garryn

Actually, wordings a bit wrong there. Its not a right, its a licence. Everyone has the right to put a cycle on the road

Larger head size, risk compensation etc. Personally I don't buy into them and wear a helmet, but the arguments are there. Besides which, riding without a helmet isn't illegal Car drivers don't pay road tax. Check the budget statements. There hasn't been road tax for decades. Roads are paid for out of council tax. What you refer to is VED Vehicle Excise duty. Its a payment for the right to put a car on the road, calculated against its polution capability. A recent poll showed almost 80% of cycle commuters also owned a car, so pay VED, but chose to cycle

Already plans to slow urban/residential streets to 20mph, to protect pedestrians etc. We all have the right to cycle on the roads anyway. Helmets aren't compulsory, and theres evidence to say they may exacerbate injuries in some cases. Also the arguments about risk compensation and the evidence that car drivers are les carefull around cyclists with helmets. Car drivers don't pay road tax. Cyclists pay the equivalent to VED for a zero emission car £0 NEXT!

Tear the damn thing down and send him the bill.

As it says http://www.ctc.org.uk/DesktopDefault.aspx?TabID=4950 Great idea!!! :thumbsup:

Main problem being that its illegal and one of the first things non-cyclists throw at us, along with the tax/licence/insurance arguments (that're normally shot down within 1 or 2 posts) I just use them as a chance to chill and get my breath back..:)

This'll give some of you something to moan about, although it makes me quite happy. £140 million MORE govt funding to promote cycling!! http://www.ctc.org.uk/DesktopDefault.aspx?TabID=4950 Nice :D:D

point: I am not defending cyclists jumping red lights, but: Over what period did you see these? I can honestly say I notice at least that many by cars on a daily basis. Usually I go thro on amber and see 2 or 3 go thro behind me, at a point when theres no way the lights weren't red. What do you mean by "I actually try and get and get near them so they have to slow down." Theres a definite problem from a significant minority on the roads of drivers not giving cyclists enough room. You're supposed to be driving, not policing. If you're doing what I think you are, It could be construed as using a ton of metal as a weapon. Theres a lot of riders out there now using cameras. Get your manouvre wrong & you could find yourself on Youtube or getting a visit from plod....

Its actually illegal parking. They used to park like that round here. Till they started getting ticketed for it.

accidents are accidents, fair enough. Ginas post suggested they should be able to just pile thro and sod the consequences. Causing criminal damage...

Yep, its shown on the floor of the bus gates. Also on the signage.

Right:thumbsup:, I just don't consider it a valid reason for wrecking someones car

Why, you don't need one. Bikes have to be sold with one. However the law states for using a bike 'audible warning device' and it was established, in law, years ago that a voice constituted that. I have one of these: http://www.beseenonabike.com/shopuk/product_info.php?products_id=184 But its for other road users. A bit too harsh for peds

Er, because if they do it on purpose, as you propose, its not an accident - it's criminal damage. The only vehicle thats allowed to do this and is tested for its ability is fire engines. They've got to be able to shift 5 cars, with their handbrakes on. Getting your bins emptied isn't exactly an emergency!!

This could be good, if one of the other big projects doesn't go ahead: http://www.sustransconnect2.org.uk/schemes/project_detail.php?id=127

(1) massive generalisation. Why do car drivers use their mobiles whilst driving. Why do they speed? Why don't motorbike riders buy tax discs? Why do car drivers and motorcyclists cross the advance stop lines? But as a cyclist and a car driver, I'd have no problem if the police did enforce it. Blitz particular junctions. So long as they enforce infractions by car drivers at the same time. (2) You need to get down to the new inner relief road. It seems theres many drivers who don't realise theres 3 points and a fixed penalty notice for going over the advance stop line and encroaching the cyclists forward box. Hardly surprising, I might approach SY police under the freedom of information act and ask how many tickets have been issued for this particular breach. I'll bet its zero, but I see it EVERY day. (3) Most didn't complain about the ticket. Apparantly the courier who was giving them grief had other outstanding warrants (Got the info off another forum, from someone who's aquainted with him)

Wouldn't need witnesses. Due to prats on the road I have an ATC-2k on the bike. Started putting it in the car as well. Easier to set up than SatNav

Motorways busy, near saturation, you pass a junction with not many getting off and loads getting on. You've not bottlenecked it, you've reached saturation. A roads only got so much space A car needs its own space + a minimum of its braking distance. its not infinite, why d'you think the M1s just gone to 4 lanes, to increase the available space.

Really? The words 'Big Billy Goat Gruff' spring to mine:D

No, it means its advisory. If I'm on the Parkway 8/9pm I'll be in the left. If its approaching rushhour, both lanes are doing 45. If it weren't for the guy in front of the guy infront of the guy infront (etc) we could all be doing 55? Not really, its like this all the way down to Cutlers Gate. If I pull in all that happens is the guy behind moves up to where I was and I've got a problem getting back across to go down the new inner relief road. Or maybe we should all move left, doubling the volume of traffic in the left lane, so as it now moves at 15mph and leaving the right clear for you to do 50? Hold on, if its open I'll nip out and do 50. Oh, bugger, now everyones doing it... But at least we're all moving. Should concentrate on the real issues on the road. Those who are driving in a way that actually breaks the law. Speeding, phone users, Red light jumpers, lack of MOT/ins/tax/licence. How many drivers don't know that crossing the advance stop line to sit in the cyclist 'forward' box is a FPN and 3 points?

Post #138 The reduced limit tends to be across certain junctions. The limit going back up is usually just after a junction where a bulk of the volume has left.

Garbage. At road works congestion builds because lanes are out and volume capacity has been reduced. Reduction of speed limits can very partially address this, but a busy road with a lane out is always going to suffer with conjestion

If the car continues doing 70 on a road thats near saturation point, if it taps its brakes the vehicle behind reacts, as does the one behind. You end up with a more stop/start traffic flow. You'll hit 70. But the chances of a much lower AVERAGE speed increase. Malkys post put it more succinctly Think thats the ONLY bit I didn't address. Now, you addressed Cyclones point?

The low variable flow tends to be between certain junctions. More traffic leaves than joins, Therefore less volume, speed can increase as theres more available space. The above 'rubbish' you referred to is scientific fact, backed up with theoretical and empirical evidence. Not subjective anecdote.

No basic physical laws about liquid flow applied to traffic situations. When a roads traffic reaches saturation point a vehicle at 50mph needs the braking distance for a car at 50mph. At 90mph a car needs an appropriate braking distance. Therefore a car at 50mph needs less overall space. As it needs less space, you can have a greater volume of traffic on the road. Or at 90mph you'll hit saturation point with much lower volumes of traffic.