UK and Europe · Public discussion

Re: A bit of an accident

Started by Paulmouk · · Last activity · 15 posts · 314 views

← Back to UK and Europe

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

01 / Original postRe: A bit of an accidentPaulmouk · 3 Apr 2005 02 / This pagePosts 1–15Page 1 of 1 · chronological order 03 / Latest replyPost #15wafflycat · 3 Apr 2005

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
UK and Europe
Published
3 April 2005
Last activity
3 April 2005
Original author
Paulmouk
Posts
15
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
314
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–15 of 15
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. Original post
    Paulmouk
    Archived post
    #1

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

    Quoted message said:

    Nobody hurt, neither of us even fell off our bikes, but I did have a
    "coming together" with another cyclist earlier.

    Actually, it was a bit odd to be honest.

    I was cycling away from Norwich along the Railway Path. On a long
    straight stretch, there were three teenagers cycling toward me. They
    were three abreast, thereby occupying the entire width of the path.
    Slowing from about 30kph, I prepared for the one on my left to drop back
    and make room for me to pass them. But they just kept on riding. There's
    no doubt they had seen me - I had even made eye contact with the one on
    "my side". As far as I could tell, there was nothing malicious going on
    - no game of "chicken" or anything. But they kept on riding, not giving
    way, and (inevitably) I collided with the one on my left.

    I managed to yell "... what are you playing at??!" as we made contact
    (not completely head-on, I swerved slightly right at the last fraction
    of a second, but I think he panicked and swerved toward me and collided
    with my back wheel) and he said "Oh, sorry... sorry" in a pretty timid
    way, which is what suggested to me this wasn't a game of chicken - it
    just didn't feel like that. When I looked back, they were just cycling
    on their way - and so did I.

    A very minor incident - but it was notable by being almost surreal. Do
    kids not even know the cardinal "keep left" rule? I don't know what this
    kid thought was going to happen - I was riding straight towards him with
    nowhere to go.

    Like I say - nobody hurt, but my back wheel will need replacing - it's
    pretty buckled now.

    --
    Chris

    On a slightly different tack...
    I find that more than 50% of oncoming cyclists/pedestrians move to their
    right and as I move further and further towards the left, they move further
    and further to the right. We usually come to a halt (without touching) hard
    up against the fence or whatever and I say "sorry I was always told to keep
    left".
    Could it be that I'm more sensible and read the highway code and that
    they're thick and don't?
    Or just that they move to the side that's closest?

    It happens even on shared paths (marked with a line separating cyclists from
    pedestrians); In that case they usually seem to move over on to the
    cyclist's bit!

    Paul.

    Report
  2. David Hansen
    Archived post
    #2

    On Sun, 03 Apr 2005 17:19:04 GMT someone who may be "Paulmouk"
    <[email hidden]> wrote this:-

    Quoted message said:

    Could it be that I'm more sensible and read the highway code and that
    they're thick and don't?

    Can you please point us to the part of the Highway Code that says
    pedestrians and cyclists should pass on the left?
    http://www.highwaycode.gov.uk

    Quoted message said:

    It happens even on shared paths (marked with a line separating cyclists from
    pedestrians); In that case they usually seem to move over on to the
    cyclist's bit!

    Pedestrians may use any part of the path. Cyclists may use only the
    part marked for them. That is the law.

    --
    David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
    I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
    prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

    Report
  3. Just zis Guy, you know?
    Archived post
    #3

    On Sun, 03 Apr 2005 19:10:51 +0100, David Hansen
    <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    <[email hidden]>:

    Quoted message said:

    Pedestrians may use any part of the path. Cyclists may use only the
    part marked for them. That is the law.

    And one of the many reasons why pavement psychlepaths are a Work of
    Stan and should be Shunned.

    Guy
    --
    http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

    "To every complex problem there is a solution which is
    simple, neat and wrong" - HL Mencken

    Report
  4. Just zis Guy, you know?
    Archived post
    #4

    On Sun, 03 Apr 2005 19:10:51 +0100, David Hansen
    <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    <[email hidden]>:

    Quoted message said:

    Pedestrians may use any part of the path. Cyclists may use only the
    part marked for them. That is the law.

    And one of the many reasons why pavement psychlepaths are a Work of
    Stan and should be Shunned.

    Guy
    --
    http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

    "To every complex problem there is a solution which is
    simple, neat and wrong" - HL Mencken

    Report
  5. Just zis Guy, you know?
    Archived post
    #5

    On Sun, 03 Apr 2005 19:10:51 +0100, David Hansen
    <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    <[email hidden]>:

    Quoted message said:

    Pedestrians may use any part of the path. Cyclists may use only the
    part marked for them. That is the law.

    And one of the many reasons why pavement psychlepaths are a Work of
    Stan and should be Shunned.

    Guy
    --
    http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

    "To every complex problem there is a solution which is
    simple, neat and wrong" - HL Mencken

    Report
  6. Just zis Guy, you know?
    Archived post
    #6

    On Sun, 03 Apr 2005 19:10:51 +0100, David Hansen
    <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    <[email hidden]>:

    Quoted message said:

    Pedestrians may use any part of the path. Cyclists may use only the
    part marked for them. That is the law.

    And one of the many reasons why pavement psychlepaths are a Work of
    Stan and should be Shunned.

    Guy
    --
    http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

    "To every complex problem there is a solution which is
    simple, neat and wrong" - HL Mencken

    Report
  7. Ambrose Nankivell
    Archived post
    #7
    Just zis Guy said:

    On Sun, 03 Apr 2005 19:10:51 +0100, David Hansen
    <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    <[email hidden]>:

    Quoted message said:

    Pedestrians may use any part of the path. Cyclists may use only the
    part marked for them. That is the law.

    And one of the many reasons why pavement psychlepaths are a Work of
    Stan and should be Shunned.

    You are Dave Larrington & ICMFP

    Report
  8. Ambrose Nankivell
    Archived post
    #8
    Just zis Guy said:

    On Sun, 03 Apr 2005 19:10:51 +0100, David Hansen
    <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    <[email hidden]>:

    Quoted message said:

    Pedestrians may use any part of the path. Cyclists may use only the
    part marked for them. That is the law.

    And one of the many reasons why pavement psychlepaths are a Work of
    Stan and should be Shunned.

    You are Dave Larrington & ICMFP

    Report
  9. Ambrose Nankivell
    Archived post
    #9
    Just zis Guy said:

    On Sun, 03 Apr 2005 19:10:51 +0100, David Hansen
    <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    <[email hidden]>:

    Quoted message said:

    Pedestrians may use any part of the path. Cyclists may use only the
    part marked for them. That is the law.

    And one of the many reasons why pavement psychlepaths are a Work of
    Stan and should be Shunned.

    You are Dave Larrington & ICMFP

    Report
  10. Ambrose Nankivell
    Archived post
    #10
    Just zis Guy said:

    On Sun, 03 Apr 2005 19:10:51 +0100, David Hansen
    <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    <[email hidden]>:

    Quoted message said:

    Pedestrians may use any part of the path. Cyclists may use only the
    part marked for them. That is the law.

    And one of the many reasons why pavement psychlepaths are a Work of
    Stan and should be Shunned.

    You are Dave Larrington & ICMFP

    Report
  11. Danny Colyer
    Archived post
    #11
    Paulmouk said:

    I find that more than 50% of oncoming cyclists/pedestrians move to their
    right and as I move further and further towards the left, they move further
    and further to the right. We usually come to a halt (without touching) hard
    up against the fence or whatever and I say "sorry I was always told to keep
    left".
    Could it be that I'm more sensible and read the highway code and that
    they're thick and don't?
    Or just that they move to the side that's closest?

    I note that you're lumping cyclists and peds together here.

    For peds it is perfectly sensible to move to the right. In a country
    where the convention is for vehicles to travel on the left, peds are
    brought up to walk on the right in order to face the oncoming traffic
    when there is not a segregated path.

    For cyclists, although there is no law covering which side of a
    cyclepath they should ride on (unless one side happens to be marked for
    peds only), it is conventional to ride on the left. This works
    perfectly well through the winter, when most of the cyclists are
    regulars and know what they're doing. In the summer, when the
    fair-weather cyclists come out, a significant minority don't have a
    fsckin' clue where to ride and really don't seem to think in advance
    about what they should do if they meet someone coming the other way.

    --
    Danny Colyer (the UK company has been laughed out of my reply address)
    <URL:http://www.speedy5.freeserve.co.uk/danny/>
    "He who dares not offend cannot be honest." - Thomas Paine

    Report
  12. Danny Colyer
    Archived post
    #12
    Paulmouk said:

    I find that more than 50% of oncoming cyclists/pedestrians move to their
    right and as I move further and further towards the left, they move further
    and further to the right. We usually come to a halt (without touching) hard
    up against the fence or whatever and I say "sorry I was always told to keep
    left".
    Could it be that I'm more sensible and read the highway code and that
    they're thick and don't?
    Or just that they move to the side that's closest?

    I note that you're lumping cyclists and peds together here.

    For peds it is perfectly sensible to move to the right. In a country
    where the convention is for vehicles to travel on the left, peds are
    brought up to walk on the right in order to face the oncoming traffic
    when there is not a segregated path.

    For cyclists, although there is no law covering which side of a
    cyclepath they should ride on (unless one side happens to be marked for
    peds only), it is conventional to ride on the left. This works
    perfectly well through the winter, when most of the cyclists are
    regulars and know what they're doing. In the summer, when the
    fair-weather cyclists come out, a significant minority don't have a
    fsckin' clue where to ride and really don't seem to think in advance
    about what they should do if they meet someone coming the other way.

    --
    Danny Colyer (the UK company has been laughed out of my reply address)
    <URL:http://www.speedy5.freeserve.co.uk/danny/>
    "He who dares not offend cannot be honest." - Thomas Paine

    Report
  13. Danny Colyer
    Archived post
    #13
    Paulmouk said:

    I find that more than 50% of oncoming cyclists/pedestrians move to their
    right and as I move further and further towards the left, they move further
    and further to the right. We usually come to a halt (without touching) hard
    up against the fence or whatever and I say "sorry I was always told to keep
    left".
    Could it be that I'm more sensible and read the highway code and that
    they're thick and don't?
    Or just that they move to the side that's closest?

    I note that you're lumping cyclists and peds together here.

    For peds it is perfectly sensible to move to the right. In a country
    where the convention is for vehicles to travel on the left, peds are
    brought up to walk on the right in order to face the oncoming traffic
    when there is not a segregated path.

    For cyclists, although there is no law covering which side of a
    cyclepath they should ride on (unless one side happens to be marked for
    peds only), it is conventional to ride on the left. This works
    perfectly well through the winter, when most of the cyclists are
    regulars and know what they're doing. In the summer, when the
    fair-weather cyclists come out, a significant minority don't have a
    fsckin' clue where to ride and really don't seem to think in advance
    about what they should do if they meet someone coming the other way.

    --
    Danny Colyer (the UK company has been laughed out of my reply address)
    <URL:http://www.speedy5.freeserve.co.uk/danny/>
    "He who dares not offend cannot be honest." - Thomas Paine

    Report
  14. Danny Colyer
    Archived post
    #14
    Paulmouk said:

    I find that more than 50% of oncoming cyclists/pedestrians move to their
    right and as I move further and further towards the left, they move further
    and further to the right. We usually come to a halt (without touching) hard
    up against the fence or whatever and I say "sorry I was always told to keep
    left".
    Could it be that I'm more sensible and read the highway code and that
    they're thick and don't?
    Or just that they move to the side that's closest?

    I note that you're lumping cyclists and peds together here.

    For peds it is perfectly sensible to move to the right. In a country
    where the convention is for vehicles to travel on the left, peds are
    brought up to walk on the right in order to face the oncoming traffic
    when there is not a segregated path.

    For cyclists, although there is no law covering which side of a
    cyclepath they should ride on (unless one side happens to be marked for
    peds only), it is conventional to ride on the left. This works
    perfectly well through the winter, when most of the cyclists are
    regulars and know what they're doing. In the summer, when the
    fair-weather cyclists come out, a significant minority don't have a
    fsckin' clue where to ride and really don't seem to think in advance
    about what they should do if they meet someone coming the other way.

    --
    Danny Colyer (the UK company has been laughed out of my reply address)
    <URL:http://www.speedy5.freeserve.co.uk/danny/>
    "He who dares not offend cannot be honest." - Thomas Paine

    Report
  15. wafflycat
    Archived post
    #15

    "Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    On Sun, 03 Apr 2005 19:10:51 +0100, David Hansen
    <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    <[email hidden]>:

    Quoted message said:

    Pedestrians may use any part of the path. Cyclists may use only the
    part marked for them. That is the law.

    And one of the many reasons why pavement psychlepaths are a Work of
    Stan and should be Shunned.

    And speaking of which, vernon & I tried a few psychlepaths in Norwich on
    Saturday. Confirmed my view that they are the work of Stan, no place at all
    for a cyclist to be and are at best useless and at worst dangerous -
    ill-thought out, of no practical use and *stupid, stupid, stupid*. BAH! I
    got back on the road, the correct place for a cyclist to be PDQ.

    Cheers, helen s

    Report

Keep exploring

Browse the sectionUK and Europe Return to CyclingForumsStart at the home page Search discussionsFind another thread

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.