Applespider

TonyQuinn Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I'm not one to praise the powers that be. But well > done Southwark Council, everything seems to be > running far more smoothly than in the past. I'd agree. It's helped that the snow has mainly been during the day while there's been some traffic to keep the roads clear but it's been a great job. I went into town tonight at 6pm and came back around midnight. No problems with buses either way - great job by planners/gritter and bus drivers alike.

StraferJack Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > pretty much. Except I doubt many people do that > either You're possibly right. I use mine in Pret and in M&S but I'm the only person I've noticed doing it and the assistants tend to look a tad surprised that someone is using it. I find it quicker and lazier though than putting the card in, waiting to be asked for the PIN, waiting for it to be authorised and putting the card away. Yes, it only saves about 20 seconds... but it feels like more!

Good to hear some positive news... You're right, there are more good people than bad in the world.

I saw a guy wearing a Water off a Duck's Back raincoat on Saturday and was really impressed by it. The reversible reflective 'belt' on the back and the reflective bits under the collar were great and it really looked like a normal raincoat and smart. But yes, it's pricey. I have two winter cycling jackets - a Gore Phantom (year round really) with a merino jumper (or two on cold days) underneath. It's not entirely waterproof but it's stood up to 20-30 minutes of light rain without letting wet through. I picked it up in a sale though. - a Giordana Silverline that I also got in a sale. It's red/white/grey and I have been complimented on it as a jacket although it still looks like a cycle one to me! A colleague at work just bought himself a good ski jacket in TK Maxx to use on his bike. He reckons that it's just as water-resistant and warm. Some of ski ones aren't too bright although they don't have the reflective bits. You could always pick up a Sam Browne belt to go over the top for dark journeys?

Give them a call. My Mum got a letter to say it was going up ?8. Phoned to complain, got a few extra services on phone and a new wireless router and saved ?3 off her previous bill.

I know 4 people who have had cards cloned in the last month; all of who live in different areas and don't overlap. One was me; they tried 3 online transactions of around ?300 that tried to go through on consecutive days. The bank contacted me and asked if any were mine. Have to say that they were excellent; although now they seem to be stopping random transactions that are me... even when it's at sites I've used in the past! Grrrrrr! The bank told me that cashpoints aren't the main source these days - it's often ticket machines at stations/airports or the self-service checkouts since people don't look as closely at those slots as they do cashpoints.

Or the red light front and white one on the rear?!?

Don't worry; a mandatory cycle lane has a solid white line which motorised vehicles aren't allowed into and, I believe , could be penalised for. An advisory cycle lane has a striped line and vehicles can use. They're not to do with whether cyclists have to use them. Having said that, in practice there's no real difference. Motorcycles still end up using the mandatory lane on the Embankment and cars park in the one at Battersea Park.

Salsaboy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I was driving through the backstreets of > Camberwell yesterday about 5.30pm, so nice and > dark. Saw an attractive young lady on her bicycle > with no lights on, so wound down my window and > said very politely "I can't see you as you have no > lights on your bike". Got told in a refined voice > to "F*ck off, it's none of your business". I quite often play dumb when I meet a fellow cyclist with no lights if we're stopped. I tend to ask if they've realised that they've forgotten to turn their lights on. They don't seem to be as defensive as they get when you point out how f'ing stupid they are to be going around with no lights. I have some sympathy for those who get caught out in the late summer when the nights are just drawing in but at this time of year there's no excuse not to think of lights. In the old days where a light weighed more than a brick, you could almost understand it but with current LED ones, it's not hard to carry one around.

Thanks for this; will take a careful look and respond. My immediate interest is from Vauxhall onwards since I cycle via Herne Hill now because Camberwell New Road is so unpleasant. Immediate thoughts are that I am very glad to see right turns being proposed along Vauxhall Bridge Road. I definitely prefer option 2 as far as going over Vauxhall Bridge. I would far rather share a wider space with a few buses than end up on a shared pavement with pedestrians running for trains and dodging around walkers into the cycle lane. Flus for those of us who want to filter over to turn right along South Lambeth Road, it will be easier to do so. The new 'early bird' lights only help if you arrive at a point where the lights are red. If you are in free flowing traffic, getting off the pavement and over will be tricky. I'd also prefer the road option for the gyratory but could see that less confident cyclists might prefer the shared footpath option. I am not convinced by it stopping at Neathouse Place as it does. It handholds and then dumps cyclists at the start of the horrible one way system. There is no easy/direct way to get to the western end of Victoria St on two wheels. It's either taking your chances with multiple lanes of traffic around Bressenden Place, going on a detour through the back streets round St Vincent Square (incidentally also full of one-way streets) or getting off the bike and manoeuvring it through already crowded pavements. Am less familiar cycling the roads around Peckham but it does seem to address the bits that I've noticed weren't great in the past. It might make me covert my route! How well does it link up with the old canal path etc?

Isn't the official southern boundary the north side of Wood Vale since that's the Southwark boundary and it's still served by the Dulwich telephone exchange although the postcode is SE23. Having said that, the western end of Wood Vale feels more like Forest Hill and the eastern end feels closer to Honor Oak so who knows.

Hmm, e-dealer, I think I'll pass on trying your idea out... at least for this year! High-vis is most useful at dusk or on rainy/foggy days. After dark, you'd be better off just wearing white. At night, reflectivity (and lights, obviously!) is more useful to help drivers spot you than a high-vis vest. Some high-vis vests do have decent amounts of retro-reflective tape on them but most cycle clothing seems to just have thin lines of silver reflective which don't show up all that well from a distance. If I know that I'm going to be out after dark, I wear a wide silver reflective "Sam Browne" sash belt that shows up well in headlights. You can get different colours of retro-reflective tape (white, yellow, red, blue, green and even black) that you can stick onto your bike (i.e. on seat stays/seat posts, forks) or rucksacks so that it reflects. Reflective spoke 'straws' also help in terms of being visible from the side while being unobtrusive during the day. While we're talking helmets, it's also worth considering sticking a light front/back on it too (the Knog Frog ones stretch well on different shapes) so that you have some visibility at a higher point than usual too. It also has the advantage that if you glance down a side road or do a lifesaver, cars in that direction can see you more too.

Atticus Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > to suggest that drivers take less care around > cyclists with helmets is utter folly. I would ask > how you go about measuring this if I didn't think > it was such rubbish. Idiosyncratic at best. It is anecdotal but on the rare occasions that I do end up cycling without a helmet, it does feel like drivers are giving me more room when they pass. Since obviously, there's no obvious way of ensuring it's the same drivers, it's entirely subjective. And since I do prefer to wear one, I'm not going to even attempt to experiment more extensively. Again anecdotally, on the days where my pony-tail is sticking out of my helmet and clearly visible, it feels that I'm getting more room than when I've got it tucked inside my buff. Even if both could be proved, I suspect it's more subconsciously done than intentionally. Ouch, anapau! Hope you're OK now!

I've never had an experience such as you've described in the Dartmouth Arms although I've never really had to complain either. I used to go semi-regularly until a couple of years ago. I went for the first time in ages in September and didn't find it as good as it used to be. The service wasn't particularly attentive (long gaps between courses and struggling to get people's attention) although there didn't appear to be many staff working which probably didn't help. I think I had fishcakes which were OK but did taste pre-packaged rather than home-made. Canvas and Cream is lovely although packed on a Sunday. I've been on a Fri/Sat night recently and it was surprisingly quiet... had a lovely squash arancini followed by rainbow trout along with a really nice bottle of wine. Can't comment on their complaints process since it was all lovely.

Bic Basher Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Since when did we become such a want now society > that a 35 min bus ride to Victoria is now > considered FOREVER? Well - if you've been used to a 9 minute train trip, it's quite a bit longer. And traffic on New Camberwell Road means that it's often longer than 35 minutes since the bus lanes along that stretch aren't great. In the mornings, it can easily take the better part of an hour to get from Denmark Hill to Victoria. Of course, when everything is running smoothly, it takes 20 minutes or so and it's fine. I'm fortunate in that I rarely take the train to Victoria these days; I cycle there instead and can control my arrival time. I do remember those halcyon days a few years ago where we had 6tph to Victoria during morning peak... bliss.

Another problem for those advocating multiple hops and diversions is that for those of us who don't use the trains all that frequently and so don't have a Travelcard, coming out of the National Rail Network and onto a bus/Tube (or even just swapping buses) is another PAYG fare. Once you're in the barriers of the Tube Network, it's one fare regardless of interchanges - and even switching between DLR/Tube counts as one fare. Surely with the tracking technology of Oyster/bus countdown trackers, there could be a way to reconcile bus journeys overnight and allow transfers onto the Tube network/another bus within 60 minutes of the start of the journey to have the cheaper journey discounted.

Gidget - my hairdresser uses it on my hair and yes, it's fabulous stuff.

woodrot Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > how practical do you think it is to impose & then > enforce an insurance requirement for cyclists ? Not very. It doesn't work particularly well for motorists and if it's a nominal fee, it's not going to cover the costs of setting it up and administering it. Many cyclists have insurance in any case - either if they've joined LCC/British Cycling - or on their home contents. Sadly, they're probably also the sensible ones who are less likely to need it!

There's a big display at the cricket club on Dulwich Common too... first mate, I feel your pain with pets. My sis has a retriever who is terrified of fireworks - and he still needs walked so the longer the fireworks go on, the harder it is to organise it for daylight since she works.

Hi Bryony I'd try buying a second-hand one to start with (or borrow a friend's, if you can) to see whether you get the bug. Then look at buying yourself a nicer one - check if your work takes part in the cycle to work scheme. The reason I'm suggesting this is that new bikes that are fairly cheap are generally fairly rubbish too and might put you off cycling. But if you buy a nicer hybrid (flat bar handles but thinner tyres than your old mountain bike), you might find that you fancy a road bike within 6 months and what do you do then? I was dead certain that I didn't want a road bike (drop bars) when I bought mine but sure enough, after I got comfortable riding, I wanted one! It doesn't really matter if it's a men's or women's unless you really get into road bikes where the manufacturers claim that the geometry of the frame is more efficient. If you are particularly small or short-waisted, you might find the reach on a man's bike a little long (i.e. you feel stretched reaching for the handlebars) and if you have drop bars, you might find the brake levers on a man's bike a little big if you have small hands. For the most part though, go and try out a few sizes in a bike shop (most will let you go for a test ride) and you'll get some idea. I assure you, even if you end up with a second-hand one to start with, you'll likely end up spending cash in that bike shop at some point!

Problem is that sometimes it's the only place to be if you're on a road where the traffic speed is normally above your average cycling speed and then it slows. If there's a 2-3 foot gap between car and kerb, I don't see anything wrong with pedalling down the nearside while being aware that passenger doors might open etc. It's one of the reasons that urban cycling is faster than urban driving at times - you can get through gaps where cars can't. Having said that, even though cycle lanes encourage it, it's not always the right thing to do. Squeezing down the side of cars though where the cyclist is pushing themselves along with one foot on the kerb since it's too narrow to cycle but they MUST get past, is dumb though. It goes without saying that going down either side of stationary HGVs or waiting on the left of a car indicating a left turn is downright suicidal. Stopping behind cars though can frustrate the drivers behind you since as you can't accelerate along with them, they'll miss the next set of lights (or whatever) and blame you (sometimes buzzing you to make their point). Drivers tend to dislike cyclist filtering through to overtake on the offside - and that's not particularly safe anyhow since if the traffic starts moving, you're then trapped on the wrong side and need to get back across the flow of traffic. Really - damned if you do, damned if you don't. Perhaps we should all just give up on the road and hop on the pavement

Silverfox - the survey I linked to isn't based on people's claims. It's the police's assignment of blame after their accident investigation. Although given how limited some of those investigations are, at least some of the numbers will be dubious. Having said that, the proportions are so clearly divided, that it does indicate a fair likelihood that the theory holds water.

silverfox Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > "...2. Re insurance: cyclists are more likely to > be injured yet less likely to be at fault in road > traffic accidents..." > > Where is the factual evidence for this? It's here in a 2010 TFL survey - page 22 gives a table that notes the contributory factors in cycle accidents where someone was injured. The top 3 reasons* summarise as follows - Attributed to cyclist 1860 times, - Attributed to motorist 4796 times - so yes, I'd say that there's evidence to show that motorists are more likely to drive into a cyclist than otherwise. And purely in physical terms - a cyclist has a thin layer of cotton/lycra and a chunk of polystyrene (certified to 12mph) for protection. A driver has a tonne or so of metal/plastic cage that's designed to save their lives at 70+mph. Is there any doubt who is going to be injured more in any accident? * (1) not looking properly, (2) failing to judge another's speed/direction, (3) carelessness or recklessness > Also binary_star, have you ever undertaken and > passed a cycling proficiency test? (honest answer > please). Incidentally, there's no such thing as a cycling proficiency test any longer. There's Bikeability training where you get certified at different levels as a child or as an adult. And for reference, I did pass a cycling proficiency test as a kid - and I've done the Southwark current bikeability training too. I'm not denying that there are idiot cyclists out there (they make me mad since their stupidity tends tar the more sensible amongst us) but they are more of a danger to themselves than others. Idiot drivers are more of a danger to every other road user. Thankfully both groups are in a minority. But as the nights get darker, it's only common sense for all road users (including pedestrians crossing at non-crossings) to take extra care to check that they are seeing everything.

Go for a camera with a great optical zoom when you're travelling; it's amazing how small cameras with a 10x or 20x zoom are these days and it makes a huge difference to your pictures. You can take 'candid' shots while appearing to lounge against a wall on the other side of a square.

Do nothing unless it looks particularly young. Sometimes hedgehogs have two litters in a year; the second litter often doesn't have time to build up energy reserves to take it through winter. So if it looks particularly small with pale and softish prickles, keep calling RSPCA to check best course of action.