95 ALIVE, Single file cycling ??

Commuting, Day rides, Audax, Incidents, etc.
User avatar
Lance Dopestrong
Posts: 493
Joined: 18 Sep 2014, 1:52pm
Location: Middle England

Re: 95 ALIVE, Single file cycling ??

Postby Lance Dopestrong » 19 May 2017, 7:39am

I could recite it with my eyes closed if you like.

And the other sections that clarify the limits of that section...? The 'excepts', the 'when's, and the 'unlesses'? Come on, you're clearly on a roll.
Capitalism - I'm alright, Jack.

pwa
Posts: 5230
Joined: 2 Oct 2011, 8:55pm

Re: 95 ALIVE, Single file cycling ??

Postby pwa » 19 May 2017, 8:10am

Bez wrote:
pwa wrote:My point was that PPE (including hi-viz) is much more common in normal activities than it once was, so an activity that often incorporates PPE is not necessarily labeling itself as high risk.


I'm not sure that point is best made by way of an example involving the use of some machinery that is designed for cutting through trees and can easily and rapidly remove limbs, heads or internal organs if dropped. It's a little different to hopping on a bike to go and get a pint of milk.


But I also gave the example of gardening gloves! I could also have mentioned the horse riders around here who use helmets and hi-viz, or the disposable gloves available to use at some petrol stations when you are refilling. Or the ear defenders on display at B&Q near their selection of power tools. PPE is much more common in everyday life than it once was, and people are used to seeing it and using it. Just in case. Cycling does not stand out just because it has a bit of PPE.

landsurfer
Posts: 2587
Joined: 27 Oct 2012, 9:13pm

Re: 95 ALIVE, Single file cycling ??

Postby landsurfer » 19 May 2017, 8:18am

I think as a society we are more conscious of consequences. I would never use my strimmer without clear safety glasses, ear defenders around 2 and 4 stroke motors, goggles when working under the car.
PPE is a more normal part of every day tasks i must agree and does not necessarily point to a dangerous activity, rather ones own pesonal level of duty of care.
The Ride Goes On Forever ........

Bez
Posts: 698
Joined: 10 Feb 2015, 10:41am
Contact:

Re: 95 ALIVE, Single file cycling ??

Postby Bez » 19 May 2017, 8:50am

pwa wrote:Cycling does not stand out just because it has a bit of PPE.


Yes it does It stands out from absolutely every other mode of transport.

(Before someone points out that horse riding has PPE, I've never seen anyone ride a horse for transport, only for leisure.)

User avatar
531colin
Posts: 11692
Joined: 4 Dec 2009, 6:56pm
Location: North Yorkshire

Re: 95 ALIVE, Single file cycling ??

Postby 531colin » 19 May 2017, 8:59am

i think perhaps you are ignoring motorcycles.
This PPE and road transport is the usual bag of nonsense.
My neighbour expects me to wear a magic hat when riding a pedal cycle.
His neighbour expects to drive his classic open top sports car bare-headed.
His neighbour expects to drive his tuned up quad bike bare-headed.
(His neighbour expects to drive his 1920's classic car with brakes that wouldn't pass any current MOT test)

Various MPs and other dignitaries try to pass laws that would require children on pavement cycles to wear PPE, but not adults driving open top sports cars or quad bikes. (or horses, or Harley Davidson trikes.....)

Vorpal
Moderator
Posts: 13011
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 3:34pm
Location: Not there ;)

Re: 95 ALIVE, Single file cycling ??

Postby Vorpal » 19 May 2017, 9:14am

Lance Dopestrong wrote:I could recite it with my eyes closed if you like.

And the other sections that clarify the limits of that section...? The 'excepts', the 'when's, and the 'unlesses'? Come on, you're clearly on a roll.

For those unable to recite it the pertinent information is

163 Power of police to stop vehicles.
(1) A person driving a mechanically propelled vehicle on a road must stop the vehicle on being required to do so by a constable in uniform or a traffic officer.
(2) A person riding a cycle on a road must stop the cycle on being required to do so by a constable in uniform or a traffic officer.
(3) If a person fails to comply with this section he is guilty of an offence.


http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/163

Traffic Officers include those accredited to stop and control traffic under the Community Safety Accreditation Scheme.

There is no need for a suspicion of illegal behaviour. Police and traffic officers may stop and control traffic for the safety of others, such as in an accident or emergency, to reroute it for non-emergency purposes, such as events, roadworks or road conditions, to inspect vehicles (VOSA inspecting commercial vehicles is the most common use of this power), and other purposes.
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom

Vorpal
Moderator
Posts: 13011
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 3:34pm
Location: Not there ;)

Re: 95 ALIVE, Single file cycling ??

Postby Vorpal » 19 May 2017, 9:19am

Bez wrote:
pwa wrote:Cycling does not stand out just because it has a bit of PPE.


Yes it does It stands out from absolutely every other mode of transport.

(Before someone points out that horse riding has PPE, I've never seen anyone ride a horse for transport, only for leisure.)

I have seen people use horses for transport. I used to regularly see someone in Basildon who used two horses to pull a rag wagon.

I have also seen people in the US ride horses for transport. I have never seen anyone doing so, wearing a helmet.
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom

Bez
Posts: 698
Joined: 10 Feb 2015, 10:41am
Contact:

Re: 95 ALIVE, Single file cycling ??

Postby Bez » 19 May 2017, 9:20am

531colin wrote:i think perhaps you are ignoring motorcycles.


Forgetting rather than ignoring, but yes. I hereby retract my previous post ;)

thirdcrank
Posts: 23590
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: 95 ALIVE, Single file cycling ??

Postby thirdcrank » 19 May 2017, 9:23am

A lot of that is pretty general and nothing in the 95 Alive stuff would make a ha'porth of difference but I've never seen the singling-out message conveyed in such a graphic way before. Depending on how much publicity this receives, it could quickly become one of those things that everybody "knows" is a legal requirement.

I don't think anybody has commented on something in the OP's second link:-
“Rule 163 of the Highway Code states at least the width of a car should be left between cyclist and vehicle. However to make it easier for drivers, we are advising this should be 1.5 metres from the cyclist.

http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/cri ... -1-8545725

Now, that's an interesting interpretation of the HC which says "give motorcyclists, cyclists and horse riders at least as much room as you would when overtaking a car" which is not quite the same thing and IIRC, the DSA and its predecessors have balked at clarifying what this means. Obviously, the whole mat operation depends on that interpretation, but it's interesting to see it being spelled out. The obvious area of doubt is what happens if a case gets to court based on a reinterpretation of the HC. :?

Bez
Posts: 698
Joined: 10 Feb 2015, 10:41am
Contact:

Re: 95 ALIVE, Single file cycling ??

Postby Bez » 19 May 2017, 9:23am

Vorpal wrote:I have seen people use horses for transport. I used to regularly see someone in Basildon who used two horses to pull a rag wagon.


Yes, though presumably they're travelling in the horse-drawn cart rather than riding the horse* and, like you say, in such cases people don't use PPE.

* I was smart enough to phrase that post carefully, even though I was stupid enough to completely forget about motorcycles :)

pwa
Posts: 5230
Joined: 2 Oct 2011, 8:55pm

Re: 95 ALIVE, Single file cycling ??

Postby pwa » 19 May 2017, 9:38am

Bez wrote:
Vorpal wrote:I have seen people use horses for transport. I used to regularly see someone in Basildon who used two horses to pull a rag wagon.


Yes, though presumably they're travelling in the horse-drawn cart rather than riding the horse* and, like you say, in such cases people don't use PPE.

* I was smart enough to phrase that post carefully, even though I was stupid enough to completely forget about motorcycles :)


I'm not worried what you or anyone else does or does not wear when cycling, and I'm not making any points about the efficacy of cycling PPE equipment. I'm just saying that I very much doubt that ordinary people who don't do much cycling are put off cycling by seeing cyclists wearing a bit of PPE. PPE is so common in ordinary life these days. The only road user group not using any are pedestrians, and in rural areas some of those use hiviz at night. Drivers are surrounded by the stuff, from their seatbelts to their laminated windscreens and airbags. This idea that PPE makes cycling look more dangerous than it is may have been true in the 1980s when the first helmets came in, and when PPE was much less common generally, but not today.

If non-cyclists are put off by safety concerns that is due to stories of accidents and near misses, including helmet cam footage on Youtube. All reality of course, but missing the context of all those incident free moments.

ossie
Posts: 423
Joined: 15 Apr 2011, 7:52pm

Re: 95 ALIVE, Single file cycling ??

Postby ossie » 19 May 2017, 7:43pm

Lance Dopestrong wrote:I could recite it with my eyes closed if you like.

And the other sections that clarify the limits of that section...? The 'excepts', the 'when's, and the 'unlesses'? Come on, you're clearly on a roll.


You were implying the Police didn't have the power to stop a cyclist without a reason and I see Vorpal has explained it to you quite succinctly.

I'm afraid my 'roll' as you put it has ended after a decent innings but at least I had the pleasure (or not) of learning from the Manual of Guidance...urrgh.

Flinders
Posts: 2549
Joined: 10 Mar 2009, 6:47pm

Re: 95 ALIVE, Single file cycling ??

Postby Flinders » 21 May 2017, 7:18pm

531colin wrote:ABSOLUTELY AGREE.
If you "single out" they will come past, whether there is room or not. This happens each and every club run, and i often refuse to single out.
I was in front passenger seat, directing a driver round some of our local lanes. driver got upset that 2 cyclists wouldn't "let her past". I said that if cyclists got into single file, there were some drivers who would pass on a blind summit. Well, she said, how am i to know that its a blind summit? Apparently the fact that she can't see the road ahead is insufficient ......there should be a road sign.

That all goes back to what I always say. Too many people do something if they can't see anything coming, rather than if they can see nothing is coming.
Big difference.

Racehorse strings who have to use a road I know to get to their exercise grounds split into two or more groups so that traffic can overtake in sections, as a whole string can be too long to overtake safely anywhere (especially as sensible drivers overtake horses only slowly and with lots of space). When driving, I often think some cycling groups might, to everyone's advantage, take a leaf out of those racehorse riders' book.

Flinders
Posts: 2549
Joined: 10 Mar 2009, 6:47pm

Re: 95 ALIVE, Single file cycling ??

Postby Flinders » 21 May 2017, 7:30pm

Vorpal wrote:
Bez wrote:
pwa wrote:Cycling does not stand out just because it has a bit of PPE.


Yes it does It stands out from absolutely every other mode of transport.

(Before someone points out that horse riding has PPE, I've never seen anyone ride a horse for transport, only for leisure.)

I have seen people use horses for transport. I used to regularly see someone in Basildon who used two horses to pull a rag wagon.

I have also seen people in the US ride horses for transport. I have never seen anyone doing so, wearing a helmet.


A friend of mine went ranching one summer. She took her hard hat with her. She got laughed at, but wore it anyway. She is also still alive, and not brain damaged, unlike many a 'free-spirit' type who decided to ride a horse without a hard hat.
It's a far clearer-cut case with horses than bikes, because you are so much higher up, and the horse also has a mind of its own. If you don't wear a hard hat when riding*, just about everyone in the UK horse community will think you are....to paraphrase....a jackass; this was not always the case, but it is now. Competitions require you to wear one, even very low-level ones on the flat, and may even specify which official level of hat in terms of protection (it's different for different disciplines as the risks are different).
Jockeys are weighed without their hat, to discourage people wearing lighter hats than would be safe.
Also, the law is that any child on a horse on the public road MUST wear a hard hat.

*(and hard hats are a lot heavier, hotter, and far more uncomfortable than any cycling helmet)

thirdcrank
Posts: 23590
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: 95 ALIVE, Single file cycling ??

Postby thirdcrank » 21 May 2017, 7:54pm

Do you mean to say that equestrian forums don't dismiss helmet discussions to a sub-forum? Come to think of it, it sounds as though they don't even have helmet discussions. Common sense rules OK!


Return to “On the road”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests