Best way to travel 5 miles to a train station?

Mitosis are held in by myclipsis.

Colin

 

[/QUOTE]

So recumbents are really an offshoot where chain duplication is not followed
by chain separation..

Interesting..

...d

 

Everybody does - few plants survive the cooking process ;-)

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington
University

 

Priceless.

 

The size of the wheel makes no difference.
But if the child is under the age of criminal responsibility...

 

I like your use of the verb 'to Brompton'.

And there's another good point underlying your comment: if you start
looking at a Brompton as an alternative to taxis, rather than as an
alternative to the Tube, it pays for itself even quicker.

On that basis, you might even be able to get your employer to pay for
one on expenses. Though maybe more realistic would be getting them to
bung a tenner your way every time you use the Brompton instead of taking
a taxi.

d.

 

That's as maybe, but it's not as pervasive and is hardly a decent
excuse. (And there's no 'perhaps' about it, it *is* wrong for an adult
to cycle on a pavement where it is not explicitly stated that they can,
unless the Highway Code gives them a get-out clause, e.g. leaving a
driveway. You can't pick and choose traffic regulations or any other
laws ... otherwise, I'd like to opt out of income tax, please

It's not just about a blind adherence to the pronouncements of
government and the powers that be (because we all know that, cough, the
government is right, cough, and has the best interests, cough, cough, of
us all at heart, cough, and knows best, cough, sorry, I think that's
cleared it). Where traffic law is concerned it's also about predictability.

If you're obeying the rules, generally speaking, other road users (and
pedestrians) are getting clear signals about what you are doing and what
you plan to do. Break the rules and suddenly you're a loose cannon who
can't be predicted and is dangerous, to yourself and others.

You can't point to others doing the same thing as an excuse, it didn't
work in the playground at school and it doesn't hold water now.

 

There are certainly problems with perceptions on all sides. There's a
piece of road I regularly ride (Priory Lane, leading to Richmond Park)
which has a shared pavement to the side of the road - and the number of
times I have aggressive drivers beeping their horns and driving too
close beside me shouting at me telling me I shouldn't be on the road,
but the pavement, is not funny. Trying to point out the finer nuances of
difference between voluntary and obligatory generally doesn't work in
the split second you have (even assuming that they'd listen or understand).

After all when you're doing 25+mph, you prefer to share a road with a
car, not a pavement with a pedestrian.

But I disagree with the general thrust of what you're saying. I think
that most pavement cyclists know they shouldn't be there, they're just
doing it anyway because the chances of any punishment is so slim as to
not worry them.

But why ride on the pavement when the road is generally less blocked
(people, lamp-posts, broken paving slabs) and generally more conducive
to getting from A to B without hinderence. That is the bit that really
confuses me. (After all, if you're going to ride on the pavement, you're
going to go straight through red lights, aren't you?)

 

Because for generations we have been told that cyclists can only be safe if
they get out of the way of the cars. God forbid that drivers should be
required to drive carefully (note the conspicuous exemption from Michael
Howard's "zero tolerance" approach, for instance), so the only solution
which occurs to the sheeple is to ride on the pavement.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington
University

 

Well, it's entirely your choice. But I'd suggest you at least check out
the opposition, before you go throwing the towel in. ;-)[1]

http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/web/public.nsf/Documents/Cyclefest


[1] Smiley included to piss of packer. )[1]

--
Alex
BMW R1150GS
DIAABTCOD#3 MSWF#4 UKRMFBC#6 Ibw#35 BOB#8
http://www.team-ukrm.co.uk
Windy's "little soldier"

 

I don't think anyone is condoning it. It is foolish and dangerous.
However, the point (that you're much more likely to be hit or injured
or killed by a car on the pavement than by a bike on the pavement) is
still true.

 

I would have thought it was easier to look _warm_ on a scooter in
typical Italian weather, BICBW.

 

Log on to Ryanair . com and take your pick of out of the way stations....?

 

chris harrison wrote

scum on push bikes.

 

Wrong. You can cycle at less than 10mph.

If you walked gently for 25 minutes you wouldn't be covering the same
distance as the 5 miles in your cycling for 25 minutes example. It's
stupid to compare the 2 examples.

Daytona

 

Hah! You should see my dining room!

--
(Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
/-\ You have discovered a security flaw in a Microsoft product. You
|-| can report this issue to our security tesm. Would you like to
| | * Be completely ignored (default)?
| | * Receive a form email full of platitudes about how much we care?
\_/ * Spend hours helping us fix this problem for free?

 

You should try riding around on a bike with a lefty fork. People just
can't get their heads round it at all. You see them look once, look
twice, point, jabber excitedly. I've more than once had very excited
people telling me to stop at once because my bike is broken.

 

I don't believe you're right, but I'd hate to be categoric about it.

 

Ah. So as a non-newspaper-reading, non-sandal-owning, non-vegetarian
managing director I have to stop riding my bicycle now, do I? Cone on,
that doesn't even begin to be a good troll.

 

No, but you're obviously not that serious about it.