shared use

[Lance Dopestrong]

That's a matter of luck as much as judgment, I hit a pedestrian at a set of lights last week. They stepped out in front of my as I was pulling away, they were stopped in conversation as I sat there waiting for the lights to change and simply stepped out without any indication that they were going to do so. There would have been nothing you or anyone else could have done to avoid it.

It should come as no surprise to you that pedestrians can step out without any kind of logic or warning, and you should be positioned and at a velocity that would allow you to account for this should they do so. Same with car doors. Same with driveways entering from the roadside. Same with side roads with give way markings. Same with footballs bouncing out from a playing field at the side of the road.

All these things present a foreeable potential for danger, but only for those that choose to forsee that eventuality. If it is moving, if it has the potential to move, or if it could be concealing something capable of moving, then you should be taking account of it. If you're surprised when something happens, then you haven't been doing your drills correctly.

[PH]

That's a matter of luck as much as judgment, I hit a pedestrian at a set of lights last week. They stepped out in front of my as I was pulling away, they were stopped in conversation as I sat there waiting for the lights to change and simply stepped out without any indication that they were going to do so. There would have been nothing you or anyone else could have done to avoid it.

It should come as no surprise to you that pedestrians can step out without any kind of logic or warning, and you should be positioned and at a velocity that would allow you to account for this should they do so. Same with car doors. Same with driveways entering from the roadside. Same with side roads with give way markings. Same with footballs bouncing out from a playing field at the side of the road.

All these things present a foreeable potential for danger, but only for those that choose to forsee that eventuality. If it is moving, if it has the potential to move, or if it could be concealing something capable of moving, then you should be taking account of it. If you're surprised when something happens, then you haven't been doing your drills correctly.

What absolute and utter nonsense, you weren't there and you can't know.
The only way I wouldn't have hit them was to have not moved away from the lights, I'd still be there now.

[Lance Dopestrong]

Nonsense? I teach this stuff at the highest level. If you choose to disagree with long standing qualified and accredited expert level practitioners, that's absolutely your prerogative and I'm cool with that - the world would be dull if everyone blindly disagreed, and if you have some learning or logic to bring to the debate then I'd be genuinely interested to hear.

However, you've simply trotted out the word "nonsense" instead, which leads me to believe that perhaps you have no learning or logic with which to enlighten us all.

I'm not at all suggesting that such behaviour from other road users is right or correct, but it is eminiently predicatable, should you choose to learn the skills and make the effort. The old "i'd still be there now" argument is a facile one, and is no moral or lawful justification for any mishap should one occur while practicing that philosophy.

[Cugel]

Good grief...you mean to tell me that you read the road ahead, and adjust your speed and positioning to suit the environment? I thought i was the only one!

There's three of us.

Cugel

[PH]

Nonsense? I teach this stuff at the highest level.

I don't care what you claim to teach, if you believe every situation is predictable and avoidable you're wrong, no opinion about it. If you believe you're somehow qualified to judge situations you haven't witnessed you're talking nonsense. The pedestrian effectively walked into me, the only way that could have been avoided was to not have moved.

[nez]

Nonsense? I teach this stuff at the highest level.

I don't care what you claim to teach, if you believe every situation is predictable and avoidable you're wrong, no opinion about it. If you believe you're somehow qualified to judge situations you haven't witnessed you're talking nonsense. The pedestrian effectively walked into me, the only way that could have been avoided was to not have moved.

I said fool or troll for a reason. Trolls enjoy showing off how clever they are while leading everyone else along, fools are ignorant people who don't understand things. In the case of the previous poster the thing he doesn't understand is vectors.

[Vantage]

If waiting at lights, a cyclist should ideally be in the centre of the lane. This prevents drivers behind from squishing said cyclist to the side of the road and amazingly, gives the cyclist the opportunity to watch out for approaching pedestrians from either side of the road.
I can only think of 2 scenarios at this time that PH is describing. Either the pedestrians walked out in front of his/her bike (I'm assuming bike here) in which case PH could have braked and not hit them, or, the pedestrians walked into the side of his/her bike in which case they hit him/her and was in fact unavoidable.
The point I personally was trying to make earlier is that around small children/small furry mammals, a cyclist should be going slow enough than even if he/she isn't paying strict attention to what's in front or to the side of him/her then braking should result in the bike immediately coming to a halt or if unsuccessful, injury to all involved should be minimal.
I've had these discussions before on this forum and whilst I have no idea at what speed the threads op was travelling, many cyclists seem to think of 10mph as slow. It really isn't. 10 - 15kg of bike and another 65+ kg of rider travelling at 10mph is alot of weight to suddenly pile into another person/animal.
Slow is 5mph tops when passing kids/doggies and brakes should be covered. End of.

[Lance Dopestrong]

The pedestrian effectively walked into me, the only way that could have been avoided was to not have moved.

The tale changes with the retelling.

[PH]

If waiting at lights, a cyclist should ideally be in the centre of the lane. This prevents drivers behind from squishing said cyclist to the side of the road and amazingly, gives the cyclist the opportunity to watch out for approaching pedestrians from either side of the road.
I can only think of 2 scenarios at this time that PH is describing. Either the pedestrians walked out in front of his/her bike (I'm assuming bike here) in which case PH could have braked and not hit them, or, the pedestrians walked into the side of his/her bike in which case they hit him/her and was in fact unavoidable.

Neither of those scenarios fit, this is the junction, I'm in the contra flow cycle lane, there is no other road position other than the one I occupy, there is another cyclist behind me a kerb on either side. The pedestrian is chatting to someone on the pavement, their back to me, the lights change, we both set off at the same time, me along the lane, them straight into it. The idea of braking is ridiculous, it all happened in the space of four feet, i ran into them, the cyclist behind into the kerb, a bit of cursing from me an apology form the pedestrian and it's all over.
https://www.google.com/maps/@52.9221852 ... 312!8i6656

[PH]

The pedestrian effectively walked into me, the only way that could have been avoided was to not have moved.

The tale changes with the retelling.

No it doesn't.

[Vantage]

Neither of those scenarios fit, this is the junction, I'm in the contra flow cycle lane, there is no other road position other than the one I occupy, there is another cyclist behind me a kerb on either side. The pedestrian is chatting to someone on the pavement, their back to me, the lights change, we both set off at the same time, me along the lane, them straight into it. The idea of braking is ridiculous, it all happened in the space of four feet, i ran into them, the cyclist behind into the kerb, a bit of cursing from me an apology form the pedestrian and it's all over.
https://www.google.com/maps/@52.9221852 ... 312!8i6656

Aaaaaahhhhh I see.

[tykeboy2003]

Cycling home from work a couple of weeks ago (old railway line part of route 63), I saw a thirty-something woman running the other way so I pulled over to my left at the same time as she pulled over to her right, I came to a stop since I could see that she was determined not to go to her left. At the last moment she broke stride and jogged round me muttering abuse under her breath. I said that I had moved to my left as is the custom in this country and I just got a black look.

She was English by the way.

[RickH]

Cycling home from work a couple of weeks ago (old railway line part of route 63), I saw a thirty-something woman running the other way so I pulled over to my left at the same time as she pulled over to her right, I came to a stop since I could see that she was determined not to go to her left. At the last moment she broke stride and jogged round me muttering abuse under her breath. I said that I had moved to my left as is the custom in this country and I just got a black look.

She was English by the way.

If you treat the shared path as a road without a pavement.

Rule 2

If there is no pavement, keep to the right-hand side of the road so that you can see oncoming traffic. You should take extra care and

• be prepared to walk in single file, especially on narrow roads or in poor light
• keep close to the side of the road.

(link)

Her actions seem a reasonable interpretation of the above.

[Cyril Haearn]

A jogger might be as fast as a cyclist, maybe she should therefore have been on the left

[jgurney]

Cycling home from work a couple of weeks ago (old railway line part of route 63), I saw a thirty-something woman running the other way so I pulled over to my left at the same time as she pulled over to her right, I came to a stop since I could see that she was determined not to go to her left. At the last moment she broke stride and jogged round me muttering abuse under her breath. I said that I had moved to my left as is the custom in this country and I just got a black look.

She was English by the way.

If you treat the shared path as a road without a pavement.

Which it is.

Rule 2

If there is no pavement, keep to the right-hand side of the road so that you can see oncoming traffic. You should take extra care and

• be prepared to walk in single file, especially on narrow roads or in poor light
• keep close to the side of the road.

(link)

Her actions seem a reasonable interpretation of the above.

Seconded.