Twazzock of the Day Award - Trilogy

Today's award goes to the woman who overtook me, while texting, on the A14 this morning. She was very open about it in her top down A4 cabrio, registration mumber G*A*T. Asterixes have been included incase I am not supposed to divulge the registraion number.

Sight of last week on the A14 was a McLaren P1.

Twazzock of the Day Award - MrDanno

For me it was the woman taxi driver on Saturday afternoon, She was in the outside lane of the A21 as a was joining from the slip road, As I joined she decided to pull in behind me and scream up to my rear bumper before then rashly moving back to the outside lane and giving me a glare as she passed.

I can only think she must be needing a trip to specsavers.

Twazzock of the Day Award - davecooper

It is for reasons such as the stupid woman texting that I am an advocate of in car cameras. I would like to think the Police would follow up any such footage sent to them.

Twazzock of the Day Award - bananastand

There's a photo of a copper on his mobile while driving his van doing the rounds on facebook, with the caption, share this and get him his 3 points - or words to that effect

Twazzock of the Day Award - unthrottled

How slow were you going to get overtaken by someone texting?!

Whilst not a fan of playing with phones whilst driving, I don't think it is any more of a distraction than convertibles that lower the roof whilst moving, or in car 'entertainment systems' for those with ADHD.

If you propose throwing the book at texters, then the same rules should apply to other distractions.

Twazzock of the Day Award - sb10

Texting drivers are far more distracted than using a radio or anything else,one texter wrote my old car off by not seeing me stop and ploughed into my rear end,driver didnt even let go of phone when they got out still texting.

Driver, a young Lady, said my brake lights didnt work (they did but she didnt see them)

So mobiles imo should be banned from use in a car while driving and penalties should be stiffer if caught,wont stop people though I dont think

Twazzock of the Day Award - davecooper

There is no difference between texting and reading a book of playing Sudoku while driving. Properly designed instrumentation should take the drivers eyes off the road for a fraction of a second, something no mobile can ever do.

Edited by davecooper on 16/07/2013 at 13:51

Twazzock of the Day Award - unthrottled

There is no difference between texting and reading a book of playing Sudoku while driving

That's my point. Jimmy Carr was aquitted of using a mobile phone at the wheel because his lawyer successfully argued that he was recording a joke into a dictaphone. It's about common sense, not legal technicalities.

I had a complete twazzock moment today when I came to a roundabout and decided to assume that the car on the roundabout would be going straight on like the rest of the traffic.

No phone, no alcohol, no speeding, just plain idiocy on my part. .

Twazzock of the Day Award - Happy Blue!

Oh dear - I have done that before. A gentle nudge of the car in front was not what was I was expecting when I looked right and set off....

Twazzock of the Day Award - unthrottled

No, the car was ccoming from the opposite direction. It's a small roundabout with the exits very close together and virtually every car goes straight on.There's a temptation to assume that all cars will go straight on.

No collision-just an undignified emergency stop. The other car was able to continue with its manoeuvre unhindered. My driving has become sloppy lately. A gentle timely lesson :)

Twazzock of the Day Award - MrDanno

Unthrottled, The good thing is, You actually took responsibility for it and have realised you made a mistake. It never ceases to amaze me the amount of people who having done something wrong themselves, Blame other road users for it.

Twazzock of the Day Award - Trilogy

My driving has become sloppy lately. A gentle timely lesson :)

Your old age showing through. :) You should know better now you've reached 30. :)

Twazzock of the Day Award - Ed V

Me too.

Twazzock of the Day Award - sb10

There is no difference between texting and reading a book of playing Sudoku while driving

That's my point. Jimmy Carr was aquitted of using a mobile phone at the wheel because his lawyer successfully argued that he was recording a joke into a dictaphone. It's about common sense, not legal technicalities.

I had a complete twazzock moment today when I came to a roundabout and decided to assume that the car on the roundabout would be going straight on like the rest of the traffic.

No phone, no alcohol, no speeding, just plain idiocy on my part. .

Here we go,you will be saying next its ok for women to put makeup on while driving and blow drying there hair and looking in vanity mirror I`m sure they can see the road as well ;)

Twazzock of the Day Award - unthrottled

looking in vanity mirror I`m sure they can see the road as well ;)

At least they're using their mirrors-even if not for the intended purpose! (i'm feeling sanquine today)

Twazzock of the Day Award - Bobbin Threadbare

Although skilled at multitasking, women find this inadvisable as the probability of stabbing yourself in the eye with a mascara wand is high.

Twazzock of the Day Award - Trilogy

How slow were you going to get overtaken by someone texting?!

Whilst not a fan of playing with phones whilst driving, I don't think it is any more of a distraction than convertibles that lower the roof whilst moving, or in car 'entertainment systems' for those with ADHD.

If you propose throwing the book at texters, then the same rules should apply to other distractions.

70ish.

Some distractions are more dangerous than others.

BTW, I have a woman friend who says she will not answer the phone while driving yet is quite happy to text. She drives an Audi TT.

Twazzock of the Day Award - sb10

How slow were you going to get overtaken by someone texting?!

Whilst not a fan of playing with phones whilst driving, I don't think it is any more of a distraction than convertibles that lower the roof whilst moving, or in car 'entertainment systems' for those with ADHD.

If you propose throwing the book at texters, then the same rules should apply to other distractions.

70ish.

Some distractions are more dangerous than others.

BTW, I have a woman friend who says she will not answer the phone while driving yet is quite happy to text. She drives an Audi TT.

throw the book at anyone who uses a phone in the hand while driving,how many can drive one handed anyway?.

Most have to take hand off of steering to change gear and those hitting a bend at the same time actually cause accidents even though they may not be in it,ie someone else has to swerve away to miss them and hit another car,I`ve seen that a couple of times....

Twazzock of the Day Award - drd63

Oh I love a good bit of intolerance, god gave us knees to look after the steering wheel when that one hand has to deal with changing gear..........honestly!

Twazzock of the Day Award - sb10

Oh I love a good bit of intolerance, god gave us knees to look after the steering wheel when that one hand has to deal with changing gear..........honestly!

I know, van/lorry drivers use em all the time, idiots

Twazzock of the Day Award - jamie745

how many can drive one handed anyway?.

My car's an automatic....

Twazzock of the Day Award - madf

how many can drive one handed anyway?.

My car's an automatic....

Ditto.

And I can drive the wheel with my knees.. so no hands.

Twazzock of the Day Award - sb10

how many can drive one handed anyway?.

My car's an automatic....

Ditto.

And I can drive the wheel with my knees.. so no hands.

arent you clever.

Twazzock of the Day Award - Sofa Spud

Stupid one I saw today. Queue of traffic in road at roadworks. Before roadworks is a right turn with a short right turn lane, before which is keep-left island. Idiot in SUV decides to overtake queue of traffic, passing on RIGHT of keep left island. Obviously he was totally unaware of the possibility having a head-on collision if a vehicle were to turn left out of the road he wanted to turn into.

Twazzock of the Day Award - hillman

Yes, Unthrottled, I almost did the same last Friday when I relised that I was in the wrong lane coming out of the supermarket car-park. I changed to the correct lane part way onto the roundabout only to be tooted by a chap wanting to buzz staight through at a faster rate of knots. If I could have knuckled my forelock would these young people have understood the gesture ?

Twazzock of the Day Award - Trilogy

Twazzock of The Day Award 2.

This award goes to the cyclist who violenty beat his fist against my driver's side window this morning in Cambridge. This was followed by two of his fingers defying gravity. I have a feeling there may have been some profanities, but these were drowned out by my radio! Anyway, I was so shocked and shaken that I totally ignored the twazzock! If I had thought, I should have taken his photograph.

I was pretty sure I was not at fault. Later today I recounted the events to a chauffeur, who concurred with my own thoughts of the incident. He mentioned he has told off a cyclist in the past for such behaviour. The cyclist just rode off.

Twazzock of the Day Award - Bromptonaut

This award goes to the cyclist who violenty beat his fist against my driver's side window this morning in Cambridge. This was followed by two of his fingers defying gravity. I have a feeling there may have been some profanities, but these were drowned out by my radio! Anyway, I was so shocked and shaken that I totally ignored the twazzock! If I had thought, I should have taken his photograph.

I was pretty sure I was not at fault. Later today I recounted the events to a chauffeur, who concurred with my own thoughts of the incident. He mentioned he has told off a cyclist in the past for such behaviour. The cyclist just rode off.

This isn't all that informative. What hapened before the cyclist beat his fist against your window?

I don't generally favour such behaviour but last time I saw it (Addison Lee taxi pulling over cyclist as soon as latter was behind B pillar) cylist was a bit short on other options.

Twazzock of the Day Award - Trilogy

Bromptonaut,

I came up to a roundabout in Cambridge on the ring road. There are two lanes. The left one is for going left or straight ahead. I was at the front of this lane and a cyclist appeared on my right side. There was also a car in the right hand lane. We pulled away to go to the next set of traffic lights, which are just beyond the first exit. As he stayed in the same lane as me I gave him a wide berth keeping well left. When we reached the next set of traffic lights, which were red, I stopped. He stopped and then started his tirade.

Twazzock of the Day Award - gordonbennet
When we reached the next set of traffic lights, which were red, I stopped. He stopped and then started his tirade.

Lycra panties too tight, chafing the delicates.

Twazzock of the Day Award - bananastand

Does anyone know Cozy Powell's last words, without looking them up? aaagaggakakak

Twazzock of the Day Award - barney100
Wish the woman's text read 'have to get back to u.....police car flagging to stop'
Twazzock of the Day Award - Wackyracer

Had a great one the other day, Roadworks on the motorway 40mph through roadworks with SPECs cameras. I was being tailgated by a volvo FM12 truck who was flashing his lights for me to go faster! Does the baffoon not realise that it says 40 for a reason and that with average speed cameras there they will issue speeding fines! He then decided to overtake in a very agressive and close manner.

I wished I'd made a note of his number plate and reported him for tailgating and aggressive driving now, It's idiots like him that give us HGV drivers a bad name.

Twazzock of the Day Award - galileo

Presume your car speedo over reads 2 or 3 mph, which his tacho doesn't?

Twazzock of the Day Award - dan86

Hgv speedometers are calibrated unlike the one in your car. You were probably doing 35-38 mph. But he shouldn't of been tailgating.

Twazzock of the Day Award - Engineer Andy

What I never understand is if tachographs can read speed so accuractely, why can't car speedos/mileometers? I would pay an extra £50 - £100 for one that read accurately to within 1mph all the way up to 70 or more.

I am also amazed howso many supposedly "professional" HGV drivers (I would have to say the majority) can act so irresponsibly, given their vehicles take far, far longer to stop than cars and have the ability to kill many people in the blink of an eye through doing such stupid and reckless things, as appears to have been the case (not proven, just going on newpaper/TV reports yesterday) of the M25 lorry accident yesterday.

All that to get to your destination a minute earlier. If we all gave eachother decent gaps on the roads, and especially on dual carriageways/motorways, traffic would flow more freely (less braking/bunching causing hold-ups) and far, far less accidents. I was on the M25 yesterday after that accident, and many drivers (including one particular dumper truck driver) obviously couldn't care less about the rules of the road and were cutting in at high speed and doing emergency stops just to get further up queues, etc. Idiots! Shame we don't have more traffic cops to nick these berks - they deserve everything the legal system can throw at them!

Twazzock of the Day Award - Andrew-T

What I never understand is if tachographs can read speed so accuractely, why can't car speedos/mileometers?

I believe it is a long-standing agreement to allow a 10% margin of error for variable behaviour among mass-produced speedos, and fall-off in performance with older ones. They should never under-read, but may over-read by 10% - and usually do. So you should never be speeding if yours reads 32. But people move the goalposts by fitting different-sized wheels to their cars.

Of course you could just rely on your GPS ....

Twazzock of the Day Award - Engineer Andy

What I never understand is if tachographs can read speed so accuractely, why can't car speedos/mileometers?

I believe it is a long-standing agreement to allow a 10% margin of error for variable behaviour among mass-produced speedos, and fall-off in performance with older ones. They should never under-read, but may over-read by 10% - and usually do. So you should never be speeding if yours reads 32. But people move the goalposts by fitting different-sized wheels to their cars.

Of course you could just rely on your GPS ....

Some people must be really desperate to get to their destination 30 sec earlier if they think risking their licence doing 32/33 in a 30 zone. Maybe they should've left earlier?

No GPS/Sat Nav for me - I just rely on maps (stopping if I need to more than glance across), familiarising myself with today's journey and leaving a decent margin in case of delays, detours and getting lost (occasionally!). I probably would get a Satnav if I used my car on unfamiliar routes more often.

Twazzock of the Day Award - Wackyracer

I'm well aware of the fact HGV's and coaches have a more accurate speedo due to it being linked to the tacho and re checked at frequent intervals during the vehicles life. I should be having held an LGV and PCV licence myself for many years.

The speedo in my car is only about 3mph slow compared with satnav, He was just one of the many muppets who could not wait until the end of the restriction to increase his speed.

Twazzock of the Day Award - galileo

Wackyracer, I'd noted you are a HGV driver, respect for you as I appreciate the skills needed and most are still the best on the roads. As has been discussed on here many times, some HGV drivers will cheerfully be a mobile roadblock for a mile or two or three overtaking another HGV which is 0.25 mph slower.

A possible 3 mph reduction following a car will thus be enough to drive these muppets to tailgate and flash. I've suffered this from trucks (and coaches) through the 50 mph limits where central barrier works were ongoing, even though I was at the limit by satnav.

Such idiots should be banned or restricted to Reliant Robins.

Twazzock of the Day Award - daveyjp
The award today goes to the HGV operator who thinks an adequate replacement for the fuel cap on a tipper truck is a piece of jumper wedged into the fuel tank with an empty one pint plastic milk carton.

No wonder bikers come off when they hit spilt diesel.
Twazzock of the Day Award - dan86

Tipper drivers are in there own league for stupednes. As they are paud by the job they do all manner of things just to get as many jobs in as they can in one day.

Twazzock of the Day Award - Bromptonaut

Tipper drivers are in there own league for stupednes. As they are paud by the job they do all manner of things just to get as many jobs in as they can in one day.

Yep, there's a reason why tip/skip trucks are killing approx one cyclist a month in London.

Twazzock of the Day Award - A3 A4

My award goes to the cyclist on the wet and dark Bristol Ring Road A4174 without lights at 7am this morning. Maybe he feels he should be let off because he was wearing Hi-Viz, scary seeing traffic on the dual carrageway passing him at 60mph+.

Cyclists are common on this section of road, I'm not against cyclists, but I can't understand their stupidity in using this fast moving road, when at great cost to the tax payer a cycleway runs parrallel with most of this section of the A4174.

Twazzock of the Day Award - Bromptonaut

My award goes to the cyclist on the wet and dark Bristol Ring Road A4174 without lights at 7am this morning. Maybe he feels he should be let off because he was wearing Hi-Viz, scary seeing traffic on the dual carrageway passing him at 60mph+.

Cyclists are common on this section of road, I'm not against cyclists, but I can't understand their stupidity in using this fast moving road, when at great cost to the tax payer a cycleway runs parrallel with most of this section of the A4174.

No lights at 07:00 when sunrise in Bristol today was 07:11 - maybe he thought it was light enough. Depending on weather it might well be.

As to why cyclists don't use the cycleway there has to be a reason, only the odd one will ignore it from cussedness. Common reasons to avoid are poor surfacing, debris including glass, shared with pedestrians so hazards from them and dogs, cycle lane repeatedly gives way to side roads and does not run full length of ring road.

Also for half the bike traffic it might be on 'wrong' side of dual carriageway meaning a hazardous crossing times two, possibly on foot, to access it.

Twazzock of the Day Award - A3 A4

My award goes to the cyclist on the wet and dark Bristol Ring Road A4174 without lights at 7am this morning. Maybe he feels he should be let off because he was wearing Hi-Viz, scary seeing traffic on the dual carrageway passing him at 60mph+.

Cyclists are common on this section of road, I'm not against cyclists, but I can't understand their stupidity in using this fast moving road, when at great cost to the tax payer a cycleway runs parrallel with most of this section of the A4174.

No lights at 07:00 when sunrise in Bristol today was 07:11 - maybe he thought it was light enough. Depending on weather it might well be.

As to why cyclists don't use the cycleway there has to be a reason, only the odd one will ignore it from cussedness. Common reasons to avoid are poor surfacing, debris including glass, shared with pedestrians so hazards from them and dogs, cycle lane repeatedly gives way to side roads and does not run full length of ring road.

Also for half the bike traffic it might be on 'wrong' side of dual carriageway meaning a hazardous crossing times two, possibly on foot, to access it.

So passing traffic of 70mph is prefferable to the odd dog and a slow moving pedestrian?

As far as the cycleway being on the wrong side of the carriageway goes, there are underpasses and frequent pelican crossings near the roundabouts along the section of the 4174 that said cyclist was using.

Twazzock of the Day Award - Ordovices

If lights were so necessary, how did you see him and why wouldn't everyone else?

This cycle path is in good condition, but unlit and overgrown with high hedges which compounds the visibility issues. It is used by many pedestrians who don't wear hi viz or carry lights, neither do the dogs being walked. The crossings would be fine if the car and lorry drivers understood that red and amber means stop not speed up.

Twazzock of the Day Award - A3 A4

If lights were so necessary, how did you see him and why wouldn't everyone else?

This cycle path is in good condition, but unlit and overgrown with high hedges which compounds the visibility issues. It is used by many pedestrians who don't wear hi viz or carry lights, neither do the dogs being walked. The crossings would be fine if the car and lorry drivers understood that red and amber means stop not speed up.

I saw him because the carriageway is lit and my headlights picked out his twinkling hi-vz, it was still dark and raining heavily, visibility was poor, maybe it would have been OK for me not to have my lights on as my car has rear reflectors? no sorry, I forgot motorists have to abide by the law....

Cyclists are not allowed to cycle on a motorway for good reason, as far as I'm concerned a dual carriageway with a 70 mph limit is just as dangerous, moreso in rain and poor light, not to mention with no lights and with a cycletrack yards away to his left.

The cyclist I saw this morning and the appeasers here give the decent cyclists a bad name and want it all ways, give 'em cycleways and thats still not good enough...

Twazzock of the Day Award - Andrew-T

"Cyclists are not allowed to cycle on a motorway for a good reason, as far as I'm concerned a dual carriageway with a 70 mph limit is just as dangerous, more so in rain and poor light, not to mention with no lights and with a cycletrack yards away to his left.

The cyclist I saw this morning and the appeasers here give the decent cyclists a bad name and want it all ways, give 'em cycleways and thats still not good enough..."

Perhaps this cyclist was ignoring his special cycletrack for the same reason that some joggers insist on running in the gutter instead of on a perfectly suitable pavement. I've never understood the sense in that.

Edited by Andrew-T on 05/11/2013 at 23:22

Twazzock of the Day Award - Wackyracer

Give up A3 A4! You'll never win an arguement about a twazzock cyclist, I've heard all the excuses -

"Its safer to jump a red light "

"I can't use the cycle lane because it takes me 1 minnute more, I'd rather cause big problems cycling on this 60mph single carriage way and nearly get myself killed 4 times a day "

"I put myself in front of this woman was at the front of the junction looking right for a space in the traffic and when there was a space in the traffic she nearly ran me over as she had not realised I'd be such an idiot to put myself in danger"

Maybe it would be ok for me to drive my car on the pavement as there is less hazards there for me? It's about as plausable as some of the nonsense I've heard from cyclists.

Twazzock of the Day Award - Bromptonaut

Give up A3 A4! You'll never win an arguement about a twazzock cyclist, I've heard all the excuses -

"Its safer to jump a red light "

"I can't use the cycle lane because it takes me 1 minnute more, I'd rather cause big problems cycling on this 60mph single carriage way and nearly get myself killed 4 times a day "

"I put myself in front of this woman was at the front of the junction looking right for a space in the traffic and when there was a space in the traffic she nearly ran me over as she had not realised I'd be such an idiot to put myself in danger"

Maybe it would be ok for me to drive my car on the pavement as there is less hazards there for me? It's about as plausable as some of the nonsense I've heard from cyclists.

Wacky,

This is a discussion forum, its about putting alternative perspectives not win/lose.

I have a foot in both camps as a driver and cyclist and will contribute here from time to time to put the cyclist's perspective. There are the odd few junctions where running a red light is safer than getting in the 'Grand Prix' start when red+amber comes up. Not many and there are plenty more where RLJ is suicidal, where it is safer it's a consequence of poor junction design. Some cycle lanes, even well segregated ones, present their own dangers - again poor design.

If a road is busy enough for a few cyclists to cause 'big problems' then it's no busines having a 60 limit.

Twazzock of the Day Award - Wackyracer

Bromptonaut,

While I'm happy to accept that people have different opinions and perspectives on things, There are times where an opinion is not plausable. Such as Jumping a red light, It is an absolute offence and is NOT optional and I hope more cyclists get fined for it.

I watched a program about the possibility of having special roundabouts like they use abroad, They set one up and asked cyclists and motorists to try. It segregated them and is used abroad very effectively. A couple of the cyclists said they would not use the cycle part of it as it would take longer. It is pure b***** mindedness at it's best!

If you know of any cyclists who can design cycle routes better than what is currently available I'd like to hear these ideas. I mean short of just banning cars, trucks and buses from using the roads, Because it seems to me that is what most cyclists want.

My main gripe with cyclists is they have this attitude that everyone else is wrong and yet they cannot recognise when they do the wrong thing or break the law themselves. One rule for everyone else and they do what they want.

Every time there is mention of a badly driven Lorry you sing up about tipper drivers killing cyclists, I'm not defending Lorry drivers as a mass but, You have to ask yourself the question of why this happens. While I won't say the lorry driver is never to blame, Often it takes 2 people to get something wrong to make an collision. I rode a bike too in my younger days and I'd never have gone up the inside of anything turning left, I just waited behind it until it moved off. For 2 reasons, Firstly I didn't want to die young with a horrible death and secondly because it is not any faster unless your a budding Lance Armstrong. Lorries might be slow but, they can pull away faster than most cyclists do.

Twazzock of the Day Award - alan1302

because it is not any faster unless your a budding Lance Armstrong.

Not sure people aspire to be him nowadays!

Twazzock of the Day Award - Bromptonaut

Bromptonaut,

While I'm happy to accept that people have different opinions and perspectives on things, There are times where an opinion is not plausable. Such as Jumping a red light, It is an absolute offence and is NOT optional and I hope more cyclists get fined for it.

I understand the absolute offence point and I'v no time for people who fly through reds without discrimiantion - they deserve a FP notice. There are however odd places, the now remodelled junction of Bloomsbury way with Southampton Place was such an example, where GP type starts create a danger. At that point there were three lanes of general traffic plus a nearside bus lane. The bus lane got green 5 seconds before the cars so that routes turning right into S'oton Row could postion themselves.

Caught in the cars lanes I'd no compunction in going against the red when the bus got green so as to be out of the melee. There are two on my current commute that need a car to trigger the coils in the road - no car no green. I treat them as a give way.

I watched a program about the possibility of having special roundabouts like they use abroad, They set one up and asked cyclists and motorists to try. It segregated them and is used abroad very effectively. A couple of the cyclists said they would not use the cycle part of it as it would take longer. It is pure b***** mindedness at it's best!

If you know of any cyclists who can design cycle routes better than what is currently available I'd like to hear these ideas. I mean short of just banning cars, trucks and buses from using the roads, Because it seems to me that is what most cyclists want.

There are plenty of people who can do better than traffic engineers - see stuff on web about Blackfriars Bridge (north end) and the ongoing sagas of the so called Superhighways.

The special roundabouts work in Holland but the number of cyclists and driver awareness of them is very differnt to UK. The outside of a roundabout is not a place I would choose to be, irrespective of any dealy it imposed on my journey.

Every time there is mention of a badly driven Lorry you sing up about tipper drivers killing cyclists, I'm not defending Lorry drivers as a mass but, You have to ask yourself the question of why this happens. While I won't say the lorry driver is never to blame, Often it takes 2 people to get something wrong to make an collision. I rode a bike too in my younger days and I'd never have gone up the inside of anything turning left, I just waited behind it until it moved off. For 2 reasons, Firstly I didn't want to die young with a horrible death and secondly because it is not any faster unless your a budding Lance Armstrong. Lorries might be slow but, they can pull away faster than most cyclists do.

Most of us are well aware of the risks and have strict rules of engagement where tippers etc are involved. Don't go up the inside unless (a) you're absolutely certain it cannot move and (b) you've an escape route in case you cock up on (a). But if one of them left hooks you in moving traffic or moves over your lane while overtaking then you'll be very lucky to get out in time. There was another tipper fatality last night, once again on Cycle Superhighway 2, this time at Mile End. This route was heavily criticied by the corner at inquest on Brian Dorling and the French lass killed on a hire bike in the summer. Here, and with ordinary cycle lanes in other places the unwary particulalry it appears foreign women, are led into danger.

Another accident last night, so far classed as serious injury, involved a coach at junction of Vernon Place and S'oton Row. Again either a turnover or a nearside creep by the cyclist. The danger here maybe that it's a tight turn and the bus had to swing out, giving a misleading impression of it's intended track through the junction.

I've also found over years that first couple of weeks of GMT can be a bit hairy in London traffic.

I'd be more willing to accept blame for cyclists if more of these accidents involved buses or the other, non construction, HGV's in the capital.

Edited by Bromptonaut on 06/11/2013 at 13:22

Twazzock of the Day Award - Ed V

Motor cycles are definitely safer than bicycles in urban areas because they flow with the vehicle traffic, so no-one (usually) overtakes them and vice-versa.

Bicycles though travel adjacent to traffic lines not as part of them, often going faster or slower than the lorries, vans and cars.

It may now be time in urban areas to put cyclists centre stage as it were, so they move at the same speed as everyone else.

Then they'd sell their bikes, right?

Twazzock of the Day Award - Bromptonaut

Motor cycles are definitely safer than bicycles in urban areas because they flow with the vehicle traffic, so no-one (usually) overtakes them and vice-versa.

While I'd agree that is commonsense I'm not sure the KSI stats would confirm it.

Bicycles though travel adjacent to traffic lines not as part of them, often going faster or slower than the lorries, vans and cars.

And cylists need experience or training to cope with that. In Central London it's usually safer to go down the outside of queues. In some streets however, Strand is an example, central refuges prevent it.

It may now be time in urban areas to put cyclists centre stage as it were, so they move at the same speed as everyone else.

Then they'd sell their bikes, right?

Apparently the next generation of Boris's Cycle Superhighways will be segregated. Those of us who use the segregated route in Tavistock Sq etc might hope they can imrove the execution.

Twazzock of the Day Award - Trilogy

Bromptonaut,

Do you have any idea why so many cyclists have a 'death wish'? i.e. ride after dark without either lights or a reflective jacket. A work colleague in Cambridge yesterday mentioned his girlfriend, a woman around 30 years of age, was going to go out on her bike after dark, with no way of being seen. He told her not to go out. I think there should be an advertising campaign to remind people they need to light up. Apparently at this time of year Cambridge police hand out on the spot fines to offenders.

Twazzock of the Day Award - Bromptonaut

Trilogy,

While I'd cavill at the phrase 'death wish' that one puzzles me too. I suspect the answer is they think like pedestrians. In lit streets you can see and be seen on foot so, they assume, same applies on a bike. Certainly seems to be case in London.

And of course in Cambridge you've got squillions of students half of whom are male, under 25, and think they're immortal anyway.

Green/yellow or for that matter pink hi-viz isn't actually much use in lit streets although they do stand out in poor daylight - grey day or under trees etc. Under orange or white sodium lights all look a washed out grey. A conventional overcoat in cream/fawn is more conspicuous.

Only lights make you stand out but not flashing as they make judging distance and track/convergence dificult for observers. Peter (TfL) Hendy is getting a kicking on cycling fora after suggesting the falshing lights on the hire bikes should be universal.

Outside street lit zones it's the retro-reflective strips on a gilet that stand out in dark together with pedal reflectors.

Edited by Bromptonaut on 06/11/2013 at 21:40

Twazzock of the Day Award - Ben 10

I've never seen a safe cyclist on the road.

Jumping red lights especially pedestrian ones. Not having adequate or no lights. Riding too far from kerb. Riding two abreast. Weaving in and out of traffic from all sides. Not obeying road rules. No hand/arm signals. Not using well swept cycle paths. Overtaking on the inside of large vehicles or the outside along white lines facing oncoming traffic. Wearing dark clothing especially at night. No helmets. No audible warnings, except the fist on the roof or door!

Not all cyclists cross all these brackets. The odd few do, but they ALL fail on one of these at least. So there is no such thing as a safe cyclist.

Yet they always accuse drivers for being bad and show their displeasure at the drop of a hat. Well give us a chance. At night and in rain it's very hard to see you with rainsoaked mirrors and windows. Light up, be bright and keep to the rules. That way we might be able to read what you intend doing or where you might emerge from.

Twazzock of the Day Award - bathtub tom

>>but they ALL fail on one of these at least. So there is no such thing as a safe cyclist.

Like saying ALL car drivers speed dangerously, or all lorry drivers are tail-gating bullies.

I won't bother reading any more of your rant!

Twazzock of the Day Award - Andrew-T

>>but they ALL fail on one of these at least. So there is no such thing as a safe cyclist.

Like saying ALL car drivers speed dangerously, or all lorry drivers are tail-gating bullies.

I won't bother reading any more of your rant!

That's not what was said at all. A long list of faults was produced, with the assertion that every cyclist failed on at least one of them. You may not agree, but it is NOT the same as saying all motorists speed.

Twazzock of the Day Award - Bromptonaut

That's not what was said at all. A long list of faults was produced, with the assertion that every cyclist failed on at least one of them. You may not agree, but it is NOT the same as saying all motorists speed.

True, but one could produce a similar list for motorists covering speeding, jumping amber/red lights, parking infringements, lighting and other C&U offences etc etc and manufacture a conclusion similar to that arrived at by Ben 10.

Twazzock of the Day Award - Bromptonaut

I've never seen a safe cyclist on the road.

Jumping red lights especially pedestrian ones. Not having adequate or no lights. Riding too far from kerb. Riding two abreast. Weaving in and out of traffic from all sides. Not obeying road rules. No hand/arm signals. Not using well swept cycle paths. Overtaking on the inside of large vehicles or the outside along white lines facing oncoming traffic. Wearing dark clothing especially at night. No helmets. No audible warnings, except the fist on the roof or door!

Not all cyclists cross all these brackets. The odd few do, but they ALL fail on one of these at least. So there is no such thing as a safe cyclist.

Yet they always accuse drivers for being bad and show their displeasure at the drop of a hat. Well give us a chance. At night and in rain it's very hard to see you with rainsoaked mirrors and windows. Light up, be bright and keep to the rules. That way we might be able to read what you intend doing or where you might emerge from.

Ben,

You know roughly how I might respond at length to that rant and I'm not biting.

A couple of points though

I agree running reds, particularly where peds are crossing, being unlit, lack of lights and failure to signal are bad. You failed to mention riding while wearing earphones or while using a mobile.

The human species comes, as standard, with an audible warning device that functions the second they pop off the production line - a voice!!

Some of your so called dangerous practices help cycle safety, I'm thinking here about riding 'too' far out and overtaking queues on the outside. Riding two abreast is fine - see the Highway Code.

Helmets only affect the user and wearing or not is a matter of choice. FWIW I don't.

Edited by Bromptonaut on 09/11/2013 at 16:00

Twazzock of the Day Award - galileo

Riding two abreast is fine - see the Highway Code.

See Highway Code Rule 66

  • never ride more than two abreast, and ride in single file on narrow or busy roads and when riding round bends
Twazzock of the Day Award - Bromptonaut

Riding two abreast is fine - see the Highway Code.

See Highway Code Rule 66

  • never ride more than two abreast, and ride in single file on narrow or busy roads and when riding round bends

Absolutely. It's OK to ride two abreast unless it's busy or narrow. Busy and narrow are both a bit subjective but riding in pairs on a country road shouldn't be a problem.

Edited by Bromptonaut on 09/11/2013 at 19:13

Twazzock of the Day Award - Andrew-T

< It's OK to ride two abreast unless it's busy or narrow. Busy and narrow are both a bit subjective but riding in pairs on a country road shouldn't be a problem. >

By 'OK' I suppose you mean that you are not explicitly advised not to? But there is no need to, except to chat comfortably with your mates. I have always felt that road users should take up no more width than they have to - cyclists abreast are a little like middle-lane hogs on the M'way. Likewise motorcyclists who choose to follow the centre line 'for safety reasons'. It just makes life a bit more irritating and awkward for those following.

And I have nothing against cyclists - I used to spend some time in the saddle myself.

Twazzock of the Day Award - galileo

Riding two abreast is fine - see the Highway Code.

See Highway Code Rule 66

  • never ride more than two abreast, and ride in single file on narrow or busy roads and when riding round bends

Absolutely. It's OK to ride two abreast unless it's busy or narrow. Busy and narrow are both a bit subjective but riding in pairs on a country road shouldn't be a problem.

Except that country roads tend to be both narrow and have frequent bends, often with double white lines.

Twazzock of the Day Award - Ben 10

So Brom, you agree there is no such thing as a safe cyclist?

Yes there are bad drivers and unsafe drivers. But I don't "set in stone" stick up for them like you do for your cycling fraternity. Just admit, they can help themselves by being a bit more savvy on the road. Like I said, give us a clue, allow us to give you ample room, as long as we know what your intended path will be by sticking to the rules.

Riding haphazardly around, without safety features is a recipe for colliding with metal. You should be educating your fellow bikers, rather than having a regular go at us. Sail before steam. Not in my book, or the highway code.

Edited by Ben 10 on 09/11/2013 at 22:27

Twazzock of the Day Award - Bromptonaut

Ben,

No I don't agree there's no such thing as a safe cyclist. As I said, some of the boxes you're trying to tick (too far out, overtaking sensibly on the outside, only two abreast and helmets) are false dangers.

I've ridden in London on my eponymous folder every working day since May 1999. My accident tally amounts to one clip from behind by a car and one contact with a (foreign) ped who looked left and stepped into road in front of me. Missed her but got wheel stuck in a drain gulley @ 45 degrees to kerb.

I don't have a 'set in stone' point to stick up for cyclists. As I said earlier today, RLJ and no lights are just daft. OTOH the threat from tip/skip trucks is very real indeed.

But if you're trying to portray cyclists as the greatest threat to western civilisation after Al Quida then I'll laugh in your face!!

Edited by Bromptonaut on 09/11/2013 at 23:16

Twazzock of the Day Award - Ben 10

Don't be stupid. Do you honestly think that.

I just find the majority of cyclists don't do themselves any favours and always paint drivers as the enemy.

Your group are not a threat to western civilisation, just an itch in the crack of every drivers backside that needs a scratch now and again.

I say again. Don't preach to us old chap, preach to your fellow cyclists. I would have thought the odd crush might make them realise the seriousness of using the roads properly. But they're in the "wont happen to me" mindset and too arrogant to listen. Which means there will be more deaths to come, unless you and your lot change their ways for their own safety.

You might be the saint of all cyclists and managed to avoid possible harm all these years, but there are countless other twazzocks who need your guiding hand and advice, or do you hit the same brick wall with them as we all do. Falls on deaf ears, doesn't it.

Edited by Ben 10 on 10/11/2013 at 00:34

Twazzock of the Day Award - nortones2

Until Ben came along, there was an intelligent discussion.

Twazzock of the Day Award - Ben 10

Yes there it was until the cycling stuff started to get going. Why don't you carry on the intelligent part of the discussion instead of that post above. Rather unintelligent pop. Naughty!

Twazzock of the Day Award - bathtub tom

Until Ben came along, there was an intelligent discussion.

"I just find the majority of cyclists ...................................... always paint drivers as the enemy."

He does seem to enjoy sweeping generalisations.

Twazzock of the Day Award - alan1302

Your group are not a threat to western civilisation, just an itch in the crack of every drivers backside that needs a scratch now and again.

There are good cyclists and there are bad cyclists. Just the same as with driver and bikers.

Bad cyclists, drivers and bikers annoy me - why don't we try and sort out the bad ones rather than trying to make out every cyclist is bad which is nonsense?

Twazzock of the Day Award - Bromptonaut

Ben makes the mistake of seeing cyclists as a homogeneous 'out' group of rebels.

Of course they're not. Probably difficult to find a more mixed set of individuals. Even among those of us for whom the bike is more than just a means of transport there are divisions. Some of us are 'vehicular' riders for whom bus lanes, quieter roads and the odd one way contraflow are ample provision. Others would have us 'go Dutch' or 'Copenhagenize' with segregated cycle ways everywhere. A useless pipe dream in my opinion. And mention of helmet compulsion is equivalent to dropping the C bomb at the Mother's Union!! No quicker way to start a fight.

There's plenty of stuff on the net on CycleChat, YACF and other sites about how to ride safely. There needs to be much more trainng, particulalry, and I'm talking Central London here, for the annual influx of students and the new arrivals, many non British, in service industries and junior office posts.

Some of the stuff you suggest as a tick box for safety like riding 'too' far out, two abreast or sans helmet are contrary to how riders are trained (see John Franklin's book Cyclecraft), 2 abreast (expressly permitted by the Highway Code) appear to be based on missapprehension.

I come here to spread the message not rant or lecture.

Twazzock of the Day Award - Ordovices

I would have thought the odd crush might make them realise the seriousness of using the roads properly.

Yes the human race is famous for learning from its mistakes, That's why we don't hear of people drink driving anymore, why wars have all ended and why the ice caps are regrowing.

Twazzock of the Day Award - Andrew-T

That's deep stuff, Ordo. But I'm afraid mistakes are often the only thing humans learn from. Most of them tend to ignore explicit instruction.

Twazzock of the Day Award - Bromptonaut

I would have thought the odd crush might make them realise the seriousness of using the roads properly.

Yes the human race is famous for learning from its mistakes, That's why we don't hear of people drink driving anymore, why wars have all ended and why the ice caps are regrowing.

The idea that each and every 'odd crush' is down to the cyclist is plain wrong. Some are of course but why do these accidents almost without exception involve tip/skip vehicles?

There are plenty of other large vehicles in London. The ubiquituos bus, domestic and office removal pantechnicons, delivery lorries up to and including full size artics. But it's the 2% or so from construction industry that do the damage.

Why??

Clue. Cement mixers used to be part of the problem too. Then, after a victim's mother bought shares in Cemex and made a scene at the company AGM, they too training of their drivers about risk to the vulnerable much more seriously.

While the likes of Thames Materials are allowed to ply their trade, employing drunks like Dennis p u t z as drivers and securing heavy doors with bent coat hangers, the deaths will continue.

Twazzock of the Day Award - Wackyracer

Recently a friend of mine who is a keen cyclist was talking about riding and I asked if he wore a cycle helmet and he said he did but, It was a waste of time in his opinion. The following day he came off his bike and landed on his head and shoulder. He is now very glad he was wearing the helmet.

I have a distant relative who died from falling from his bike and striking his head on a kerb edge , So I think personally that cycle helmets should be compulsory. However unpopular that might make me with cyclists. Especially for children.

Twazzock of the Day Award - Bromptonaut

Recently a friend of mine who is a keen cyclist was talking about riding and I asked if he wore a cycle helmet and he said he did but, It was a waste of time in his opinion. The following day he came off his bike and landed on his head and shoulder. He is now very glad he was wearing the helmet.

I have a distant relative who died from falling from his bike and striking his head on a kerb edge , So I think personally that cycle helmets should be compulsory. However unpopular that might make me with cyclists. Especially for children.

Wacky,

We all know these things happen. Pedestrians also die from striking their heads on kerbs, pavements etc. In fact the death rate per mile for cycling is only slightly worse than that of pedestrians.

I think most of us who are helmet refusers understand we are taking a small risk. My reasons for not wearing are comfort - heat and chinstrap - having bits of it in my peripheral vision, a subliminal effect on hearing and having to take my specs off every time I don/remove the thing. Plus, as a commuter I'd leave the damn thing on the train two times a year.

The safety gain from compulsion - see Oz, NZ and some US states - is negligible. OTOH the general fitness gain from casual cycling which would deterred/lost by the faff of having to put on a helmet just to get the paper or do a quick spin on a Boris Bike is a public health cost.

Kids are a slightly differnt cup of tea but I'm not sure compulsion would help and if you did go down that road how would it be enforced. Sometimes you've got to let people decide.

Twazzock of the Day Award - bathtub tom

Brompt, have you tried a helmet lately?

There's almost as much hole as helmet, so I don't find heat a problem.

Chinstrap - Granted, but you get used to it, like wearing a seatbelt.

Peripheral vision - Not a problem as the helmet doesn't come below eye level.

Hearing - The ears aren't covered.

Specs - I don't have to remove mine and can easily slip the side-arms under the straps.

As for leaving it on the train, that won't be a problem for you soon, but as for forgetfulness and old age................................................ ;>)

I appreciate your argument about rotational injuries, but I'm prepared to take that risk for the protection one may grant me. I also find the visor very useful in low sun conditions and for keeping the rain off my specs.

Twazzock of the Day Award - Bromptonaut

Don't be stupid. Do you honestly think that.

I just find the majority of cyclists don't do themselves any favours and always paint drivers as the enemy.

Your group are not a threat to western civilisation, just an itch in the crack of every drivers backside that needs a scratch now and again.

Irony doesn't travel well on forums does it.

Twazzock of the Day Award - Wackyracer

Brompt,

Motorist could say the same about wearing seatbelts but, that is enforced. Most of us could say that in the millions of miles we have travelled we have never benefitted from wearing one.

Seatbeats and cycle helmets are an 'insurance policy', We hope never to benefit from them but, would be glad we had them should there be an unfortunate situation.

Twazzock of the Day Award - A3 A4

The problem with some cyclists is the "I can so I will" attitude bolstered by the supercillious "I'm being green so it's OK" attitude.

At rush hour I regularly travel a secondary 'A' route between Bath and Bristol, its both hilly and narrow, and on most mornings the traffic with be reduced to a crawl, eventually once the ground levels one finds that its a cyclist, often two abreast holding up traffic.

Passing them is often difficult because the road is not only narrow, but an uphill section is then followed by a downhill section where they speed up.

The biggest issue I have with this is that between Bath and Bristol is a flat level tarmaced old LMS railway line, that was converted into a cycle track in 1980. It starts and finishes in the same places as this section of road, yet I assume to give themselves a 'work out' and risk death these cyclists prefer the hilly route.

The irony is that they may be being green, but the dozens of cars that they are holding up are using more fuel comstantly changing up and down, braking/acellerating to match their speed....

Twazzock of the Day Award - Andrew-T

A3 A4 - it's a pity you tainted your otherwise balanced and reasonable post by branding a cyclist's greenness as 'supercilious'. You cannot deny that a cyclist is using less fossil fuel than a driver, and probably benefitting their health too (apart from exhaust fumes from cars and their angry drivers). Their obstructing your path does not make their behaviour supercilious.

Twazzock of the Day Award - A3 A4

A3 A4 - it's a pity you tainted your otherwise balanced and reasonable post by branding a cyclist's greenness as 'supercilious'. You cannot deny that a cyclist is using less fossil fuel than a driver, and probably benefitting their health too (apart from exhaust fumes from cars and their angry drivers). Their obstructing your path does not make their behaviour supercilious.

Its both supercillious and selfish, I stand by my comment, I did say some, not all.

Edited by A3 A4 on 10/11/2013 at 13:16

Twazzock of the Day Award - Wackyracer

Sadly I find that it is almost impossible to discuss the issues of cyclists with cyclists. While they seem to see fault in all other road users they fail miserably to see fault in things they do themselves. Often dismissing their faults as 'nothing' while pointing the finger at other road users. The cyclists seem to preach "do as I say, Not as I do"

Many of the cyclists who drive will moan about trucks overtaking each other on a 3 lane motorway, Yet they think it is fine for cyclists to ride 2 abreast when it causes trafic flow problems for vehicular traffic. What is the difference?

I don't have a problem with cyclists who abide with the rules of the road and I try to give them as much space as I can but, I do get irritated with those who keep banging on and on about things others do and they quite happily do as they please.

A friend of mine had over £4000 worth of damage to his car after a suicidal oncoming cyclist decided to turn right without warning across the front of him just a few feet away. There was many witnesses who said my friend had no chance of predicting or of being able to preventing himself from hitting him. My friend had to claim off his own car insurance for the damage as could not claim from the cyclist but, The most irritating part is the police had to record it as a cyclist injured by a car! Even though the cyclist caused the accident!

Twazzock of the Day Award - dan86

It should of been recorded as car injured by cyclists ;-)

Twazzock of the Day Award - Ben 10

@ Wackyracer. ^5

Twazzock of the Day Award - Bromptonaut

The problem with some cyclists is the "I can so I will" attitude bolstered by the supercillious "I'm being green so it's OK" attitude.

At rush hour I regularly travel a secondary 'A' route between Bath and Bristol, its both hilly and narrow, and on most mornings the traffic with be reduced to a crawl, eventually once the ground levels one finds that its a cyclist, often two abreast holding up traffic.

Passing them is often difficult because the road is not only narrow, but an uphill section is then followed by a downhill section where they speed up.

The biggest issue I have with this is that between Bath and Bristol is a flat level tarmaced old LMS railway line, that was converted into a cycle track in 1980. It starts and finishes in the same places as this section of road, yet I assume to give themselves a 'work out' and risk death these cyclists prefer the hilly route.

The irony is that they may be being green, but the dozens of cars that they are holding up are using more fuel comstantly changing up and down, braking/acellerating to match their speed....

Notwithstanding the word some you fall into same trap as Ben 10 of treating cyclists as a homogeneous group. We're not. We fall out within ourselves over everything from how to handle urban challenges via helmet wearing to Al v steel frames.

IIRc - it's not my end of the country - there are issues on the Bath>Bristol former rail route with other users (peds/dogs) and N'er do wells lurking at various points. If it were a fast and viable route why would cyclists take to the raod?

Twazzock of the Day Award - Wackyracer

I'd be interested to know a cyclist's opinion of what happened at the Waterbeach level crossing when a woman cycled around the half barrier and came just inches away from being a stain on the windscreen of the train.I expect it will be blamed on the train going too fast, The barrier being insufficient etc etc.

Twazzock of the Day Award - Bromptonaut

I'd be interested to know a cyclist's opinion of what happened at the Waterbeach level crossing when a woman cycled around the half barrier and came just inches away from being a stain on the windscreen of the train.I expect it will be blamed on the train going too fast, The barrier being insufficient etc etc.

Why a cyclist's opinion?

It was a stupid thing to do. Period.

A quick look at the Rail Accident Investigation website will show that abuse of crossings is a massive issue.

Twazzock of the Day Award - Bromptonaut

I'd be interested to know a cyclist's opinion of what happened at the Waterbeach level crossing when a woman cycled around the half barrier and came just inches away from being a stain on the windscreen of the train.I expect it will be blamed on the train going too fast, The barrier being insufficient etc etc.

Why a cyclist's opinion?

It was a stupid thing to do. Period.

A quick look at the Rail Accident Investigation website will show that abuse of crossings is a massive issue.

Revieing the vid I suspect this was not the first time she'd done it.

Waterbeach seems to be one of those places where the road crosses immediately after the platform ends. Combine that with automatic barriers and you get a situation where barriers are down but train stopped in platform.

In those circs fools of any cloth are tempted to dodge round. Other barrier set ups present different dangers - no easy answers. (and that doesn't mean it was the barriers fault!)

She was caught out by either a train unexpectedly restarting or one that didn't stop at Waterbeach.

But at least she wore a helmet and chapeau to her reactions (and to whoever set up her brakes).

Edited by Bromptonaut on 11/11/2013 at 17:28

Twazzock of the Day Award - A3 A4

They take the road purely because as I stated - they can!

You replied to an earlier post that pedestrians and dogs were an issue on the A4174 cycleway, but miss the point that like yourselves (cyclists) they don't pay tax or insurance and have every right to use the cycleway.

Now you state that the Bristol - Bath cyceway is a problem because of, again pedestrians, and dogs and now [quote] 'other users' so it would seem cyclists are causing problems for cyclists. When the hell will you lot be happy?

I don't in anyway buy that its better to run the risk of a close passing HGV, bus or fast moving car rather that the odd pedestrain, dog or other cyclist.

You complain about the attitude of drivers to cyclists yet I have seen far far worse from cyclists towards pedestrians and other cyclists when using said paths.

The atttude of the cyclists that I encounter on my commute stinks, I cycle and if I were aware of myself holding up traffic I would pull over and let them pass, it the right and polite thing to do, yet these cyclists are so self righteous, its beyond them, the same self righteousness that you yourself seems to display, blind and unwilling to see the problems that some cyclists cause to other road (and cycleway) users ...

Twazzock of the Day Award - Andrew-T

They take the road purely because as I stated - they can!

You replied to an earlier post that pedestrians and dogs were an issue on the A4174 cycleway, but miss the point that like yourselves (cyclists) they don't pay tax or insurance and have every right to use the cycleway.

A3 A4 - If you hope to be taken more seriously in your invective against cyclists, you should stop making an issue of the fact that they pay no 'tax'. Cycles arrived on the roads some time before cars, and like pedestrians they take up little space and cause little damage to the roads they use. Powered vehicles do, and they also pose more threat to those that don't. Road users are not taxed simply for being there.

Your objection seems to be mainly that cyclists (especially those abreast) reached a piece of road space before you wished to, and they travel more slowly. Seems everyone is being selfish (and maybe supercilious) in their own way?

Twazzock of the Day Award - bathtub tom

>> (cyclists) they don't pay tax or insurance

Not that old t*** again.

Cyclists pay exactly the same Vehicle Excise Duty (VED or what you call tax) as all other low emission vehicles.

When I'm on my bike, I'm not driving my car which is taxed and insured.

I have third party liability insurance when I'm riding my bike through my house insurance.

Twazzock of the Day Award - Trilogy

I have third party liability insurance when I'm riding my bike through my house insurance.

You may have, but most students won't have or indeed most young adults, nor are they easily traceable. I've spoken to a few taxi drivers who have been scraped by cyclists. They say cyclists say to them 'Sorry mate', which won't pay for the damage. If a cyclist rides off it is a bit difficult to chase after them or trace them. Perhaps motorists should take their photo ( I can imagine the abuse). If a cyclist is wronged by a motorist they can make a note of the number plate. Hardly seems a fair or correct system.

Twazzock of the Day Award - Trilogy
Cycles arrived on the roads some time before cars, and like pedestrians they take up little space and cause little damage to the roads they use.

When cycles arrived on roads there weren't separate cycle ways etc. especially for them. Motorists are supposed to, even if they directly don't, pay for roads. Cycllsts should pay for cycle ways in some form. A special tax on all new ones sold would be appropriate. Most new bikes are not cheap, so a little more won't hurt. (I can hear the whinging already!).

I think most motorists just want the system to be fair, even when many have a car and a cycle.

Twazzock of the Day Award - Andrew-T

< I think most motorists just want the system to be fair, even when many have a car and a cycle. >

That is an interesting but unattainable concept. Usually systems are considered fair only when there is some advantage, often to the side making the point. You can't please all at once, as this thread shows.

Twazzock of the Day Award - Trilogy

That is an interesting but unattainable concept. Usually systems are considered fair only when there is some advantage, often to the side making the point. You can't please all at once, as this thread shows.

Indeed. Seems both sides are making their own point.

Twazzock of the Day Award - Andrew-T

< When cycles arrived on roads there weren't separate cycle ways etc. especially for them. >

At that time there were no 'separate ways' for anyone, except maybe what we would now call pavements for pedestrians, in towns. Those 'separate' pavements have now been invaded by parked cars and sometimes fast-moving cyclists. That is gradually becoming 'tolerated' as fewer people go about on foot.

Holland and other European countries have found space to segregate cars, bikes and people, and society there has got used to it. I can't see it happening in much of London, if only because most roads are too tight. But I guess attitude may have a lot to do with it.

Twazzock of the Day Award - Bromptonaut

They take the road purely because as I stated - they can!

You replied to an earlier post that pedestrians and dogs were an issue on the A4174 cycleway, but miss the point that like yourselves (cyclists) they don't pay tax or insurance and have every right to use the cycleway.

Now you state that the Bristol - Bath cyceway is a problem because of, again pedestrians, and dogs and now [quote] 'other users' so it would seem cyclists are causing problems for cyclists. When the hell will you lot be happy?

I don't in anyway buy that its better to run the risk of a close passing HGV, bus or fast moving car rather that the odd pedestrain, dog or other cyclist.

You complain about the attitude of drivers to cyclists yet I have seen far far worse from cyclists towards pedestrians and other cyclists when using said paths.

The atttude of the cyclists that I encounter on my commute stinks, I cycle and if I were aware of myself holding up traffic I would pull over and let them pass, it the right and polite thing to do, yet these cyclists are so self righteous, its beyond them, the same self righteousness that you yourself seems to display, blind and unwilling to see the problems that some cyclists cause to other road (and cycleway) users ...

Of course cyclists pay tax just that like some cars they don't pay VED. Many are insured either through household insurance or membership of organisations such the CTC or British Cycling etc.

My point about using or not cycle routes is that people are making an informed decision. There will be a reason why they're preferring the road. I can give you generic answers and, in relation to the Bristol/Bath route, quote stuff that comes up on cycling websites. Milton Keynes was built with miles of 'redways' - cycle and pedestrian routes. They're fantastic for a weekend pootle and give a whole new perspective on the city. But they're poorly lit, have many underpasses (all to often with a complement of 'yooves' ) and are lengthy/indirect. Unsurprisingly they're not well used by commuters

The highway code accepts that use of lanes/tracks etc is not compulsory and depends on riders' skills and experience. Commuter riders, like drivers, want to make their journey quickly and will avoid routes that prevent riding at sensible speeds. Even on my Brompton folder I'm peaking at 17-20mph in London - and I'm in my mid fifties and no athlete.

I'm not going to get into a 'willy waving' contest about relative lack of consideration by motorists or cyclists - all walks of life have the selfish and unthinking. Of course people should pull over to permit a pass but urban roads don't always permit doing so easily and safely at the drop of a hat.

As I said before I post these sort of comments to inform debate. If you see them as self righteous than so be it.

Twazzock of the Day Award - Bromptonaut

Thanks to BT and Andrew for joining in the debate. Good points chaps.

Twazzock of the Day Award - Ben 10

The last time I looked, this is a MOTORING forum not a cycling one. What did you expect from some of the motorists on here.

Thanks to them for joining the debate. Good points chaps. ^5 Trilogy, Andrew-T, A3/4, Wackyracer.

Twazzock of the Day Award - bathtub tom

This guy also appeared to be anti-cyclist: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2500674/The-bends-best-bit-Mechanic-bragged-dangerous-driving-posted-videos-YouTube-jailed-killing-teenage-passenger-high-speed-smash-smoking-cannabis.html

Not that I'd accuse all anti-cyclist motorists of having the same attitude, but............................

Twazzock of the Day Award - Bromptonaut

The last time I looked, this is a MOTORING forum not a cycling one. What did you expect from some of the motorists on here.

Thanks to them for joining the debate. Good points chaps. ^5 Trilogy, Andrew-T, A3/4, Wackyracer.

Ben ,

I hate to disabuse you but it's a motoring based DISCUSSION forum. I'm a 20k miles a year motorist who also rides a folding bike in London bike plus a a mountanbike and a vintage Dawes tourer for fun.

On top of that I travel 35k+ plus miles a year by train, use ferries and occasionaly fly.

If you just want to talk to like minds you may be better off on pistonheads.

Edited by Bromptonaut on 11/11/2013 at 20:11

Twazzock of the Day Award - Bromptonaut

Some narrative from over the pond with which I'd brodly agree, including the condemnation of law breaking cyclists.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/10/opinion/sunday/is-it-ok-to-kill-cyclists.html?pagewanted=2&_r=0

Twazzock of the Day Award - Trilogy

Bromptonaut, I've nicked the last paragraph. BTW, the reason I don't cycle as much as I did when I was a teenager is since I've become a driver I've become much more aware of how dangerous it can be. :(

Nicked paragraph.

Every time you get on a bike, from this moment forward, obey the letter of the law in every traffic exchange everywhere to help drivers (and police officers) view cyclists as predictable users of the road who deserve respect. And every time you get behind the wheel, remember that even the slightest inattention can maim or kill a human being enjoying a legitimate form of transportation. That alone will make the streets a little safer.