60 Cyclists To Sue Edinburgh Council

thriftylass

jeepjunkie wrote: »

Yeah but the roads in Edinburgh are toy town when compared to big European cities with trams.


Continuing on... our roads are already shared by cars, buses, taxis, coaches, trucks, cyclists and pedestrians.


Not to mention crap weather being Scotland, crap road surfaces, endless traffic calming and road works. And now trams... which does nothing better then the bus it replaces.


Does not create the laid back environment I've experienced in loads of European cities.


The Edinburgh tram is purely a vanity project. It's not even the slightest bit comparable to say the metro in Newcastle...

No not necessarily. In my home town (smaller than Edinburgh) the tram runs through the in some places still cobbled streets of the old town which are even narrower than Princess street and also shared by busses etc. Plus there is only one straight tram line, of what 2 mi?, in Edinburgh. How hard can it be to remember where the tricky bits are and learn to navigate them.

thriftylass

Norman_Castle wrote: »

I agree, but in this video http://youtu.be/GAVD4EXb8_M The cyclist would need to move to the edge of the lane and slow down before crossing sharply. Its likely following motorists would see the slowing cyclist at the edge of the lane as an indication to overtake. Track crossings like this need to be marked to highlight them to cyclists and (hopefully) show motorists the likely path of cyclists.

How about slowing down, sticking your hand out to indicate your move back to the right and cross the tracks. Yes they could/should be marked but cyclists also need to adapt their behaviour.

custardy

thriftylass wrote: »

How about slowing down, sticking your hand out to indicate your move back to the right and cross the tracks. Yes they could/should be marked but cyclists also need to adapt their behaviour.

So you advocate taking a hand of the bars for that manoeuvre?
Where would the drivers think the cyclist was going.
This isnt a right hand turn and experience of that road and the traffic would make such a move risky IMO.

Altarf

brat wrote: »

I presume your selective quoting of Esuhl's post means that you agree with the rest of it

Nope, there is sheer nonsense that is just not worth replying to. That was an example.

brat wrote: »

Accidents happen - fact. We need to learn from them. Those responsible for reducing collisions, from front line road referees and cause investigators, to those charged with making roads and cars safer, are gradually but inexorably reducing the number of collisions. They don't do it by knee jerk banning of one entire group based on their own personal prejudices. They do it by examining what factors are placing road users at risk, and working on positive progressive solutions.

But when one group of road users fails to 'play by the rules' but still complains when they put themselves in danger, what other alternative is there.

Tilt wrote: »

Like this you mean?

http://youtu.be/L95IR9ZvPDA

Exactly, people like this.

thriftylass wrote: »

How about slowing down, sticking your hand out to indicate your move back to the right and cross the tracks. Yes they could/should be marked but cyclists also need to adapt their behaviour.

Not sure if I have ever seen a cyclist in London give hand signals, other than the one or two finger variety. Perhaps one of our knowledgeable cyclists could say why they have given up following the Highway Code.

custardy wrote: »

So you advocate taking a hand of the bars for that manoeuvre?
Where would the drivers think the cyclist was going.
This isnt a right hand turn and experience of that road and the traffic would make such a move risky IMO.

And here we go. The rules don't apply to me.

custardy

Altarf wrote: »

And here we go. The rules don't apply to me.

What 'rule' would that be?
Feel free to provide a link or citation

Altarf

custardy wrote: »

What 'rule' would that be?
Feel free to provide a link or citation

Rule 66 of the Highway Code -
https://www.gov.uk/rules-for-cyclists-59-to-82/overview-59-to-71

keep both hands on the handlebars except when signalling or changing gear

And the Highway Code Signals to other road users -

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/312184/the-highway-code-signals-to-other-road-users.pdf

I would like to say I am shocked that a cyclist isn't familiar with the Highway Code. But I am not.

custardy

Altarf wrote: »

Rule 66 of the Highway Code -
https://www.gov.uk/rules-for-cyclists-59-to-82/overview-59-to-71

keep both hands on the handlebars except when signalling or changing gear

And the Highway Code Signals to other road users -

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/312184/the-highway-code-signals-to-other-road-users.pdf

I would like to say I am shocked that a cyclist isn't familiar with the Highway Code. But I am not.

so do you often signal right while going straight ahead in primary position?
Im not shocked that many drivers dont. I see them often in the various means of transport I use.

Altarf

custardy wrote: »

so do you often signal right while going straight ahead in primary position?

And in plain English?

custardy wrote: »

Im not shocked that many drivers dont. I see them often in the various means of transport I use.

So you never see cars indicating, ever. And that is your excuse not use hand signals. Cyclists...

custardy

Altarf wrote: »

And in plain English?



So you never see cars indicating, ever. And that is your excuse not use hand signals. Cyclists...

Once again. Do you indicate right to go straight on? Its a pretty simple point.

armyknife

Trolling and time consuming replies, no surprise that this thread ended up 'running on tramlines'.