Freedom at last...

modsandmockers

brat wrote: »

I have some views on the future of transport, and the general consensus is for more segregation of road user groups. Pedestrians are much more segregated from other traffic these days and, notwithstanding the horrible incident going on in Glasgow at the moment, our town centres have been largely reprioritised to facilitate the safety of vulnerable road users.
Technological innovation will control the way transport develops throughout the 21st century and it would be wrong to constrain that too much with plans and ideas from 2014.

The general consensus is right, road users should be clearly segregated, and therefore cyclists should be kept off the pavement. The incident in Glasgow is huge, and it’s only a year or so since a police helicopter crashed onto a Glasgow pub killing similar numbers. Life will always be a game of chance.

Technological innovation will indeed dominate the way in which we all move around during the coming years - how will cycling be be affected?

I just noticed your response to the mirror/blindspot question - I will respond ASAP..

modsandmockers

modsandmockers wrote: »

The general consensus is right, road users should be clearly segregated, and therefore cyclists should be kept off the pavement. The incident in Glasgow is huge, and it’s only a year or so since a police helicopter crashed onto a Glasgow pub killing similar numbers. Life will always be a game of chance.

Technological innovation will indeed dominate the way in which we all move around during the coming years - how will cycling be be affected?

I just noticed your response to the mirror/blindspot question - I will respond ASAP..

I have no firsthand experience of truck collisions, but most truck operators, and their insurers, seem to accept the inevitability of HGV blindspots. The police response is much less consistent, and I have never heard of a police investigator or a traffic cop checking out a truck driver’s mirrors.

It is quite normal for a truck driver to be required to jump into a cab and hit the road immediately. Truck drivers are routinely not encouraged to take the necessary time to carry out the legally required vehicle checks.

Mirrors are frequently damaged or corroded to the point where they are no longer properly adjustable. Reversing sensors/cameras suffer the same fate, and extra cameras will probably follow suit.

There is a TFL video which purports to show the unavoidability of HGV blindspots, but every time I watch it, I think to myself that if only the wide-angle mirror had been pushed out a bit and down a bit, and the camera operator had taken the trouble to take a proper look out of the nearside window, every one of the group of cyclists would have been visible.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9E1_1M-qhU

Johno100

More of these signs on vehicles is what is needed.

modsandmockers

Johno100 wrote: »

More of these signs on vehicles is what is needed.

I would prefer the sign to say "If you can't see my eyes, then I probably can't see you at all". Mirrors only work properly when they are properly adjusted.

brat

modsandmockers wrote:

Traffic cops are no better - I have never heard of a collision investigator asking a trucker to demonstrate that he had taken the trouble to position his mirrors correctly

Given that you later said...

I have no firsthand experience of truck collisions,

...you would be in no position to know that collision investigators would, as a matter of course, check mirrors of any vehicle for which that was relevant to the investigation.

To use your ignorance of a situation as a tool to criticise traffic cops is typical of the disingenuity you have exhibited throughout this thread.

I've wasted enough time on you.

modsandmockers

brat wrote: »

Given that you later said...

...you would be in no position to know that collision investigators would, as a matter of course, check mirrors of any vehicle for which that was relevant to the investigation.

To use your ignorance of a situation as a tool to criticise traffic cops is typical of the disingenuity you have exhibited throughout this thread.

I've wasted enough time on you.

I have listened at great length to truckers complaining of the unfair treatment which they have received from their various masters. Sometimes it's about speed cameras, sometimes it's about illegal tyres or overloading, and sometimes it's about tacho infringements. But I have never heard of any truck driver being questioned about mirror positioning.

You seem to know something about these things - have you ever sat in a cab and tried to ascertain what you can or cannot see from a normal driving position?

fred246

modsandmockers wrote: »

I cycle on cycle paths, most of which are shared with pedestrians and dog-walkers. It works because the rules are clearly understood by all the users, and everybody makes way for everybody else. Confrontations are unheard of, mirrors and signals are not required, there are no lane markings, and people negotiate by voice or eye contact, the paths are never crowded and cycling becomes enjoyable again.

modsandmockers apparently enjoys cycling on shared use paths in parks but can't abide doing the same on pavements. Can't really understand the difference. In Japan pavement cycling is the norm.

modsandmockers

fred246 wrote: »

modsandmockers apparently enjoys cycling on shared use paths in parks but can't abide doing the same on pavements.

Absolutely not - I think I might write a book called PavementCraft, in which I will advise pedestrians to take up a primary walking position to protect their own safety.

esuhl

modsandmockers wrote: »

Absolutely not - I think I might write a book called PavementCraft, in which I will advise pedestrians to take up a primary walking position to protect their own safety.

The problem with pedestrians is that they won't walk on the pavement if a nearby cycle path is available.

I cycled about 1/3rd of a mile on a cycle path near me. It's about 1.5 metres wide, and runs parallel to a footpath also 1.5m wide. There's a small kerb between the two making it difficult to switch paths when cycling.

I had to squeeze round 14 pedestrians who were walking on the dedicated cycle path, whilst only ONE pedestrian was using the footpath.

So, I've just decided to cycle on the pavements in future. Which is handy, as there are more pavements than cycle paths.

modsandmockers

esuhl wrote: »

The problem with pedestrians is that they won't walk on the pavement if a nearby cycle path is available.

I cycled about 1/3rd of a mile on a cycle path near me. It's about 1.5 metres wide, and runs parallel to a footpath also 1.5m wide. There's a small kerb between the two making it difficult to switch paths when cycling.

I had to squeeze round 14 pedestrians who were walking on the dedicated cycle path, whilst only ONE pedestrian was using the footpath.

So, I've just decided to cycle on the pavements in future. Which is handy, as there are more pavements than cycle paths.

That's what I mean by 'combative' (see the CyclingCraft thread)