|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Routemasters (again)
"Mrcheerful" wrote in message ... Thumper wrote: "Baker" wrote in message .. . On Thu, 25 Jul 2013 22:36:16 +0100, "Thumper" wrote: Are there any cyclists on that group anymore? Last time I checked that former cycling group had turned into a mutual masturbation society for sad lonely trolls. If there are, they're are not taking the bait :-) It's the moderators - my perfectly reasonable follow up on the TDF was rejected due to "probation". What is the TDF? Sacre Bleu! Oh yeah, the French race. |
Ads |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Routemasters (again)
"Thumper" wrote in message
... "Mrcheerful" wrote in message ... Thumper wrote: "Baker" wrote in message .. . On Thu, 25 Jul 2013 22:36:16 +0100, "Thumper" wrote: Are there any cyclists on that group anymore? Last time I checked that former cycling group had turned into a mutual masturbation society for sad lonely trolls. If there are, they're are not taking the bait :-) It's the moderators - my perfectly reasonable follow up on the TDF was rejected due to "probation". What is the TDF? Sacre Bleu! Oh yeah, the French race. Though it's a while since a Frenchman won it. I mean, this year's winner was born in Kenya and brought up in South Africa, while last year's was born in Belgium. -- Gordon Davie Edinburgh, Scotland "Slipped the surly bonds of Earth...to touch the face of God." |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Routemasters (again)
"GordonD" wrote in message ... "Thumper" wrote in message ... "Mrcheerful" wrote in message ... Thumper wrote: "Baker" wrote in message .. . On Thu, 25 Jul 2013 22:36:16 +0100, "Thumper" wrote: Are there any cyclists on that group anymore? Last time I checked that former cycling group had turned into a mutual masturbation society for sad lonely trolls. If there are, they're are not taking the bait :-) It's the moderators - my perfectly reasonable follow up on the TDF was rejected due to "probation". What is the TDF? Sacre Bleu! Oh yeah, the French race. Though it's a while since a Frenchman won it. I mean, this year's winner was born in Kenya and brought up in South Africa, while last year's was born in Belgium. at lease the latter spent all of his formative year's here tim |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Routemasters (again)
in message o.uk... "Mr Pounder" wrote in message ... "NY" wrote in message o.uk... "Mrcheerful" wrote in message ... NY wrote: [snipped my self-imposed rules for safe but unselfish cycling] and then I woke up. Sorry, I'm not sure what your point is. Are you saying that you don't believe that I abide by these rules, or are you saying that I am wrong to abide by them and that I should be more selfish/assertive? "that it will take longer for me to be clear of the junction if I do happen to go through on amber". Do you know what amber means? "NY" wrote: Amber means stop, just as red does. But it is a grace period in which no opposing traffic will yet (legally!) be able to set off. It is present because if the lights change from green to amber when you are very close, you will be unable to stop before the light: if you are closer to the lights that your vehicle's stopping distance at the speed at which you are travelling. Because of this, it is not regarded as an offence to go through an amber light. The amber phase is necessary to make red enforceable because only with it is the road user given sufficient warning that he will be able to stop before the red light. Going from green to amber I would tend to agree with you but when the lights are in the opposite sequence and are going from green to amber there are far to many cowboys who look upon that amber light to get their clog down. I much prefer our system here in N America where our lights go from red to green with no amber in between and that green does not appear until the red in the cross direction has been lit for five seconds after showing the warning amber. Another great traffic mover I find is the practice in Ontario to allow a right turn (left in UK case) on a red light provided you come to a complete stop first and only then proceed when it is safe to do so. Truebrit. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Routemasters (again)
Because of this, it is not regarded as an offence to go through an amber
light. The amber phase is necessary to make red enforceable because only with it is the road user given sufficient warning that he will be able to stop before the red light. Truebrit" wrote: Going from green to amber I would tend to agree with you but when the lights are in the opposite sequence and are going from amber to green there are far to many cowboys who look upon that amber light to get their clog down. I much prefer our system here in N America where our lights go from red to green with no amber in between and that green does not appear until the red in the cross direction has been lit for five seconds after showing the warning amber. "NY" wrote: There are people who set off on amber instead of waiting for green, although at least the red is also illuminated during this time to send a "stay stopped" message. I wonder whether the amber warning of green was partly included originally to say "time to put move the gear lever from neutral to first (or neutral to drive in the case of automatic)" so people were not left doing this when the light went green - which could lead to rear-end shunts if the car behind is already prepared to set off and doesn't notice/expect that the car in front isn't ready yet. Turning left/right (delete as applicable) is probably a good one. What do pedestrian lights show during this time? Green/walk? It needs pedestrians to be aware that cars will turn, even if they (cars) *should* give way to them. The pedestrian has the right of way in such instances and has a green "walk" sign. As I said the driver can only proceed and make the turn after coming to a FULL stop and only then when it is safe to do so. Truebrit. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Routemasters (again)
"Truebrit" wrote: Going from green to amber I would tend to agree with you but when the lights are in the opposite sequence and are going from green to amber Judith" wrote: Oh dear : not bright. Indeed. :-) Proof reading never was one of my fortes. Of course the second line should read from amber to green. I did correct it in a later post. Truebrit. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Routemasters (again)
NY" wrote in message
Turning left/right (delete as applicable) is probably a good one. What do pedestrian lights show during this time? Green/walk? It needs pedestrians to be aware that cars will turn, even if they (cars) *should* give way to them. "Thumper" wrote: When the pedestrian green man goes out there is about 20-30 seconds before the traffic lights start to change from red to green. So no excuse for a pedestrian to still be crossing. "Bertie Wooster" wrote: Is there any legal requirement for pedestrians to wait while the red symbol is showing? Or do pedestrians have an unrestricted right to cross the highway (other than motorways and other restricted use highways)? Do you not have jaywalking laws? We have them here and for the most part they are quite vigorously enforced. Truebrit. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Routemasters (again)
"in message ... "Truebrit" wrote in message ... NY" wrote in message Turning left/right (delete as applicable) is probably a good one. What do pedestrian lights show during this time? Green/walk? It needs pedestrians to be aware that cars will turn, even if they (cars) *should* give way to them. "Thumper" wrote: When the pedestrian green man goes out there is about 20-30 seconds before the traffic lights start to change from red to green. So no excuse for a pedestrian to still be crossing. "Bertie Wooster" wrote: Is there any legal requirement for pedestrians to wait while the red symbol is showing? Or do pedestrians have an unrestricted right to cross the highway (other than motorways and other restricted use highways)? Do you not have jaywalking laws? We have them here and for the most part they are quite vigorously enforced. Truebrit. tim....." wrote: Where is here? Does you name refer to your location or your birthplace (perhaps)? Brit by birth but lived in Canada for almost 50 years. IME whilst ignoring a red man does constitute jaywalking in the UK, your chances of being "ticketed" for it are somewhat less than negligible. OTHO in the US and Germany it is quite possible. And Canada. Particularly in Toronto and Vancouver. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Routemasters (again)
"NY" wrote in message o.uk... "Mrcheerful" wrote in message ... NY wrote: [snipped my self-imposed rules for safe but unselfish cycling] and then I woke up. Sorry, I'm not sure what your point is. Are you saying that you don't believe that I abide by these rules, or are you saying that I am wrong to abide by them and that I should be more selfish/assertive? "that it will take longer for me to be clear of the junction if I do happen to go through on amber". Do you know what amber means? |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Routemasters (again)
"Mr Pounder" wrote in message
... "NY" wrote in message o.uk... "Mrcheerful" wrote in message ... NY wrote: [snipped my self-imposed rules for safe but unselfish cycling] and then I woke up. Sorry, I'm not sure what your point is. Are you saying that you don't believe that I abide by these rules, or are you saying that I am wrong to abide by them and that I should be more selfish/assertive? "that it will take longer for me to be clear of the junction if I do happen to go through on amber". Do you know what amber means? Amber means stop, just as red does. But it is a grace period in which no opposing traffic will yet (legally!) be able to set off. It is present because if the lights change from green to amber when you are very close, you will be unable to stop before the light: if you are closer to the lights that your vehicle's stopping distance at the speed at which you are travelling. Because of this, it is not regarded as an offence to go through an amber light. The amber phase is necessary to make red enforceable because only with it is the road user given sufficient warning that he will be able to stop before the red light. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|