Road signs

[dennis]

Really. I am the driver that leaves a gap between me and the vehicle in front so idiots can overtake and have somewhere to go rather than pulling into my side. I bet you don't. I doubt if you have ever thought about it.

You said it.

I bet I don't

Its too long because of the idiots that drive too fast. I have never seen one where its too short.

Its not a problem for good drivers, we don't go into the backside of speeders. Not even the ones that overtake, pull in and jump on the brakes at the speed camera they have just seen.

[dennis]

They slowed it to 70. Just think how much worse it can be when they drive at 100 mph. If its really bad you can get them to install a barrier to reduce the noise.

All the tarmac on motorways is much quieter than it used to be. The new porous stuff is even quieter, when they get to your stretch you will probably notice. Unless the idiots speed more because it sounds quieter and they don't look at their speedo. Just think what its like for the poor buggers next to the few remaining bits of concrete motorway.

[dennis]

Some of them are just plain stupid and I tell them so. They don't like it. Especially the drivers who can never accept that they are the ones who are wrong. People are never wrong when it comes to their politics, religion or driving.

[dennis]

He probably thought you were too close. Are you sure you weren't too close?

[Roger]

The message from Dave contains these words:

I haven't been anywhere near the M25 and was relying on the media reports that claimed the variable limits had been an unqualified success. So have I been conned? The argument for the limits seem to be that if you slow the traffic down the gaps in the inner lanes fill up increasing capacity and with no change of lane overtaking there are no braking waves reverberating down the outer lanes. (But see below).

In the mid 70s I used to commute on the M6 between Stafford and Walsall and it was overcrowded even then. I now live in Yorkshire and have travelled to South Wales several times a year since about 1986. I have consistently avoided the M6/M5/Ross Spur route preferring instead to take my chances on the A49 or the A483. My main problem going there is getting past Manchester on what is now the M60 before the traffic grinds to a halt at about 7 am. I can't see how variable speed limits help when there are 3 or 4 lanes full of stationary traffic.

[dennis]

The idea is to get the traffic moving at the ideal speed. Too fast and it stalls like on the M6 j4-j10. If you didn't see the need to limit the speed then it was probably working as intended.

[Mark]

If you did this then you shouldn't be allowed to drive.

[Roger]

The message from Dave contains these words:

Yes. It was I believe during a discussion about tailgating and/or overtaking several years ago but I can't remember what the thread title was. I have just tried a search but Google isn't co-operating at the moment. I can't get even a single hit where Roger and Dennis appear in the same message. Roger alone picks up a few messages by Roger Mills and Dennis pulls out even less.

Ironic really but I didn't killfile Dennis at the time mainly on the basis of his brass face in admitting he deliberately obstructed those who wanted to overtake him.

[Mark]

Very true. A lot of motorists appear to have no idea what it is like to use a two wheeled vehicle. Pot holes and road debris are a much bigger problem, for example.

[Clumsy Bastard]

they said it would reduce journey times, it didn't. so they said it reduced accidents, which it did a bit. Many times I use it the limit set is above what the traffic is doing,sometimes it holds you up for no apparent reason, they would of course say "aha we know more than you" I wonder if they do?

[Steve Walker]

Judging by the fact that I have on a number of occasions seen a sign saying that all is clear ahead, followed by a sign saying "debris in road 40", then a sign saying "end", where the "debris in road" and "end" signs are so close that they are visible at the same time and there is absolutely nothing there, I don't beleive they have a clue what's going on half the time!

SteveW

[Clot]

Careful, you are in danger of falling into another respondent's approach to logic. ;)

[dennis]

Roger Chapman

lying pratt!

[Dave Liquorice]

Pedant.

Because there is a difference, that you seem unable grasp, between the action of riding a bicycle ("no cycling") and places where bicycles are prohibited. Bicycles can be permitted in areas but they should not be ridden.

[Mike Barnes]

I'm baffled. Above, you call me a "pedant" for making exactly that distinction regarding a motorway (which was your example). In the next breath you think I'm unable to make the distinction.

So, to clarify things, I'd like you to describe one of those areas where bicycles are permitted but they should not be ridden[1]. I genuinely have no idea what you're talking about. When we've clarified that I'll be interested to see how that makes the omission of the bar on the "no cycling" sign useful.

[1] If I'm not mistaken, pushing a cycle also counts as cycling, because it's "propelling" a cycle. Well, you did call me a pedant :-)

[Dave]

If he was taking up 2/3rds of a road that can only get 2 cars side by side, then to him, it would be too close.

When a bunch of cyclists use that road, they use all the width, forcing drivers to stop.

Dave

[Jules]

There is no Cod?

[Clive George]

You are mistaken :-) Crank vs Brooks - that was pushing across a crossing, but it seems to be accepted that it's entirely fair to push along a footway too. (ask in uk.legal if you want several vociferous people to disagree with me).

Station platforms is one place - can push but not ride bike there.

Pedestrianised areas are generally fine, but private shopping malls tend not to be.

The only cases I've heard where people have been forbidden to push their bike are on private land, ie the abovementioned shopping malls.

Re the bar/no bar thing, it is an interesting question. Theoretically a right hand bend inside a red circle does mean no right turn, but I'm wondering if it's just too easily confused, so needs the bar as well. No cycling signs don't appear to offer the same potential for confusion, so can use the simpler form - easily comparable to the "beware low flying motorbikes" sign, which most people seem to understand.

[ARWadsworth]

But the hard shoulder is only used when the speed limits are at 50 or below. People do not speed as there are too many cameras. The hard shoulders are constantly montiored.

When traffic is that heavy you are just as likely to break down in any lane.

Adam

[ARWadsworth]

Very early one Sunday morning I passed a naked bloke running down the hard sholder of the M67. I phoned the police and operator asked "can you description him please?"

I am not sure how many naked blokes run down the M67 hard shoulder at 5 in the morning for the police to want a description of them.

Adam