nunhead_man

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19226144 Read down to see casualty figures - many more at 30mph - later figures elsewhere. Eg this updated 2014 - www.roadsafetyobservatory.com/Evidence/Details/10390 Attachment with thanks from RoadPeace

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- ........................ Despite the car-haters, > we will always need cars/vans/lorries on our > roads.. Need? For an able bodied person, why not cycle to the shops and not drive? Heavy shopping? Use a cargo bike or trailer! We could make do with far fewer short journeys by motor vehicles - and we would be fitter and not fatter too

Indeed this would help in my view as one who as a pedestrian has had several near misses at that corner - one issue being it is difficult to make eye contact with car drivers who are in a rush. But then traffic wanting to go in this direction would be displaced in part to Tintagel Crescent, Elsie Road, Derwent Grove etc perhaps suggesting each should have a barrier for motor vehicles half way along? Peckhamgatecrasher Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Surely the easiest/cheapest thing to do would be > to ban right turns from Lordship Lane into Dulwich > Grove except for buses. The near misses I have > had/seen, all come from cars speeding right to > buck the traffic lights.

> As a daily user of the 37 bus this will be > HORRENDOUS! Also the school buses will be affected > and kids will be late for school and later getting > home. www.onestreet.org/resources-for-increasing-bicycling/115-traffic-evaporation

Fon has been a bit weird recently - my own Fon router in misbehaving

Hey blah blah - that is precisely what I did the first time - and went around the back streets after that until the work was done.

As I said buggie - "Now if the contractors had left a cycle lane as opposed to leaving us fighting it out with pedestrians I'd feel cyclists finally have a place So how about blaming the contractors not the cyclists? Southwark KNOWS how many cyclists use that route in weekday am and pm - if not a lane why not a diversion? buggie Wrote: > > Having been a pedestrian "fighting it out" with > cyclists through the Rye Lane roadworks the other > day, my over riding feeling was get off you bike > and push it for 100yrds. > I was not alone in having a small child with me > and couldn't believe the callous & unthoughtful > attitude of several cyclists who seemed to see it > as a sport to weave around everyone regardless of > anyone else - pretty disrespectful and ironic > given how quickly most cyclists complain about the > lack of respect their given with regard to their > own safety. > > Feel that some cyclists need to learn to treat > others how they'd like to be treated themselves.

Yeah - me too Now if the contractors had left a cycle lan as opposed to leaving us fighting it out with pedestrians I'd feel cyclists finally have a place in the heart of the construction industry - especially in their motor vehicle role in causing death and serious injury to cyclists - about 50% of cases? Blah Blah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > When I cycled down there last night, only a small > section south side of Bournemouth Road junction > was blocked off. It was kind of nice to experience > half of Rye Lane without traffic and made me think > that pedestrianising south of Bournmouth Road, and > re-routing buses down Bournemouth and back round > to meet Peckham Rye could work.

Charles Notice Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > For cyclists the option is to dismount if they > fear they are in danger. Why? - cyclists are part of the obesity / type 2 diabetes and air quality solution, not part of the problem. What about pedestrians - what do you suggest they get off of? (grammer? - yes; not public skool) Car drivers need to get out and push their cars

BrandNewGuy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Bunching is not the issue ? it might result in > staggered gaps, but not in the total number of > buses making the journey. I';m with you, Sue. > Taking longer to make the journey does not > directly affect frequency. As I mentioned, that's > why no-one looks at a tube timetable (apart from > first and last). If trains are every five minutes, > it doesn't matter if they're all twenty minutes > late ? you just jump on the next one. Oh yes it is!! Two thangs about tube trains that differ from buses - apart from the underground bit 1) There is nothing else on the line apart from trains - so no cars parked in bus lanes etc etc 2) They cannot bunch up (signalling systems) nor overtake (railways are like that)

Certainly a confirmed incident - we saw the immediate aftermath when passing

I know I should get out more but .... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bus_bunching in particular ......... "Merely adding more vehicles to the schedule without making other changes has been proven not to be a reliable solution to the problem of bunching"

Hi Teddy teddy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ...........................a fair > few have been stolen from inside the bike park > (the designs of the double stands dont let you > easily secure your rear wheel). ? eh wot I thought this park was secure and camera - ed up?

minder Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Why do cyclists jump red lights? Happened a few > times to me. #They just seem to saunter through. _______________________________________________________ Why do car drivers and motor bikes and scooters jump red lights at 40mph (not "saunter") especially at zebra crossings and light controlled crossings? As a pedestrian I've had to jump out of the way a number of times to avoid being killed.

Yeah - absolutely - I think all those "cyclists get off and walk" signs should be replaced with ones that say "motorists get out and push" yourmomma Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Zebedee Tring Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > Why should cyclists dismount? They have as much > right to use the road as other road users. I doubt > you'd advocate smaller cars taking different > routes to allow faster/bigger cars to use a > motorway.

Interesting - I've go to do this next week and was thinking of going over Lambeth Bridge and then going through Victoria and then down the Kings Road - assume that is less direct?

So car centered :-( You could easily cycle to there from ED with an item or so in your panniers

Drive children to school? What about the safety of those children who walk and cycle?

Similar report from cyclists on the Waterlink Way in Lewisham.................... https://www.facebook.com/groups/bromleycyclists/

I'm interested by the Virgin infra structure - goes back to when in the 1990's NTL installed and provided what was the only domestic supply of optic fibre - implementation was interesting - one place we lived there were boxes in the street but no cables - confused the bods who came around to try to supply our service! And none where we are now either. Making optic fibre joints is not like joining two copper wires together - it is akin to curing glass - you need a quite complex joining jig - e.g. http://www.fibrefab.com/products/tools-test-equipment/fibre-optic-cold-curing-termination-and-inspection-kits/ And you do need to know where the cable runs are - amongst all the 100 year old legacy of "knitting" of pipes and cables under out streets :-)

Re your post Dulwichgirl82; You mention "genuine accidents, things that can't be predicted or stopped" 1) a "surprise" skid - you were going too fast and/or are poorly trained to drive the vehicle 2) car/bike malfunction that couldn't be predicted - no! - poor maintainance or poor original design! 3) in reality probably in many cases mistakes by both parties causing COLLISIONS which on a luckier day would have just been a near miss. ..................... What is wrong with taking responsibility for your actions? 4) "in an ideal world cars and bikes would have some form of separation to be prevent these COLLISIONS where I agree sadly the cyclist is likely to come off worse" - a) we need less motor vehicles including cars - leading to better health, better air quality, less pedestrian and cyclist casualties, clamer and happier streets b) much less chance if 20mph is enforced on low traffic roads and motor vehicles segregated on higher traffic roads with enforced limits over 20mph

London Bridge station rebuild information session Wednesday Oct 29th 5-7pm. Info below. RSVP to Olivia White at [email protected]. Info to me from Team London Bridge

Simple painted cycle lanes are as much use as a chocolate teapot without enforcement, as is the case for advanced stop lines. So segregation is vital on roads with 30mph + speeding (not speedlimits!!). But if 20 mph is enforced, perhaps segregation would not be needed? Also my worry about segregated routes is that cycling trips are increasing fast and facilities built now MUST have 20 years forward growth planned in - unless the separation is made of temporary measures ? c/f the congestion on Tavistock Place

Agree re parking - no probs for us as we use our bikes etc And we have lived around there since 2000 and no flooding - but there are some oddnesses going on with increasing recent heavy downpours

I heard now't This was a real emegency and not our beloved foxes? http://www.foxforest.com/upclose/voicescarry.shtml