[censored] Cyclists!

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by Spencer Bullen
Greetings,

as somebody who commutes 100+ miles a week to work in London on my trusty slick tyred MTB, this may
appear an unusual header. However, I have to comment on the most bizarre SMIDSY moment I've ever
encountered which happened this morning.

Halfway into my commute to work I only just managed to avoid a fellow cyclist who shot off the
pavement to my left between two parked cars, almost "T-boning" me, as our American cousins would
say. Having swerved to my right to avoid an impact, and even more quickly to my left to avoid a car,
I was not best pleased.

I followed the other cyclist over a 580 metres (the joys of a Shimano Flightdeck) to the next red
light, noting that not once did they check over their shoulder when passing parked cars, skips,
etc., and also noting their complete lack of lights and reflectors at 7am on a winter morning, as
they rode their all black bike, dressed from head to toe in black, right up to the woolly hat.

At the lights I pulled along side them, and in the politest terms I could muster said, "do you want
to get run over? Have you ever thought of some lights? It would be a good idea on these roads." Can
you guess the reply of the young lady of about 20 to me? "Sorry mate, I didn't see you!"

I did a quick double take of my fluoro jacket, glowing Lumicycles, multiple Cateye LEDs, Ron Hill
Bikester Reflects, and all the Scotchlite on my kit, pannier, and frame, sighed deeply, and
headed off.

Sometimes I can almost, but only almost, sympathise with the cagers.

T.T.F.N.

SPENNY

I wouldn't worry too much, someone in another thread told me that cycling is safer than walking. She will be fine!!!!

Just zis Guy said:

"PK" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

<<If there is no pavement or footpath, walk on the right-hand side of the road so that you can
see oncoming traffic>>

And since only a small proportion of people ever walk on such roads, it's amazing that they seem
to follow the rule when walking on the very thing whose absence is mentioned in this rule ;-)

It's the only logical (or is it illogical?) reason I can see why some cyclists seem determined to
keep right on shared tracks. Going round the yellow brick road in Richmond park: :midweek or early
weekend morning when almost all cyclists are regulars, it's very unusual to come across any cyclist
who sticks to the right as described. :Middle of the day at the weekend, when the place is full of
occasional cyclists there always some who stick closely to the right and are oblivious to the
problems they are causing and some who eve get stroppy about anyone travelling on the left.

pk

John Mallard' not_me@all said:

Tim Hall wrote: .

Quoted message said:

This has worried me for some time.

Suppose I'm cycling down an unlit country lane. No pavement.

I hit a pothole and my lights fly off the bike, hit the dirt and fall into many unmendable
pieces. I have no spares. I'm wearing a refelective waistcoat and have a tail reflector on
my bike.

Do I:

1) Walk the 3 miles home, perfectly legally, taking about an hour?

2) Ride, illegally, but reduce my exposure to danger to about 9 minutes?

I'm trying to imagine this scenario. Thinking of country lanes near me that I might possibly be
cycling down at night.

OK. Unlit country lane. I assume that the traffic is not constant. You can hear motor vehicles
coming from some way off at night on a country lane. I'd ride until I heard something approaching.
Get off move as far off road as poss whilst alowing reflectors to still work. After vehicle has
passed remount and continue until hearing next vehicle. Repeat untill home.

Good answer.

I see no one spotted my deliberate mistake of still being able to cycle at 20mph in the pitch black
with no lights.

Quoted message said:

I'll now admit that this is exactly what my sons and I did on a very dark lane near Athens Ohio
this summer. Although it was only about a mile and a half. (Borrowed bikes, no lights, drinks
party, stayed too late, oops)

Oops indeed. Take a hundred lines.

Tim

Tim Hall said:

you know? said:

Sue said:

Moral: pavements are cluttered with all sorts of stuff. If you've forgotten your lights it's
safer to ride in the road.

Nah - if you've forgotten your lights it's safer to walk.

This has worried me for some time.

Suppose I'm cycling down an unlit country lane. No pavement.

I hit a pothole and my lights fly off the bike, hit the dirt and fall into many unmendable pieces.
I have no spares. I'm wearing a refelective waistcoat and have a tail reflector on my bike.

Do I:

1) Walk the 3 miles home, perfectly legally, taking about an hour?

2) Ride, illegally, but reduce my exposure to danger to about 9 minutes?

Depends on the traffic volume. Round here the night time traffic volume on the main A711, let alone
the lanes, is one vehicle every fifteen minutes - so you cycle until you hear a motor vehicle in the
distance, hop off and wait till it passes, and then hop on again - nae bother. But if the traffic is
passing at one vehicle every couple of minutes, or the ambient noise is such that you can't reliably
hear a car coming, this ceases to be practical. In which case I'd walk.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) jasmine.org.uk~simonOpen ↗

to err is human, to lisp divine ;; attributed to Kim Philby, oddly enough.