[TCUG] Re: Wacky ideas - Flashing Ambers etc.
- From: "Welsh, Paul" <Paul.Welsh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "'tcug@xxxxxxxxxxxxx'" <tcug@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 10:12:55 +0100
Part of the problem lies with the blame culture. If we introduce something
where people have to think and someone gets hurt, who will get sued?
The other issue is that drivers are agressive towards pedestrians.
Despite it being in the Highway Code, if someone exerts their right of way
to turning traffic at a junction (unsignalled), they are likely to drive
straight at you and at the very least give you a glare as if pedestrians had
no right to exist.
By contrast, in some countries like Canada, you are as like as not to get a
friendly wave, even in Vancouver. There is a massive culture issue to be
addressed to make changes.
PW
-----Original Message-----
From: mervyn.hallworth@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:mervyn.hallworth@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: 11 June 2004 10:04
To: tcug@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [TCUG] Re: Wacky ideas - Flashing Ambers etc.
It's usually stated that continental accidents are generally higher - but I
doubt that there will be a direct comparison with UK for this particular
issue. The French/Italian systems seems 'hairy' to us - but our trouble is
that from the UKs current starting point on junctions almost anything 'more
efficient' will be 'more hairy' (or perhaps 'more ambiguous' is a softer
way of saying it). Ironically, in UK we've had a 35 year 'ambiguity affair'
at mid-block crossings (pelicans through puffins), and now we've concluded
that the real congestion is usually at junctions, we are presented with a
much tougher problem to try to introduce some level of ambiguity into
junctions. But on the positive side - the advantage we have at junctions
is that we can opt to selectively deal only with the slower turning traffic
- so there may be hope - this does seem a fruitful line of discussion!
Mervyn
0113 2476750
________________________________________________________________________
The information in this email (and any attachment) may be for the
intended recipient only. If you know you are not the intended recipient,
please do not use or disclose the information in any way and please
delete this email (and any attachment) from your system.
Service of legal documents is not accepted by email
________________________________________________________________________
-----------------------------------------------------------
A message from the TCUG mailing list. For information about
the list visit //www.freelists.org/webpage/tcug
************************************************************************
This email contains confidential information, solely for the
person/organisation intended. If you received it in error,
please contact the sender right away and do not copy this email for any
purpose, or disclose its contents to any person. The contents of an
attachment to this email may contain software viruses which could
damage your own computer system. While Owen Williams has taken every
reasonable precaution to minimise the risk, we cannot accept liability
for any damage which you sustain as a result of software viruses. You
should carry out your own virus checks before opening the attachment.
************************************************************************
-----------------------------------------------------------
A message from the TCUG mailing list. For information about
the list visit //www.freelists.org/webpage/tcug
Other related posts:
