What to do (Pelican Crossings)

Black Sheep said:
The roads were for people, then horses, then bikes and finally 'horseless carrages' or cars
that'll be the "new thing I learnt today" then...I never knew that's were the term "Car" came from.
 
OP
gaz

gaz

Cycle Camera TV
Location
South Croydon
coruskate said:
Fine, so wait for them to get back in their cars and then run them down on a bicycle. But the moral obligation is on the more dangerous party (that's the cyclist, who is carrying more mass and more momentum) to be correspondingly more careful in his interaction with the more vulnerable (that's the pedestrian).
Can't disagree with you on that.
 

nigelb

New Member
HaloJ said:
Isn't this the bit where Mike says Air Zound?
Oh, wow, love the look of that.

I'm glad that all I've had to fit is a tiny single "ding" bell, just enough to let pedestrians know (politely) that I'm there, and they generally make way immediately. Only exception is around the schools, which are a nightmare, made more dangerous by the vehicles of those dropping the kids!

Nige
 

Moodyman

Guru
Part of my commute takes into the city centre and I get peds just ignoring me if there's no other vehicle.

So now I pro-actively ting-ting my bike bell. Sounds a bit naff but it alerts them and they stop at the kerb.
 

HaloJ

Rabid cycle nut
Location
Watford
BentMikey said:
LOL! It would work well, but might be a tad harsh on peds. :evil:
Saw one used this morning and was more than surprised myself at how loud they are. A pedestrian stepped out between two parked cars into the path of a cyclist who was a few meters in front of me. Even following behind it was loud. It had the desired effect though as the pedestrian leapt back.
 

thomas

the tank engine
Location
Woking/Norwich
Black Sheep said:
doesn't work like that.
They do have a duty of care to check it is clear to cross, the green light is there to say it is safe, you do not have to wait for it if you think it is safe to cross on red.
In a similar way, green lights mean 'go if safe'...so we too have a duty of care.

nigelb said:
So we can stop a major dual carriageway like the A14 by having a snake of say 50 people crossing in single file, turning round and crossing back again?

Common sense says no, and in any case I suspect you'd find yourself in trouble for causing an obstruction.
IMO, common sense would say you do slow down/give way to the people...because the alternative is probably mowing down 50 people.

Gaz, I'd probably say slow down a bit and yell a polite warning. Better to just let them cross then risk hitting someone, though I can understand how annoying it'd be in a busy city.
 
The phenomenon of people trying to save time by risking a crossing close to something that they consider quite safe is annoying, but I often have this even on a motorbike. They see that there is more room in the road to avoid the vehicle, or even using strength of numbers to force a smaller vehicle to stop is just typical of impatient people and todays rush rush rush society.

I found that holding the clutch and revving the engine on the approach to the crossing got people to scatter, but I would imagine an airzound must work at least as well to remind them of their mortality and the vehicle heading in their direction ;)
 

jonesy

Legendary Member
2Loose said:
The phenomenon of people trying to save time by risking a crossing close to something that they consider quite safe is annoying, but I often have this even on a motorbike. They see that there is more room in the road to avoid the vehicle, or even using strength of numbers to force a smaller vehicle to stop is just typical of impatient people and todays rush rush rush society.
It is an indication of the poor crossing provision and the inadequate pedestrian phase typically available for pedestrians.

I found that holding the clutch and revving the engine on the approach to the crossing got people to scatter, but I would imagine an airzound must work at least as well to remind them of their mortality and the vehicle heading in their direction ;)
This behaviour however is 'just typical of impatient people and todays rush rush rush society'. :laugh:
 

GrasB

Veteran
Location
Nr Cambridge
jonesy said:
It is an indication of the poor crossing provision and the inadequate pedestrian phase typically available for pedestrians.
Not convinced of this. Where I used to work there was a cross where the lights were sequenced to give more than enough time for people to cross & would switch to amber within about 5s. Once the traffic had stopped people would just walk across the road in front of cars, there were hooters going most of the day as drivers, imo quite rightly, got pissed off with pedestrians ignoring the lights. Sometimes motorist took to almost driving through the stream of pedestrians to start moving again.
 
Top Bottom