Cyclists

pwnt? Haw, haw, haw. You've just shot yerself in the foot there fellah. It's the velocity squared. So the velocity is the dominant factor.
I didn't discount mass m (v)squared. You seem to be suggesting that 14stone man doing say 20kph versus some 7 stone doing 40kph have equal momentum? They don't

A honda 50 weighs 75 kg and can do 80km/h

A bicycle weighs approx 15 kg and can do about 30km/h

Allowing for the fact that the person on both is the same weight, how does your theory work again?
 
A honda 50 weighs 75 kg and can do 80km/h

A bicycle weighs approx 15 kg and can do about 30km/h

Allowing for the fact that the person on both is the same weight, how does your theory work again?



As I explained earlier, it's to do with the speed through the lights. You were trying to discount any consequences of cyclist going through the lights. I was saying that someone crawling through the lights on a Honda 50 could potentailly cause less damage than someone gunning through on a pushbike. Thus the question is raised should the Honda 50 driver be permitted crawl through the lights with minimal likely consequences - or is it the fact that it's a motorised vehicle that would have you say it shouldn't be allowed break the lights.
 
As I explained earlier, it's to do with the speed through the lights. You were trying to discount any consequences of cyclist going through the lights. I was saying that someone crawling through the lights on a Honda 50 could potentailly cause less damage than someone gunning through on a pushbike. Thus the question is raised should the Honda 50 driver be permitted crawl through the lights with minimal likely consequences - or is it the fact that it's a motorised vehicle that would have you say it shouldn't be allowed break the lights.

Is that the sound of some furious back peddling I hear? (pun intended)
Heres the direct quote I responded to:

Going on your "doesn't cause harm" bs then someone on a Honda 50 should be OK to go through the odd traffic light because it doesn't cause harm. Where do you draw the line then? I think it should be that all road users obey the rules of the road - you appear to be suggesting the rules of the road should only apply to motorised vehicles. Is that what you're saying?
 
Stall the ball there. You can't seriously be suggesting that cyclists breaking red lights isn't dangerous but chiding other road users for doing the same. Either bikes are entitled to be on the road or they're not (I think they are). But if they're on the road they should obey the rules of the road.

Going on your "doesn't cause harm" bs then someone on a Honda 50 should be OK to go through the odd traffic light because it doesn't cause harm. Where do you draw the line then? I think it should be that all road users obey the rules of the road - you appear to be suggesting the rules of the road should only apply to motorised vehicles. Is that what you're saying?

"You can't seriously be suggesting that cyclists breaking red lights isn't dangerous but chiding other road users for doing the same. "

Yes, that is exactly my point. It is not the same. Cyclists breaking red lights is not as much as a concern as motorists breaking red lights. In the same way that I don't really worry about pedestrians or joggers breaking red lights. It's statistically less significant. BTW, I haven't seen someone on a honda 50 in the city centre in quite a long time. I'd be far more concerned about speeding cars at junctions than cyclists or honda-50 drivers.

If you were doing a road safety audit on a junction which included an anlaysis of user behaviour, and you found that 5% of drivers broke red lights and 20% of cyclists broke red lights, which would raise more concern from a road-safety perspective? The 5% of drivers or the 20% of cyclists? It'd be the 5%.
 
Is that the sound of some furious back peddling I hear? (pun intended)
Heres the direct quote I responded to:



No it's not. You're trying to claim that it's OK for bicycles to break the lights by dint of tehm not being likely (on occasion they can) to cause damage. I pointed out that depends heavily on their speed through the junction. THe H50 was the smallest motorised vehicle i could think of and I was talking about it crawling through.

The question remains should it be down to the liklihood of causing damage - in which case a H50 crawling should be OK, or is it down to road users obeying road rules (which I think it should).

As for cars trucks etc - of course they shouldn't break lights, I've not seen anyone here ever suggesting that they should.

Point remains, if as cyclists do, you want to be treated as having a right to be on the road, then you should obey the rules of the road which are there for ALL users of the road. Not just for motorised vehicles. Simples
 
WTF?

A honda 50 has the potential to travel up to 80km/h and weighs more than a bike

A bike has the potential to travel up to say 30km/h under normal circumstances and weighs significantly less than a Honda 50

Therefore, the potential to inflict serious or fatal injuries on someone else is massively different.. surely this is beyond dispute?

...what about a fat fella ?
I mean orca fat like
..on one of those electric bikes....
pootling along at..... let's say....40Kmph...

Should they obey the lights?
That's a lot of momentum....
 
EVENT GUIDE - HIGHLIGHT
Lyra
Live At The Marquee

16th Jun 2024 @ 7:00 pm
More info..

A Matter Of Time

Crawford Art Gallery, Tomorrow @ 10am

More events ▼
Top