Pavement cycling

[Just zis Guy, you know?]

Interesting post in response to a proposed Washington law outlawing
child trailers on roads where pavement cycling is not specifically
illegal. Comment by Claire Petersky (of wreck.bikes) is the fourth
response.

http://www.washingtonvotes.org/Legislation.aspx?ID=42267

Guy
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

"To every complex problem there is a solution which is
simple, neat and wrong" - HL Mencken

[Tim Woodall]

On Sat, 10 Dec 2005 10:54:56 +0000,
Just zis Guy, you know? > wrote:
> Interesting post in response to a proposed Washington law outlawing
> child trailers on roads where pavement cycling is not specifically
> illegal. Comment by Claire Petersky (of wreck.bikes) is the fourth
> response.
>
> http://www.washingtonvotes.org/Legislation.aspx?ID=42267
>
Most of her reply looks good but I don't believe the 10x ratio between
pedestrians and cyclists speed on the pavement unless you are
considering stopped pedestrians in which case talking about a ratio of
speed is silly. In practice I would expect deltaV <10mph in most cases
with it rising to ~20mph in extreme cases. I would have thought a
typical speed ratio between pedestrians and cyclists was nearer 4. My
walking pace when pushing the bromton is ~6kph. Even allowing for me
walking twice as fast as the average person, the average cyclist would
have to be doing 20mph.

Tim.

--
God said, "div D = rho, div B = 0, curl E = - @B/@t, curl H = J + @D/@t,"
and there was light.

http://tjw.hn.org/ http://www.locofungus.btinternet.co.uk/

[Peter Fox]

Following on from Tim Woodall's message. . .
>> http://www.washingtonvotes.org/Legislation.aspx?ID=42267
Cracking good response.

>>
>Most of her reply looks good but I don't believe the 10x ratio between
>pedestrians and cyclists speed on the pavement unless you are
>considering stopped pedestrians in which case talking about a ratio of
>speed is silly. In practice I would expect deltaV <10mph in most cases
>with it rising to ~20mph in extreme cases. I would have thought a
>typical speed ratio between pedestrians and cyclists was nearer 4. My
>walking pace when pushing the bromton is ~6kph. Even allowing for me
>walking twice as fast as the average person, the average cyclist would
>have to be doing 20mph.

IMHO the actual speed a cyclist 'attacks' a pedestrian at is pretty
irrelevant.

Over many years I observed roller skating collisions at various local
venues. The serious injuries happened to the stopped or slow skater
while the faster skater often never even fell over! Part of this can be
attributed to the unexpected 'attack' experienced by the stationary
skater and the 'attacker' being prepared. Also the 'attacker' tended to
carry on and perhaps take a minor tumble while going along, but the
'victim' fell in a heap with many opportunities to damage lower limbs
and joints and putting hands out in a panic, hurting wrists.[1]

In summary, If, (on feet now) I push you over, its you that get hurt.
There are many old ladies who have fallen over and broken a hip because
of a dog round their feet and subsequently died.

OK then what does this mean for situations where cyclists and
pedestrians mix such as shared use paths? IMHO to always give way and
consideration to pedestrians. For 99% reading this all this is obvious
but there are a minority of I-want-to-be-Clarkson-when-I-get-bigger oafs
around who need to be checked or brought up properly in the first
place.[2]

The issue of speed arises because of the additional difficulty of
controlling a bike dangling carrier bags from the handle bars and the
quickness of pedestrians required to 'get out of the way'.


[1] We did train skaters from day one not to do this and we insisted
people didn't stop on the rink.

[2] It also means that if you're on a dark path at night and a bunch of
ne'r do wells are hogging the path you can plough through them and be
out the other side before they know what's happening. - Just a glancing
blow you understand...




--
PETER FOX Not the same since the e-commerce business came to a .

www.eminent.demon.co.uk - Lots for cyclists

[Simon Brooke]

in message >, Peter Fox
l') wrote:

> For 99% reading this all this is obvious but there are a minority of
> I-want-to-be-Clarkson-when-I-get-bigger oafs around who need to be
> checked or brought up properly in the first place.[2]
^^^^^^^

Why did I read that as 'choked'?

--
(Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

See one nuclear war, you've seen them all.

[John_Kane]

Tim Woodall wrote:
> On Sat, 10 Dec 2005 10:54:56 +0000,
> Just zis Guy, you know? > wrote:
> > Interesting post in response to a proposed Washington law outlawing
> > child trailers on roads where pavement cycling is not specifically
> > illegal. Comment by Claire Petersky (of wreck.bikes) is the fourth
> > response.
> >
> > http://www.washingtonvotes.org/Legislation.aspx?ID=42267
> >
> Most of her reply looks good but I don't believe the 10x ratio between
> pedestrians and cyclists speed on the pavement unless you are
> considering stopped pedestrians in which case talking about a ratio of
> speed is silly. In practice I would expect deltaV <10mph in most cases
> with it rising to ~20mph in extreme cases. I would have thought a
> typical speed ratio between pedestrians and cyclists was nearer 4. My
> walking pace when pushing the bromton is ~6kph. Even allowing for me
> walking twice as fast as the average person, the average cyclist would
> have to be doing 20mph.
>
> Tim.

I have to agree. I usually figure walking speed at about 5-6 km/hour
(3-3.7 mph) and it strikes me as unlikely that a pavement cyclist would
traveling over 25 km/hr. Fifteen to 20 seems more likely. Probably a
typo or cut and paste mistake
John Kane, Kingston ON Canada

[wafflycat]

"Simon Brooke" > wrote in message
...
> in message >, Peter Fox
> l') wrote:
>
>> For 99% reading this all this is obvious but there are a minority of
>> I-want-to-be-Clarkson-when-I-get-bigger oafs around who need to be
>> checked or brought up properly in the first place.[2]
> ^^^^^^^
>
> Why did I read that as 'choked'?
>

I think you are being kind, I read it as 'throttled' ;-)

Cheers, helen s

[Roos Eisma]

Peter Fox > writes:

>Hold on! You are making the unwarranted assumption that peds are
>marching, chin up, chest out, in an orderly direction. How fast are the
>"lets stop and feed the ducks" peds going? How fast is "my joints are
>killing me but I must get out while I'm still able to hobble" going?

Or the "trying to keep my feet moving while sending text messages on my
phone" sort. Results in some sort of Brownian motion, with occasionally a
step in the right direction.

Roos

[Chris Malcolm]

Tim Woodall > wrote:
> On Sat, 10 Dec 2005 10:54:56 +0000,
> Just zis Guy, you know? > wrote:
>> Interesting post in response to a proposed Washington law outlawing
>> child trailers on roads where pavement cycling is not specifically
>> illegal. Comment by Claire Petersky (of wreck.bikes) is the fourth
>> response.
>>
>> http://www.washingtonvotes.org/Legislation.aspx?ID=42267
>>
> Most of her reply looks good but I don't believe the 10x ratio between
> pedestrians and cyclists speed on the pavement unless you are
> considering stopped pedestrians in which case talking about a ratio of
> speed is silly. In practice I would expect deltaV <10mph in most cases
> with it rising to ~20mph in extreme cases. I would have thought a
> typical speed ratio between pedestrians and cyclists was nearer 4. My
> walking pace when pushing the bromton is ~6kph. Even allowing for me
> walking twice as fast as the average person, the average cyclist would
> have to be doing 20mph.

In Tokyo where everyone cycles on the pavements -- in large numbers,
there's as many housewives and bank managers on bikes as in Amsterdam
-- the cyclists are very courteous and in general do not exceed twice
pedestrian speed. Cyclists are considered to be as much pedestrians as
are folk pushing shopping trolleys or using zimmers.

--
Chris Malcolm +44 (0)131 651 3445 DoD #205
IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]

[Adrian Boliston]

"Chris Malcolm" > wrote in message
...

> In Tokyo where everyone cycles on the pavements -- in large numbers,
> there's as many housewives and bank managers on bikes as in Amsterdam
> -- the cyclists are very courteous and in general do not exceed twice
> pedestrian speed. Cyclists are considered to be as much pedestrians as
> are folk pushing shopping trolleys or using zimmers.

Surely the *last* thing we want is "considered to be as much pedestrians as
are folk pushing shopping trolleys or using zimmers"!

[Tony Raven]

Chris Malcolm wrote:
>
> In Tokyo where everyone cycles on the pavements -- in large numbers,
> there's as many housewives and bank managers on bikes as in Amsterdam
> -- the cyclists are very courteous and in general do not exceed twice
> pedestrian speed. Cyclists are considered to be as much pedestrians as
> are folk pushing shopping trolleys or using zimmers.
>

....and travel at about the same speed. Cycling on the city roads in
Japan OTOH is breathtakingly reckless at times from my experience of
cycling with Japanese friends. Fortunately the driving is all very slow
and civil so it seems to work.

--
Tony

"The best way I know of to win an argument is to start by being in the
right."
- Lord Hailsham

[John_Kane]

Roos Eisma wrote:
> Peter Fox > writes:
>
> >Hold on! You are making the unwarranted assumption that peds are
> >marching, chin up, chest out, in an orderly direction. How fast are the
> >"lets stop and feed the ducks" peds going? How fast is "my joints are
> >killing me but I must get out while I'm still able to hobble" going?
>
> Or the "trying to keep my feet moving while sending text messages on my
> phone" sort. Results in some sort of Brownian motion, with occasionally a
> step in the right direction.
>
> Roos

Good point and in that case at one km/hr it would be easy to tavel 25X
as fast. So Clare's ten times the speed is not necessarily
unreasonable.

Of course if you hit a stationary pedestrian then the accident is
undefined, I believe.
John Kane, Kingston ON Canada