Canrider
Guru
Maybe you should read back? I'd highly recommend making more voluble responses to posts rather than thinking that Lindfordesque-one-liners will secure you 'points'.2114568 said:Have you got a point to make here?
Maybe you should read back? I'd highly recommend making more voluble responses to posts rather than thinking that Lindfordesque-one-liners will secure you 'points'.2114568 said:Have you got a point to make here?
I have proposed a junction where the maximum safe speed is approximately 0 MPH, therefore it is, by your definition, undriveable. Here's another: http://goo.gl/maps/Gyqm02114584 said:I have invited the discussion of the underpinning principle that you don't drive faster than the speed that enables you to stop in the bit of road you can see. Your individual junction does not add or detract from that so it has no relevance to add. Sorry.
Can I just clear up a point? @G2EWS has confused two principles, which is the fastest safe speed to take any given corner, but that is based on that corner having full sight lines, therefore the "racing line" (out,apex,out) simply extends the geometry of the curve and means a car can travel round that curve "safely", ie without losing grip.
However, the police driving manual also talks of sight lines, and the "arrowhead" effect, which is the point at which the sides of the road appear to converge. Too fast, and that point rushes towards you, bang on the right speed and the arrowhead stays at a constant distance until the road straightens again. That arrowhead principle also teaches a driver to shift position in the road to extend that arrowhead, for example by moving to the offside edge of the carriageway to extend the sight lines on a left hander, and as far over to the nearside as possible on a right hander.
Absolutely none of this theory over rides the most fundamental principle of safe cornering, which is that YOU MUST AT ALL TIMES BE TRAVELLING AT SUCH AS SPEED THAT YOU CAN STOP SAFELY WITHIN THE DISTANCE YOU CAN SEE AHEAD. Oh, and the other point made above, which is that the vehicle should be able to stay on the correct side of the road.
So sorry G2EWS, but if you had to make an emergency stop to avoid the cyclist, you were simply travelling too fast. Please don't fall out with me, I'm not doing this as a personal attack, but a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Unless you have done all of the Advanced driving course, leave fast cornering to the experts, or the race track.
The way I read it, the cyclists were simply cycling, and couldn't be expected to go faster, slower, or be anywhere else, so the responsibility therefore lies with the car driver, I'd say. Everyone on the road, walking, cycling, or in whatever vehicle, should expect the unexpected, and take appropriate precautions.
It's a tricky one G2EWS, though i am glad everything worked out okay on this occasion.
Is it realistic to expect ALL drivers to slow down to 20-30mph on blind bends? You could argue yes. Certainly would prefer it as a cyclist, but as a realist i would suggest it's not likely. As a cyclist i suggest, like it or not, cycling on the road brings with it risks. Being struck by a car from behind is very much one of them. All you can do is ride best you can to keep yourself safe and hope the other road users are going to be safe also.
How many people have seen a few slow moving cars in front of a long que of traffic. Clearly holding everyone else up but in their minds they are travelling at a safe pace. ??
Right or wrong this encourages risky overtaking and needless crashes. I see this all too often and is one of the main reasons people die on busy 60mph roads such as the A9.
So again G2EWS. It's a tricky one with no easy answer. You could forget what everyone else does and treat every corner as if there may be a cyclist just around that blind corner. Cos you never know.
stay in lane then no issue , we all know the motorist must get ahead though. There's no answer i'm afraid. education does not work...2114649 said:Don't drive it then. Get a mirror put up so you can see.Take a chance but don't cone whining to me when it goes wrong. You choose.
.............. I think a lot of roads are too narrow for the posted speed limits to start with.
this is not a personal attack but what i beleive and what I TRY to do all the time, and it annoys the hell out of some people when they are behind me.Hi Jamie,
Having been taught by the man who wrote the Police chase manual to drive round a bend, I can confirm that I was well within the 'safe' speed for the bend.
But I think you are right, any vehicle that has stopped becomes a danger. If you broke down on a bend, the first and safe thing you would surely do, is let oncoming motorists know by alerting them before the bend.
A conundrum for sure!
Regards
Chris
I was taught to pass a test by an instructor, who taught me to travel at a speed that means I can stop safely in the distance I can see.
then when all of my friends had passed their tests, the fatjher of one of my friends who was a commended police driver and instructor at Cheshire police taught us to drive. one of the first things he asked us was How fast can you drive round a corner? , i gave my answer as I had been taught whilst learning to pass the test and he congratulated me on having a bit of sense.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roadcraft item 3 Speed .
from the info given in your post it shows you were not meeting the requirements. this is one reason HMG wants to bring in lower limits on a lot of rural roads.