| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Red lights in Criclewood, Harrow and elsewhere
Sometimes a traffic light that you know very well seems to have a Windows moment and will inexplicably remain on red for ages. If you are in a one-way road and a traffic light breaks down showing red, you can't back out out of it and so would have to go through it eventually. Does the law say anything about how long a traffic light has to stay on red before you are allowed to go through it? Or are you legally required to sit there for days with the cars behind beeping at you until an engineer fixes it? I have noticed that a number of traffic lights have long phases late at night. Long phases at busy junctions during rush hour increase capacity by removing the dead time when nothing is moving, but long phases late at night are pointless. There are some traffic lights in Harrow town centre which remain red for up to four minutes late at night, while approximately one vehicle per minute passes in the other direction. Is this design or incompetence? Maybe it is supposed to deter vehicles from going through Harrow centre - but it also delays buses, and increases taxi fares by two pounds. The traffic lights at Cricklewood Lane / Claremont Road are a particular conundrum, because they only allow about 4 vehicles to emerge from busy Cricklewood Lane before quiet Claremont Road has a full minute of green phase. This has the effect of punishing traffic which sticks to the main Cricklewood Lane, and rewarding traffic which rat-runs down The Vale and Claremont Road or Minster Road and Lichfield Road. Why doesn't Britain extend the "flashing amber" signal from meaning "you can go if no pedestrians are crossing" to also mean "you can go if no cars are crossing"? This could then be used on numerous traffic lights late at night. It would also improve safety on roundabouts which currently have the traffic lights switched off outside the peak - at the moment there is no way of telling whether the traffic light is switched off or the red bulb is blown. Why has Britain never copied the Japanese idea of having a digital countdown above traffic lights? Surely it would increase capacity, and also give drivers free time to have drinks or change CDs instead of staring at the red light. -- John Rowland - Spamtrapped Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001 http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood. That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line - It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes |
Red lights in Criclewood, Harrow and elsewhere
On Tue, 25 Oct 2005 12:00:02 +0100, "John Rowland"
wrote: Why doesn't Britain extend the "flashing amber" signal from meaning "you can go if no pedestrians are crossing" to also mean "you can go if no cars are crossing"? Bah, what we need is the traffic light systems used on some busy roads in Thailand. When the light is green a clock counts down showing when they're going to go red, when the light is red it counts down until the lights turn green. A fantastic noise is heard for the ten seconds before they turn green :) -- - GamerTag: Hayn - icq: 9235201 -- Hayn on dal.net - http://www.sendit.com/scp/id/what - Want DVDs/Games? |
Red lights in Criclewood, Harrow and elsewhere
John Rowland wrote: I have noticed that a number of traffic lights have long phases late at night. I've seen a lot of tempary ones that work fine during the day but oddly seem to get fixed to red at night when the workers have gone home. I'd suspect they can be setup by the workers with whatever delay is required and kids sometimes can get in and fiddle with em. There was one near me that was red from friday night to midday sunday before the police noticed/were informed and turned it off. Fod |
Red lights in Criclewood, Harrow and elsewhere
"John Rowland" wrote in message ... SNIP I have noticed that a number of traffic lights have long phases late at night. Long phases at busy junctions during rush hour increase capacity by removing the dead time when nothing is moving, but long phases late at night are pointless. There are some traffic lights in Harrow town centre which remain red for up to four minutes late at night, while approximately one vehicle per minute passes in the other direction. Is this design or incompetence? Maybe it is supposed to deter vehicles from going through Harrow centre - but it also delays buses, and increases taxi fares by two pounds. SNIP Why doesn't Britain extend the "flashing amber" signal from meaning "you can go if no pedestrians are crossing" to also mean "you can go if no cars are crossing"? This could then be used on numerous traffic lights late at night. It would also improve safety on roundabouts which currently have the traffic lights switched off outside the peak - at the moment there is no way of telling whether the traffic light is switched off or the red bulb is blown. Why has Britain never copied the Japanese idea of having a digital countdown above traffic lights? Surely it would increase capacity, and also give drivers free time to have drinks or change CDs instead of staring at the red light. -- John Rowland Oh how I agree with you !!!! Nothing more annoying than being stopped for several minutes in the early hours of the morning by a red light when you can see quite clearly that there isn't another vehicle on the road for miles. Cheerz, Baz |
Red lights in Cricklewood, Harrow and elsewhere
Marratxi wrote in
: "John Rowland" wrote in message ... SNIP I have noticed that a number of traffic lights have long phases late at night. Long phases at busy junctions during rush hour increase capacity by removing the dead time when nothing is moving, but long phases late at night are pointless. There are some traffic lights in Harrow town centre which remain red for up to four minutes late at night, while approximately one vehicle per minute passes in the other direction. Is this design or incompetence? Maybe it is supposed to deter vehicles from going through Harrow centre - but it also delays buses, and increases taxi fares by two pounds. SNIP Why doesn't Britain extend the "flashing amber" signal from meaning "you can go if no pedestrians are crossing" to also mean "you can go if no cars are crossing"? This could then be used on numerous traffic lights late at night. It would also improve safety on roundabouts which currently have the traffic lights switched off outside the peak - at the moment there is no way of telling whether the traffic light is switched off or the red bulb is blown. Why has Britain never copied the Japanese idea of having a digital countdown above traffic lights? Surely it would increase capacity, and also give drivers free time to have drinks or change CDs instead of staring at the red light. Oh how I agree with you !!!! Nothing more annoying than being stopped for several minutes in the early hours of the morning by a red light when you can see quite clearly that there isn't another vehicle on the road for miles. This happened to me: I took a wrong turning down a dead end late at night and then found that the traffic lights to let me out at the junction had stuck on red. After waiting about five minutes with no other cars coming, I decided to apply a bit of common sense. I crawled forwards, flashing my headlights - it was after 11 PM so sounding my horn would have been illegal! And bugger me a police car came along just as I got to the other side of the junction. With much wailing of sirens (a brief flash of his blue lights would have sufficed!) he signalled me to stop - which I was already preparing to do anyway. In the standard patronising tone which treats people as if they have a mental age of five, he started to say that he had "reason to believe" that I'd just gone through a red light. "Yes," I said. "It's been stuck on red for five minutes with no cars coming and it's a dead end." He didn't believe me, so I suggested he might like to drive down there and try to get out again without going through a red light. And he did! With his mate keeping an eye on me to make sure I didn't bugger off, he actually drove down there, turned round and realised that he couldn't get out again. Eventually he put on his blues and twos to give him an excuse to go through the light. "Well you *did* warn me!" he confessed, finally seeing the funny side of it. When I asked him how long one should wait at a red light before assuming it's got stuck, he said he didn't know - but five minutes, late at night when there's nothing coming, was probably long enough - it seems I'd done the right thing. |
Red lights in Criclewood, Harrow and elsewhere
Marratxi wrote: Oh how I agree with you !!!! Nothing more annoying than being stopped for several minutes in the early hours of the morning by a red light when you can see quite clearly that there isn't another vehicle on the road for miles. Cheerz, Baz Or especially at 2 in morning when the side road only goes into a supermarket. Kevin |
Red lights in Criclewood, Harrow and elsewhere
"Fod" wrote in message ups.com... John Rowland wrote: I have noticed that a number of traffic lights have long phases late at night. I've seen a lot of tempary ones that work fine during the day but oddly seem to get fixed to red at night when the workers have gone home. I'd suspect they can be setup by the workers with whatever delay is required and kids sometimes can get in and fiddle with em. There was one near me that was red from friday night to midday sunday before the police noticed/were informed and turned it off. If I can see to the other side of those temp ones (often they are for all of about 10 metres) I'll go through them anyway (if its clear) same as overtaking a parked bus really! Bloody things... |
Red lights in Criclewood, Harrow and elsewhere
"JamesB" wrote in message
... John Rowland wrote: I have noticed that a number of traffic lights have long phases late at night. If I can see to the other side of those temp ones (often they are for all of about 10 metres) I'll go through them anyway (if its clear) same as overtaking a parked bus really! Bloody things... When road works reduced my (straight) road to one lane, they put temporary lights on it for a week, even though my road is habitually reduced to one lane by parked cars anway. -- John Rowland - Spamtrapped Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001 http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood. That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line - It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes |
Red lights in Criclewood, Harrow and elsewhere
On Tue, 25 Oct 2005, John Rowland wrote:
Why doesn't Britain extend the "flashing amber" signal from meaning "you can go if no pedestrians are crossing" to also mean "you can go if no cars are crossing"? Good idea. I'm not entirely sure about using flashing amber, though: rightly or wrongly, people associate amber with 'go' - and, indeed, 'go, quick!' - which is not what you want to say here. Also, the main failure modes (in driving rain, with your windscreen wipers thrashing about, and people's umbrellas zipping through your line of sight) are going to be only seeing the lit phases - and so mistaking it for a 'go' sign - or only seeing the unlit phases, and so not seeing it at all! I was thinking about this a while ago, and i thought that the best thing might be to use shape - build red lights with two elements, an inverted triangle and a circle enclosing it, like an upside-down version of this: http://www.analyzemath.com/Geometry/...cumcircle2.gif When you mean 'stop', light both bits; when you mean 'probably stop, but go if nobody's coming', you light the triangle. The idea here is that the probably-stop light looks like an illuminated version of the existing 'give way' sign, which will hopefully trigger the right behaviour in drivers who see it. And, since it's solid red, the main failure mode is going to be to mistake it for a circular red, which is fine - it's always safe to stop at a probably-stop. The downside, of course, is that you need to build entirely new, and more complex, lights. If you want to use existing lights, then i'd say you need something which includes a solid red: that means 'stop', giving fail-safe behaviour if a driver misses the other element. Ideally, you'd then have another element which doesn't mean 'go' on its own, to give fail-safety if the driver doesn't see the red. The trouble is, there isn't anything like that - all forms of green mean 'go' and, despite what the highway code says, so do all forms of yellow. Perhaps a solid red + briefly flashing green would do; the quick pulses of green wouldn't be enough to let anyone think it was a solid green, but would be seen by a driver who was stopped at the light. All that said, isn't the real solution to make the lights (or rather, the junction) sensor-controlled, or perhaps better-sensor-controlled? If the junction knew there was a queue of cars waiting to go one way, and cars were only a few a minute the other way, it could just change its lights to let them through. This could then be used on numerous traffic lights late at night. Or at any time and place where this pattern of traffic occurs. Mostly at night, granted. Why has Britain never copied the Japanese idea of having a digital countdown above traffic lights? Surely it would increase capacity, and also give drivers free time to have drinks or change CDs instead of staring at the red light. Maybe there's a worry that if people know they can go in 1 second, they'll go right now, since it's bound to be safe, isn't it ... tom -- If a scientist were to cut his ear off, no one would take it as evidence of heightened sensibility -- Peter Medawar |
Red lights in Criclewood, Harrow and elsewhere
On Tue, 25 Oct 2005 13:01:58 +0100, "Marratxi"
wrote: Oh how I agree with you !!!! Nothing more annoying than being stopped for several minutes in the early hours of the morning by a red light when you can see quite clearly that there isn't another vehicle on the road for miles. Yes there is. That police car, just round the corner :-) They won't nick you for creeping through a light that's been read for several minutes. But you'd better have a fully legal vehicle, and not have had a drink :-) |
Red lights in Criclewood, Harrow and elsewhere
"Tom Anderson" wrote in message
.li... I was thinking about this a while ago, and i thought that the best thing might be to use shape - build red lights with two elements, an inverted triangle and a circle enclosing it, like an upside-down version of this: http://www.analyzemath.com/Geometry/...cumcircle2.gif When you mean 'stop', light both bits; when you mean 'probably stop, but go if nobody's coming', you light the triangle. The idea here is that the probably-stop light looks like an illuminated version of the existing 'give way' sign, which will hopefully trigger the right behaviour in drivers who see it. And, since it's solid red, the main failure mode is going to be to mistake it for a circular red, which is fine - it's always safe to stop at a probably-stop. The downside, of course, is that you need to build entirely new, and more complex, lights. And that after a while, people would start mistaking stop lights for give way lights, which isn't always safe. All that said, isn't the real solution to make the lights (or rather, the junction) sensor-controlled, or perhaps better-sensor-controlled? If the junction knew there was a queue of cars waiting to go one way, and cars were only a few a minute the other way, it could just change its lights to let them through. I think bicycles fail to activate the sensors, which is one reason why cyclists habitually jump red lights. Why are these sensors so rare anyway? Are they very expensive? Why has Britain never copied the Japanese idea of having a digital countdown above traffic lights? Surely it would increase capacity, and also give drivers free time to have drinks or change CDs instead of staring at the red light. Maybe there's a worry that if people know they can go in 1 second, they'll go right now, since it's bound to be safe, isn't it ... Some drivers do that already. As a driver, I usually watch the traffic lights for crossing traffic and pedestrians, because they give me advance warning of when my light will go green. Incidentally, the other week I saw a car stop at a red light, and then slowly roll forward at about 5cm/sec until his entire car was over the stop line. At which point the camera above the traffic light flashed and he got a 100 pound fine and three points on his license. For some reason, that made my day. -- John Rowland - Spamtrapped Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001 http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood. That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line - It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes |
Red lights in Criclewood, Harrow and elsewhere
John Rowland wrote:
"Tom Anderson" wrote in message .li... All that said, isn't the real solution to make the lights (or rather, the junction) sensor-controlled, or perhaps better-sensor-controlled? If the junction knew there was a queue of cars waiting to go one way, and cars were only a few a minute the other way, it could just change its lights to let them through. I think bicycles fail to activate the sensors, which is one reason why cyclists habitually jump red lights. Why are these sensors so rare anyway? Are they very expensive? Good question. Back in the dark ages, when traffic levels were low, many if not all traffic lights were controlled by rubber detector strips set into metal frames on the road surface. Nowadays you can have either movement detectors mounted on the lights, using presumably the same cheap technology as in burglar alarm PIRs, or sensor wires embedded in the top layer of the road surface. But most lights now seem to work on a fixed time sequence. When I lived just outside Reading, a busy cross roads near us was the subject of Transport Research Laboratory investigations into different phasing and sensor strategies. The final system was excellent in responding very quickly to the actual traffic levels on each road. If all the traffic queue in the green direction was cleared, the lights immediately switched to the next phase. At quiet periods at night, all lights were set to red, and an approaching vehicle would immediately trigger a red+amber/green sequence for that direction. That was 15-20 years ago. I'm sure the technology is cheap, and it shouldn't cause any more disruption to install it as laying anti-skid coatings around signalled junctions. We also seem to have gone backwards on area control of a set of lights. Do these schemes still exist in London? I keep being stopped, particularly at light-controlled pedestrian crossings, in a way that sug gests that each set of lights functions independently. -- Richard J. (to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address) |
Red lights in Criclewood, Harrow and elsewhere
"Richard J." wrote in message o.uk... We also seem to have gone backwards on area control of a set of lights. Do these schemes still exist in London? I keep being stopped, particularly at light-controlled pedestrian crossings, in a way that sug gests that each set of lights functions independently. -- Richard J. (to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address) Perhaps there _is_ area control of the lights, but it is programmed to stop you as often as possible? Paul |
Red lights in Criclewood, Harrow and elsewhere
"John Rowland" wrote in message ... SNIP When road works reduced my (straight) road to one lane, they put temporary lights on it for a week, even though my road is habitually reduced to one lane by parked cars anway. -- John Rowland I thought nearly ALL roads in Harrow were reduced to a single lane by parked cars !! Baz |
Red lights in Criclewood, Harrow and elsewhere
"Richard J." wrote in message o.uk... MAJOR SNIP !!! We also seem to have gone backwards on area control of a set of lights. Do these schemes still exist in London? I keep being stopped, particularly at light-controlled pedestrian crossings, in a way that sug gests that each set of lights functions independently. -- Richard J. Have you noticed how many sets of light-controlled pedestrian crossings seem to be able to activate without any pedestrian being anywhere near ? I suspect its just another of these expensive but useless "traffic calming" systems installed by stealth by those "who know best" Baz |
Red lights in Cricklewood, Harrow and elsewhere
Paul Scott wrote in
: "Richard J." wrote in message o.uk... We also seem to have gone backwards on area control of a set of lights. Do these schemes still exist in London? I keep being stopped, particularly at light-controlled pedestrian crossings, in a way that sug gests that each set of lights functions independently. -- Richard J. (to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address) Perhaps there _is_ area control of the lights, but it is programmed to stop you as often as possible? What happened to that set of linked traffic lights on the A4 near Slough that was programmed to let you through if you drove at 30 mph, but to ensure that you hit every red light in turn if you drove slower than 25 or faster than 35? Does that still exist? |
Red lights in Criclewood, Harrow and elsewhere
"Richard J." wrote in message
o.uk... We also seem to have gone backwards on area control of a set of lights. Do these schemes still exist in London? I keep being stopped, particularly at light-controlled pedestrian crossings, in a way that suggests that each set of lights functions independently. I believe they still exist, but they can only work in one direction. If you commute against the flow, you will likely get red after red. Another thing - there is a pedestrian crossing in Kenton Road near the Northwick Park roundabout which regularly goes red (to vehicles) even though there are never any pedestrians anywhere near. Is this a malfunction or design? -- John Rowland - Spamtrapped Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001 http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood. That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line - It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes |
Red lights in Cricklewood, Harrow and elsewhere
"Martin Underwood" wrote in message ... SNIP What happened to that set of linked traffic lights on the A4 near Slough that was programmed to let you through if you drove at 30 mph, but to ensure that you hit every red light in turn if you drove slower than 25 or faster than 35? Does that still exist? I thought those lights were on the road from Uxbridge. Baz |
Red lights in Criclewood, Harrow and elsewhere
"John Rowland" typed
Another thing - there is a pedestrian crossing in Kenton Road near the Northwick Park roundabout which regularly goes red (to vehicles) even though there are never any pedestrians anywhere near. Is this a malfunction or design? I've not tried that one. Are you sure that it doesn't make pedestrians wait so long that they cross long before the lights stop the traffic? There are certainly some on heavily-used routes that keep pedestrians waiting inordinately long. (Finchley Road (A41) just south of Platts Lane/Fortune Green Rd is one such example.) -- Helen D. Vecht: Edgware. |
Red lights in Criclewood, Harrow and elsewhere
"Helen Deborah Vecht" wrote in message
... "John Rowland" typed Another thing - there is a pedestrian crossing in Kenton Road near the Northwick Park roundabout which regularly goes red (to vehicles) even though there are never any pedestrians anywhere near. Is this a malfunction or design? I've not tried that one. Are you sure that it doesn't make pedestrians wait so long that they cross long before the lights stop the traffic? I thought that the first few times, but I've been stopped by it about 100 times this year, and I don't think I have ever seen a pedestrian in this road at all. -- John Rowland - Spamtrapped Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001 http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood. That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line - It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes |
Red lights in Criclewood, Harrow and elsewhere
John Rowland wrote:
"Helen Deborah Vecht" wrote in message ... "John Rowland" typed Another thing - there is a pedestrian crossing in Kenton Road near the Northwick Park roundabout which regularly goes red (to vehicles) even though there are never any pedestrians anywhere near. Is this a malfunction or design? I've not tried that one. Are you sure that it doesn't make pedestrians wait so long that they cross long before the lights stop the traffic? I thought that the first few times, but I've been stopped by it about 100 times this year, and I don't think I have ever seen a pedestrian in this road at all. Try reporting it as a fault to http://streetfaults.tfl.gov.uk/ -- Richard J. (to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address) |
Red lights in Criclewood, Harrow and elsewhere
"JamesB" wrote in message ... .... If I can see to the other side of those temp ones (often they are for all of about 10 metres) I'll go through them anyway (if its clear) same as overtaking a parked bus really! Except that it is legal safely to overtake a parked bus, but, contrary to popular belief, you are breaking the law by going through the red at temporary traffic lights. Colin Bignell |
Red lights in Criclewood, Harrow and elsewhere
"Tom Anderson" wrote in message .li... On Tue, 25 Oct 2005, John Rowland wrote: Why doesn't Britain extend the "flashing amber" signal from meaning "you can go if no pedestrians are crossing" to also mean "you can go if no cars are crossing"? Good idea. I'm not entirely sure about using flashing amber, though: rightly or wrongly, people associate amber with 'go' - and, indeed, 'go, quick!' - which is not what you want to say here. Flashing amber is very distinct from a steady amber and the French use the system quite successfully on quiet junctions at night. Colin Bignell |
Red lights in Criclewood, Harrow and elsewhere
"John Rowland" wrote in message ... Sometimes a traffic light that you know very well seems to have a Windows moment and will inexplicably remain on red for ages. If you are in a one-way road and a traffic light breaks down showing red, you can't back out out of it and so would have to go through it eventually. Does the law say anything about how long a traffic light has to stay on red before you are allowed to go through it? Or are you legally required to sit there for days with the cars behind beeping at you until an engineer fixes it?... It is an absolute offence to cross the stop line or to pass the light when a red light is showing. There used to be one in Glasgow, in the days of electro-mechanical systems, that would sometimes only change if you got out and gave a hard kick to the green box next to it. You then had to get back in the car sharpish if you wanted to get across while it was still green. Colin Bignell |
Red lights in Criclewood, Harrow and elsewhere
"nightjar" nightjar@insert my surname here.uk.comtyped
"John Rowland" wrote in message ... Sometimes a traffic light that you know very well seems to have a Windows moment and will inexplicably remain on red for ages. If you are in a one-way road and a traffic light breaks down showing red, you can't back out out of it and so would have to go through it eventually. Does the law say anything about how long a traffic light has to stay on red before you are allowed to go through it? Or are you legally required to sit there for days with the cars behind beeping at you until an engineer fixes it?... It is an absolute offence to cross the stop line or to pass the light when a red light is showing. AIUI you can squeeze past a red light if you think the traffic lights are out of order. The OP waited five minutes and then had good reason to believe this was the case. Likewise, cyclists whose machines do not trigger sensors are not obliged to die of exposure for that reason. -- Helen D. Vecht: Edgware. |
Red lights in Criclewood, Harrow and elsewhere
Helen Deborah Vecht wrote:
"nightjar" nightjar@insert my surname here.uk.comtyped "John Rowland" wrote in message ... Sometimes a traffic light that you know very well seems to have a Windows moment and will inexplicably remain on red for ages. If you are in a one-way road and a traffic light breaks down showing red, you can't back out out of it and so would have to go through it eventually. Does the law say anything about how long a traffic light has to stay on red before you are allowed to go through it? Or are you legally required to sit there for days with the cars behind beeping at you until an engineer fixes it?... It is an absolute offence to cross the stop line or to pass the light when a red light is showing. AIUI you can squeeze past a red light if you think the traffic lights are out of order. The OP waited five minutes and then had good reason to believe this was the case. Likewise, cyclists whose machines do not trigger sensors are not obliged to die of exposure for that reason. Cyclists can always dismount and walk across the junction. -- Richard J. (to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address) |
Red lights in Criclewood, Harrow and elsewhere
On Wed, 26 Oct 2005 09:35:03 +0100, Helen Deborah Vecht
wrote: Likewise, cyclists whose machines do not trigger sensors are not obliged to die of exposure for that reason. You can argue all night over whether a cyclist who gets off ad pushes becomes a pedestrian. But I very much doubt that one who chooses that option will get nicked :-) |
Red lights in Criclewood, Harrow and elsewhere
"Richard J." typed
Likewise, cyclists whose machines do not trigger sensors are not obliged to die of exposure for that reason. Cyclists can always dismount and walk across the junction. It is still an offence to pass the stop line whilst wheeling a bicycle though. There is no particular necessity to dismount. -- Helen D. Vecht: Edgware. |
Red lights in Criclewood, Harrow and elsewhere
Helen Deborah Vecht wrote:
"Richard J." typed Likewise, cyclists whose machines do not trigger sensors are not obliged to die of exposure for that reason. Cyclists can always dismount and walk across the junction. It is still an offence to pass the stop line whilst wheeling a bicycle though. Really? I thought if you wheeled a bicycle you became a pedestrian, as with a shopping trolley. Anyway, if you wheel your bicycle past the stop line on the pavement, surely you count as a pedestrian then? -- Richard J. (to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address) |
Red lights in Criclewood, Harrow and elsewhere
"Richard J." wrote in message Anyway, if you wheel your bicycle past the stop line on the pavement, surely you count as a pedestrian then? How often have you seen a cyclist dismount before using the pavement? They normally ride along the pavement and expect pedestrians to jump out of the way, even though it has been offence for 180 years to ride on the pavement. The police no longer enforce the no cycling on the pavement law as can be clearly seen in dft_foi_037604.pdf. In 1984 there were 1991 successful prosecution for cycling on the pavement. By 2003 there were only 82. Similarly, in 1982 there were 4441 successful prosecution of cyclists for lighting and reflector offences. By 2003 this had dropped to 166. Careless and reckless cycling offences peak on the table mentioned above at 398 in 1983. By 2003 they had dropped to 77. According to dft_transstats_031373, 214 pedestrians were hit by cyclists, 38 were seriously injured and 4 killed. I don't suppose that those injured and the relatives of those killed by cyclists think that dangerous cycling is as trivial as the police obviously now do. Ian |
Red lights in Cricklewood, Harrow and elsewhere
Richard J. wrote in
: Helen Deborah Vecht wrote: "Richard J." typed Likewise, cyclists whose machines do not trigger sensors are not obliged to die of exposure for that reason. Cyclists can always dismount and walk across the junction. It is still an offence to pass the stop line whilst wheeling a bicycle though. Really? I thought if you wheeled a bicycle you became a pedestrian, as with a shopping trolley. Anyway, if you wheel your bicycle past the stop line on the pavement, surely you count as a pedestrian then? It's certainly not an offence to wheel a bike the wrong way down a one-way street: there's a cycle route in the centre of the town where I live which signposts cyclists to do this - with big "Cyclists must dismount" signs. Having said this, the National Trust have prohibited cyclists from wheeling or even carrying (not riding) their bikes along a footpath through the grounds of Quarry Bank Mill in Cheshire, and Oxford University bans bicycles (even if wheeled or carried) from University Park and Christ Church Meadow, so it looks as if a person pushing a bike doesn't *totally* become a pedestrian! |
Red lights in Criclewood, Harrow and elsewhere
"Richard J." typed
Helen Deborah Vecht wrote: "Richard J." typed Likewise, cyclists whose machines do not trigger sensors are not obliged to die of exposure for that reason. Cyclists can always dismount and walk across the junction. It is still an offence to pass the stop line whilst wheeling a bicycle though. Really? I thought if you wheeled a bicycle you became a pedestrian, as with a shopping trolley. Anyway, if you wheel your bicycle past the stop line on the pavement, surely you count as a pedestrian then? Not AIUI. If you CROSS the road, you are a pedestrian, if you move with the traffic flow, either on the footway or the carriageway, you should not pass the stop line. -- Helen D. Vecht: Edgware. |
Red lights in Cricklewood, Harrow and elsewhere
"Martin Underwood" wrote in message ... It's certainly not an offence to wheel a bike the wrong way down a one-way street: What about pushing a car? |
Red lights in Cricklewood, Harrow and elsewhere
|
Red lights in Criclewood, Harrow and elsewhere
In message , Ian
writes How often have you seen a cyclist dismount before using the pavement? They normally ride along the pavement and expect pedestrians to jump out of the way, even though it has been offence for 180 years to ride on the pavement. The police no longer enforce the no cycling on the pavement law as can be clearly seen in dft_foi_037604.pdf. In 1984 there were 1991 successful prosecution for cycling on the pavement. By 2003 there were only 82. Perhaps that's because the police now issue on-the-spot penalty notices rather than prosecuting. This has happened to more than one person I know in recent months. -- Paul Terry |
Red lights in Criclewood, Harrow and elsewhere
Helen Deborah Vecht wrote:
"Richard J." typed Helen Deborah Vecht wrote: "Richard J." typed Likewise, cyclists whose machines do not trigger sensors are not obliged to die of exposure for that reason. Cyclists can always dismount and walk across the junction. It is still an offence to pass the stop line whilst wheeling a bicycle though. Really? I thought if you wheeled a bicycle you became a pedestrian, as with a shopping trolley. Anyway, if you wheel your bicycle past the stop line on the pavement, surely you count as a pedestrian then? Not AIUI. If you CROSS the road, you are a pedestrian, if you move with the traffic flow, either on the footway or the carriageway, you should not pass the stop line. I can't believe the law is that much of an ass. Do you have a reference? -- Richard J. (to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address) |
Red lights in Cricklewood, Harrow and elsewhere
Martin Underwood wrote:
Helen Deborah Vecht wrote in : "Richard J." typed Anyway, if you wheel your bicycle past the stop line on the pavement, surely you count as a pedestrian then? (Carrying my bike over a stop line on the carriageway, remounting immediately after, and cycling across the T junction is quicker). Not AIUI. If you CROSS the road, you are a pedestrian, if you move with the traffic flow, either on the footway or the carriageway, you should not pass the stop line. Even though the stop line only extends across the road and not the pavement alongside it? http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2002/20023113.htm#36 'vehicular traffic shall not proceed beyond the stop line' It irrelevent whether crossing traffic is pedestrian or not. The stop line usually goes across only the left hand side of the carriageway, but nobody imagines that using the right hand side of the road gets you past a red light legally. Cyclists can cycle past a stop line if there is a marked cycle lane which is not covered by it. 'Vehicular traffic' is not explained, but I would guess that a wheeled cycle is counted as a pedestrian controlled vehicle, so is vehiclar traffic, as is a shopping trolley. Pedestrians carrying luggage should be OK, even if The Luggage has wheels. The offence (if any) would come under RTA section 36, http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1988...n_2.htm#mdiv36 which refers to the person 'driving or propelling a vehicle', no mention of riding, so again it looks like a shopping trolley being pushed along the footway need to stop at red lights (or be carried over the line). Strange that this should be prohibited when AIUI cyclists can't be prosecuted (or have their car licence endorsed) if they exceed a speed limit on the road - Speed limits, are specified as only applying to motor vehicles (except some Royal Parks). |
Red lights in Cricklewood, Harrow and elsewhere
Nick Finnigan wrote in
: Martin Underwood wrote: Helen Deborah Vecht wrote in : "Richard J." typed Anyway, if you wheel your bicycle past the stop line on the pavement, surely you count as a pedestrian then? (Carrying my bike over a stop line on the carriageway, remounting immediately after, and cycling across the T junction is quicker). Not AIUI. If you CROSS the road, you are a pedestrian, if you move with the traffic flow, either on the footway or the carriageway, you should not pass the stop line. Even though the stop line only extends across the road and not the pavement alongside it? http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2002/20023113.htm#36 'vehicular traffic shall not proceed beyond the stop line' It irrelevent whether crossing traffic is pedestrian or not. The stop line usually goes across only the left hand side of the carriageway, but nobody imagines that using the right hand side of the road gets you past a red light legally. Cyclists can cycle past a stop line if there is a marked cycle lane which is not covered by it. Ah, so the absence of a stop line on a cycle lane in the road means it's OK to go ahead, but the absence of a stop line on a pavement that is separated from the road by a kerb still means you have to stop? Perverse. 'Vehicular traffic' is not explained, but I would guess that a wheeled cycle is counted as a pedestrian controlled vehicle, so is vehiclar traffic, as is a shopping trolley. Pedestrians carrying luggage should be OK, even if The Luggage has wheels. This just get better and better! I've visions of little old ladies (and men - must be PC these days!) with their shopping trolleys stopped on the pavement at the imaginery stop line at traffic lights, waiting until the lights turn green and they can set off again. ;-) I'm not sure whether a shopping trolley could be classed as a vehicle, on the grounds that it's not usually used for carrying people on/in it - unless you count the obligatory pekinese that the LOL/LOM always seems to carry in their trolley! The offence (if any) would come under RTA section 36, http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1988...n_2.htm#mdiv36 which refers to the person 'driving or propelling a vehicle', no mention of riding, so again it looks like a shopping trolley being pushed along the footway need to stop at red lights (or be carried over the line). Strange that this should be prohibited when AIUI cyclists can't be prosecuted (or have their car licence endorsed) if they exceed a speed limit on the road - Speed limits are specified as only applying to motor vehicles (except some Royal Parks). Exactly. I *know* that speed limits only apply to motor vehicles and not to bicycles (and skateboards and roller skates etc etc). My question was "why"? You'd think that speed limit and drink-driving laws, and the requirement for 3rd-party insurance, would apply equally to *all* vehicles (motor or otherwise). In my book, the law should be a servant not a master: society should decide which acts it wants to permit and which it doesn't, and then frame its laws accordingly. Making perverse laws and then expecting people blindly and unthinkingly to keep them in all circumstances without applying common sense is to put the cart before the horse. If a law cannot be justified, it should be repealed. I'd love to see the so-called justification for making people who are pushing bikes or shopping trolleys stop at traffic lights when they are on the pavement! Now if they want to extend the highway code to apply the same rules-of-the-road on pavements for pedestrians as on roads for vehicles, then I'm all in favour of that: people emerging from shops ("side roads") should wait for people on the pavement to go past instead of barging in front of them; people should walk on the left-hand side of the pavement (rather than walking in a line abreast, forcing oncoming people to step into the road). I'm only being half-humourous he walking along the average high street requires more "emergency stops" in half an hour than you'd require in a lifetime of driving. When I was at the Tram Museum at Crich (Derbyshire) the other year, I noticed that there were serious proposals in the early 1900s to bring in laws requiring people to walk on the left hand side of any pavement so the people closer to the kerb would always be facing the oncoming traffic - especially electric trams which were so much quieter than noisy motor cars. Shame that one never made it onto the statue book ;-) |
Red lights in Cricklewood, Harrow and elsewhere
Martin Underwood wrote:
Nick Finnigan wrote in : The stop line usually goes across only the left hand side of the carriageway, but nobody imagines that using the right hand side of the road gets you past a red light legally. Cyclists can cycle past a stop line if there is a marked cycle lane which is not covered by it. Ah, so the absence of a stop line on a cycle lane in the road means it's OK to go ahead, but the absence of a stop line on a pavement that is separated from the road by a kerb still means you have to stop? Perverse. Yep. I'm not sure whether a shopping trolley could be classed as a vehicle, on the grounds that it's not usually used for carrying people on/in it - unless you count the obligatory pekinese that the LOL/LOM always seems to carry in their trolley! It would be a goods vehicle (even with pekinese dogs in it). You'd think that speed limit and drink-driving laws, and the requirement for 3rd-party insurance, would apply equally to *all* vehicles (motor or otherwise). Only to those vehicles it is illegal for children under 10 to drive. In my book, the law should be a servant not a master: society should decide which acts it wants to permit and which it doesn't, and then frame its laws accordingly. Making perverse laws and then expecting people blindly and unthinkingly to keep them in all circumstances without applying common sense is to put the cart before the horse. If a law cannot be justified, it should be repealed. I'd love to see the so-called justification for making people who are pushing bikes or shopping trolleys stop at traffic lights when they are on the pavement! Because they may be a nuisance to other road users. |
Red lights in Criclewood, Harrow and elsewhere
"Richard J." wrote in message .uk... ...I thought if you wheeled a bicycle you became a pedestrian... See URL:http://www.nationalcyclingstrategy.o...oad/showthread ..php?t=229&goto=nextoldest -- MatSav |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 04:43 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk