Cyclists: Rules of the road apply to you too

Grandpa Hassan

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Red means stop, green means go, and amber means go faster.

And there's a special rule for the first 3 seconds of a red light which says 'floor it'

Surveyor11

Aard wrote: »

FWIW, according to openstreetmap there is a road and bridge in planning about a kilometre east of Leixlip Confey, which will link the M4 at Weston to Ongar. Perhaps the old bridge (i.e. the one under discussion) could be turned into a cycle/walking route, much like they do in the Netherlands when they build new roads.

http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/53.3702/-6.4693

But, but, but, they don't even pay road tax :eek: (there, I said it). Great idea though - I know this junction and there's easy access to the Canal from here.

Iwannahurl

Surveyor11 wrote: »

TBH, for all vehicles and road users compliance is abysmal.

...

Gardaí would clean up here on fines. Alas, even they couldn't be bothered stopping motorists and other road users breaking the red lights here, as the below accounts were done in eyeshot of 2 squad cars.

...

we are incapable of sharing the road in a responsible and courteous manner. It's me, me, me outta my way for a sizable minority of road users.

The abysmal standard of enforcement, when it does occur, is a major factor, imo. Change people's behaviour through enforcement, and their attitudes will follow in due course.

Unfortunately we need a police force willing and able to do the job. Two anecdotes from my own recent experience, in that regard.

I was driving on a 50 km/h urban road recently, and a Garda vehicle entered the roundabout ahead of me. The driver was travelling well in excess of the speed limit (judging by the rate at which he was pulling away from me) and went through two roundabouts without signalling. It will be argued that they are legally exempt, but there was absolutely no reason for them to be breaking the speed limit or not bothering their arse to signal.

Last Tuesday a Garda spokesperson was quoted in the local paper asking people to park responsibly around schools. On Friday I passed two local schools where an insane number of illegally parked vehicles were chaotically obstructing footpaths, junctions and bus stops. I spotted a Garda vehicle parked near a bus stop (behind a car which was parked on the path in front of the bus shelter). I walked towards the car to enquire of the Garda whether he was in the process of enforcing parking law, as per the Garda press announcement earlier in the week. Just then a girl in a school uniform hopped into the front seat, and he drove off. He was actually doing the school run in a Garda van. Welcome to the use of allegedly scarce police resources, Irish style.

Surveyor11

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Last Tuesday a Garda spokesperson was quoted in the local paper asking people to park responsibly around schools. On Friday I passed two local schools where an insane number of illegally parked vehicles were chaotically obstructing footpaths, junctions and bus stops. I spotted a Garda vehicle parked near a bus stop (behind a car which was parked on the path in front of the bus shelter). I walked towards the car to enquire of the Garda whether he was in the process of enforcing parking law, as per the Garda press announcement earlier in the week. Just then a girl in a school uniform hopped into the front seat, and he drove off. He was actually doing the school run in a Garda van. Welcome to the use of allegedly scarce police resources, Irish style.

I'm sort of with the Guards TBH on this one, it's just pure ignorance on the part of drivers. We have this in our local schools in Dublin 15 - the guards will show up with cones etc for the first few days of term, give out the odd warning / fine to drivers. When they're gone it's back to 'normal' - a losing battle. People would drive up the corridor to the classroom if it was wide enough, probably not beyond the reals on possibility. A combination of sheer lack of consideration and laziness.

What's very seldom demonstrated in this county is common courtesy and respect towards other people, as I said above it's me, me, me. The society of individuals.

uck51js9zml2yt

Surveyor11 wrote: »

But, but, but, they don't even pay road tax :eek: (there, I said it). Great idea though - I know this junction and there's easy access to the Canal from here.

motorists don't pay road tax either. we pay motor tax...bla. bla bla.:)

Spook_ie

Surveyor11 wrote: »

I'm sort of with the Guards TBH on this one, it's just pure ignorance on the part of drivers. We have this in our local schools in Dublin 15 - the guards will show up with cones etc for the first few days of term, give out the odd warning / fine to drivers. When they're gone it's back to 'normal' - a losing battle. People would drive up the corridor to the classroom if it was wide enough, probably not beyond the reals on possibility. A combination of sheer lack of consideration and laziness.

.

Don't see why not until schools sort out the problems of storing and transporting books. I never had to carry the equivalent of a 10 kilo+ sack of spuds to and from school But of course you could always get them to cycle to school with a cargo bike ( very chic and not likely to get them ostracised and bullied at all! )

Heavy school bags 'cause irreversible back deformities'

Posted by SchoolDays Newshound on 13/03/2012. Heavy school bags 'cause irreversible back deformities'Tags: Parenting Kids Health

Carrying overloaded bags is leading to a rise in the number of school children being seen with irreversible back deformities.

This is according to a new study by the charity BackCare, which explained how half of all youngsters suffer back pain by the age of 14, the Daily Mail reports.

Children who routinely carry backpacks weighing more than 15 per cent of their body weight risk long-term damage, health experts warn, with BackCare estimating many in fact carry 20 per cent.

"Many are carrying their bags on one shoulder or are increasingly carrying them on the crook of their elbow, so are placing a great strain on the spine," the organisation's spokesperson Sean McDougall remarked.

He warned the problem is a "healthcare timebomb" and said parents need to ensure their offspring only take what they need to school with them and always wear their backpack on two shoulders.

In 2010, Michael Lynch of the Irish Independent claimed children in Ireland carry an average school bag weighing 11.8 kg, which is well above the 3.7 kg recommended by a government working group.

Written by Donal WalshADNFCR-2163-ID-801316146-ADNFCR

Iwannahurl

Where has the OP gone?

Spook_ie wrote: »

Don't see why not until schools sort out the problems of storing and transporting books. I never had to carry the equivalent of a 10 kilo+ sack of spuds to and from school But of course you could always get them to cycle to school with a cargo bike ( very chic and not likely to get them ostracised and bullied at all! )

Heavy schoolbags may well be a universal problem (eg see this Dutch TV report) but is it really so bad in Ireland that it results in massive car use and car dependence? There are children in my neighbourhood travelling 800 metres to the same primary school with presumably the same weight of books, yet some opt for the car and some walk. The video above discusses the weight of schoolbags but in the background droves of children are seen cycling, whereas here they would be walking a few metres to a car parked up on the footpath.

My child is currently cycling to Senior Infants on a chunky bike weighing 10kg, passing out kids sitting in cars travelling the same or less distance. The primary obstacle is traffic.

Spook_ie

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Where has the OP gone?





Heavy schoolbags may well be a universal problem (eg see this Dutch TV report) but is it really so bad in Ireland that it results in massive car use and car dependence? There are children in my neighbourhood travelling 800 metres to the same primary school with presumably the same weight of books, yet some opt for the car and some walk. The video above discusses the weight of schoolbags but in the background droves of children are seen cycling, whereas here they would be walking a few metres to a car parked up on the footpath.

My child is currently cycling to Senior Infants on a chunky bike weighing 10kg, passing out kids sitting in cars travelling the same or less distance. The primary obstacle is traffic.

Just out of interest decided to weigh their bags as they just staggered in...

Son 3rd year schoolbag 15 Kilos
Daughter 5th year schoolbag 10.5 Kilos

hopefully by the time your child gets to secondary they'll ALL be using laptops and EBooks

EDIT According to that backcare report the lad should be around 100 Kilos (16 stone in old money ) to be carting that bag around

Surveyor11

Iwannahurl wrote: »

The primary obstacle is traffic.

Same for my son, cycling since day 1 of Junior Infants. He's now in 1st class, I'm still amazed the parents that drive to the school and back home again - I would say some drive 300 - 400 yards. Fair enough if they need the car for onward journeys and this is the most efficient way, but we need to encourage more kids to walk and cycle to school.

Iwannahurl

Spook_ie wrote: »

Just out of interest decided to weigh their bags as they just staggered in...

Son 3rd year schoolbag 15 Kilos
Daughter 5th year schoolbag 10.5 Kilos

hopefully by the time your child gets to secondary they'll ALL be using laptops and EBooks

EDIT According to that backcare report the lad should be around 100 Kilos (16 stone in old money ) to be carting that bag around

What's damaging young Dutch backs is too much time on computer games, reportedly: http://www.irishtimes.com/news/health/warning-of-spine-damage-to-young-from-computer-games-1.1491109

There's a simple solution to the problem of heavy schoolbags, imo. Bicycle panniers.

Spook_ie

Iwannahurl wrote: »

What's damaging young Dutch backs is too much time on computer games, reportedly: http://www.irishtimes.com/news/health/warning-of-spine-damage-to-young-from-computer-games-1.1491109

There's a simple solution to the problem of heavy schoolbags, imo. Bicycle panniers.

You just wait for 7 years, think you might be in for a shock!

Surveyor11

Those canny Dutch seem to have it well covered in this video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OrQ-d2PBUto

Some common sense like lockers for books that can be left would surely go a long way? I'll see if I can root out a video of Dutch school kids putting their books in them. :rolleyes:

Spook_ie

Surveyor11 wrote: »

Those canny Dutch seem to have it well covered in this video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OrQ-d2PBUto

Some common sense like lockers for books that can be left would surely go a long way? I'll see if I can root out a video of Dutch school kids putting their books in them. :rolleyes:

Been there, got the T-Shirt, you only need wait for 5-6 years to find out

Surveyor11

Spook_ie wrote: »

Been there, got the T-Shirt, you only need wait for 5-6 years to find out

Find out what? About the volume of books? So surely we can sort this problem out, if it's the reason kids need to be ferried a half mile to school.

If it's a case that it can't be sorted, I would have no issue sending my child the mile or so to school with panniers on his bike to carry these.

KwackerJack

Any cyclist who breaks a red light is a bit on the stupid side me thinks.

Cyclist v car = scratch on car and person wrapped around bicycle....its simple really.

Cycling 2 abreast on a straight road is fine but on twisty roads your asking for trouble.

A car is travelling on an 80kph doing 80kph road and the driver comes around a blind bend to find the Sunday cyclist cruising at a fine speed of 15mph. He/she glances ahead to see a big truck swaying as it tries to brake knowing that the car is in a sticky situation...So while braking hard the car driver has to decide where to go, left into a ditch or wall or right into a 20 ton truck or just go straight through the middle!

Now say he was only doing 70kph or even 60kph, the driver will still have the same issues so if a crash were to occur who is at fault?

Well id say the cyclist's ( if any lived) will tell me I'm wrong

Before we hear this right to cycle blaa blaa it doesn't matter as feck all people obey the politically correct rules. If your walking along a road your not going to walk 4/5 abreast and expect people to drive around you because you know its to dangerous so why do it on a bike travelling at 15 mph when everyone else is doing 50/60 mph

Another thing I never leave home on my bike without leathers and back protector. I would never dream of it, never mind go out on a push bike baked into lycra.

We don't want to ban cyclist we just want you to use common sense and road safety to protect yourself and others!

Oh and what do cyclists think about pedestrians on roads???

Spook_ie

Surveyor11 wrote: »

Find out what? About the volume of books? So surely we can sort this problem out, if it's the reason kids need to be ferried a half mile to school.

If it's a case that it can't be sorted, I would have no issue sending my child the mile of school to school with panniers on his bike to carry these.

Until your child is attending secondary school you have no idea of the logistics involved, when you do then you can validate/invalidate arguments about book volumes etc. When my children were in junior schools the most they carried was a pencil case, a sandwich box, a drink, and 2 or 3 project books, the whole lot would fit into a messenger type bag

RossieMan

KwackerJack wrote: »

Any cyclist who breaks a red light is a bit on the stupid side me thinks.

Cyclist v car = scratch on car and person wrapped around bicycle....its simple really.

Cycling 2 abreast on a straight road is fine but on twisty roads your asking for trouble.

A car is travelling on an 80kph doing 80kph road and the driver comes around a blind bend to find the Sunday cyclist cruising at a fine speed of 15mph. He/she glances ahead to see a big truck swaying as it tries to brake knowing that the car is in a sticky situation...So while braking hard the car driver has to decide where to go, left into a ditch or wall or right into a 20 ton truck or just go straight through the middle!

Now say he was only doing 70kph or even 60kph, the driver will still have the same issues so if a crash were to occur who is at fault?

Well id say the cyclist's ( if any lived) will tell me I'm wrong

Before we hear this right to cycle blaa blaa it doesn't matter as feck all people obey the politically correct rules. If your walking along a road your not going to walk 4/5 abreast and expect people to drive around you because you know its to dangerous so why do it on a bike travelling at 15 mph when everyone else is doing 50/60 mph

Another thing I never leave home on my bike without leathers and back protector. I would never dream of it, never mind go out on a push bike baked into lycra.

We don't want to ban cyclist we just want you to use common sense and road safety to protect yourself and others!

Oh and what do cyclists think about pedestrians on roads???

you're not getting the point. It shouldn't matter if they cycle 2 abreast. The same space should be given to a single cyclist as 2 cyclists.

People pass even when cars are coming the other way, and you get squeezed into a ditch and i myself have nearly fell off a few times due to this. It only takes 10 seconds to slow down, wait, then pass out. Not a whole pile to ask i think.

KwackerJack

KwackerJack wrote: »

Any cyclist who breaks a red light is a bit on the stupid side me thinks.

Cyclist v car = scratch on car and person wrapped around bicycle....its simple really.

Cycling 2 abreast on a straight road is fine but on twisty roads your asking for trouble.

A car is travelling on an 80kph doing 80kph road and the driver comes around a blind bend to find the Sunday cyclist cruising at a fine speed of 15mph. He/she glances ahead to see a big truck swaying as it tries to brake knowing that the car is in a sticky situation...So while braking hard the car driver has to decide where to go, left into a ditch or wall or right into a 20 ton truck or just go straight through the middle!

Now say he was only doing 70kph or even 60kph, the driver will still have the same issues so if a crash were to occur who is at fault?

Well id say the cyclist's ( if any lived) will tell me I'm wrong

Before we hear this right to cycle blaa blaa it doesn't matter as feck all people obey the politically correct rules. If your walking along a road your not going to walk 4/5 abreast and expect people to drive around you because you know its to dangerous so why do it on a bike travelling at 15 mph when everyone else is doing 50/60 mph

Another thing I never leave home on my bike without leathers and back protector. I would never dream of it, never mind go out on a push bike baked into lycra.

We don't want to ban cyclist we just want you to use common sense and road safety to protect yourself and others!

Oh and what do cyclists think about pedestrians on roads???

Go and dig out the rules of the road, look up the "2 second rule", read it and understand it.

If a corner is truly 'blind' then there's no way on earth you should be going around it at 80kph, in that situation you should ALWAYS be slowing well down in the knowledge that you have no idea what is around it.

Learn to drive - you are obviously a danger to yourself and others

Surveyor11

Spook_ie wrote: »

Until your child is attending secondary school you have no idea of the logistics involved, when you do then you can validate/invalidate arguments about book volumes etc. When my children were in junior schools the most they carried was a pencil case, a sandwich box, a drink, and 2 or 3 project books, the whole lot would fit into a messenger type bag

I have thought of this, my child will cycle the mile to school with a back pack and if the volume of books is huge, he will be using panniers.

Surveyor11

KwackerJack wrote: »

Any cyclist who breaks a red light is a bit on the stupid side me thinks.

Cyclist v car = scratch on car and person wrapped around bicycle....its simple really.

Cycling 2 abreast on a straight road is fine but on twisty roads your asking for trouble.

A car is travelling on an 80kph doing 80kph road and the driver comes around a blind bend to find the Sunday cyclist cruising at a fine speed of 15mph. He/she glances ahead to see a big truck swaying as it tries to brake knowing that the car is in a sticky situation...So while braking hard the car driver has to decide where to go, left into a ditch or wall or right into a 20 ton truck or just go straight through the middle!

Now say he was only doing 70kph or even 60kph, the driver will still have the same issues so if a crash were to occur who is at fault?

Well id say the cyclist's ( if any lived) will tell me I'm wrong

Before we hear this right to cycle blaa blaa it doesn't matter as feck all people obey the politically correct rules. If your walking along a road your not going to walk 4/5 abreast and expect people to drive around you because you know its to dangerous so why do it on a bike travelling at 15 mph when everyone else is doing 50/60 mph

Another thing I never leave home on my bike without leathers and back protector. I would never dream of it, never mind go out on a push bike baked into lycra.

We don't want to ban cyclist we just want you to use common sense and road safety to protect yourself and others!

Oh and what do cyclists think about pedestrians on roads???

yeah, had plenty of that back at Kilbride on Sunday coming back from our spin. The sheer stupidity of drivers overtaking was mind blowing - into the path of oncoming cars, almost clipping us (we were in single file BTW) and overtaking on blind corners. Why can't people in this country just chill out behind the wheel? What could be so urgent as to risk the lives of fellow drivers and cyclists? Why so motorists think it is cyclists that are causing the danger - we were in single file, I even had a 1vewry bright flashing light on the back, but that still didn't put off those determined to cause needless danger.

TheChizler

Deleted User wrote: »

Go and dig out the rules of the road, look up the "2 second rule", read it and understand it.

If a corner is truly 'blind' then there's no way on earth you should be going around it at 80kph, in that situation you should ALWAYS be slowing well down in the knowledge that you have no idea what is around it.

Learn to drive - you are obviously a danger to yourself and others

I've said it multiple times, drive as if someone has built a brick wall around the next corner.

jimmycrackcorm

Surveyor11 wrote: »

Jesus, where do you start.....

By asking what he thinks about coming around a country road bend and meeting a slow moving tractor

Spook_ie

Surveyor11 wrote: »

I have thought of this, my child will cycle the mile to school with a back pack and if the volume of books is huge, he will be using panniers.

Then until 2019 or so we probably need not discuss the issue of schoolbooks further.

Just out of interest (edit) and to clarify where you stand on the rules of the road
How far does your child cycle to school at the moment and is he accompanied?
Assuming he's accompanied does the accompanying person cycle or walk if he cycles does he use the footpath, cyclelanes or roadway?

hardCopy

Spook_ie wrote: »

Until your child is attending secondary school you have no idea of the logistics involved, when you do then you can validate/invalidate arguments about book volumes etc. When my children were in junior schools the most they carried was a pencil case, a sandwich box, a drink, and 2 or 3 project books, the whole lot would fit into a messenger type bag

I'm 29, my sister is 17.

Her bag weighs less than mine ever did, I never had any problem cycling to school with all my books plus sports gear in a separate bag. I never even needed a cargo bike.

She also has no problem walking 3km each way every day.

Schoolbags are too heavy, but to suggest that they are so heavy that all children must be driven to school is a gross exaggeration.

Victor

Spook_ie wrote: »

Then until 2019 or so we need not discuss the issue of schoolbooks further.

Just out of interest.
How far does junior cycle or walk to school at the moment and is he accompanied?
Assuming he's accompanied does the accompanying person cycle or walk?
Assuming that you've started as you mean to continue, if he cycles does he use the footpath, cyclelanes or roadway?
Are you going to allow him to walk/cycle when the nights get longer?

I'd like you to improve your quality of posting and tone.

Moderator

cython

KwackerJack wrote: »

Any cyclist who breaks a red light is a bit on the stupid side me thinks.

Cyclist v car = scratch on car and person wrapped around bicycle....its simple really

No argument here.

KwackerJack wrote: »

Cycling 2 abreast on a straight road is fine but on twisty roads your asking for trouble.

A car is travelling on an 80kph doing 80kph road and the driver comes around a blind bend to find the Sunday cyclist cruising at a fine speed of 15mph. He/she glances ahead to see a big truck swaying as it tries to brake knowing that the car is in a sticky situation...So while braking hard the car driver has to decide where to go, left into a ditch or wall or right into a 20 ton truck or just go straight through the middle!

Now say he was only doing 70kph or even 60kph, the driver will still have the same issues so if a crash were to occur who is at fault?

Aw, and you had started out so well! What if said driver came around the corner to find a car that had broken down in the previous 30-60 seconds? I.e. long enough to be stopped and potentially the driver have gotten out, bit nowhere near long enough for even the most responsible driver to erect a warning triangle before the corner. This will have similar results, but the only constants are the following driver and the corner. Now I've yet to hear blame apportioned to an inanimate corner so that leaves us with the driver rounding the corner being at fault.

KwackerJack wrote: »

Well id say the cyclist's ( if any lived) will tell me I'm wrong

They will, because you are

KwackerJack wrote: »

Before we hear this right to cycle blaa blaa it doesn't matter as feck all people obey the politically correct rules. If your walking along a road your not going to walk 4/5 abreast and expect people to drive around you because you know its to dangerous so why do it on a bike travelling at 15 mph when everyone else is doing 50/60 mph

Another thing I never leave home on my bike without leathers and back protector. I would never dream of it, never mind go out on a push bike baked into lycra.

We don't want to ban cyclist we just want you to use common sense and road safety to protect yourself and others!

Oh and what do cyclists think about pedestrians on roads???

As already mentioned countless times you described a scenario where 50/60mph is an inappropriate speed, so if people are going to drive dangerously the only way to really protect ourselves (speaking as a driver, cyclist and pedestrian) is to stay off all the roads, which is hardly viable.

And as far as peds are concerned, I've no issue with the law abiding ones but the blind lemmings that step in front of traffic without looking are as bad as your first example of cyclists

Spook_ie

hardCopy wrote: »

I'm 29, my sister is 17.

Her bag weighs less than mine ever did, I never had any problem cycling to school with all my books plus sports gear in a separate bag. I never even needed a cargo bike.

She also has no problem walking 3km each way every day.

Schoolbags are too heavy, but to suggest that they are so heavy that all children must be driven to school is a gross exaggeration.

Far be it for me to suggest that ALL children be driven to school, my own children have bags with wheels on and will walk to school when weather conditions are suitable, but given the discussion in the cycling forum about wobbly cyclists, mirrors and CoG I wonder if it would affect them more or less. I know in theory that it shouldn't (assuming the bags/books etc. are properly packed etc. ) but is theory correct?

Iwannahurl

Spook_ie wrote: »

Just out of interest (edit) and to clarify where you stand on the rules of the road
How far does your child cycle to school at the moment and is he accompanied?
Assuming he's accompanied does the accompanying person cycle or walk if he cycles does he use the footpath, cyclelanes or roadway?

I learned to cycle according to the Rules of the Road, and that's what I'm teaching my kids. Of course the RoTR doesn't cover everything, so experience and 'defensive cycling' have to be part of the mix. I recall a cycle instructor telling me that one of the first things to be learned is when it's a good idea to get off your bike and walk. Sound advice, especially when coaching kids.

To answer your questions:

Distance: 3 km.
Accompanied: yes.
Parent cycles or walks: cycles.
Footpath, cycle lane or roadway: all three as necessary/appropriate.

Why do you ask?

By any chance, are you also interested in knowing about other RoTR/infrastructural issues on the school run, such as traffic speed, junction design, continuity of route, road crossings, barriers etc?

KwackerJack

OK so we all practically stop going around a corner just in case??

1 persons judgement about cornering speed is obviously different than another but generally most vehicles will get around at a safe speed but when a bicycle is doing 15 miles and hour no matter how slow the car is going its going to cause serous harm if that driver cannot stop as there are 2 rows of bikes covering the entire road!

Oh so I am a dangerous driver yet you cycle 2 abreast on a main road where vehicles are travelling twice or 3 times your speed?

Say I slow down to 30 mph on a 60 mph road just 'in-case' a group of Sunday cyclist are riding 2 abreast on a bend, the another car travelling at 60 slams into my rear causing me to hit the cyclists.; Well the car behind is at fault yes but I would be partially to blame for going way to slow because a group of ignorant cyclists want to own the whole road even thought the bike's are taking up inches instead of feet!

It makes no odds if I am travelling at 100 mph snorting coke off the dash, what matters is that you all know that cars wont give way so why the bloody hell do you get in the way??

dukedalton

Iwannahurl wrote: »

I recall a cycle instructor telling me that one of the first things to be learned is when it's a good idea to get off your bike and walk. Sound advice

Surely the example I gave would be one such occasion? I suggested the cyclists in my case dismount and cross safely on the footpath. Would this not be better than continuing on a bridge you know you probably won't be able to cross in time, just because you've passed a green light? I think more cyclists should follow the advice of this cycling instructor of yours.