Entirely unashamed anti car propaganda, and the more the better.

[krtek a houby]

Yes I have been to Tokyo and I have spent several weeks living in one of its residential neighbourhoods. They are not full of cars - the streets are incredibly calm, quiet and safe. They are not cluttered with cars because if you own a car you have to park it within your own property. All houses are accessible by car but there is not a lot of traffic and drivers never speed. The roads are effectively shared by pedestrians, bicycles and motor vehicles. Most people do their regular shopping on foot or by bike. They take their kids to nursery by bike. Primary age schoolkids walk to and from school (and use public transport) by themselves and safely. There is ample bicycle parking at most metro stations and the entire public transport network is very efficient.

Tokyo partly achieves its quiet residential streets by confining all through traffic to expressways, and I don't consider this an ideal solution - I would still want to reduce the amount of traffic on these roads. It is essentially kept separate from people's day to day lives though, and people are very able to live their day to day lives without any reliance on a privately owned motor vehicle.

When I stayed in Tokyo I was actually enormously impressed with how well set up their residential neighbourhoods are. In terms of noise pollution, safety and accessibility, they are even better than Europe's best examples which are mostly in countries like the Netherlands. I have since wondered why Tokyo is not used more as an example or case study. Part of the reason, I think, is their system relies on deeply ingrained cultural values and habits that can't be transplanted to Europe. Nonetheless, it absolutely demonstrates how well a city can function when pedestrians and cyclists have complete priority in residential areas and local centres.

I know this reply is of no genuine interest to you but it might be to others.

Pretty much spot on. Certainly in regards to the burbs. Kids are taken by bike, or if old enough, they walk or cycle themselves to the schools. Cyclists of all ages do tend to go up on the paths here, when it's really meant for the young or elderly. Public transport is magnificent, although it's handy to have a car for work purposes.

 

[T & P]

This is one Japanese traffic practice I would like to see here. And not just from the kids...

 

[Spymaster]

This is one Japanese traffic practice I would like to see here. And not just from the kids...

It should be compulsory for cyclists.

 

[two sheds]

Awww you're mellowing in your old age - asking for kids to respect cyclists now

 

[Spymaster]

Especially maomao

 

[BigMoaner]

Lynn!

 

[maomao]

It should be compulsory for cyclists.

So what you're saying is you like seeing cyclists bend over. Will your sexual obsession with cyclists ever end?

 

[T & P]

It should be compulsory for cyclists.

In particular cyclists who don’t dismount when using a zebra crossing themselves, in breach rule 79 of the Highway Code. Who in London appear to comprise well upwards of 90% of all cyclists who use zebra crossings.

 

[Spymaster]

In particular cyclists who don’t dismount when using a zebra crossing themselves, in breach rule 79 of the Highway Code. Who in London appear to comprise well upwards of 90% of all cyclists who use zebra crossings.

99%

 

[platinumsage]

I don’t mind cyclists who don’t dismount on zebras, because there’s no need to give way to them.

 

[T & P]

I don’t mind cyclists who don’t dismount on zebras, because there’s no need to give way to them.

 

[teuchter]

Here's an interesting zebra crossing.

If as a cyclist you approach the cycle crossing directly parallel to it, there's no way of knowing what drivers will do. As far as I understand, they have the right of way, because the zebra crossing is irrelevant in this scenario. However, 75% of drivers seem to stop and give way, presumably influenced by the presence of the zebra crossing. So you have to stop, in case the driver doesn't give way, but then if you do stop, the driver will probably stop and then look at you wondering why you are wasting their time by sitting at the edge of the road when you could have just gone across already.





There's another badly designed ambiguous crossing a bit further on too.

 

[platinumsage]

Here's an interesting zebra crossing.

If as a cyclist you approach the cycle crossing directly parallel to it, there's no way of knowing what drivers will do. As far as I understand, they have the right of way, because the zebra crossing is irrelevant in this scenario. However, 75% of drivers seem to stop and give way, presumably influenced by the presence of the zebra crossing. So you have to stop, in case the driver doesn't give way, but then if you do stop, the driver will probably stop and then look at you wondering why you are wasting their time by sitting at the edge of the road when you could have just gone across already.



View attachment 288781

There's another badly designed ambiguous crossing a bit further on too.

That’s one of the new(ish) dual use cycle and pedestrian zebra crossings, where cars do have to give way to cyclists. I’m surprised you don’t know this, being a driver. At the very least you should have been able to work it out from the siting of the pedestrian crossing controlled area.

 

[teuchter]

That’s one of the new(ish) dual use cycle and pedestrian zebra crossings, where cars do have to give way to cyclists. I’m surprised you don’t know this, being a driver. At the very least you should have been able to work it out from the siting of the pedestrian crossing controlled area.

It demonstrates that we have an inadequate system in this country for ensuring that drivers keep up to date with changes. Drivers should be made to take and pass a test at appropriate intervals throughout their driving career.

 

[platinumsage]

It demonstrates that we have an inadequate system in this country for ensuring that drivers keep up to date with changes. Drivers should be made to take and pass a test at appropriate intervals throughout their driving career.

So now you sympathize with poor drivers who don't know the rules of the road, after finding yourself among them? It's not their fault, they can blame it on a lack of repeated testing. Remember that next time you moan about an illegally parked car or whatever.

 

[teuchter]

So now you sympathize with poor drivers who don't know the rules of the road, after finding yourself among them? It's not their fault, they can blame it on a lack of repeated testing. Remember that next time you moan about an illegally parked car or whatever.

No, if I were to approach that crossing as a car driver, and then hit a cyclist as a result of assuming I had priority, I would not expect any sympathy. It would be my fault, and it's my responsibility to keep up with rules. As a driver I wouldn't assume I had priority anyway - I would be watching out for anyone who looked like they might move into the roadway, and going at a speed that would allow me to stop if they did - regardless of whether they had right of way.

I would however have sympathy with any cyclist who correctly (as it turns out) assumed they had priority and was then hit by a driver.

The point is that repeated testing (which, as a driver I would support) would improve safety for everyone but doesn't happen, thanks to the road culture we have.

There's lots of stuff I can do in a car which I don't think I should be allowed to.

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

It demonstrates that we have an inadequate system in this country for ensuring that drivers keep up to date with changes. Drivers should be made to take and pass a test at appropriate intervals throughout their driving career.

I keep up by every three or four years attending a speed awareness course, these tend to cover all the changes in the Highway Code since the last time I went

 

[platinumsage]

No, if I were to approach that crossing as a car driver, and then hit a cyclist as a result of assuming I had priority, I would not expect any sympathy. It would be my fault, and it's my responsibility to keep up with rules. As a driver I wouldn't assume I had priority anyway - I would be watching out for anyone who looked like they might move into the roadway, and going at a speed that would allow me to stop if they did - regardless of whether they had right of way.

I could easily imagine you stopping and giving way to a pedestrian waiting to cross, while you are obstructing the cycle part of the crossing. You really should take some time to learn how these things are supposed to work - driving cautiously isn't sufficient, and can even cause hazards to other road users.

 

[T & P]

No, if I were to approach that crossing as a car driver, and then hit a cyclist as a result of assuming I had priority, I would not expect any sympathy. It would be my fault, and it's my responsibility to keep up with rules. As a driver I wouldn't assume I had priority anyway - I would be watching out for anyone who looked like they might move into the roadway, and going at a speed that would allow me to stop if they did - regardless of whether they had right of way.

I would however have sympathy with any cyclist who correctly (as it turns out) assumed they had priority and was then hit by a driver.

The point is that repeated testing (which, as a driver I would support) would improve safety for everyone but doesn't happen, thanks to the road culture we have.

There's lots of stuff I can do in a car which I don't think I should be allowed to.

But on the other hand, there's lots of stuff cyclists are definitely not allowed to do at all, but do it multiple times on each and every single one journey they take, throughout their entire lifespan, without the authorities ever bothering to do anything about it.

I was actually keeping a mental count of traffic light-jumping cyclists today when I went from Chelsea to Camden Town and back. Out of 17 instances of a red traffic light ahead with cyclists around, 16 times the cyclist decided traffic lights are for losers. In many of those cases the lights were governing busy junctions. Naturally that didn't deter the cyclists in question. Two of them were actually doing that mega-fucking-cunt trick of not wanting to put their foot on the ground at any cost because they're so rad, so they kept twitching and moving on their bikes to keep their balance at the very edge of moving traffic at the junction, before finding a tiny 2-second gap between passing cars and darting through.

 

[maomao]

So now you sympathize with poor drivers who don't know the rules of the road, after finding yourself among them? It's not their fault, they can blame it on a lack of repeated testing. Remember that next time you moan about an illegally parked car or whatever.

Pretty sure that the rules for indicating and stopping at red lights haven't changed in my lifetime but aside from parking it's these two rules drivers seem to have most problems with.

 

[maomao]

But on the other hand, there's lots of stuff cyclists are definitely not allowed to do at all, but do it multiple times on each and every single one journey they take, throughout their entire lifespan, without the authorities ever bothering to do anything about it.

I was actually keeping a mental count of traffic light-jumping cyclists today when I went from Chelsea to Camden Town and back. Out of 17 instances of a red traffic light ahead with cyclists around, 16 times the cyclist decided traffic lights are for losers. In many of those cases the lights were governing busy junctions. Naturally that didn't deter the cyclists in question. Two of them were actually doing that mega-fucking-cunt trick of not wanting to put their foot on the ground at any cost because they're so rad, so they kept twitching and moving on their bikes to keep their balance at the very edge of moving traffic at the junction, before finding a tiny 2-second gap between passing cars and darting through.

I don't believe this story.

 

[platinumsage]

Pretty sure that the rules for indicating and stopping at red lights haven't changed in my lifetime but aside from parking it's these two rules drivers seem to have most problems with.

I'm sure plenty of drivers fail to observe all the rules all the time. However I'm surprised that such a driver-loathing driver as teuchter doesn't even know when or where to stop at a zebra crossing.

 

[teuchter]

I could easily imagine you stopping and giving way to a pedestrian waiting to cross, while you are obstructing the cycle part of the crossing.

Nope, because I definitely know that I should never stop on a crossing of any kind, which has been a rule since I learnt to drive. Even if refusing to move onto a crossing when it's not clear on the other side means some car behind me starts hooting at me impatiently.

It seems to be a rule that many drivers (including professional ones) choose to forget on a daily basis.

 

[T & P]

I don't believe this story.

Convenient.

 

[Spymaster]

Two of them were actually doing that mega-fucking-cunt trick of not wanting to put their foot on the ground at any cost because they're so rad, so they kept twitching and moving on their bikes to keep their balance at the very edge of moving traffic at the junction, before finding a tiny 2-second gap between passing cars and darting through.

maomao does this.

 

[teuchter]

But on the other hand, there's lots of stuff cyclists are definitely not allowed to do at all, but do it multiple times on each and every single one journey they take, throughout their entire lifespan, without the authorities ever bothering to do anything about it.

I was actually keeping a mental count of traffic light-jumping cyclists today when I went from Chelsea to Camden Town and back. Out of 17 instances of a red traffic light ahead with cyclists around, 16 times the cyclist decided traffic lights are for losers. In many of those cases the lights were governing busy junctions. Naturally that didn't deter the cyclists in question. Two of them were actually doing that mega-fucking-cunt trick of not wanting to put their foot on the ground at any cost because they're so rad, so they kept twitching and moving on their bikes to keep their balance at the very edge of moving traffic at the junction, before finding a tiny 2-second gap between passing cars and darting through.

Interesting observation - it's not often discussed that some cyclists ignore traffic lights. Thanks for bringing this talking point to the table.

 

[Spymaster]

Nope, because I definitely know that I should never stop on a crossing of any kind, which has been a rule since I learnt to drive. Even if refusing to move onto a crossing when it's not clear on the other side means some car behind me starts hooting at me impatiently.

It seems to be a rule that many drivers (including professional ones) choose to forget on a daily basis.

Bollocks.

 

[maomao]

Convenient.

Cyclists don't go through 'two second gaps' in traffic. The rest isn't extraordinary or unbelievable but you definitely made it all up.

 

[T & P]

Cyclists don't go through 'two second gaps' in traffic. The rest isn't extraordinary or unbelievable but you definitely made it all up.

I didn't say all of those who jumped the lights did. Two of them certainly did.

 

[maomao]

I didn't say all of those who jumped the lights did. Two of them certainly did.

A two second gap between cars crossing a junction in London is a few meters at most. In fact responsible drivers should be following the three second rule so a two second gap should be unusually close (it's not because most drivers can't drive but it should be).