What is a cyclist?

On Sun, 13 Sep 2009 12:07:16 +0100, "Brimstone"
wrote:

My opinion with regard to Tom's safety is very relevant, unless you can
prove otherwise.

How touching: you are concenred with my safety.

Please don't bother yourself.

On Sun, 13 Sep 2009 10:05:05 +0100, "Brimstone"
wrote:

Its more usual to have a slender flagpole with a little pennant at the
top.

What useful purpose would that serve at night or in poor visibility Doug?

Probably about as much as a rag tied to a window cleaner's ladder.

Tom Crispin wrote:
On Sun, 13 Sep 2009 10:05:43 +0100, "Brimstone"
wrote:

Its more usual to have a slender flagpole with a little pennant at
the top.

That is the solution if I want to haul the trailer unladen in the
daytime. It would need something more to haul it at night.

It's not sufficient even in daylight IMO.

Do you think that a bit of rag tied to the end of an object
overhanging the rear of a motor vehicle is sufficient?

That depends on the size of the piece of rag. Responsible people use
something more substantial, such as a marker board.

However, if you're happy to fail to take precautions to make the limits of
your vehicle easily visible then by all means carry on.

Brimstone wrote:
Keitht wrote:
Tony Dragon wrote:
Tom Crispin wrote:
On Sat, 12 Sep 2009 10:45:03 +0100, "Brimstone"
wrote:

Tom Crispin wrote:
On Fri, 11 Sep 2009 20:30:44 +0100, "Brimstone"
wrote:

No. I would have preferred to haul the bikes by bike. Safety
concerns over hauling an unladen trailer caused me to use the
motor vehicle.
I'm interested to learn what these safety concerns might be.
A numpty motorist, not paying proper attention, and ramming the
trailer.
Surely you would have it properly marked, perhaps with a board
across the back with lights and other markers, to ensure it is as
visible as is humanly possible?
No.
Why not?

We could always start with banning grey cars on cloudy days and green
cars from the country-side - unless they are then covered with
reflective tape and have orange flashing lights on the roof.

I drove a green van for many years along country lanes and many many other
places, I never had a problem with being seen.


And I've never had any trouble spotting 'invisible' cyclists, either.

--

Come to Dave & Boris - your cycle security experts.

On 13 Sep, 12:47, "alan.holmes" wrote:
"Doug" wrote in message

...

On this newsgroup are motorists who also claim to be cyclists but who
are highly critical of cyclists, which casts doubt on their claim to
be cyclists. So what, for the purposes of debate here, might qualify
as a cyclist?

Someone who owns a bicycle, sometimes sits on the saddle, and puts his/her
feet on the pedals and presses them down and around which makes them move on
the road (or pavement)!

Is that simple enough?

Unfortunately not because he might do it for just 10 minutes once a
year while spending the rest of his time bombing about in a car and
criticising cyclists on this newsgroup.

--
World Carfree Network
http://www.worldcarfree.net/
Help for your car-addicted friends in the U.K.

Doug wrote:
On 13 Sep, 12:47, "alan.holmes" wrote:
"Doug" wrote in message

...

On this newsgroup are motorists who also claim to be cyclists but who
are highly critical of cyclists, which casts doubt on their claim to
be cyclists. So what, for the purposes of debate here, might qualify
as a cyclist?
Someone who owns a bicycle, sometimes sits on the saddle, and puts his/her
feet on the pedals and presses them down and around which makes them move on
the road (or pavement)!

Is that simple enough?

Unfortunately not because he might do it for just 10 minutes once a
year while spending the rest of his time bombing about in a car and
criticising cyclists on this newsgroup.

--
World Carfree Network
http://www.worldcarfree.net/
Help for your car-addicted friends in the U.K.


So what is he, this 'not a cyclist', when he is cycling.

--

Tony Dragon

On Fri, 11 Sep 2009 21:11:16 +0100, Tom Crispin
wrote:

On Fri, 11 Sep 2009 20:30:44 +0100, "Brimstone"
wrote:

No. I would have preferred to haul the bikes by bike. Safety
concerns over hauling an unladen trailer caused me to use the motor
vehicle.

I'm interested to learn what these safety concerns might be.

A numpty motorist, not paying proper attention, and ramming the
trailer.

You had a fear of a motorist hitting the trailer -
Ah - so you were "intimidated" after all.
--
Latest DfT Figures: Passenger casualty rates by mode Per billion passenger kilometers:
Killed or seriously injured: Pedal Cyclists : 527 Pedestrians 371
All casualties: Pedal Cyclists : 3494 Pedestrians : 1631
Which is more dangerous?

On Fri, 11 Sep 2009 21:23:46 +0100, "Clive George"
wrote:

"Tom Crispin" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 11 Sep 2009 20:30:44 +0100, "Brimstone"
wrote:

No. I would have preferred to haul the bikes by bike. Safety
concerns over hauling an unladen trailer caused me to use the motor
vehicle.

I'm interested to learn what these safety concerns might be.

A numpty motorist, not paying proper attention, and ramming the
trailer.

A valid concern, as my friend could testify. He was riding a tandem on his
own, and had to stop due to traffic in front of him. The car behind rammed
him, thinking he was on a conventional length bike.



What a load of ****e.

So the motorist saw the rider (not the bike ) - assumed that it was
a conventional length - worked out where the back wheel was - got it
wrong - and hence ran in to the bike?


Yes of course.

A mate of mine saw a lorry motor unit pulling a flat bed - he didn't
see the flat bed - but worked out in his head where the back of the
towing unit was - and ran in to the flat bed.




--
Latest DfT Figures: Passenger casualty rates by mode Per billion passenger kilometers:
Killed or seriously injured: Pedal Cyclists : 527 Pedestrians 371
All casualties: Pedal Cyclists : 3494 Pedestrians : 1631
Which is more dangerous?

On Sat, 12 Sep 2009 16:31:11 +0100, Tom Crispin
wrote:

On Sat, 12 Sep 2009 10:45:03 +0100, "Brimstone"
wrote:

Tom Crispin wrote:
On Fri, 11 Sep 2009 20:30:44 +0100, "Brimstone"
wrote:

No. I would have preferred to haul the bikes by bike. Safety
concerns over hauling an unladen trailer caused me to use the motor
vehicle.

I'm interested to learn what these safety concerns might be.

A numpty motorist, not paying proper attention, and ramming the
trailer.

Surely you would have it properly marked, perhaps with a board across the
back with lights and other markers, to ensure it is as visible as is humanly
possible?

No.


I bet you don't wear hi-viz as they make you more easily seen and a
helmet because it could reduce your head injury in case of an
accident.


I hope you don't teach children your logic.


--
Latest DfT Figures: Passenger casualty rates by mode Per billion passenger kilometers:
Killed or seriously injured: Pedal Cyclists : 527 Pedestrians 371
All casualties: Pedal Cyclists : 3494 Pedestrians : 1631
Which is more dangerous?

"Judith M Smith" wrote in message
...

A mate of mine saw a lorry motor unit pulling a flat bed - he didn't
see the flat bed - but worked out in his head where the back of the
towing unit was - and ran in to the flat bed.

A mate of mine hit the back of a low level trailer because the car towing it
had stopped and she had not allowed space for the trailer, (which had
incidentally also stopped).