A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » Regional Cycling » UK
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Any tips for filming mobile phone using cagers?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #171  
Old July 17th 08, 03:49 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling,uk.legal
judith
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,961
Default Any tips for filming mobile phone using cagers?

On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 00:13:43 +0100, "Clive George"
wrote:

"judith" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 19:52:58 +0100, "Clive George"
wrote:

"judith" wrote in message
...

If lanes 1 and 2 are stationary, or very slow, and lane 3 is free
flowing,
then there is no problem at all in moving into lane 3, so long as there
is
a
suitable gap in the traffic and that you signal your manoeuvre. That
is,
after all, the reason for having more than one lane.

I take it you are not an experienced driver of a motor vehicle.

(As an aside as it should be the subject of a separate thread - but
your comment indicates the need for cyclists to have some sort of test
before they are allowed on roads)

bites

I think I'm a fairly experienced motor vehicle driver, and I don't see a
problem with what Colin wrote.

He's covered observation, signalling and the manoeuvre - and all sensibly.
What bit don't you understand?


Given that his response was to my question:
What I don't do if I am in lane 1, and lane 1 and 2 are moving at
about the same low speed is cut straight across to lane 3 in order to
keep up my own speed - this is what the cyclist effectively did.


Question? I see no question there.

I think a more pertinent question was which bit did *he* not
understand as he did not answer the question posed.

Perhaps you could do so?


Assuming the question is "would you do such a thing in a car, and would you
object to others doing similar", I'll try.

Provided I've made suitable observation, ensuring the manoeuvre is safe, and
have indicated my intentions appropriately, I'd have no problem with doing
that. I'd also have no problem with others doing that.


I would therefore assume that you are one of those drivers on
motorways who frequently change lane as one lane slows to a slightly
faster lane in order to keep up their progress (in their opinion).
That is what you have said - did you mean to?




There, that was easy wasn't it. There's no safety concerns, so where's the
problem?


Stock answer - there is no safety concern ("that I can see" is
usually missed off as here) ; I know that the HC says that you
shouldn't do it; but actually I'm in a hurry and I am a cyclist so
therefore I will.

Ads
  #172  
Old July 17th 08, 03:59 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling,uk.legal
Clive George
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,394
Default Any tips for filming mobile phone using cagers?

"judith" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 00:13:43 +0100, "Clive George"
wrote:

"judith" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 19:52:58 +0100, "Clive George"
wrote:

"judith" wrote in message
m...

If lanes 1 and 2 are stationary, or very slow, and lane 3 is free
flowing,
then there is no problem at all in moving into lane 3, so long as
there
is
a
suitable gap in the traffic and that you signal your manoeuvre. That
is,
after all, the reason for having more than one lane.

I take it you are not an experienced driver of a motor vehicle.

(As an aside as it should be the subject of a separate thread - but
your comment indicates the need for cyclists to have some sort of test
before they are allowed on roads)

bites

I think I'm a fairly experienced motor vehicle driver, and I don't see a
problem with what Colin wrote.

He's covered observation, signalling and the manoeuvre - and all
sensibly.
What bit don't you understand?

Given that his response was to my question:
What I don't do if I am in lane 1, and lane 1 and 2 are moving at
about the same low speed is cut straight across to lane 3 in order to
keep up my own speed - this is what the cyclist effectively did.


Question? I see no question there.

I think a more pertinent question was which bit did *he* not
understand as he did not answer the question posed.

Perhaps you could do so?


Assuming the question is "would you do such a thing in a car, and would
you
object to others doing similar", I'll try.

Provided I've made suitable observation, ensuring the manoeuvre is safe,
and
have indicated my intentions appropriately, I'd have no problem with doing
that. I'd also have no problem with others doing that.


I would therefore assume that you are one of those drivers on
motorways who frequently change lane as one lane slows to a slightly
faster lane in order to keep up their progress (in their opinion).
That is what you have said - did you mean to?


Well, actually it wasn't what I said - the quoted text above confirms that.

Your inferences are entirely without basis. You may withdraw them, and if
you wish, try to get to your point another way, but as it stands your new
question does not warrant an answer, and your previous one has now been
answered entirely satisfactorily.

There, that was easy wasn't it. There's no safety concerns, so where's the
problem?


Stock answer - there is no safety concern ("that I can see" is
usually missed off as here) ; I know that the HC says that you
shouldn't do it; but actually I'm in a hurry and I am a cyclist so
therefore I will.


Stock "judith" answer - nothing whatsoever corresponding to what has been
written nor to real life.

clive


  #173  
Old July 17th 08, 04:05 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Mark[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 290
Default Any tips for filming mobile phone using cagers?

On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 09:49:57 +0100, judith
wrote:

On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 23:43:11 +0100, "Colin Reed"
wrote:

snip


A single manoeuvre to the right to overtake traffic is not "weaving". Your
choice of words to imply erratic cycling is becoming tiresome when it has
been shown that this was a perfectly normal and safely executed overtake.


You are right - it was "perfectly normal" for a cyclist - but it is
not in accord with the Highway Code.

Here's a couple of quotes from the HC regarding overtaking:

stay in your lane if traffic is moving slowly in queues.
signal when it is safe to do so,

Are they not applicable to cyclists?


Now how about if I just mention words such as "swerve", "dive across",
"veer", "cut across" or "skew"? Lets get them all out in advance and see
which term you choose next.



Sorry - I now understand that the cycling term for crossing two lanes
is "filtering" - I believe that this term may defined in the book
Cyclecraft - but I am awaiting confirmation - do you know?


No it isn't. Filtering is passing stationary traffic in the space
between the lanes. It can only be done using a narrow vehicle.

(NB MY reference to Cyclecraft doe not mean I endorse it - I prefer to
use the law or the HC as a reference)


The HC is just a simplified guide to the law and also contains some
recommendations. It is by no means the definitive guide to driving.
If you ever do any advanced driving/riding courses you will have to go
beyond what is printed in the HC. I thoroughly recommend doing this
as anyone's driving/riding can improve.

--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) Owing to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
(")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking most articles
posted from there. If you wish your postings to be seen by
everyone you will need use a different method of posting.
See http://improve-usenet.org

  #174  
Old July 17th 08, 04:09 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling,uk.legal
burtthebike
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 540
Default Any tips for filming mobile phone using cagers?


"burtthebike" wrote in message
...

"Mad Cliffy's Legs Don't Work" wrote in
message
...
On Jul 17, 10:53 am, judith wrote:

If someone is in a lane marked with a LH turn rather than a straight
on/lh turn combined and they go straight on without good reason then
they would be partly to blame if something else hit them.


This is the bit that the cyclists contributing to this debate don't
seem to be able to grasp.

Why, unless it's out of sheer bloody-mindedness, would you put your
safety at risk by ignoring (usually more than one) six or eight foot
big **** off arrow indicating that traffic in that particular lane
should be turning left? This "ah well they're only advisory" ********
doesn't cut it I'm afraid.

All you are demonstrating is your lack of knowledge of cycling. The
behaviour described is *safer* for cyclists not more dangerous, and cyclists
are only doing it for their own safety.

If anyone knows the Gloucester Road in Bristol heading into town (a
popular cyclist route), you'll know the Ashley Down Road junction; at
the lights, it's two lanes, left turn and straight on...........so as
you go through the lights to go straight on, all of a sudden you get
half a dozen cyclists steam through on your inside and then swerve
across the front of you because they've rapidly run out of road
(having been in the wrong lane to start with).

I know that junction very well, cycling through it twice a day, and I've
never seen the behaviour you describe. I've seen quite a few drivers who go
straight on from the left turn lane, with me on a bike on their RH side in
the straight on lane. When I used to use the junction going from Ashley
Down Road onto the Glos Rd, I used to keep a count of how many drivers
bothered indicating, and it was never more than about 30%. This is a
single
lane T junction, so it is impossible to tell from road position whether the
car is going left or right, but most people just can't be bothered to
indicate, despite the fact that other road users need to know which way
you're going.


As someone else has pointed out, I just wish a few of them would put
their hands up and admit that their goal is to get from A to B ASAP
and to hell with how they do it.

I just wish that some of the hypercritical drivers would get out of their
tin cans and find out what it's like to ride a bike in traffic. And yes, I
do drive a car.

  #175  
Old July 17th 08, 04:13 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling,uk.legal
judith
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,961
Default Any tips for filming mobile phone using cagers?

On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 23:21:26 +0100, "Colin Reed"
wrote:


"judith" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 18:10:29 +0100, "Colin Reed"
wrote:


"judith" wrote in message
...
On 16 Jul 2008 12:38:20 GMT, Ian Smith wrote:

On Wed, 16 Jul, Colin Reed wrote:

"judith" wrote in message
...

Or - were you wanting to point out the cyclist in the green top
who clearly cycles across two lanes of traffic - to apparently
overtake on the other carriageway? If you were - then yes - it is
another good example of bad cycling.

Said cyclist filtered across two lanes of near stationary traffic
when it was clearly safe to do so - you can see him glance over his
right shoulder to check for any traffic before doing the manoeuvre.

Indeed. Apparently she doesn't like traffic moving across a
multi-lane carriageway to overtake slower vehicles. Presumably when
Judith is driving on the inside lane of the motorway and comes across
slower traffic she just sits behind it, regardless of how slow or how
clear the other lanes are.

A really good analogy - well done.
What I don't do if I am in lane 1, and lane 1 and 2 are moving at
about the same low speed is cut straight across to lane 3 in order to
keep up my own speed - this is what the cyclist effectively did.

If lanes 1 and 2 are stationary, or very slow, and lane 3 is free flowing,
then there is no problem at all in moving into lane 3, so long as there is
a
suitable gap in the traffic and that you signal your manoeuvre. That is,
after all, the reason for having more than one lane.


I take it you are not an experienced driver of a motor vehicle.

(As an aside as it should be the subject of a separate thread - but
your comment indicates the need for cyclists to have some sort of test
before they are allowed on roads)


You mean something like a driving test, that would suggest the order of
"mirror - signal - manoeuvre", which fairly much describes the order of
events I described above?


Yes - that would be good - also questions on the HC which many
cyclists here seem to be ignorant of.

What is the correct position for a cyclist to adopt on the road?
Under what circumstances can a cyclist use a Bus Lane?
What must you do if a pedestrian is on a zebra crossing as you
approach it?
What do hashed markings/chevrons painted on a road mean?
What does a LH pointing arrow as a road marking mean?
How would you overtake safely?
Under what circumstances should you not overtake?
What do you understand by lane
discipline..................................


Now, could you explain what is actually wrong with the manoeuvre I suggested
above, without making erroneous assumptions about my motoring experience?


There can never be anything wrong with "mirror - signal - manoeuvre" -
did I suggest otherwise?

The attributions are getting ragged - I assume that you mean the bit
If lanes 1 and 2 are stationary, or very slow, and lane 3 is free flowing,
then there is no problem at all in moving into lane 3, so long as there is
a
suitable gap in the traffic and that you signal your manoeuvre. That is,
after all, the reason for having more than one lane.


It is unnecessary - other than for the selfish view of maintaining
your journey time.

It is bad driving to do this on a motorway - it is bad cycling for
cyclists to do it in the example shown.

The HC is quite clear on this.
  #176  
Old July 17th 08, 05:18 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling,uk.legal
Just zis Guy, you know?
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,612
Default Any tips for filming mobile phone using cagers?

On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 15:43:33 +0100, judith
said in :

Cyclecraft is not an authoritative document as I have said many times.
Cyclists should follow what it says in the HC - and certainly not what
it says in Cyclecraft if they are different.


No, you're wrong there. Cyclecraft is the official manual of the
National Standards for Cycle Training and was written by experts in
cycle safety. The Highway Code was written by the Driving Standards
Agency who, at the time of the last revision, demonstrated that they
knew the square root of bugger all about cycling. Where the two
conflict, I will always follow Cyclecraft.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound
  #177  
Old July 17th 08, 05:18 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
!Speedy Gonzales!
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13
Default Any tips for filming mobile phone using cagers?

"Mark" wrote in message
...
The HC is just a simplified guide to the law and also contains some
recommendations.


I'd go even one further and say it was a booklet highlighting acceptable
'highway' etiquette and only a few of the bullet points are actually a legal
requirement(the ones that say 'must' etc).
The highway code is indeed superseded by many other literary works, and
those are much more beneficial to their specific audience but the HC is
always the one people hark back to when pointing out fellow road users
indiscretions!

--
!Speedy Gonzales!

Remove the SPAMTRAP to reply



  #178  
Old July 17th 08, 05:21 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling,uk.legal
Colin Reed[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 148
Default Any tips for filming mobile phone using cagers?


"judith" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 23:21:26 +0100, "Colin Reed"
wrote:


"judith" wrote in message
. ..
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 18:10:29 +0100, "Colin Reed"
wrote:


"judith" wrote in message
m...
On 16 Jul 2008 12:38:20 GMT, Ian Smith wrote:

On Wed, 16 Jul, Colin Reed wrote:

"judith" wrote in message
...

Or - were you wanting to point out the cyclist in the green top
who clearly cycles across two lanes of traffic - to apparently
overtake on the other carriageway? If you were - then yes - it is
another good example of bad cycling.

Said cyclist filtered across two lanes of near stationary traffic
when it was clearly safe to do so - you can see him glance over his
right shoulder to check for any traffic before doing the manoeuvre.

Indeed. Apparently she doesn't like traffic moving across a
multi-lane carriageway to overtake slower vehicles. Presumably when
Judith is driving on the inside lane of the motorway and comes across
slower traffic she just sits behind it, regardless of how slow or how
clear the other lanes are.

A really good analogy - well done.
What I don't do if I am in lane 1, and lane 1 and 2 are moving at
about the same low speed is cut straight across to lane 3 in order to
keep up my own speed - this is what the cyclist effectively did.

If lanes 1 and 2 are stationary, or very slow, and lane 3 is free
flowing,
then there is no problem at all in moving into lane 3, so long as there
is
a
suitable gap in the traffic and that you signal your manoeuvre. That
is,
after all, the reason for having more than one lane.

I take it you are not an experienced driver of a motor vehicle.

(As an aside as it should be the subject of a separate thread - but
your comment indicates the need for cyclists to have some sort of test
before they are allowed on roads)


You mean something like a driving test, that would suggest the order of
"mirror - signal - manoeuvre", which fairly much describes the order of
events I described above?


Yes - that would be good - also questions on the HC which many
cyclists here seem to be ignorant of.

What is the correct position for a cyclist to adopt on the road?
Under what circumstances can a cyclist use a Bus Lane?
What must you do if a pedestrian is on a zebra crossing as you
approach it?
What do hashed markings/chevrons painted on a road mean?
What does a LH pointing arrow as a road marking mean?
How would you overtake safely?
Under what circumstances should you not overtake?
What do you understand by lane
discipline..................................


Now, could you explain what is actually wrong with the manoeuvre I
suggested
above, without making erroneous assumptions about my motoring experience?


There can never be anything wrong with "mirror - signal - manoeuvre" -
did I suggest otherwise?

The attributions are getting ragged - I assume that you mean the bit
If lanes 1 and 2 are stationary, or very slow, and lane 3 is free
flowing,
then there is no problem at all in moving into lane 3, so long as there
is
a
suitable gap in the traffic and that you signal your manoeuvre. That
is,
after all, the reason for having more than one lane.


It is unnecessary - other than for the selfish view of maintaining
your journey time.

It is bad driving to do this on a motorway - it is bad cycling for
cyclists to do it in the example shown.

The HC is quite clear on this.


So you believe that all overtaking should be outlawed - or at least you have
stated that all overtaking is unnecessary, since it is almost always
overtaking slower traffic for the "selfish view of maintaining your journey
time." I have to admit that I've never noticed the bit in the Highway Code
which states that overtaking should always be avoided - maybe you could cite
it.

  #179  
Old July 17th 08, 05:49 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling,uk.legal
Ian Smith
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,622
Default Any tips for filming mobile phone using cagers?

On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 15:43:33 +0100, judith wrote:
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 23:29:55 +0100, "Colin Reed"
wrote:

There's the difference between cars and cycles, and the reason that
they behave differently in certain traffic situations. It's also
the reason why Roadcraft and Cyclecraft are not identical books.


Cyclecraft is not an authoritative document as I have said many
times.


Eh? Last time I let my curiosity get the better of my filters (err,
yesterday I think), Judith hadn't heard of cyclecraft, hadn't read it,
didn't know what was in it, and was wondering if she could download it
for free. This time she's an expert on it, knows its relevance and
legal significance and has been gracious enough to share this with her
adoring audience "many times".

Wow, that's fast work - zero to expert in under 24 hours.
Oh well, welcome to usenet, I suppose.

[before she starts claiming not to have said things
that are a matter of public record, see for example:
Message-ID:
or, for the technically less capable:
http://groups.google.com/group/uk.re...1cb52741099c9b ]

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|
  #180  
Old July 17th 08, 06:41 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling,uk.legal
judith
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,961
Default Any tips for filming mobile phone using cagers?

On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 18:21:26 +0000 (UTC), Tim Woodall
wrote:

On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 18:18:59 +0100,
Marc wrote:
judith wrote:


What I (and many motorists) don't like are cyclists continually
switching lanes/driving the wrong way round bollards/cycling on
hatched areas in order to shave a couple of minutes of a journey
time.

There is no prohibition on any vehicle using a hatched area.



No - but you should not do so unless it is necessary. Getting home in
time for tea does not count

diatribe on why I ignore the HC and would encourage other road users
to do the same snipped

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Motorists ignore mobile phone law Eric Vey Social Issues 0 March 4th 08 04:20 PM
mobile phone jammers Meeba[_11_] Australia 13 December 5th 07 12:14 PM
Where is a mobile phone :-) PEO from ITALY UK 1 October 27th 06 08:12 PM
Mythbusters - mobile phone and car use Euan Australia 40 October 27th 05 03:02 AM
Cyclist with mobile phone Gags Australia 2 August 25th 04 01:12 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:26 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.