An example of a left hook

Archcp · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by magnatom

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Arch

And for fairness, I will include the bits that show me doing stuff that I'd regard afterwards as daft...[:I]

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

You don't do anything daft, surely? [;)]

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

We all do, sometimes, don't we?[;)]

Anyway, here's a clip of a bad facility. I've left in the run up to it - so that you can marvel at yet another piece of crap road surface, and giggle at the ipod-wearing lady who sees me a bit late and has to trot out of my way (although I was slowing for her..) The bad bit is where the lane runs alongside a brick wall, so absolutely nowhere to go if someone comes close.

And in answer to your question above... I expect people to say I was too close to the kerb. Looking at it on film, I'd agree (I think the camera can have a distorting effect, slightly, and also makes cars seem to pass closer), but at the time I felt I was doing the right thing - what I always do, cycle pretty much on the outer edge of the lane - on a quiet Sunday morning. So much depends on peripheral vision and senses that the camera doesn't have...

http://s8.photobucket.com/albums/a6/Sue ... adlane.flv

I like the website idea too, but have neither the skill or time....

If I had a baby elephant, it could help me clean the car. If I had a car.

magnatom · June 2007

[:0] That's a terrible lane. There is nowhere to bale out and the lane is far too narrow.[:(!]

I must admit after turning left onto that road I (personally) would take the primary position as to me that is a pinch point. As well as that you are approaching a number of junctions and you want to make yourself as visible as possible. However, that requires a bit of guile with irate drivers coming up behind you (I'm quite assertive so it wouldn't bother me!).

However, the cycle lane there is absolutely useless. I wonder how many cyclists actually manage to stay in that lane! Also if you do decide to take the primary position the drivers will just point to the cycle lane saying you should be there! Therefore, its very existence reduces cyclists safety rather than enhancing it!

Maybe you should e-mail that clip to Stephen Ladyman MP asking him to explain how this cycle lane enhances cyclists safety....[:(!]

Archcp · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by magnatom

[:0] That's a terrible lane. There is nowhere to bale out and the lane is far too narrow.[:(!]

I must admit after turning left onto that road I (personally) would take the primary position as to me that is a pinch point. As well as that you are approaching a number of junctions and you want to make yourself as visible as possible. However, that requires a bit of guile with irate drivers coming up behind you (I'm quite assertive so it wouldn't bother me!).

However, the cycle lane there is absolutely useless. I wonder how many cyclists actually manage to stay in that lane! Also if you do decide to take the primary position the drivers will just point to the cycle lane saying you should be there! Therefore, its very existence reduces cyclists safety rather than enhancing it!

Maybe you should e-mail that clip to Stephen Ladyman MP asking him to explain how this cycle lane enhances cyclists safety....[:(!]
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Yeah maybe I should. Actually, when I wrote to my MP over the HC changes, and he suggested a less standard letter with examples, I did mention that one.

It's funny how sometimes we do stuff. I know that primary position would be best, but I don't often take it there. I do at other places, but not there. Maybe because it's very slightly uphill and I know I'm slowing down. Maybe I feel further out than I am when I'm there. Maybe because I know the road so well, I know what the level of traffic is likely to be. Thinking about it, if there had been a bigger vehicle coming up behind me, I would move further out to block them coming past.

Actually, mostly, I avoid it, and go all the way along the riverside path instead! Just depends whether I need to get to that bit of the road (where a friend lives).

There is a route that would avoid that little stretch - but it involves a rather short but stiff climb away from the river, and takes a little longer, and I can do without extra hills...[;)]

Next time, I'll try and make myself ride further out.

Now, about the time I cut through the foot or so between one corner of a stationary skip lorry and the kerb...[:I] In my defence, I knew from the traffic light sequence that he wasn't going anywhere for some minutes, and he was at an angle away from the kerb, not parallel to it. But on camera, the 'foot or so' looks like about 6 inches....[:0] That bit will go in 'how not to'...

If the weather's any good at the weekend, and I have any energy after doing the allotment, I'll try and ride around a few of York's best worst examples...

If I had a baby elephant, it could help me clean the car. If I had a car.

magnatom · June 2007

Thats the problem with posting videos on the web, everyones a critic! Nothing can replace being there and you obviously know the road (I thought it looked downhill on the video [:I]).

I won't be going cycling this weekend. I have a 2 year old birthday gathering to organise [B)][:D].

Archcp · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by magnatom

Thats the problem with posting videos on the web, everyones a critic! Nothing can replace being there and you obviously know the road (I thought it looked downhill on the video [:I]).
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Oh, cool, does that mean it looked like I was speeding up? [;)] normally, I'm afraid, I'm flagging a bit...

But it's a good point, that familiarity can breed, if not contempt, then a certain blaseness (is that a word? And I dunno how to get the accent on the e)

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
I won't be going cycling this weekend. I have a 2 year old birthday gathering to organise [B)][:D].
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Oh, jolly good fun! Will there be jelly? Cheesey/pineapple on sticks? Pass the parcel, and someone being sick due to overexcitement and excessive consumption of cake?

And what about the kids?[;)]

If I had a baby elephant, it could help me clean the car. If I had a car.

Archcp · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by magnatom
[Amazingly the cyclist didn't flinch despite it being very close. If he was traveling a couple of mph faster that could have been very nasty!

I know I would have been pretty angry. This guy must have a lot of Zen
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

It occured to me on the way in, that the fact that he doesn't flinch means that this maybe has limited value to show to non-cyclists... Afer all, we all look at it, and think, "poop, if that was me, I'd have sworn..." or whatever, because we've either had it happen, or come close. But that guy just carries on without a wobble. Result? If you showed it to that motorist involved, they'd say "Oh, well, he didn't seem worried, what are you going on about?" [:(!]

In fact, he's so unwobbly that if I didn't regard magnatom as one of the trustworthy members of the forum, I might be congratulating him on his Special Effects skills. How does that guy not wobble? Was he completely asleep at the handlebars or something? If you'd asked him afterwards, would he even have noticed it? Whatever he's on, I think I want some...

If I had a baby elephant, it could help me clean the car. If I had a car.

magnatom · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Arch

In fact, he's so unwobbly that if I didn't regard magnatom as one of the trustworthy members of the forum, I might be congratulating him on his Special Effects skills. How does that guy not wobble? Was he completely asleep at the handlebars or something? If you'd asked him afterwards, would he even have noticed it? Whatever he's on, I think I want some...

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

If you look closely at the video you can see I almost do a double take as I am really surprised by the cyclists non-reaction! I've seen him before and he always seems a bit blinkered. Strikes me as he is an accident waiting to happen as he is just not aware of what is happening around him. [:0] I don't think there is any point chatting to him about his cycling (he would probably just take after the last guy I had a chat too!), although if I ever see him at traffic lights I might just mention the video.

Thanks for calling me trustworthy you made me blush [:I]. I don't have the skills to fake something like this (or more importantly the time!). Also there is no need to fake it as there are many many real examples out there!![:0]

I still think it is worth showing cagers. Just say to them what if the chap was traveling just 2 or 3mph faster? He would have struck the back of the car and been off. In fact the car driver might not have even noticed. Car drivers are notoriously difficult at judging cyclists speed.

As for my sons birthday party, we are a little worried about it as my wife is due to 'pop' again. My wife doesn't want to start going into labour with everyone there!

Sh4rkybloke · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by magnatom

Just say to them what if the chap was traveling just 2 or 3mph faster? <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">No point, it's just going to get replies that if he was travelling a bit faster he wouldn't have been at that point, at that point in time... which is true, unless he just happened to speed up a bit at that precise moment.

I have to say that his road positioning, whilst not fantastic, would not have changed anything IMO. That idiot in the car would have gone past just the same and it would have been worse if he'd been further from the kerb as he would have been struck by the car.

Also, at that speed, and with that much (lack of) awareness of anything going on around him he'd be an absolute liability to all on the road!!

I too found it remarkable that he didn't brake or do anything which actually would demonstrate that he even knew what had happened. I think it's a case of 'person on bike' rather than cyclist. [;)]

Nothing in life is foolproof, fools are ingenious

Tynancp · June 2007

that original video look like plain mad bad driving to me, the car is so wide and so determined to make the turn that I don't see anything the cyclist does is relevant

the car come from so wide I reckon the car did the famous 'came from nowhere' where it just cuts across the handlebars, if drivers absolutely insist on being arseholes they will

I like lanes, the ones I ride on anyway, the newer ones near me all seem to be wide, well marked and in good nick, I tackle junctions on my own hook though, like a scooter/car

magnatom · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Sh4rkybloke

I have to say that his road positioning, whilst not fantastic, would not have changed anything IMO. That idiot in the car would have gone past just the same and it would have been worse if he'd been further from the kerb as he would have been struck by the car.

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

I have to disagree with you there. There were two occasions that this chap could have affected the drivers actions.

The best would have been before the first car went passed him (it didn't turn). That car would have had to do an overtaking maneuver slowing it down slightly and forcing the car behind to slow down. The second car would be slightly further back and would have had to pull around the cyclist (into the other lane) to turn the corner, which would be unlikely in this case.

The poorer option (if the cyclist had any awareness!) would have been to wait for the first car to pass and then to look back and signal intent to move to the primary position. There was probably insufficient space to actually pull out, but the signal would probably have the desired effect of slowing the car down. The cyclists is not interacting with the traffic at all. He needs to 'heard' the traffic more.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
Also, at that speed, and with that much (lack of) awareness of anything going on around him he'd be an absolute liability to all on the road!!

I too found it remarkable that he didn't brake or do anything which actually would demonstrate that he even knew what had happened. I think it's a case of 'person on bike' rather than cyclist. [;)]
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Agreed. The car driver was an ar*e but the 'cyclist' is not doing himself any favours.

In general by being in the primary road position, if the driver is determined to turn ahead of you he has to do a much more complicated maneuver; he has to overtake (into the opposing lane) and then cut back in. In nearly all cases the driver will shy away from this. Of course you can't account for complete nutters [V]

Tynancp · June 2007

I'd say less capable cyclists attempting to move into the centre of the road would cause more accidents than it'd prevent, they're grinding along a foot from the curb for a reason

Nigeyy · June 2007

It's no good, I have to put my 2 cents worth in on this discussion. Having read all the posts about this video, I have a question:

I think I'm correct when I say from the posts, it seems that some people advocate that the cyclist could have taken primary position to protect himself. Being brutally honest, I do believe in that situation, a primary position would have been a better option (of course, assuming that the car driver who performed that left hook would not be prone to hitting a cycling in the primary position, which can be debatable at times I believe).

From the video, this looks pretty much like any common junction. Which then leads to the next question, assuming primary position is the best position to take for such a situation, when do you take primary position cycling along a suburban road with many similar junctions?

All the time? Or do you assume a default secondary, and then everytime you see a junction, look behind you and if safe to do so, go to primary position? And I ask, is this practical? Since I'm not a fast rider, should I assume a primary position at 15mph exiting the outer suburbs of Milton Keynes for those 2-3 miles? Or taking the other option, if a junction occurs every 100 metres or so, should I be attempting to change road position everytime to go from secondary to primary, and back again once a junction has been passed for fear of a driver pulling a left hook? (and of course you cannot assume that you can check the intent of a motorist as indicators are not always used!)

It seems to me the answer isn't obvious -and perhaps this cyclist is receiving some unfair criticism for his road positioning on this one (though having seen the video, personally I'd have certainly been more off the kerb, but more than likely not in primary position having said that). It also seems to me we seem to be missing the point -THE DRIVER WAS AT FAULT AND PULLING A RECKLESS AND DANGEROUS MOVE. Sure, the cyclist could have been x metres away from the kerb, and the result could have been the same, better or worse -but we'll never really know.

FYI, I'm not a primary position evangelist or opponent; I think you have to do the best you can given your own judgement and situation. Primary position should be a reasoned choice, not a panacea for all cycling positioning.

Fight Cystic Fibrosis: do something. http://www.cycleforhaylee.org http://www.cff.org

Tynancp · June 2007

that driver was so wide and so going for it regardless I think they'd have done it even if the rider was a lot wider, the car saw the bike just fine

BentMikey · June 2007

I probably would have taken primary position through that junction - given the following traffic, and the car waiting to pull out of where Magnatom was sitting in the side road. Junctions are where most "accidents" happen, so I don't like to go through them in the secondary position. Of course it all depends on the specific situation, because you need to be able to adapt.

My bikes
My skates

If I had a baby elephant, I'd teach it to skate.

magnatom · June 2007

Nigeyy,

As I have said in another thread, observation is vital. This chap did no observation on approach to the junction. The blinkers were on. If he bothered to look behind him he would have seen a couple of cars approaching which could potentially cross his path. Therefore, he should have pulled out to prevent that.

Therefore, what I think is reasonable is that if you observe something approaching a junction that you feel could be a problem for you then take a better position. If you don't stay in the secondary.

Also if you know your road (which we often do) you know where the conflicts are. Adjust your riding appropriately.

Remember this chap wasn't even in the secondary position, at least not when he was approaching the junction. It is possible that this might have helped.

Tynan,

We will just have to agree to disagree on this one. [:)]

I should point out, I'm no expert. I've just been commuting for a few years, I've read cyclecraft (read it!!) and I've adjusted my cycling to what I feel keeps me safest. I don't expect everyone to agree with my opinion!! [:0]

Tynancp · June 2007

'a couple of cars approaching which could potentially cross his path'

that's all the time in London rush hour surely?

my riding has always been full on rush hour in London, perhaps that's the difference, it's not just about what's safest, there's the Highway code and due consideration for other road users too, never mind common sense

imho

the fact that I've never seen people taking the primary position every time a junction approaches probably shows the roads I've ridden on are different to to other peoples'

the more traffic and the bigger the road the better has always been my mantra, to the disbelieving goggle of the back roads cycle route types

Nigeyy · June 2007

And you won't get an argument out of me on that one either Magnatom; observation is vital. Though I have to ask, (i) do you really look behind you at every junction? (ii) And what if that car doesn't have an indicator on, does that mean they aren't going to turn across you -and ergo you don't assume primary? Or just because a blinker is on, does that mean they will turn? Or as I asked, do you assume primary all the time?

To fair, to answer my own questions:
(i) no I don't, particularly if I'm on a quiet street and can't hear a car and the junction is minor. But at junctions where I assume there is more danger of this happening, you bet I do!
(ii) it all depends on the situation for me, sometimes I will, sometimes I won't.... a judgement call on that one, even if a car is behind me.

But I can't agree more, observation is key to being aware of your situation, and your remark about knowing where your conflicts are is spot on.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by magnatom

Nigeyy,

As I have said in another thread, observation is vital. This chap did no observation on approach to the junction. The blinkers were on. If he bothered to look behind him he would have seen a couple of cars approaching which could potentially cross his path. Therefore, he should have pulled out to prevent that.

Therefore, what I think is reasonable is that if you observe something approaching a junction that you feel could be a problem for you then take a better position. If you don't stay in the secondary.

Also if you know your road (which we often do) you know where the conflicts are. Adjust your riding appropriately.

Remember this chap wasn't even in the secondary position, at least not when he was approaching the junction. It is possible that this might have helped.

Tynan,

We will just have to agree to disagree on this one. [:)]

I should point out, I'm no expert. I've just been commuting for a few years, I've read cyclecraft (read it!!) and I've adjusted my cycling to what I feel keeps me safest. I don't expect everyone to agree with my opinion!! [:0]
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Fight Cystic Fibrosis: do something. http://www.cycleforhaylee.org http://www.cff.org

magnatom · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Tynan

the fact that I've never seen people taking the primary position every time a junction approaches probably shows the roads I've ridden on are different to to other peoples'
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

tynan,

I never said always take the primary position. Earlier in the thread I mentioned that this is a junction where cars more often than not turn at this junction. Approaching cars therefore suggest that you should take caution.

I also said that if you know your road and know where the conflicts are then take that into account. I have never said always take the primary position. Cab is your man for that...[:p][;)]

Tynancp · June 2007

grunt

suppose

the whole things an eye opener for me (to be polite), I make eye contact and move a tad wider when passing a turning with traffic waiting to pull out, I certainly wouldn't obstruct a car that might be about to pass me, if it's called for I'd check and signal, life's too short to be doing that every couple of minutes

magnatom · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Nigeyy

And you won't get an argument out of me on that one either Magnatom; observation is vital. Though I have to ask, (i) do you really look behind you at every junction? (ii) And what if that car doesn't have an indicator on, does that mean they aren't going to turn across you -and ergo you don't assume primary? Or just because a blinker is on, does that mean they will turn? Or as I asked, do you assume primary all the time?

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Sorry I should have been clearer, by observation I also include hearing as well as vision. I would even include that 6th sense that sometimes just tells you something is up![:D] so

i) No I don't, but I know which junctions I definitely have too, but I always try to be 'aware'.

ii) You absolutely always have to assume that drivers will do their worst. As I said in another thread, if you can't stop them doing something daft, always try to have a get out option!

I don't take primary all the time (again I discussed this in another thread). I never said you should, honest!! [:D]

Tynancp · June 2007

'You absolutely always have to assume that drivers will do their worst'

that's a motorbike argument as well

you stay in bed if you believe that's true or you ride assuming that, they'll kill you in the first mile regardless if it were true, sorry but that's unhelpful hyperbole imho

be cautious and wary sure but the majority of drivers are fine and even most of the naughty ones do it safely

magnatom · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Tynan
that's a motorbike argument as well

you stay in bed if you believe that's true or you ride assuming that, they'll kill you in the first mile regardless if it were true, sorry but that's unhelpful hyperbole imho

be cautious and wary sure but the majority of drivers are fine and even most of the naughty ones do it safely
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

We will have to disagree again![:0] If I am waiting at a junction ready to pull out and I see a car coming from my right with it's left indicator on there is no way I pull out until I am sure they are turning left, usually when the car slows and starts to turn. Can you always assume that they will do what their indicator indicates? Maybe they forgot to cancel it from a previous turn, maybe their arm caught the indicator, maybe......

Cab · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Nigeyy
I think I'm correct when I say from the posts, it seems that some people advocate that the cyclist could have taken primary position to protect himself. Being brutally honest, I do believe in that situation, a primary position would have been a better option (of course, assuming that the car driver who performed that left hook would not be prone to hitting a cycling in the primary position, which can be debatable at times I believe).

From the video, this looks pretty much like any common junction. Which then leads to the next question, assuming primary position is the best position to take for such a situation, when do you take primary position cycling along a suburban road with many similar junctions?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Pretty much all of the time, unless the road conditions (including layout and speed of traffic) dictate otherwise. Primary position is default, secondary position (note that secondary is still further out than the dude in the video) is useful sometimes though.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">All the time? Or do you assume a default secondary, and then everytime you see a junction, look behind you and if safe to do so, go to primary position? And I ask, is this practical? Since I'm not a fast rider, should I assume a primary position at 15mph exiting the outer suburbs of Milton Keynes for those 2-3 miles? <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Depends on conditions. If visibility is good enough, then I would. If the road is really quick (more than 35mph or so) then perhaps not. Primary is safest because you're visible, you have escape room, and you can't be passed without a vehicle moving out around you; note that you're perfectly within your rights to claim this position, and you shouldn't give a wet slap about whether it delays other people by a few seconds.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Or taking the other option, if a junction occurs every 100 metres or so, should I be attempting to change road position everytime to go from secondary to primary, and back again once a junction has been passed for fear of a driver pulling a left hook? (and of course you cannot assume that you can check the intent of a motorist as indicators are not always used!)<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Thing about pulling in and out is that its ratherharder than taking primary all the time. If primary is your default then you can choose locations to allow people past as frequently as necessary, if secondary is your default then you're no longer in control of your own safety.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
It seems to me the answer isn't obvious -and perhaps this cyclist is receiving some unfair criticism for his road positioning on this one (though having seen the video, personally I'd have certainly been more off the kerb, but more than likely not in primary position having said that). It also seems to me we seem to be missing the point -THE DRIVER WAS AT FAULT AND PULLING A RECKLESS AND DANGEROUS MOVE. Sure, the cyclist could have been x metres away from the kerb, and the result could have been the same, better or worse -but we'll never really know.

FYI, I'm not a primary position evangelist or opponent; I think you have to do the best you can given your own judgement and situation. Primary position should be a reasoned choice, not a panacea for all cycling positioning.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

I totally agree that the motorist here is out of line. Note I'm not a primary position 'evangelist' either, but I don't see any reason why primary shouldn't be your default location.

Free baby elephants for every citizen
Vote Arch for Prime Minister

magnatom · June 2007

I think cab and myself disagree on the default position. I personally feel that the default changes from road to road, and at different times (i.e. there isn't really a default). I think sometimes you should aim for primary, sometimes secondary depending on circumstances. However, although we might sound different in the way we describe it I wonder how different we cycle in reality? It's a different thing saying it and doing it! Wat do you think Cab? [:)]

(edit for typo)

Tynancp · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by magnatom

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Tynan
that's a motorbike argument as well

you stay in bed if you believe that's true or you ride assuming that, they'll kill you in the first mile regardless if it were true, sorry but that's unhelpful hyperbole imho

be cautious and wary sure but the majority of drivers are fine and even most of the naughty ones do it safely
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

We will have to disagree again![:0] If I am waiting at a junction ready to pull out and I see a car coming from my right with it's left indicator on there is no way I pull out until I am sure they are turning left, usually when the car slows and starts to turn. Can you always assume that they will do what their indicator indicates? Maybe they forgot to cancel it from a previous turn, maybe their arm caught the indicator, maybe......
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

come on now, if you think they're going to do their worse then every single driver is going to pull out, turn across you, veer into you, overtake onto to your side of the road etc etc

I'm sure we both agree really about due precautions, I defo wouldn't move off until the car was committed to the turn, sure

Cab · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by magnatom

I think cab and myself disagree on the default position. I personally feel that the default changes from road to road, and at different times (i.e. there isn't really a default). I think sometimes you should aim for primary, sometimes secondary depending on circumstances. However, although we might sound different in the way we describe it I wonder how different we cycle in reality? It's a different thing saying it and doing it! Wat do you think Cab? [:)]
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

I wonder if we're just phrasing things slightly differently; I'd say that my 'default position' is primary because thats where I'll be unless theres a reason why not. I think you're saying that you don't have a single default position... I dunno, I doubt whether our road positioning would vary that much.

Free baby elephants for every citizen
Vote Arch for Prime Minister

magnatom · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Tynan

come on now, if you think they're going to do their worse then every single driver is going to pull out, turn across you, veer into you, overtake onto to your side of the road etc etc

I'm sure we both agree really about due precautions, I defo wouldn't move off until the car was committed to the turn, sure
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

It's really a state of mind. Assuming the worst leads to defensive (although still assertive) cycling. I feel this is the safest way to cycle.

magnatom · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Cab

I wonder if we're just phrasing things slightly differently; I'd say that my 'default position' is primary because thats where I'll be unless theres a reason why not. I think you're saying that you don't have a single default position... I dunno, I doubt whether our road positioning would vary that much.

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Yes I think what really matters is we don't cycle in the gutter, we observe and we react accordingly. (at least we try!!)

Let's just agree that we are damn good cyclists and that everyone else should worship at our feet [:p][:D]

(Thats me in for a bad commute home now!)

mjones · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by magnatom

OK I think I will write to the council. Can anyone direct me to resources for good cycle lane design (Ideally with some clout in Scotland as well).

I will search for documents but if someone already has details tha would be great.

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
someone has already mentioned 'Cycle Friendly Infrastructure'. THis is being updated. Consultation versions of the latest document are available on Cycling England's website. CE's Design Checklist is also helpful. Here's the direct link because finding things on the CE website can be quite difficult:
http://www.cyclingengland.co.uk/engineering2e.php

magnatom · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by mjones

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
someone has already mentioned 'Cycle Friendly Infrastructure'. THis is being updated. Consultation versions of the latest document are available on Cycling England's website. CE's Design Checklist is also helpful. Here's the direct link because finding things on the CE website can be quite difficult:
http://www.cyclingengland.co.uk/engineering2e.php
[/quote]

I haven't had a chance to write yet but hopefully I will over the next week. That looks like a good reference thanks![:)]

An example of a left hook

Comments

Categories