Road rager takes out Aussie cycle champ pack

pm0203
Posts: 28
Joined: Thu May 08, 2008 10:09 am

Postby pm0203 » Tue May 13, 2008 3:27 pm

They actually think that their next step to oblivion is when OIL runs dry and they will have to ride bikes.

Many times I notice road rage from people with bogan cars that just holding together by tissue paper, and if one thing breaks, they will have to ride a bike!

Jason the supposed driver called in the Ray Hadley and (if I can ever get to hear it), he makes up a very good story which is half believable.

Hawkeye

Postby Hawkeye » Tue May 13, 2008 3:28 pm

tenspeed wrote:Letter in Monday's SMH from someone in Mascot (who ought to know?) says that they were cycling illegally, road is "clearly signposted with directions to the adjacent cycleway" etc etc.


As usual, misinformation rules.:roll:

Cycleways adjacent to roads are only compulsory for cyclists if marked "Bike Lane". Otherwise, they are entirely optional. This is quite clearly spelled out in the Oz and NSW road rules.

I rarely use these shared-use paths as they're just too dangerous, especially where they cut across roads at T-intersections. Drivers just aren't looking for cyclists on the path as they turn off into the side street and across the cyclists' path. I prefer my chances on the road, where I don't have to deal with unpredictable humans and unleashed pets, and where I am riding where drivers look.

User avatar
Aushiker
Posts: 22225
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2007 1:55 pm
Location: Fremantle, WA
Contact:

Postby Aushiker » Tue May 13, 2008 3:58 pm

j.r.hawkins wrote:As usual, misinformation rules.:roll:

Cycleways adjacent to roads are only compulsory for cyclists if marked "Bike Lane". Otherwise, they are entirely optional. This is quite clearly spelled out in the Oz and NSW road rules.

Can you point to the actual rules on this? I don't think we have something similar in our WA rules which I assume are based on the uniform code.

Andrew

User avatar
Bnej
Posts: 2880
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2006 11:43 pm
Location: Katoomba, NSW

Postby Bnej » Tue May 13, 2008 4:16 pm

Aushiker wrote:Can you point to the actual rules on this?


RTA wrote:247 Riding in a bicycle lane on a road
(1) The rider of a bicycle riding on a length of road with a bicycle
lane designed for bicycles travelling in the same direction as
the rider must ride in the bicycle lane unless it is impracticable
to do so.
Offence provision.
Note Rule 153 defines a bicycle lane and deals with the use of bicycle
lanes by other vehicles.
(2) In this rule:
road does not include a road-related area.
Note Road-related area includes the shoulder of a road — see rule 13.

User avatar
Aushiker
Posts: 22225
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2007 1:55 pm
Location: Fremantle, WA
Contact:

Postby Aushiker » Tue May 13, 2008 4:20 pm

Hi Bnej

I guess I am missing something here, but the section you quoted says cyclists must ride in a bike lane, unless impracticable to do so. This seems a different issue to the one raised.

Andrew

User avatar
suspectinoz
Posts: 62
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 2:06 pm
Location: Kiama, NSW

Postby suspectinoz » Tue May 13, 2008 4:42 pm

I think the description of what a Bicycle Lane is needs to be clarified. I think the rule mentioned above applies to a Bicycle Lane that is painted (?) on an existing road, I guess that the "impartible to do so" may refer to cars parked on the side of the road or something else blocking it, meaning a cyclist would have to move into the actual road.

I'm not sure the rule clarify’s what a cyclist can/cannot do if there is a Cycle Lane (or shared pathway) that is completely removed from the road. Does a cyclist have to use the lane/path or can they chose whichever they like?
Giant OCR-3 ('07)
_@
_- \,
(*)/ (*)

Hawkeye

Postby Hawkeye » Tue May 13, 2008 4:46 pm

Offense Provision:
247 Riding in a bicycle lane on a road ($44 fine)
(1) The rider of a bicycle riding on a length of road with a bicycle
lane designed for bicycles travelling in the same direction as the
rider must ride in the bicycle lane unless it is impracticable to do
so. NSW: Only applies where there is a bike lane sign (bike logo
above ‘LANE’) beside the road. NOT where only bike logo on road
.
(2) In this rule road does not include a road-related area.

Definitions:
153 Bicycle lanes
(1) A driver (except the rider of a bicycle) must not drive...<snipped>...in the bicycle lane.
(4) A bicycle lane is a marked lane, or the part of a marked lane:
(a) beginning at a bicycle lane sign applying to the lane; and
(b) ending at the nearest of the following:
(i) an end bicycle lane sign applying to the lane;
(ii) an intersection (unless the lane is at the unbroken side of
the continuing road at a T–intersection or continued across
the intersection by broken lines);
(iii) if the road ends at a dead end — the end of the road.

13 What is a road-related area
(1) A road-related area is any of the following:
(a) an area that divides a road;
(b) a footpath or nature strip adjacent to a road;
(c) an area that is not a road and that is open to the public and
designated for use by cyclists or animals;
(d) an area that is not a road and that is open to or used by the
public for driving, riding or parking vehicles.
(2) However, unless the contrary intention appears, a reference in
the Australian Road Rules (except in this Division) to a roadrelated
area includes a reference to:
(a) an area so far as the area is declared, under another law of
this jurisdiction, to be a road-related area for the Australian Road
Rules; or
(b) any shoulder of a road; or
(c) any other area that is a footpath or nature strip as defined in
the dictionary;
but does not include a reference to an area so far as the area is
declared, under another law of this jurisdiction, not to be a roadrelated
area for the Australian Road Rules.

User avatar
Aushiker
Posts: 22225
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2007 1:55 pm
Location: Fremantle, WA
Contact:

Postby Aushiker » Tue May 13, 2008 5:04 pm

Thanks J.r. That is interesting. I am pretty sure we don't have anything like that here.

Andrew

User avatar
Bnej
Posts: 2880
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2006 11:43 pm
Location: Katoomba, NSW

Postby Bnej » Tue May 13, 2008 5:10 pm

Need a state government ad campaign, to correct misconceptions and encourage good behaviour.

User avatar
il padrone
Posts: 22931
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
Location: Heading for home.

Postby il padrone » Tue May 13, 2008 5:42 pm

Aushiker wrote:
j.r.hawkins wrote:As usual, misinformation rules.:roll:

Cycleways adjacent to roads are only compulsory for cyclists if marked "Bike Lane". Otherwise, they are entirely optional. This is quite clearly spelled out in the Oz and NSW road rules.

Can you point to the actual rules on this? I don't think we have something similar in our WA rules which I assume are based on the uniform code.


What constitutes a bike lane is clearly spelled out in the road rules in Victoria, and there are lots near me that are not legally bike lanes because they have not posted signs (actual signs on a pole - a bike logo on the road is not a legal sign). With the National Road Rules now, NSW road rules should be essentially the same, maybe even same rule number

Rule 153, Part 4

"A bicycle lane is a marked lane, or part of a marked lane -
(a) beginning at a bicycle lane sign applying to the lane; and
(b) ending at the nearest of the following -
(i) an end bicycle lane sign applying to the lane;
(ii) an intersection (unless the lane is at the unbroken side of the
continuing road at a T-intersection or continued across the
intersection by broken lines);
(iii) if the road ends at a dead end - the end of the road."


Specific 'Bike Lane' sign and 'Bike Lane end' signs are shown in the rule. No sign = no bike lane under law. And by implication, after each intersection there should be a new bike lane sign, unless the lane is continued across the intersection with broken lines.
Mandatory helmet law?
"An unjustified and unethical imposition on a healthy activity."

User avatar
chuckchunder
Posts: 384
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 12:18 pm

Postby chuckchunder » Tue May 13, 2008 8:08 pm

Aushiker wrote:Thanks J.r. That is interesting. I am pretty sure we don't have anything like that here.

Andrew


Andrew we do - see the WA Road Traffic Code 2000 Rule 213 for the "use the bike lane rule" and Rule 3 for the definition of a bike lane.

cheers

glen

Hawkeye

Postby Hawkeye » Tue May 13, 2008 9:33 pm

In other words, apart from the section numbers, WA is functionally identical to the NSW rules and a verbatim pull from the Australian Road Rules.

Ha! Dontcha love these armchair lawyers pontificating on these newspaper poll sites. All hot-and-bothered emotion and no substance whatsoever. God forbid there be any facts involved. :lol:

User avatar
Parrott
Posts: 2960
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2007 8:45 pm

Postby Parrott » Tue May 13, 2008 9:41 pm

Kalgrm wrote:Too late, I got in first.... :P


Thanks Graeme, can't be too careful, some of them might be able to read :o

User avatar
Kalgrm
Super Mod
Super Mod
Posts: 9653
Joined: Fri May 25, 2007 5:21 pm
Location: Success, WA
Contact:

Postby Kalgrm » Tue May 13, 2008 9:52 pm

Parrott wrote:
Kalgrm wrote:Too late, I got in first.... :P


Thanks Graeme, can't be too careful, some of them might be able to read :o

Wasn't me - one of my moderating friends must have gotten nervous! :)

Cheers,
Graeme

(I'm guessing MB)
Think outside the double triangle.
---------------------
Music was better when ugly people were allowed to make it ....

User avatar
mikesbytes
Super Mod
Super Mod
Posts: 19153
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:42 pm
Location: Tempe, Sydney
Contact:

Postby mikesbytes » Tue May 13, 2008 9:59 pm

j.r.hawkins wrote:Offense Provision:
247 Riding in a bicycle lane on a road ($44 fine)
(1) The rider of a bicycle riding on a length of road with a bicycle
lane designed for bicycles travelling in the same direction as the
rider must ride in the bicycle lane unless it is impracticable to do
so. NSW: Only applies where there is a bike lane sign (bike logo
above ‘LANE’) beside the road. NOT where only bike logo on road
.
(2) In this rule road does not include a road-related area.


So does this mean that it is legal not to ride in the bike lane? Cos there's a lot of bike lanes inside door zones and I don't like the idea of hitting a car door at 40kph.
If the R-1 rule is broken, what happens to N+1?

User avatar
mikesbytes
Super Mod
Super Mod
Posts: 19153
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:42 pm
Location: Tempe, Sydney
Contact:

Postby mikesbytes » Tue May 13, 2008 10:00 pm

Kalgrm wrote:
Parrott wrote:
Kalgrm wrote:Too late, I got in first.... :P


Thanks Graeme, can't be too careful, some of them might be able to read :o

Wasn't me - one of my moderating friends must have gotten nervous! :)

Cheers,
Graeme

(I'm guessing MB)


Moderators can get excited at times.
If the R-1 rule is broken, what happens to N+1?

User avatar
Parrott
Posts: 2960
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2007 8:45 pm

Postby Parrott » Tue May 13, 2008 10:38 pm

mikesbytes wrote:
Kalgrm wrote:
Parrott wrote:
Kalgrm wrote:Too late, I got in first.... :P


Thanks Graeme, can't be too careful, some of them might be able to read :o

Wasn't me - one of my moderating friends must have gotten nervous! :)

Cheers,
Graeme

(I'm guessing MB)


Moderators can get excited at times.


Discretion is the better part of valour. :)
Last edited by Parrott on Tue May 13, 2008 11:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Hawkeye

Postby Hawkeye » Tue May 13, 2008 10:45 pm

mikesbytes wrote:So does this mean that it is legal not to ride in the bike lane? Cos there's a lot of bike lanes inside door zones and I don't like the idea of hitting a car door at 40kph.

The way I read it, that's a definite yes. I freely ignore the so-called bike lanes through Kirribill/Neutral Bay on the way to Milson's Point in the a.m., as they're a dangerous invitation to get doored.

In any case a fine is cheaper than being dead. My wonderful 70yo cycling nut cousin (who is is far fitter than I am :D ) tells of a racing mate who was doored and was bounced out onto the road just in time to go under the front wheel of a passing truck.

Sorry, way too much detail I know. :oops: :x :cry: But, it happens, unfortunately, and to ignore the possibility is deadly.

User avatar
Aushiker
Posts: 22225
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2007 1:55 pm
Location: Fremantle, WA
Contact:

Postby Aushiker » Wed May 14, 2008 12:06 am

chuckchunder wrote:
Aushiker wrote:Thanks J.r. That is interesting. I am pretty sure we don't have anything like that here.

Andrew


Andrew we do - see the WA Road Traffic Code 2000 Rule 213 for the "use the bike lane rule" and Rule 3 for the definition of a bike lane.

Hi Glen

I need to check at work tomorrow (can't find what I am looking for at the moment) but from what I can gleam from the WA State Government the current road code in WA is the Road Traffic Act 1974 as last amended on April 27, 2008. Mind you this does not fit with what I found this afternoon.

Based on experience I wouldn't rely on Austlii for WA legislation.

Interesting also according to the State Law Publisher there is no Act called WA Road Traffic Code. You can find a list of all WA legislation at http://www.slp.wa.gov.au/.

Regards
Andrew
Last edited by Aushiker on Wed May 14, 2008 12:21 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Aushiker
Posts: 22225
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2007 1:55 pm
Location: Fremantle, WA
Contact:

Postby Aushiker » Wed May 14, 2008 12:16 am

G'day

Ah okay I picked the difference. The Act is the Road Traffic Act 1974. The link in Austlii is to Regulations, which are a different kettle of fish. Now the State Law Publisher website is not working so can't find a link to the latest copy of the Regulations.

My original point was that I have never come across a Bike Lane in WA as defined and marked with signs as was being discussed early and as is defined in the Regulations you refer to Glen, which is why I doubted we have them. Have you come across any?

Andrew

User avatar
Mulger bill
Super Mod
Super Mod
Posts: 29013
Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 2:41 pm
Location: Sunbury Vic

Postby Mulger bill » Wed May 14, 2008 3:00 am

Parrott wrote:
Kalgrm wrote:Too late, I got in first.... :P


Thanks Graeme, can't be too careful, some of them might be able to read :o


Yeah, that was me, I happen to agree with Parrott on this. Sorry Graeme, shoulda dropped you a PM :oops:

Shaun
...whatever the road rules, self-preservation is the absolute priority for a cyclist when mixing it with motorised traffic.
London Boy 29/12/2011

User avatar
Mulger bill
Super Mod
Super Mod
Posts: 29013
Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 2:41 pm
Location: Sunbury Vic

Postby Mulger bill » Wed May 14, 2008 3:04 am

Must ride in bikelanes if practical eh?
In the CBD here the bikelanes are usually in the doorzone. Don't recall many signs either...

Shaun
...whatever the road rules, self-preservation is the absolute priority for a cyclist when mixing it with motorised traffic.
London Boy 29/12/2011

User avatar
Aushiker
Posts: 22225
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2007 1:55 pm
Location: Fremantle, WA
Contact:

Postby Aushiker » Wed May 14, 2008 9:32 am

Aushiker wrote:My original point was that I have never come across a Bike Lane in WA as defined and marked with signs as was being discussed early and as is defined in the Regulations you refer to Glen, which is why I doubted we have them. Have you come across any?

I stand corrected! We have them. Apparently on my regular commute from Fremantle I ride along two short bike lanes marked with signs. Never noticed the signs before :oops:

Andrew

bc
Posts: 23
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 4:29 pm
Location: Melbourne

Postby bc » Wed May 14, 2008 9:59 am

The various road authorities made an effort not too long ago to "harmonise" the road laws so they were consistent throughout Australia. Not sure how hard they looked at the bike related laws, but sounds like they generally align.

User avatar
toff
Posts: 586
Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2008 6:19 pm
Location: Between my seatpost and my stem.
Contact:

Postby toff » Wed May 14, 2008 1:44 pm

pm0203 wrote:They actually think that their next step to oblivion is when OIL runs dry and they will have to ride bikes.

Let's jump ahead 50 years:

- Peoole are buying petrol in containers the size of Vasoline jars.
- Kids look at their parents in disbelief when they tell them they used to drive 4wds weighing several tonnes.
- People gasp when they hear how the dwindling oil reserves, so vital for plastics, and medicines were squandered. They pull back in horror saying "you mean you used to BURN this stuff!".

...Someone will find an old newspaper article in their attic and read the letters section. Everyone will laugh at the silly car-driving people back in 2008 and their myopic views, the same way we get a laugh reading those books from the fifties about sex education, or how to be the perfect housewife.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: chalkie, Exabot [Bot], Jmuzz