Lycra lout 'rammed'

On 29/10/2013 01:42, Zapp Brannigan wrote:

"Phil W Lee" wrote in message
...
"Zapp Brannigan" considered Mon, 28 Oct 2013

A sensible road user wouldn't have waited to be "eventually" forced
off the
road. They would have braked out of the trap.

And found themselves blocked in and stationary while the psychopath
came round the back with a baseball bat, jack handle or knife?

Yeah, really sensible course of action.

Do you have a better suggestion for a road-user who is being squeezed
off the tarmac by a larger, hostile vehicle?




well apparently you are much safer when forced off and into railings.

as to the being attacked after stopping: if you have come to a rest of
your own volition there is nothing to stop you running around the
vehicle to evade the supposed bat wielding thug, after all cyclists are
very fit and agile.

On 29/10/2013 00:34, Phil W Lee wrote:
"Zapp Brannigan" considered Mon, 28 Oct 2013
14:34:27 -0000 the perfect time to write:


"Phil W Lee" wrote in message
...
"Zapp Brannigan" considered Sun, 27 Oct 2013

Imagine that you were driving a car, and a lorry decided to gradually
force
you off the road like this. Would you grit your teeth and try to hold on
to your "rightful" lane, exchanging abuse with the truck driver all the
way?
Would you maintain that inevitable losing battle all the way, until your
car
crashed into something on the roadside?

I'm certain that it took place in less time than it took to describe.

You think it was over before the cyclist was able to perceive the hazard and
apply emergency braking (a period usually estimated at one second)?
Because the cyclist's own account does not describe it as a sudden swerve
which he was unable to anticipate.

He said "We were alongside, probably going at about 10mph for a short
distance and then he began pulling in toward me. His wheels were getting
closer and closer to the kerb and eventually there was nowhere else to go
and I was forced off the road"

A sensible road user wouldn't have waited to be "eventually" forced off the
road. They would have braked out of the trap.

And found themselves blocked in and stationary while the psychopath
came round the back with a baseball bat, jack handle or knife?

Move somewhere less pikey.

Urgently.

"Mrcheerful" wrote
On 28/10/2013 22:33, TMS320 wrote:

"Eventually" gives us no idea of time. Your guess is as good as mine.
Who
says he didn't brake? He didn't say he didn't brake.

bicycles can always outbrake cars (we have been told that numerous
times)

But if is 1 foot better from that speed it can't make up the16ft needed.

a handfull of feet from 15 mph wa the distance claimed

But does a "handfull" make 16 feet? Anyway any difference in performance
will be based on an approach to a static hazard. It mustn't be forgotten
that this relative linear change has to be achieved before the gap
disappears.

I would love to see you (and some others) deal with difficult situations as
easily as it is to pontificate from the comfort of your chair.

On 29/10/2013 17:48, TMS320 wrote:
"Mrcheerful" wrote
On 28/10/2013 22:33, TMS320 wrote:

"Eventually" gives us no idea of time. Your guess is as good as mine.
Who
says he didn't brake? He didn't say he didn't brake.

bicycles can always outbrake cars (we have been told that numerous
times)

But if is 1 foot better from that speed it can't make up the16ft needed.

a handfull of feet from 15 mph wa the distance claimed

But does a "handfull" make 16 feet? Anyway any difference in performance
will be based on an approach to a static hazard. It mustn't be forgotten
that this relative linear change has to be achieved before the gap
disappears.

I would love to see you (and some others) deal with difficult situations as
easily as it is to pontificate from the comfort of your chair.



The claim was that it was possible to stop from 15 (or 20) mph in a
handful of feet, which I would take to be less than 6 unless you come
from Hull or Norfolk.

I use the road in such a manner as to avoid getting in those situations,
but when they are completely unavoidable (it does happen) I deal with
them by using my skills, honed over many years.

"Mrcheerful" wrote
On 29/10/2013 17:48, TMS320 wrote:
"Mrcheerful" wrote
On 28/10/2013 22:33, TMS320 wrote:

"Eventually" gives us no idea of time. Your guess is as good as mine.
Who
says he didn't brake? He didn't say he didn't brake.

bicycles can always outbrake cars (we have been told that numerous
times)

But if is 1 foot better from that speed it can't make up the16ft
needed.

a handfull of feet from 15 mph wa the distance claimed

But does a "handfull" make 16 feet? Anyway any difference in performance
will be based on an approach to a static hazard. It mustn't be forgotten
that this relative linear change has to be achieved before the gap
disappears.

I would love to see you (and some others) deal with difficult situations
as
easily as it is to pontificate from the comfort of your chair.

The claim was that it was possible to stop from 15 (or 20) mph in a
handful of feet, which I would take to be less than 6 unless you come
from Hull or Norfolk.

Don't know about you but the number of objects I can count in a handfull
varies according to the size of objects.

I use the road in such a manner as to avoid getting in those situations,

And, no doubt, as this cyclist and many others you criticise habitually do.

but when they are completely unavoidable (it does happen)
I deal with them by using my skills, honed over many years.

Oh, so you are getting things wrong. Don't be such a hypocrite.

On 29/10/2013 20:53, TMS320 wrote:
"Mrcheerful" wrote
On 29/10/2013 17:48, TMS320 wrote:
"Mrcheerful" wrote
On 28/10/2013 22:33, TMS320 wrote:

"Eventually" gives us no idea of time. Your guess is as good as mine.
Who
says he didn't brake? He didn't say he didn't brake.

bicycles can always outbrake cars (we have been told that numerous
times)

But if is 1 foot better from that speed it can't make up the16ft
needed.

a handfull of feet from 15 mph wa the distance claimed

But does a "handfull" make 16 feet? Anyway any difference in performance
will be based on an approach to a static hazard. It mustn't be forgotten
that this relative linear change has to be achieved before the gap
disappears.

I would love to see you (and some others) deal with difficult situations
as
easily as it is to pontificate from the comfort of your chair.

The claim was that it was possible to stop from 15 (or 20) mph in a
handful of feet, which I would take to be less than 6 unless you come
from Hull or Norfolk.

Don't know about you but the number of objects I can count in a handfull
varies according to the size of objects.

I use the road in such a manner as to avoid getting in those situations,

And, no doubt, as this cyclist and many others you criticise habitually do.

but when they are completely unavoidable (it does happen)
I deal with them by using my skills, honed over many years.

Oh, so you are getting things wrong. Don't be such a hypocrite.


no-one except a liar could claim to use the roads and 'never' get in a
difficult situation, so there is no hypocrisy from me.

"Mrcheerful" wrote
On 29/10/2013 20:53, TMS320 wrote:

Oh, so you are getting things wrong. Don't be such a hypocrite.

no-one except a liar could claim to use the roads and 'never' get in a
difficult situation,

There's an admission. What are you doing wrong?

And it takes a liar to claim to have seen it all and a fool to pontificate
from a position of comfort.

so there is no hypocrisy from me.

A vote is required on that one.

On 30/10/2013 08:29, TMS320 wrote:
"Mrcheerful" wrote
On 29/10/2013 20:53, TMS320 wrote:

Oh, so you are getting things wrong. Don't be such a hypocrite.

no-one except a liar could claim to use the roads and 'never' get in a
difficult situation,

There's an admission. What are you doing wrong?

And it takes a liar to claim to have seen it all and a fool to pontificate
from a position of comfort.

so there is no hypocrisy from me.

A vote is required on that one.



I don't claim to have seen it all, there is something new every day,
using the roads is a dynamic process, a fact which is lost on the
average road user and many cyclists.

Complacency on the road leads to crashes.

There are many nutters on the road and indeed everywhere (check this
newsgroup), avoiding physical conflict with them is a life skill.

On Fri, 25 Oct 2013 19:58:26 +0100, Mrcheerful wrote:

Lie number 1:
"I put out my arm to indicate I was going to turn and moved into the
middle of the road."

When has any cyclist used an arm signal?

"He was so close to me that I could bang on his window and I gave him
the finger back because I was so angry at what he had done when he tried
to overtake me."

Now we see the problem, the cyclist objected to being overtaken and
attacked the car. Angry people should not be on the road.

"We were alongside, probably going at about 10mph for a short distance
and then he began pulling in toward me.
"His wheels were getting closer and closer to the kerb and eventually
there was nowhere else to go and I was forced off the road."

Ever heard of brakes?


http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/Cy...ail/story.html

If he wore normal clothing instead of dressing up like a windsurfer, maybe drivers would respect him more. What's wrong with jeans and a tshirt?

--
You have got to remember that women make babies - not a great bit of design work. Messy, noisy and cannot do anything useful.

"Mrcheerful" wrote
On 30/10/2013 08:29, TMS320 wrote:
"Mrcheerful" wrote
On 29/10/2013 20:53, TMS320 wrote:

Oh, so you are getting things wrong. Don't be such a hypocrite.

no-one except a liar could claim to use the roads and 'never' get in a
difficult situation,

There's an admission. What are you doing wrong?

And it takes a liar to claim to have seen it all and a fool to
pontificate
from a position of comfort.

so there is no hypocrisy from me.

A vote is required on that one.

I don't claim to have seen it all,

You certainly act as though you have; which amounts to the same thing.

there is something new every day, using the roads is a dynamic process, a
fact which is lost on the average road user and many cyclists.

Dynamics is not the word to use for what you mean. It is obvious that you
don't understand dynamics.

Complacency on the road leads to crashes.
There are many nutters on the road and indeed everywhere (check this
newsgroup), avoiding physical conflict with them is a life skill.

True. But blaming someone for inadvertantly straying into the way of the
nutter does not solve anything.