For help, advice and discussion about stuff not related to aviation. Play nice: no religion, no politics and no axe grinding please.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 12
User avatar
By OCB
#1894957
Flyin'Dutch' wrote:What, my friends, what, have the Dutch ever done for us!?


Making gin a popular tipple in the U.K.?

Giving us Heineken beer - and thus that classic joke “what does s x in a boat and Heineken have in common? Both are effin close to water” :wink:

Van der Valk?

Little windmill souvenirs playing “Tulips from Amsterdam”

…the latter 2 being solidly embedded features of my 70s childhood for some reason…
Flyin'Dutch', T6Harvard liked this
#1894961
malcolmfrost wrote:...I find it hard to disagree with any of it, unless you believe drivers should be allowed to do what they want regardless. I walk, cycle and drive so in all camps (except horses!)

You have totally the wrong end of the stick, Malcolm. I did not make any comment on the rights, wrongs, or offer an opinion on same. What I am suggesting is that on busy streets with a continual pedestrian flow, opportunities for traffic to turn may be few and far between. This having a knock on effect on queuing traffic.

I say again, suggesting it is not workable (in certain scenarios) ≠ objecting to the concept.

VRB_20kt wrote:I imagine a lot of drivers are going to be in compliance already.

Absolutely, certainly for me holding back a few secs to let people cross (or traffic exit) is common courtesy. When the volume of pedestrians is such that it's not a few secs... :wink:

It is certainly unlikely to be an issue for me very often.
malcolmfrost liked this
User avatar
By Paul_Sengupta
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1894966
malcolmfrost wrote:Basically if you are turning into a road, you should give way to a pedestrian who is about to, or already crossing.


You already had to give way to those already crossing. It's the "about to" which is the issue now...it means people can just carry on walking without looking and stopping if a car is about to turn into the road.
Miscellaneous, T6Harvard, Nick and 1 others liked this
User avatar
By JAFO
#1894979
Paul_Sengupta wrote:
malcolmfrost wrote:Basically if you are turning into a road, you should give way to a pedestrian who is about to, or already crossing.


You already had to give way to those already crossing. It's the "about to" which is the issue now...it means people can just carry on walking without looking and stopping if a car is about to turn into the road.


No, it doesn't. It says that all road users have a responsibility for their own safety and that of other road users.
#1894983
Jim Jones wrote:I think it’s aimed at solving a London problem.

Maybe due living in the sticks, but I'm struggling to understand what problem required fixing and how the changes achieve it? :?

Ingrained habits are hard to change. I certainly won't be stepping out in the hope the motorist turning knows I have right of way. :wink: :shock:
User avatar
By Rob P
#1894987
Miscellaneous wrote:What I am suggesting is that on busy streets with a continual pedestrian flow, opportunities for traffic to turn may be few and far between. This having a knock on effect on queuing traffic.


Indeed it will, which is the long term objective surely. The owner-driven passenger car in the city is an anachronism, the end of which is in sight.

Rob P
User avatar
By JAFO
#1894996
Paul_Sengupta wrote:
JAFO wrote:No, it doesn't. It says that all road users have a responsibility for their own safety and that of other road users.


But that's always been the case, why is something changing?


Perhaps somebody thinks it will get them a promotion.
#1894997
.it means people can just carry on walking without looking and stopping if a car is about to turn into the road.

Had that happen to me a couple of days ago.

Pedestrian walked out in front of me as I was turning into a car park. Their speed and my rate of turn kept them behind the car’s left hand B post robbing me of the chance to spot them.

All at slow speed so stopped in time but it was a bit of a shock. Then there was “The Stare” :evil:
#1895001
JAFO wrote:
Paul_Sengupta wrote:
JAFO wrote:No, it doesn't. It says that all road users have a responsibility for their own safety and that of other road users.


But that's always been the case, why is something changing?


Perhaps somebody thinks it will get them a promotion.

Well, I suppose considered in the context of the ultimate motorist liberator…Smart Motorways. :think: :D
#1895004
With some modern cars with big door pillars for airbags and side impact protection etc it is impossible to see anything looking over the shoulder even for a flexible non-arthritic person so it is nonsense to make it a law to look over shoulder before opening the door with or without Dutch Reach method.

A recommendation to look over the shoulder is a good idea for a vehicle that does not have the limiting blind spots as it is not obvious to some people.

Similarly for looking over the shoulder before lane changing. Some drivers do but many dont either because they were not taught it, not had the near miss, forgotten it, not concentrating fully as too fatigued in the afternoon/evening congestion, or the modern vehicle blind spots make it impossible.

With older cars with less structural blind spots, those drivers/passengers that are also motorcyclists are likely to look over the shoulder anyway from basic motorcycle training.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 12