- Messages
- 7,457
- Edit My Images
- No
I imagine some may need an HGV style 'Wide Load' plate on the back of them too!I wonder if there is a weight carrying limit to e scooters, could end up being stopped by VOSA for weight checks.
and the site receives a small commission
E - Scooters
- Thread starter arclight
- Start date
AndrewFlannigan
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 11,977
- Edit My Images
- No
To be fair, not all...
- Messages
- 4,870
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Bicycles are a menace in pedestrianised areas too. And cars and delivery lorries.
- Messages
- 7,457
- Edit My Images
- No
And pedestrians! Getting in my bloody way while I'm trying to walk somewhere!
- Messages
- 18,340
- Edit My Images
- No
I posted about what I see here. Where I am there are no cars or delivery lorries.
cambsno
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 20,999
- Name
- Simon
- Edit My Images
- Yes
So why not do the same with horse riders? They get in the way, force traffic to slow more than bikes...
- Messages
- 15,804
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
If it is a pedestrianised area there shouldn't be any bikes, cars or delivery lorries.
- Messages
- 15,804
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
No reason why not, but in my experience horse riders only use the roads for a very short distance, usually to get from the stables to a nearby field or paddock or a bridle path.
- Messages
- 4,870
- Edit My Images
- Yes
As if a licensing system could be done for £10 or £20 per person. 
So how would someone with a TT bike, an Audax one, a tourer, a gravel bike, and a load carrier get theirs licensed - would they have 5 plates all the same or five individual licences. How would you stop the plates being stolen?
Probably when cyclists do as much damage to the environment as cars do, it could be worth looking at. Or when insurance and licences are shown to work and all drivers have them, which is not the case at the moment.
So how would someone with a TT bike, an Audax one, a tourer, a gravel bike, and a load carrier get theirs licensed - would they have 5 plates all the same or five individual licences. How would you stop the plates being stolen?
Probably when cyclists do as much damage to the environment as cars do, it could be worth looking at. Or when insurance and licences are shown to work and all drivers have them, which is not the case at the moment.
- Messages
- 15,804
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
It isn't the bike that is licensed, it is the rider. A modern version of the cycling proficiency test is still running, it's available to adults and funded by the Department of Transport. There are independent companies who run the same courses and I doubt they will be expensive as they are aimed at kids as well as adults.As if a licensing system could be done for £10 or £20 per person.
So how would someone with a TT bike, an Audax one, a tourer, a gravel bike, and a load carrier get theirs licensed - would they have 5 plates all the same or five individual licences. How would you stop the plates being stolen?
Probably when cyclists do as much damage to the environment as cars do, it could be worth looking at. Or when insurance and licences are shown to work and all drivers have them, which is not the case at the moment.
The licence can be issued as a result of passing the test. The licence number can then be clearly displayed on the riders back on a hi vis vest.
Having a license has nothing to do with damage to the environment, so I don't know why you keep bothering to mention it.
If a car and hence the motorist is uninsured an ANPR camera will pick it up.
Pointing out that a small minority drive without a license or insurance isn't a valid argument as to why other road users shouldn't have to do it.
That's like saying you should have the right to go out and commit murder because the police failed to catch and prosecute other murderers.
- Messages
- 4,870
- Edit My Images
- Yes
When you did the course and test, what did you think of it?
- Messages
- 15,804
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I only did the cycling proficiency test when I was in primary school, but it taught all the essentials about highway code, hand signals, what you should and shouldn't do. It was all done in a school playground with a car for us to practice cycling around as if parked at the kerb.
I would imagine there is a bit more to it now and from what I have seen kids are now taught and tested on the roads wearing their helmets and a hi vis.
- Messages
- 4,870
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Yes, I imagined when you posted this below that you were indicating that that you did it a long time ago, 40 years?, and had not a lot of idea about what is in the course now.
You can google bikeability courses and find out what they teach cyclists now. It can help driving attitude if drivers understand better why other road users do what they do.
- Messages
- 15,804
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Theres alot of difference in there recommendation of not cycling any closer to the kerb than 50cm (1 ft 7.7 inches and the 6ft you reckon people should cycle from the kerb.
That gives drivers all the understanding they require.
- Messages
- 15,804
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
We have facial recognition cameras for that.
boliston
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 3,959
- Name
- Adrian
- Edit My Images
- No
cyclists have facesWe have facial recognition cameras for that.
- Messages
- 4,870
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Did you google bikeablity and the training given nowadays, or are you still stuck in your cracked record of 40 years ago? Go on the course, update yourself. Get out of your pothole.
To remind you what I actually said that elicited the response quoted here:
"You can google bikeability courses and find out what they teach cyclists now. It can help driving attitude if drivers understand better why other road users do what they do."
- Messages
- 15,804
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Never yet found any potholes near the kerb and if you are riding a suitable bike, they don't create a problem anyway.
Nothing to do with 40yrs ago
From Bikeability
"Understanding Primary Road Position
When riding in the primary position, travel at a reasonable speed as part of the traffic flow. If, however, traffic is building up behind and the road ahead is clear, move to the secondary position to avoid obstructing other road-users unnecessarily."
"Understanding Secondary Road Position
The secondary road position (roughly 1 metre to the left of the traffic flow and not less than 0.5 metres to the edge of the road) may be appropriate if the road is wide enough to allow safe overtaking, and the rider’s safety is not reduced by riding in this position.
The correct choice of road position can be used to help riders affect driver behaviour."
Perhaps you're the one that needs to go on the course.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 4,870
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Glad to see you finally googled it, well done! 
From your quote above: "The secondary road position may be appropriate if the road is wide enough to allow safe overtaking"
That's pretty clear. This is what you said:
"Of course they do. When I was a kid and teenager and adult, you rode by the kerb, you caused little hindrance but traffic could overtake and keep moving, then someone decided that more room should be left when overtaking, now that gap has changed again, so instead of being able to overtake safely and still remain on the correct side of the road, motorists now have to wait for a suitable sized gap in the oncoming traffic before they can overtake. Thus traffic starts building up behind the cyclist. At best maybe two cars get to overtake and then the rest have to wait for the next gap."
I've highlighted how things have changed since you did your test 40 years ago. And the driver focussed attitude about what a driver thinks is safe.
Like I said: It can help driving attitude if drivers understand better why other road users do what they do.
From your quote above: "The secondary road position may be appropriate if the road is wide enough to allow safe overtaking"
That's pretty clear. This is what you said:
"Of course they do. When I was a kid and teenager and adult, you rode by the kerb, you caused little hindrance but traffic could overtake and keep moving, then someone decided that more room should be left when overtaking, now that gap has changed again, so instead of being able to overtake safely and still remain on the correct side of the road, motorists now have to wait for a suitable sized gap in the oncoming traffic before they can overtake. Thus traffic starts building up behind the cyclist. At best maybe two cars get to overtake and then the rest have to wait for the next gap."
I've highlighted how things have changed since you did your test 40 years ago. And the driver focussed attitude about what a driver thinks is safe.
Like I said: It can help driving attitude if drivers understand better why other road users do what they do.
- Messages
- 15,804
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
But you said about riding in the middle of the road (primary position) and not moving over ( secondary position) to allow following cars ease of overtaking.Glad to see you finally googled it, well done!
From your quote above: "The secondary road position may be appropriate if the road is wide enough to allow safe overtaking"
That's pretty clear. This is what you said:
"Of course they do. When I was a kid and teenager and adult, you rode by the kerb, you caused little hindrance but traffic could overtake and keep moving, then someone decided that more room should be left when overtaking, now that gap has changed again, so instead of being able to overtake safely and still remain on the correct side of the road, motorists now have to wait for a suitable sized gap in the oncoming traffic before they can overtake. Thus traffic starts building up behind the cyclist. At best maybe two cars get to overtake and then the rest have to wait for the next gap."
I've highlighted how things have changed since you did your test 40 years ago. And the driver focussed attitude about what a driver thinks is safe.
Like I said: It can help driving attitude if drivers understand better why other road users do what they do.
Which I pointed out isn't likely to instill a positive attitude in drivers.
It creates just one thought of why cyclists do that and it's not a nice one.
If you show respect for other road users, they will do the same for you.
- Messages
- 4,870
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I didn't. Could you point to where I did?
- Messages
- 15,804
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Your wish is my command.
Yes, 6ft from road edge is sensible. Cyclists are traffic and should not think that they should get out of the way of motorists at any cost. They can do so when it is safe. Often a driver's perception of what is safe is not actually safe for a cyclist.
Unfortunately, as I've said up-thread, we have developed a culture where many car users think that they are more equal than others, and behave accordingly. Some of these even cycle
- Messages
- 4,870
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Like I thought, I did not say what you seem to think I did. I don't think you read it properly, it appears that you saw it through a polarising filter, with bits you didn't want to acknowledge removed.
Back on ignore, unfortunately.
Back on ignore, unfortunately.
- Messages
- 15,804
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Put me on ignore all you like, but even bikeability doesn't show the primary position as being as far as 6ft from the kerb, totally unnecessary.
The fact that you feel that is a perfect distance and you wouldn't feel safe further, speaks volumes to the fact that you have no intention of moving over to allow cars to overtake.
Perhaps you just like trolling on the road just as you do on here.
- Messages
- 4,870
- Edit My Images
- Yes
The usual width of a single lane is 12ft.
"Riding in the primary position is sometimes called taking the lane as the cyclist takes the position normally taken by the motorist, who is thus prevented from attempting to overtake."
So, maybe 6ft is over-egging it slightly. Let's say 5ft. Or more importantly, that it is the position in which the motorist is prevented from overtaking, until it is safe. Riders should take secondary to avoid obstructing other road-users unnecessarily, but that does not mean moving to secondary when it is unsafe. To that end, whether 6ft or 4 ft, the driver behind should not be able to overtake. That is what Primary is about.
By all means accuse me of trolling, if it helps you.
Things you said:
"Riding in the primary position is sometimes called taking the lane as the cyclist takes the position normally taken by the motorist, who is thus prevented from attempting to overtake."
So, maybe 6ft is over-egging it slightly. Let's say 5ft. Or more importantly, that it is the position in which the motorist is prevented from overtaking, until it is safe. Riders should take secondary to avoid obstructing other road-users unnecessarily, but that does not mean moving to secondary when it is unsafe. To that end, whether 6ft or 4 ft, the driver behind should not be able to overtake. That is what Primary is about.
By all means accuse me of trolling, if it helps you.
Things you said:
The gym I go to is on a country road, not overly busy more a steady stream of cars. The local cycling club seem to favour it for some reason, mostly it will be a single rider or a pair, one behind the other, so not really a problem and usually only a second or so before there is a gap in oncoming traffic to allow people to overtake. But if it is anymore than two then they become the obnoxious problem, two or three riding side by side, holding up cars behind and making it difficult to overtake, and you have to hang right back to watch for a gap to overtake.
If I get such a group that won't show some consideration for everyone else, lucky for me my car comes with the means to be even more considerate. It has 4 driving modes, one of them being Sport mode which gives a sharper throttle response as well as better handling. A byproduct of the sharper throttle response is a bit of backfire when changing gear. Moderate acceleration may produce a small pop from the exhaust, but to get past the group quickly requires harder acceleration, which results on more than just a pop , it's more like loud rapid machine gun fire. It must frighten the life out of them.
- Messages
- 15,804
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Not sure why you felt the need to quote somethings I said and then highlight some of it in bold.
But I will add to those, just for you. My car will pop and bang under acceleration even in normal mode, it just does it more so in sport mode. I always put the car in sport mode because the mapping increases the torque, this means better economy. I don't put it in sport mode in the hope of finding some anti social cyclists.
Because roads can be in poor condition, it is safer to ride a bike with suspension and knobbly tyres, debris, potholes and broken glass don't become a problem. Debris can end up anywhere in the road by the way.
Thankfully all the lycra clad cyclists who ride on their own on any of the roads around here, do so safely and considerately and they are no more than 18" from the kerb. More than enough to clear any drain gratings.
Cyclists don't to be as far out in the road as a motorist driving a car. A cyclist has the advantage of a higher line of sight and also being closer to the front of their bike than a motorist will be to the front of their car. A cyclist also has better alround visibility.
- Messages
- 4,870
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Your words. If you are uncomfortable with some of them in bold, then that's your issue and you should consider why you are uncomfortable.
- Messages
- 15,804
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Why on earth would they make me uncomfortable?
- Messages
- 4,870
- Edit My Images
- Yes
"Not sure why you felt the need to quote somethings I said and then highlight some of it in bold."
Not sure why you felt the need to post this... there was no need to... were you uncomfortable with your words being emboldened?
Look, there are lots of differing views out there, but what is important is that roads are not just for cars, they are for all road users.
The best way that that can happen is if all users (and in any situation, primarily those that can cause the greatest harm) are aware of the needs and vulnerability of the more vulnerable users. You wish to have cyclists hug the kerb. That is not the best place for them in a mixed use environment. You post about making your car make a nice noise to frighten the life out of cyclists. A smiley doesn't really take away from the intent - you know how to do it, you know the settings on your vehicle. It does not come across as hypothetical, but hopefully it is just internet bravado...
In life:
There are a******e pedestrians
There are a******e cyclists
There are a******e car drivers
There are a******e performance car drivers
There are a******e SUV drivers
There are a******e van drivers
There are a******e lorry drivers
There are a******e Challenger 2 drivers
The list increases in size and kinetic energy as you go down it, and decreases in vulnerability. The bigger you are, the more care you should take of others.
Some kind of Presumed Liability will come in law, it is on its way.
Chill and find ways of getting on with other road users, rather than claiming that drains are fine for cyclists and the cyclists shouldn't be in your way, and if they are you are entitled to swap to a nice performance setting in your car in order to frighten the life out of them. That quote of yours is not edifying, however many smileys there were.
Sit behind a horse rider and take care.
Sit behind some cyclists and beat yourself up for your own error in assuming you'd have no hold ups on your route
Chill.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 15,804
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
There fixed that for you.
After that excessive and rather strange tantrum, it appears you are the one who needs to chill.
Tell me, in the past, have you fallen off a bike and hit your head on a central reservation?
- Messages
- 18,340
- Edit My Images
- No
I’m literally watching a guy getting a ticket now for riding one of these in a pedestrian area.
Box Brownie
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 17,645
- Edit My Images
- No
Perhaps the car insurance companies and/or individuals need to take(on evidence as noted above the illegality of use on public areas) action against the person so causing damage. But how???
AndrewFlannigan
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 11,977
- Edit My Images
- No
As has been suggested elsewhere: cyclists should be obliged to wear high-vis vests with a registration number on the back. Then they can be forced to carry insurance and be identified if they are involved in a collission or break the rules,
Last edited:
cambsno
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 20,999
- Name
- Simon
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Really? Very difficult to have a readable number plate on a bike (unless you are next to it) and as all bikes are different where can you put it? Some have the saddle low, others high.
What about pedestrians who break rules like stepping in front of bikes/cars, maybe we could get them to wear a personal number and hi viz too?
All that will do is put people off using bikes which is not good for the health of our country.
AndrewFlannigan
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 11,977
- Edit My Images
- No
Please reread what I wrote, then you may be able to make a sensible response. :banghead:
cambsno
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 20,999
- Name
- Simon
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I would if it was a sensible suggestion. The costs of setting up a registration scheme for millions of people is huge. And what stops me nicking someone else or making my own up?
Do kids need one, that's a new hi viz every year or so as they grow.
- Messages
- 4,870
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Most rider
It is an utterly ridiculous suggestion. Badly thought out and harmful to public health and the environment.
AndrewFlannigan
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 11,977
- Edit My Images
- No
So you disagree with me.
