Anything wrong with this?

[Tom_kkh]

As I said, IF they're using the crossings, the should dismount. There's nothing in that law (or any other I'm aware of) that states they HAVE to use crossings and can't make turns like a motorised vehicle.

 

http://www.ntu.edu.sg/ohs/safetyforeveryon...n%20Cycling.pdf

 

Bicycle to be ridden on left side of road

8.

Every bicycle shall be ridden close to the left hand edge of the roadway and

in such a manner as not to obstruct vehicles moving at a faster speed. Load

on bicycle not to exceed 18 kg.

7.

(1) No bicycle shall be ridden on the right of another vehicle proceeding in

the same direction except when overtaking such other vehicle.

(2) No bicycle shall be ridden on the right of any two other bicycles

proceeding abreast in the same direction except when overtaking such

other bicycles or on parts of roads or paths set aside for the exclusive

use of bicycles.

(3) Wherever part of a road or a path adjacent to a road has been set

aside for the exclusive use of bicycles, no bicycle shall be used on any

other part of the roadway.

Edited September 11, 2012 by Tom_kkh

[Darryn]

One thing that really bugs the ever loving s--t outta me is this attitude that cycling is mostly a "leisure" activity. As long as it is viewed as a "leisure" activity of course you are going to want to push cyclists from the road, and restrict them to things like parks.

 

As someone that used to cycle to and from work daily, and also could only get to school via bicycle I can very much assure you that for some people cycling is very much a commuting activity and has nothing at all to do with fun or leisure.

 

Once you realise that some people do have a genuine need to be cycling on the same roads that you drive on, then your attitude will be a bit more accepting. And I must say, cycling is a leisure activity seems to be an attitude that is very much prevalent in govt eyes at the moment.

[Darryn]

http://www.ntu.edu.sg/ohs/safetyforeveryon...n%20Cycling.pdf

 

 

(1) No bicycle shall be ridden on the right of another vehicle proceeding in

the same direction except when overtaking such other vehicle.

Key here is "proceeding in the same direction" - if the bike is turning right, and car going straight, then is logical that this cyclist is where he is.

 

 

 

(3) Wherever part of a road or a path adjacent to a road has been set

aside for the exclusive use of bicycles, no bicycle shall be used on any

other part of the roadway.

 

Again here the key word is exclusive - the Park Connector Network is NOT for the exclusive use of bikes - it is for shared use for joggers, rollerbladers and walkers as well.

[Mustank]

This video was posted on Youtube. Do you see anything wrong here?

 

 

Looks pretty good and normal to me, with the cyclist being pretty responsible.

 

FWIW, I live around that area, cycle regularly and had to do a double take to make sure it wasn't me - 'cus I would be riding exactly the same way.

 

Also, it was said in MyPaper today by some govt lackey or other that dun need cycling as a commuting option as the public transport system is enough. [hur]

 

My opinion is obvious - but what does youse fellahs reckon?

 

 

hey this is mcf777's video! he quickly chiat when turning right

[Tom_kkh]

One thing that really bugs the ever loving s--t outta me is this attitude that cycling is mostly a "leisure" activity. As long as it is viewed as a "leisure" activity of course you are going to want to push cyclists from the road, and restrict them to things like parks.

 

As someone that used to cycle to and from work daily, and also could only get to school via bicycle I can very much assure you that for some people cycling is very much a commuting activity and has nothing at all to do with fun or leisure.

 

Once you realise that some people do have a genuine need to be cycling on the same roads that you drive on, then your attitude will be a bit more accepting. And I must say, cycling is a leisure activity seems to be an attitude that is very much prevalent in govt eyes at the moment.

 

its about safety for me. i don mind cyclist on the road so long they don ride like their grandfather's road.

 

Just yesterday, while on the way back home, a "professionally" dressed cyclist just decided to sway right onto the 2nd lane with no regards that I almost knocked into him.... stared at me some more and raised his hands as if scolding me "WTF"........

 

 

[Tom_kkh]

Key here is "proceeding in the same direction" - if the bike is turning right, and car going straight, then is logical that this cyclist is where he is.

 

 

 

(3) Wherever part of a road or a path adjacent to a road has been set

aside for the exclusive use of bicycles, no bicycle shall be used on any

other part of the roadway.

 

Again here the key word is exclusive - the Park Connector Network is NOT for the exclusive use of bikes - it is for shared use for joggers, rollerbladers and walkers as well.

 

 

ok. cyclist should ride on the road

[Darryn]

ok. cyclist should ride on the road

 

Regardless that the Network is shared - it is still my far preferred option over the road Especially weekday mornings when it only receives very light use

 

 

Just a side point, for the Punggol North one - it is good, for some, they are actually a shared footpath, which is much more dangerous

[1fast1]

One thing that really bugs the ever loving s--t outta me is this attitude that cycling is mostly a "leisure" activity. As long as it is viewed as a "leisure" activity of course you are going to want to push cyclists from the road, and restrict them to things like parks.

 

As someone that used to cycle to and from work daily, and also could only get to school via bicycle I can very much assure you that for some people cycling is very much a commuting activity and has nothing at all to do with fun or leisure.

 

Once you realise that some people do have a genuine need to be cycling on the same roads that you drive on, then your attitude will be a bit more accepting. And I must say, cycling is a leisure activity seems to be an attitude that is very much prevalent in govt eyes at the moment.

 

I actually agree with cycling as a valid mode of commuting that should be encouraged, but that doesn't mean cyclists should be encouraged, or even allowed, to go as fast as they can. If they're on the PCNs (as they should be, when they're a viable route), then they should go as slowly as the PCN conditions permit (and should NOT go on the road). If they're on the roads (only when there's no alternative legal path), they should go as fast as conditions allow. If all this means travelling at a max speed of 30 km/hr or even lower, so be it. Cars can go much faster than our limits, yet we have to follow the limits, so why should cycles and cyclists be so darn special?

 

Those guys wearing spandex and riding really expensive gear on weekends ARE leisure cyclists. Leisure cyclists are most often the ones demanding ostensibly equal treatment on the roads (when in actuality, they're actually agitating for preferential treatment). Leisure cyclists are the ones complaining about not being able to go really, really fast on the PCN, so they're "forced" to break the law and use the adjancent road. The true commuters would be flexible and only go as fast as conditions allow, and actually follow the law.

Edited September 11, 2012 by Turboflat4

[1fast1]

Again here the key word is exclusive - the Park Connector Network is NOT for the exclusive use of bikes - it is for shared use for joggers, rollerbladers and walkers as well.

 

You're splitting hairs, just like David did last time. I suggest you write to the authorities and ask for a clarification, citing this Act. Let's see who they agree with.

[Ender]

How do we know that the driver never signal and cyclist never see?

Can't tell if the cyclist turn his head to see the hind car signal or not. But anyway, riding the left side of the lane and turning together with a car is dangerous, same goes to motorcyclist who always to that. They should take up the whole lane by themselves.

 

I always extra alert and concern if a motorcycle shared a lane with me on the left while turning right. I wonder why they can't just take a whole lane behind me.