanes' in the country/bush. Wrong, we have a few. Not many though. Irrelevant to his absolute claim. I've been investigating routes that would take me out of Brisbane and into NSW. So far it's a 50-50 toss between Spring Creek Road or The Lions Road. There's no inland cycle path that I know of, otherwise I'd gladly use it. I didn’t say anything about cycle paths on that sort of route. |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
Talkback one eyed lunatics.
On Sat, 16 May 2015 05:39:47 +1000, Stuart Longland wrote:
On 15/05/15 21:30, Rod Speed wrote: Mate, there's no freaking 'bicycle lanes' in the country/bush. Wrong, we have a few. Not many though. I've been investigating routes that would take me out of Brisbane and into NSW. So far it's a 50-50 toss between Spring Creek Road or The Lions Road. Where isx Spring Creek Road? There's no inland cycle path that I know of, otherwise I'd gladly use it. There is/was a documented guide Ipswich(Brisbane) to Windsor(Sydney) via Lions Road. The rest of the alternatives were never described in print that I know of. |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
Talkback one eyed lunatics.
On Fri, 15 May 2015 21:30:44 +1000, Rod Speed wrote:
Mate, there's no freaking 'bicycle lanes' in the country/bush. Wrong, we have a few. Where are they? |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
Talkback one eyed lunatics.
"news13" wrote in message ... On Fri, 15 May 2015 21:30:44 +1000, Rod Speed wrote: Mate, there's no freaking 'bicycle lanes' in the country/bush. Wrong, we have a few. Where are they? Marked on the sides of some of the major roads in town and we have a couple of dedicated cycle paths too, concrete. |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
Talkback one eyed lunatics.
On Sat, 16 May 2015 09:42:00 +1000, Stuart Longland
wrote: On 16/05/15 07:43, wrote: Which may be the centre in some cases. I don't care about 'some cases'. You clearly do care about "some cases", otherwise you'd care about "no cases" and we would not be having this discussion. No. I never brought up 'other cases', nor was I interested in any other 'cases' either. Other people brought them up. |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
Talkback one eyed lunatics.
On Sat, 16 May 2015 10:30:27 +1000, F Murtz
wrote: Jeßus wrote: On Fri, 15 May 2015 20:44:25 +1000, F Murtz wrote: Jeßus wrote: On Fri, 15 May 2015 11:01:45 +1000, F Murtz wrote: F Murtz wrote: Jeßus wrote: On Thu, 14 May 2015 18:33:45 +1000, F Murtz wrote: Jeßus wrote: On Thu, 14 May 2015 17:17:33 +1000, "Pelican" wrote: "Jeßus" wrote in message ... On Thu, 14 May 2015 15:28:49 +1000, F Murtz wrote: I do not know If any one has heard 2UE afternoon talkback, think his name is Justin smith,on the subject of bicycle rider registration, he seems manic on the subject and howls down anyone who has an opposite view to his, he seems to have the opinion that it is a foregone conclusion that we will have rider registration by the end of the year. He seems to have Duncan Gay (roads minister)on his side. He also has the opinion that bicycle ordinations should not be allowed representation at the soon to be,round table group on the subject with Duncan Gay because "they are going to say no to everything". His idea is registration of rider not bicycle with mandated fluoro jackets with number on the back. We would then be the only place in the world with it. It would almost mean the death knell for cycle riding. You might find a lot of people celebrating if that comes to pass. I know I certainly would be. I recently fitted cameras to all my vehicles, specifically because of lycra wearig cyclists who think theyre entitled to do whatever they please on country roads. The next rider who makes me choose between hitting him/her, or another innocent vehicle, or the roadside verge, is going to have a very bad day. Even if every rider was a suicidal ****wit, you should not be in a situation of making such a choice. I shouldn't be, as you say. The last incident that compelled me to install cameras was extremely dangerous and almost caused a head on collision with an oncoming car. Not only was the rider unapologetic, he fully denied being dead centre of my lane (even though he was, hence the cameras now)... this was on a tight bend, on a country road with barriers/rails on the LHS and a cutting to the right (oncoming car anyway so that wasn't an option either). That rider is very lucky to still be here. After 10 years living in the Sunshine Coast hinterland and now N.E Tas - both places very popular with riders - I've lost pretty much all tolerance for them. Too many incidents and far too consistently for my liking. You have me puzzled, why would a rider being dead centre of a lane cause a problem? was he coming toward you on the wrong side of the road? He was in my lane, going in my direction. The problem was he was in the middle of my lane and I couldn't veer into the oncoming lane because of an oncoming vehicle. I was *going* to veer into the other lane but thankfully I didn't (blind corner). I dunno, you've lost me a bit here if you can't see the problem? The problem is, regardless of the inconvenience of it a cyclist has every right to cycle in the middle of the lane and unless the law is changed it is one of the things up with which we must put, like wombats, tractors,and any other slow moving things,that is why emphasis is put on the dangers of blind curves. OOPS,Apparently some jurisdictions state that you must keep to the left when practicable on a bicycle. Naturally. Why in the blue **** would some juridictions allow cyclists to sit in the middle of the lane? Most jurisdictions have a rider, "if practicable"which would cover many things. They are allowed if they have a reason.which may be a number of things including bad surface at the edge etc,If there are two bicycles side by side at least one would be at the centre. Side by side? I think you will find that the law allows that. I saw that a lot in QLD but not Tasmania, thankfully. I guess cyclists here aren't *that* suicidal, most of our roads are clearly unsuited to riding two abreast. I know of a couple of freeways here (near Launceston) where cyclists do, and it is safe to do so on those roads IMO. but most roads here - no way. It would also seem strange that it seem that motor cycles do not have to keep to the left when cars and bicycles are supposed to. To me, the reason for that (and I AM assuming here) is that motorcycles can keep up with the flow of traffic whereas a bicycle generally cannot. I think that that it was not to do with speed but the practicable bit. Zebee Johnstone touched on it in an earlier post where she said, "The reason it doesn't apply to motorcyclists is due to some court cases about safety and the meaning of the word practicable. (I was involved in motorcycle lobbying in SA at the time the SA law was changed before the national road rules came in and helped with the defence of one of the riders.) I expect that should a cyclist be prosecuted for it they'll be playng the practical card. I certainly take the lane when it is not safe to stay left such as in a lane too narrow for safe passing and with no escape route for me if a car does crowd me." To be honest, I'll stick with my original comment on this one. |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
Talkback one eyed lunatics.
On Sat, 16 May 2015 15:34:11 +0000 (UTC), news13
wrote: On Fri, 15 May 2015 21:30:44 +1000, Rod Speed wrote: Mate, there's no freaking 'bicycle lanes' in the country/bush. Wrong, we have a few. Where are they? I suspect his definition of 'country' is significantly different to mine. |
#59
|
|||
|
|||
Talkback one eyed lunatics.
Jeßus wrote
news13 wrote Rod Speed wrote Mate, there's no freaking 'bicycle lanes' in the country/bush. Wrong, we have a few. Where are they? I suspect his definition of 'country' is significantly different to mine. You're wrong, as always. |
#60
|
|||
|
|||
Talkback one eyed lunatics.
On Sun, 17 May 2015 05:57:22 +1000, Rod Speed wrote:
"news13" wrote in message ... On Fri, 15 May 2015 21:30:44 +1000, Rod Speed wrote: Mate, there's no freaking 'bicycle lanes' in the country/bush. Wrong, we have a few. Where are they? Marked on the sides of some of the major roads in town and we have a couple of dedicated cycle paths too, concrete. Urban bike paths, whooppeee do!!!!! Woops, urban terrorist paths shared by the walking dead. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Talkback one eyed lunatics | F Murtz[_2_] | Australia | 2 | May 15th 15 07:57 AM |
lunatics or heroes? | Zebee Johnstone | Australia | 3 | June 18th 08 03:38 AM |
ABC 774 talkback etc | cfsmtb | Australia | 3 | May 16th 06 04:36 AM |
Clarkson pie-eyed | Just zis Guy, you know? | UK | 219 | September 28th 05 07:08 AM |
RR: Get away from me you lazy eyed freak | Jimbo(san) | Mountain Biking | 1 | December 2nd 03 01:47 PM |