what about when you loose your footing on some ice? I wear a helmet most of the time when I ride a bike but arguments like this are daft. Utility cycling is about as low a risk as walking, no one wears a helmet while they nip to the shops on foot (or in the car) so why should they feel the need when on a bike?What about when you lose the front wheel on a bit of ice, or a patch of oil?
so you've made a decision on your form of transport and route, that's cool, but unless the cyclists in your OP are oblivious to the existence of the cycle paths you mention they've made a choice too. But you don't seem to think it's a valid one.Because just perhaps the route to take jnr would involve roads and im not prepared to take that risk with him, if you think i should take a 20mnth old child on the road be it in a bike seat or tag along i think you need to think a little harder.
Imagine the moral indignation if roads popped up that suddenly stopped halfway to nowhere.
Rannoch Moor?
😆
A1061 Blyth - Cramlington (fatalitys), A193 Blyth - Seaton Sluice (fatalities) and A190 Seaton Sluice - Seaton Deleval
Hang on, I know those roads and I know those cycle paths. For the most part I'd describe them as pretty piss poor rather than especially good but there are certainly worse around. They also feature some stunning pieces of planning such as [url= https://www.google.co.uk/maps/ @55.102073,-1.497832,3a,75y,24.14h,65.36t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sORzrL36VqFkEcK05_Lbjnw!2e0]this[/url].
Ropey concrete surfacing like [url= https://www.google.co.uk/maps/ @55.103763,-1.498496,3a,75y,154.97h,63.05t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1swBD4F5y1k8BpaTt0zpFJMw!2e0]this[/url].
Wonderfully convenient moments like [url= https://www.google.co.uk/maps/ @55.104086,-1.541977,3a,75y,267.36h,69.47t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sLzfxpZ5DBeQjvlYJNwcCYw!2e0]this[/url].
They're poorly signposted and uncomfortably narrow for two way traffic. They run only on one side of the road so if you're joining going the other way, they're instantly inconvenient.
The problem as I'd see it is that those roads have a disproportionate number of people driving like pricks, possibly living in Blyth gives them a healthy disrespect for their own mortality?
Edit: And I say this as someone living in the north east who rides on cycle paths every day.
Because just perhaps the route to take jnr would involve roads and im not prepared to take that risk
...and therein lies the whole root problem... "oh I can't possibly because". If you WANT to make it work, you'll figure out a way. How about just pushing the bike along the pavement if there's a particularly "dangerous" bit (actually dangerous, or merely dangerous in your mind because your precious offspring is involved?), and ride the rest?
If every other idiot (and I include myself in this) thought hard and realistically about why and when they use their tin boxes and when they use a more appropriate form of transport, the roads would be a damn sight emptier and therefore a damn sight safer.
cynic-al - MemberI n r a t s
But cyclists have a right to be on the road (drivers are there by licence only) and SHOULD NOT be sidelined on to cyclepaths etc.
As ever this is just about allowing drivers to drive dangerously and making it up to cyclists to deal with it rather than making the roads safe.
Indeed you do have the right, that's not the point of what i posted unless you have decided to read into it that way
whoops.Hang on, I know those roads and I know those cycle paths. For the most part I'd describe them as pretty piss poor rather than especially good
I use a mixture of roads and cycle paths "now" as they are suitable for my needs. When I lived in Lincs the laughable one at the side of the A607 on the way to Waddington was in disrepair and too narrow for a shared path, so I rode on the road.
The only issue I have with 2 of the wider cycle paths by me is that they come down a hill and it's easy to get up speed (on the road you're doing 35mph with little effort) and even though it is very wide and has a distinct separator down it, you get folk bimbling on the cycle part (usually with about 8000 dogs on those extender leads). I know there's nothing to stop them, however this is why most serious cyclists won't use cycle paths as pedestrian dodging at speed isn't fun.
One of the Sustrans paths near me is in a great location, but the path is a battered farm track so isn't suitable for road bikes so roadies won't use it.
Also don't the govt recommend you being on the road if you're doing 17-18mph+
Right that's enough from me 😀
They're poorly signposted and uncomfortably narrow for two way traffic. They run only on one side of the road so if you're joining going the other way, they're instantly inconvenient.The problem as I'd see it is that those roads have a disproportionate number of people driving like pricks, possibly living in Blyth gives them a healthy disrespect for their own mortality?
i don't find them too bad but again all down to opinion, im happy with my choices and ultimately would rather use them over the road. everyone can do what they want to do, it has no direct effect on me. also yes there are a huge proportion of crap drivers on these roads thus my original question of why people want to ride on them.
..and therein lies the whole root problem... "oh I can't possibly because". If you WANT to make it work, you'll figure out a way. How about just pushing the bike along the pavement if there's a particularly "dangerous" bit (actually dangerous, or merely dangerous in your mind because your precious offspring is involved?), and ride the rest?If every other idiot (and I include myself in this) thought hard and realistically about why and when they use their tin boxes and when they use a more appropriate form of transport, the roads would be a damn sight emptier and therefore a damn sight safer.
valid point and i cant disagree and perhaps i may look at it more and take him this way on the odd day.
I also fully agree im sure we all use the car when we don't need to and huge changes could be made if we all thought in this way. Its a undeniable fact.
Also don't the govt recommend you being on the road if you're doing 17-18mph+
this post was never aimed at people capable of riding like this, its aimed at those who bumble about with no clue, i thought that would be clear from how the original post was written but perhaps not, either way its opened a huge can of worms 😯
what about when you loose your footing on some ice? I wear a helmet most of the time when I ride a bike but arguments like this are daft. Utility cycling is about as low a risk as walking, no one wears a helmet while they nip to the shops on foot (or in the car) so why should they feel the need when on a bike?
Who has decided on this risk rating system? I tend to travel at slightly higher speeds when I'm on a bike compared to walking on an icy path, I also don't have any walls or other things to help me stay upright whilst i'm traveling at this increased speed.
I simply don't buy it that ambling along in a slow one foot at a time manner is as risky as travelling at higher speed on a bike, you may think arguments like this are daft, I think not wearing a helmet on the roads because people don't wear them then they are walking to the shops is beyond daft.
People can justify it all they want, usually using some 'they dont, so why should I' ridiculousness, I doubt that argument would keep peoples other halves warm at night if they suffer an avoidable head injury.
whenever i travel in europe i am envious of their cyclelanes. they are amazing things well away from the road, and the culture is so different as everyone presumably grows up cycling everywhere as a kid so there isn't that us and them feeling with cars. i lament the lack of proper cycleways between my house and where i work. the only places that appear to have lots of them are new towns, and places like bristol. all power to them but i do not see things improving for the rest of us any time soon. maybe if boris becomes PM he will roll out some Utopian super cycle highway system so i can visit my inlaws in devon traffic free. if only eh.
OK, I'll put it a little more simply - if you elect to ride on the road when there is a good* cycle path alternative because you are entitled to, you are a dick - irrespective of how safely and legally you do it. I appreciate that the concept of a good* cycle path is an anathema in some parts of the country but when you have one, use the damned thing and don't be stubborn just because it's your right to be on the road!*good - a smooth, clean, safe surface where good progress can be made and it's going in the direction you want to travel.
A "Dick" eh? I'd say it's all about context rather than making a blanket rule, even the "Good" cycle lanes come to an end eventually...
As it happens I do use [u]some[/u] of the cycle lanes along my commute route, but not all, and certainly not the cycle [i]paths[/i] (bit's of coloured pavement) that would put me in conflict with ipodded Ped's and force me to rejoin traffic in more dangerous spots...
A single section of cycle lane may be wonderful, but then you will invariably be merged back with the tin boxes at the next junction/roundabout/slightly narrower section of the road...
The lines seem to mostly get put down where the road was generally straight and wide enough for cars and bikes to easily share space already... hardly a breakthrough in cycle safety TBH.
Many cyclists might not be turning their noses up at a perfectly good section of cycle lane but deliberately making sure they are a visible and acknowledged part of the main traffic flow at a sensible, earlier point, rather than the piss poor location the original designer of the infrastructure chose for them to pop out and get squished...
And then of course some people on bikes are just useless human beings, put them in a car, Van or on foot and they'd probably continue to be a danger to themselves and others... Human's are imperfect: Shocka!
Europe most certainly has it sussed, perhaps over time the UK will go in this direction but i cant see it, there is no argument surely that we all want to be safer on bikes in any situation be it commute or pleasure?
[img] 
[/img]
my commute bike path shits all over your commute bike path.
yes, yes it does!! it may take some work for the UK to be anywhere close to that!!
my commute bike path shits all over your commute bike path.
Which brings me round to another issue with a lot of cycle paths...
If every other idiot (and I include myself in this) thought hard and realistically about why and when they use their tin boxes
I use mine so I arrive at work in a presentable state, a requirement of the job.
Other than that, I use it very little; less than half the UK average mileage.
WRT cycle lanes, there are good and bad in my neck. In the town there are the type that cross side roads every 30yds, out of town we have a newish bypass with a beautifully surfaced really wide lane alongside, that the majority of cyclists use, with the exception of the odd lycra lout who will inevitably fail to indicate at the roundabout ahead.
I don't use it either, because I'll be taking the shortcut through the woods and fields. 8)
You roadies are so precious. 😛
I see it everyday in Bristol too. Bristol City Council and South Glos Council spent millions creating a cycling utopia (cycle paths completely separate from the road) and yet some Muppets continue to ride around the ring road.
I cycle in Bristol every day. Most of the infrastructure you refer to is utter garbage. That's why many of us choose to ignore the paths and use the road.
Oh, and my kids go to nursery in a trailer.
scandal42 - MemberWho has decided on this risk rating system?
I believe the stats show that you are more likely to bang your noggin as a pedestrian than as a cyclist, so it is not a ridiculous thing to suggest.
timthetinyhorse - Member
Indeed you do have the right, that's not the point of what i posted unless you have decided to read into it that way
Your point appears to be that cyclists SHOULD use cycle lanes etc because (in your opinion only, unless you have provided stats) it's safer.
My point is that your view only encourages acceptance of unsafe driving rather than tackling it, cyclists have a choice and it is up to them.
I for one don't like dog shit, glass, self propelled trip-wires (dogs on leads) and slumbering peds I see on cycle paths, so I usually choose the roads. I don't want to be ghetto'd off the roads like Farage etc want.
futon river crossing - MemberI'd like to ask the OP why he he thinks he's more entitled to use the road network than other users.?
This. You may not think you're like this, but it's very dominant in the OP.
Oh, and my kids go to nursery in a trailer.
fair play to you there if your prepared to take your kids in trailer on the road? I just cant make the risk worth it. Love using the trailer at weekends etc however 🙂
Nobeerinthefridge - Memberfuton river crossing - Member
I'd like to ask the OP why he he thinks he's more entitled to use the road network than other users.?
This. You may not think you're like this, but it's very dominant in the OP.
It was most certainly not intended in that way i can assure you, its very easy to read things in such a way though im sure.
fair play to you there if your prepared to take your kids in trailer on the road? I just cant make the risk worth it. Love using the trailer at weekends etc however
Yet you drive with your kids in the car, and walk with them on the pavement. I bet you don't even wear a helmet.
timthetinyhorse - Member
fair play to you there if your prepared to take your kids in trailer on the road? I just cant make the risk worth it. Love using the trailer at weekends etc however
So before you had kids you were happy on roads, but with them you won't ride on them?
Seems you have an odd imbalance between the value of their live(s) and yours.
Plenty of good ped/cycle paths where I live but at some stage they're going to cross a roubdabout or intersection, then as a cyclist you're in a poition of worse visibility than if you were on the road.
As for cycle "gutter lanes" I think they just condition car drivers to expect cyclists to only use the metre or so of road with the lowest visibility and worst condition.
Properly planned and constructed cycleways would be great, but until we get them I'll use whatever I consider the safest option - be it pavement, primary road position or cycle path.
dutch , french , german , denmark cycle paths are just that cycle paths and for the most part are GREAT
uk - we seem to see fit to put signs /street furniture/ more road crossings than you can shake a stick at not to mention speed restricting quirks on the path its self.....
or i can ride on the road keeping pace or passing the 5mph traffic queues....its the guys in the cars whos sanity i query.
They also feature some stunning pieces of planning such as this.Ropey concrete surfacing like this.
I can't believe anyone would have a problem with a cyclist being on the road there. There's one lane in each direction which looks about 3-4 car widths wide, with the same width again in empty hatchings in the middle of the road. You could have a TDF peloton going through there and still be able to safely and easily overtake them in a HGV.
I simply don't buy it that ambling along in a slow one foot at a time manner is as risky as travelling at higher speed on a bike, you may think arguments like this are daft, I think not wearing a helmet on the roads because people don't wear them then they are walking to the shops is beyond daft.
Is there a risk of a head injury while cycling? Yes, but it's very, very small.
Is there a risk of a head injury while walking? Yes, but it's very, very small.
A cyclist who chooses not to wear a helmet has done a quick assessment of the risk and made their decision.
You walking to the shops do a quick assessment of the risk and make your decision not to wear a helmet.
Why is your assessment perfectly sensible and the cyclist's assessment is completely stupid?
Can you not see the irony in
I simply don't buy it that ambling along in a slow one foot at a time manner is as risky as travelling at higher speed on a bike,I doubt that argument would keep peoples other halves warm at night if they suffer an avoidable head injury.
There's a risk, a small one, but it's there. So why would you expose yourself to greater than necessary risk by walking/running/driving/ice skating/whatever without a helmet? What makes a head injury sustained while not cycling different to a head injury sustained whilst cycling?
Every day i drive to the office after dropping Tinyhorse Jnr off at nursery and im amazed by the amount of commuters who chose not to use cycle paths, now i do understand as a cyclist myself that they are not great for some on road bikes who make real progress and can hold u good average but the majority just are not doing this!
Every day I cycle to the office after dropping off Ransoses minor & micro at nursery, and I'm amazed by the amount of commuters who choose to drive instead of cycle, now I do understand as a motorist myself that cars are very handy sometimes, but the majority are doing short journeys, going nowhere in rapidly depreciating cars, polluting the air and being part of the problem rather than the solution.
timthetinyhorse
everyone can do what they want to do, it has no direct effect on me
But isn't the point of your original rant that they're getting in your way when you're driving? If it's not, I'm really not sure you're making any rational argument at all any more.
and those driving kids to school because of the traffic...
YOU ARE the traffic
fair play to you there if your prepared to take your kids in trailer on the road? I just cant make the risk worth it. Love using the trailer at weekends etc however
Has there ever been a child KSI in the UK in a cycle trailer? I can't find an example.
So why would you expose yourself to greater than necessary risk by walking/running/driving/ice skating/whatever without a helmet? What makes a head injury sustained while not cycling different to a head injury sustained whilst cycling?
My three-year old daughter fell over running yesterday, and banged her head on the path. She'd been cycling shortly before and was still wearing her helmet, which took the brunt of the impact.
The risk may well be similar, but the resultant damage is more serious when travelling at a higher speed.
Regardless, it's all personal preference, the fact people don't wear them on the pavement is totally redundant when talking about cycling imo, it matters not when you are on a bike, and the thought certainly wont save you.
in a shouting at the wind style...
This really pisses me off, wiiiiide road here have a cycle lane, as soon as the road hits a narrow spot and it gets slightly tricky for the road planners, the cycle lane disappears and you have to fend for yourself. W.T.F? You should be basing your efforts on the tricky spots not the safe bits, or has the local council just got a surplus of green paint combined with a complete lack of cycle infra planners?The lines seem to mostly get put down where the road was generally straight and wide enough for cars and bikes to easily share space already
road near me within 200 meters has
2 lanes + cycle lane
3 lanes
3 lanes + cycle lane
1 lane
nothing at all to help/protect (haha) cyclists on the merge/lane swap sections.
piss poor.
self propelled trip-wires (dogs on leads)
/me makes a note of that term. I like it.
dogs off leads can be just as bad.
Yes I have been apprehended for riding too fast on a cycle path through the forest, despite having already slowed down to walking pace, and had clocked her mutts running wild... in a nature reserve! (stupid bitch)
Yes I have spotted a white shaggy cat sized dog rummaging in the undergrowth, only to have the owner see me riding along the cycle path, and then call the dog back.... right in to my front wheel.
slumbering peds I see on cycle paths
the mum+dad+grandma+grandad+2 kids+ at least one pushchair are the worst. of course they will all be side by side, edge to edge, and not one single one will even take a pace to one side or go one behind the other to allow a cyclist past. on a cycle path.
At least joggers and nordic walkists generally keep to one side.
Being "apposed" to a cycle path is not necessarily a choice thing 😉
[i]If one punch can kill a man so can an accidental clash with a curb or post etc etc, I just don't understand why people wont protect themselves the best they can do against things out of their control.[/i]
[img] 
[/img]
Best get your car, leisure and work helmet on then. If you can't see it, cycling as a cause of head injuries is right down there at the bottom, it's the same as walking.
This helmet nonsense stuff is utter, utter nonsense. It's victim blaming crap and is specifically designed as an argument to make cycling look dangerous (which it isn't) and make it look like you need safety gear to participate in (which you don't). Especially when we're talking about commuting. Not racing or jumping off the side of a mountain, but riding to work and back, going shopping and ambling about the place.
utter, utter nonsense with not one single iota of evidence to support it.
from the OP
Sorry for such a ridiculous rant and i do understand that people on this forum are cyclists and most likely don't fall into this category but i suppose if one person takes note its worth it
I'll volunteer to be the one person....and that will make the world a safer place for cyclists.
The risk may well be similar, but the resultant damage is more serious when travelling at a higher speed.
That would be why injury rates are so high in Denmark, where no-one wears a helmet...
people (ime) use that line as an argument against compulsion not as a reason to choose not to wear a helmet.People can justify it all they want, usually using some 'they dont, so why should I' ridiculousness,
There's a risk to walkers for head injuries there's an even greater risk to drivers for head injuries no one has started a "stop the [i][b]insanity[/b][/i] stop people driving without lids!" campaign. It's just helmet compulsion for cyclists. Cyclists are getting slapped with the outgroup stick, again, which many cyclists object to.
"[i]The risk may well be similar, but the resultant damage is more serious when travelling at a higher speed. Regardless, it's all personal preference, the fact people don't wear them on the pavement is totally redundant when talking about cycling imo[/i]"
Of course it's personal preference, but the preference is really one of whether you prefer best-available statistics or baseless preceonceptions.
Fatality rates for pedestrians in RTCs (that's road traffic collisions on the carriageway and the footway and on crossings, not trips and slips) are higher per mile than for cyclists. In other words, walking from your house to the station carries more risk (in broad statistical terms) of death. Note also that the rates of head injury in KSIs for pedestrians, cyclists and car occupants are almost identical, from which one might reasonably deduce two things: that a helmet is of equivalent value in each of these modes, and that this value is low (or you might deduce that there is a high head injury risk differential for cycling *and* this is mirrored to a near-exact magnitude by the use of helmets, but that would be quite a long bet).
This returns to a point previously made, about safety not being a factor when pedestrians decide on their route: people are naturally inclined and socially conditioned to view walking as being of negligible risk. Whereas they have more of a natural inclination and far, *far* more social conditioning to view cycling as risky.
So, no, the fact that people don't wear them when walking certainly isn't totally redundant in the context of cycling. It's quite relevant in that it shines a light on the decisions that people are making, and those decisions—which are heavily influenced by social conditioning—often tend to be based on the idea that once you sling your leg over a bicycle you're at much greater risk than you were before. The key question is: Where is the evidence for that, in and of itself, as the compelling differentiator?
[quote=lemonysam ]Has there ever been a child KSI in the UK in a cycle trailer? I can't find an example.
Yes, sorry, because I agree with the general point that it's not dangerous, and I expect this is probably the only one ever, and is clearly completely atypical
Yes, sorry, because I agree with the general point that it's not dangerous, and I expect this is probably the only one ever, and is clearly completely atypical
Christ, and two years in jail for that seems fairly lenient. As you say though, not so much a typical road crash as an encounter with a damaged individual.
quick google but couldn't find out what he actually served, bet it wasn't 2 years tho. Fairly lenient driving ban (and a haulier ban that ran concurrently I think) 🙄Christ, and two years in jail for that seems fairly lenient
I don't tend to use the cyclepaths around where I live because -
A. they are very badly designed - 20m then stop for side road, etc.
B. they are normally littered with broken glass/other shit.
However, I have ridden on some great paths - like the disused railway that runs from Chester into North Wales.
People will use cycle paths if they are fit for purpose. If you go to the Netherlands, people automatically use cycle paths because they are safe, well maintained, and crucially, they are just as direct and efficient than the road network (sometimes more direct and efficient than the route available to the car).
People don't ignore cycle paths in this country because they are stupid or awkward, but because the cycle paths don't deliver what they need. I use bits of my local cycle paths, but I would struggle to identify any of the routes that I could effectively use in its entirety. They always fail at some point because they are not maintained or gritted, riskier, don't go where I want to go, or are simply slower.
For what it's worth, the only place I have been run down by a car was while cycling on a cycle and pedestrian path, completely separated from the road (and I was using lights, high viz jacket and a helmet at the time). So anectodally, I've found cycle paths to be much more dangerous than cycling on the road...!
"For what it's worth, the only place I have been run down by a car was while cycling on a cycle and pedestrian path, completely separated from the road (and I was using lights, high viz jacket and a helmet at the time). So anectodally, I've found cycle paths to be much more dangerous than cycling on the road...!"
odd that - moi aussi .....
sprayed my self across the bonnet of an audi who just didnt look before driving into his drive at speed from the other side of the road.
Just to follow that theme my worst bike accident was on a segregated path, too. Hit a pothole damaging myself and writing off the frame.
OP's gone quiet 🙄
I wonder what Samurai's stats would look like if pro-rata'd by total time spent in each activity?
I wonder what Samurai's stats would look like if pro-rata'd by total time spent in each activity?
I'm also fairly sure that his stats would look less good when you take into account that in a bike or pedestrian interface with a car, the car is recorded as as [i]the cause[/i], as per his stats title. The cycling and walking category is reserved for when you cock up without vehicle assistance. And before anyone asks, I'll find the source of that (we've been here before) when not fiddling about on a little screen.
No still here,
There are a lot of well stated points and I'm not discounting any of them, I have no motive here at all and if anything have a much better understanding for the outlined issues.
The original post was not designed to cause insult etc although it does appear to have.
Perhaps I might drop the car a few days a week 8)
I stopped using them when it became obvious that they're simply there as extra parking spaces for morons.
When raised with the council (ie, why aren't you doing something about this?) the response was "if they don't park there they'll park on the road!".
In Denmark you by law as a cyclist you have to use the cycle path if there is one. But that's not a problem as they are well designed and maintained. The most important thing is that the path is treated like a road lane so drivers on side roads need to give way.
In the UK unless I stop and every side junction I feel more vulnerable on the path than on the adjacent road. 95% of bike lanes on roads are even more dangerous, suddenly stopping when the road narrows just when you need it the most.
Councils obviously have targets for X miles of cycle paths / lanes and just squeeze them in wherever they can without any regard to usability. I'd like to see some being tried for manslaughter due to the dangerous designs.
Having cycled all over the UK touring, my main reasons for not using cycle paths are;
Didnt know they were there (no signs on road telling me cycle path adjacent or how to get to it)
Dont know where it goes (not joining a cycle path only to find veers off in the wrong direction)
No access (if im on the road how do i get on a segragated path? often it means stopping in the middle of the road, often on the exit of a roundabout, to turn off while navigating barriers and cars charging at you, often more risky than just staying on the road)
Not linked (short section which is difficult to join and then dumps you back on the road, may as well stay on it).
Having grown up and still cycling where the OP has quoted his 'death roads'...
[i]The A1061 Blyth - Cramlington (fatalitys)[/i]
Yep, a big wide clear road that people do 80mph, the cycle path along most of it is very good. However the access onto it from Cramlington end is woeful, often i cycle up the dual section and only join the cyclepath where it turns to single carriageway. Also, once across the railway crossing heading east, the cyclepath is nothing more than a rebranded footpath, the traffic is slower by this point so road is much nicer to cycle on.
[i]A193 Blyth - Seaton Sluice (fatalities)[/i]
What cycle path alternative? it may be tarmac by the links but its a muddy gravel track north of there. I take that route on my cross bike, useless if youve got a road bike.
[i]A190 Seaton Sluice - Seaton Deleval[/i]
The main avenue section yes, there is a nice path. Crappy once you reach the end section of the avenue, where it puts you on the rebranded (narrow) footpath and dumps you on the road at Deleval end.
So yes, the 3 roads [i]all have very good cycle paths[/i] in part, but anyone coming upto them will find the road they just left was easier to navigate and smoother, so might not get to 'the good bit' that is there. And the roads in question should be safe as they link into small towns, why should we suddenly need to leap off them!?
So yes, the 3 roads all have very good cycle paths in part, but anyone coming upto them will find the road they just left was easier to navigate and smoother, so might not get to 'the good bit' that is there. And the roads in question should be safe as they link into small towns, why should we suddenly need to leap off them!?
again im not telling you to leap off them, you have stated why you don't use them and i can accept that, pint taken, im not on a high horse here and im always open to correction.
The roads should be safe yes, bur as has already been covered there are many poor drivers. not saying that you should have to move because of this either and i dont condone bad drivers.
Sorry, that was a metaphorical 'we', not aimed at you. I think a lot of people on bikes tho are just that, people on bikes. Just as drivers pay no attention and dont see outside their small view on the world (as in, just drive whats in front of them, no thought to alternative routes etc.) then i think a lot of people on bikes are like that. Grab bike (lights or not), Go - do not stop to look around or employ thought.
there are many poor drivers
So change that, not the cyclists who are doing it right.
One way to get more better, more understanding drivers is to get them to spend time riding bikes (and ideally driving vans & trucks too). Too many drivers have no experience and therefore no empathy of any other form of road use.
Am I too late to join in? Has anyone pointed out that cycle paths are mostly a bit crap? 🙂
Have a short ride to nursery with my boy on the back of the bike and reckon it's a damn sight safer negotiating junctions and roundabouts on the roads where car drivers actually expect you to be. Also has the added benefit of avoiding the game of driveway Russian roulette you get when the "cycle path" is just a line on the pavement.
STATO - MemberSorry, that was a metaphorical 'we', not aimed at you. I think a lot of people on bikes tho are just that, people on bikes. Just as drivers pay no attention and dont see outside their small view on the world (as in, just drive whats in front of them, no thought to alternative routes etc.) then i think a lot of people on bikes are like that. Grab bike (lights or not), Go - do not stop to look around or employ thought.
yes, you have put into words more or less what i was trying to put across (however badly i have done so) granted the ranty nature of my posy may not have helped.
When I'm on my bike I don't care about the risk of head injuries to those that are walking, I care about the possibility of a head injury to me whilst cycling.
I understand the comparisons, but they mean sweet bugger all. The risk of head injury to cyclists is the only stat that matters when on a bike, the rest is utterly irrelevant.
The stats above are pretty much useless in the sense that the causes of accidents are reported, in the main, as being car related if it involves one.
I maintain that anyone riding without a helmet on the road probably doesn't need one.
Don't forget the head injury stats bear no relation whatsoever to how many people wear helmets, or whether wearing a helmet would make any difference.
Wearing a helmet while riding a motorbike is Mandatory in Germany.
I understand the comparisons, but they mean sweet bugger all. The risk of head injury to cyclists is the only stat that matters when on a bike, the rest is utterly irrelevant.
No, because if it were shown that cycling is much more dangerous than walking, you might choose to walk instead.
No, because the risk of head injury doesn't tell you anything in itself about the benefit of wearing a helmet, which is a highly controversial topic.
Generally, people avoid cycle paths/lanes because they've been so poorly thought out that they either don't promote good (cycle) traffic flow, or are downright dangerous.
Examples include...
[url= https://www.google.co.uk/maps/ @51.122231,-0.203256,3a,75y,104.5h,88.2t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1smiGFWN9MKxF9A8wCDKLbTQ!2e0]This[/url] - Why lead the cyclists off the road at all, when merging back in with the trafffic is far more dangerous than staying in amongst it?
[url= https://www.google.co.uk/maps/ @51.103776,-0.186145,3a,75y,162.37h,88.99t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s8WAP3eeqYzZE-jWf-h49QQ!2e0]This[/url] Why interrupt the cycle lane (on the shared use path) for the bus stop, when simply swapping the cycle/pedestrian sections to the opposite haves of the path would have allowed the cycle half to continue unimpeded?
[url= https://www.google.co.uk/maps/ @51.1013601,-0.1926245,105m/data=!3m1!1e3]This[/url] -Coming up from the subway on the bottom left, the cycle path takes the sensible, wide, route, which reduces blind spots nicely, but then stop abruptly at the top of the slope and forces cyclist/pedestrains to swap sides (resulting in an awkward "will they/won't they?" dance) - straight into the path of a bus shelter. (Another conflict that could have been avoided, simply by keeping the cycle path on the same side)
It is all a great shame, really, as I'm convinced it does more to put people off commuting, than it does to encourage them.
Cyclist without lights are just trying to prove that Darwin was right.
As for Helmets, that argument will rage on for eternity - I'm relatively happy for people to make their own mind up on that one.
Cyclists have no chance when they are so hostile and intolerant towards each other. No wonder so many drivers have such a low opinion of us.
Having only read some of this thread. I must say I found many of the comments absolutely abhorrent. Cyclists (I presume) are whinging here about other cyclists perfectly legal behavior, calling them idiots for choosing not to wear a helmet or simply riding legally on roads, hinting that they deserve all they get for not having bright enough lights and even making assumptions as to why they cycle and even the cost of their bicycles. And yet not one of them seems to be doing anything about their grievances. is this really how folk feel? are some of you honestly this selfish or is it just internet bravado?
A few weeks ago at around dusk I was driving with my kids along a local stretch of tree lined and shaded A road and there was a guy towing a tag-a-long positioned to turn right towards some farm cottages. He was dressed all in black and the tag-a-long and bike were black and grey. (I tend to notice this kind of thing) He had no lights or reflectives and despite being right in the middle of the road was very difficult to see. Luckily I did see him so slowed down to let him turn. Thinking about how difficult it had been to see him I then also turned in to stop and warn him of how difficult it had just been to see him.
turned out the guy was very grateful and went on to explain he'd just dropped his daughter off in the nearby village, realised it was getting dark but had no idea it had been that difficult to see him. We had a quick chat about lights and reflectives where I mentioned cheap LED lights to him. pretty sure we both parted feeling happier.
Win Win. really.
If you can find the time to bitch online about the behavior of a fellow cyclist after the fact, you can certainly find the time to help them if you truly believe them to be in serious danger.
I see it everyday in Bristol too. Bristol City Council and South Glos Council spent millions creating a cycling utopia (cycle paths completely separate from the road) and yet some Muppets continue to ride around the ring road.
hmm thats what bugs me the millions spent - but I'm still not getting the utopia..
Was speaking to Mrs DoD the other day on how the ring road paths are probably the best bit but then everything else is a bit crap...
A few weeks ago at around dusk I was driving with my kids along a local stretch of tree lined and shaded A road and there was a guy towing a tag-a-long positioned to turn right towards some farm cottages. He was dressed all in black and the tag-a-long and bike were black and grey. (I tend to notice this kind of thing) He had no lights or reflectives and despite being right in the middle of the road was very difficult to see. Luckily I did see him so slowed down to let him turn. Thinking about how difficult it had been to see him I then also turned in to stop and warn him of how difficult it had just been to see him.
turned out the guy was very grateful and went on to explain he'd just dropped his daughter off in the nearby village, realised it was getting dark but had no idea it had been that difficult to see him. We had a quick chat about lights and reflectives where I mentioned cheap LED lights to him. pretty sure we both parted feeling happier.Win Win. really.
Unless you genuinely are the nicest person in the entire world (and smell of cookies and cream ice cream or have a quite incredible cleavage) I guarantee this is not how the vast majority of 'friendly advice' conversations will go. Wave down the next commuter cyclist you see (preferably in the rain, always in the best mood and most receptive in the rain) without lights and repeat your little chat and see how it goes. Please report back.
So lets take this in a different direction now then, what can be done to make things better in the UK for us all as a collective??
What small changes can we all make that can have a positive impact for the masses??
Of course as far as cycle paths etc go this is most likely tackled form a local council level (i know very little of the politics involved) but how can this be influenced?
There are most certainly a lot of valid opinions in this thread now so how do we all make them count?
Unless you genuinely are the nicest person in the entire world (and smell of cookies and cream ice cream or have a quite incredible cleavage) I guarantee this is not how the vast majority of 'friendly advice' conversations will go. Wave down the next commuter cyclist you see (preferably in the rain, always in the best mood and most receptive in the rain) without lights and repeat your little chat and see how it goes. Please report back.
I have to say i do agree with the above this is most likely not going to work in most cases.......
I talk to strangers in real life all the time..
the above was just one example, not a one off.
but well done for dismissing something you personally don't have the social skills to do or have simply never tried.
I talk to strangers in real life all the time..
Well done you. That must make you the exception to the rule, because literally no one does this ever*.
but well done for dismissing something you personally don't have the social skills to do or have simply never tried.
Then you say this, which I'm afraid shows you probably aren't all that. Do you really actually spend much time with people or do you just like the theory? 😉 Give it a go though - if you can spend the evening flagging down and making cheery suggestions to passing commuting cyclists about their lighting choices (without the safety of a day glow police jacket on) and don't meet at least one ingret who wants to stove your face in you have missed you calling as a hostage negotiator!
*this may actually be true if you are from London.
a Cyclist? stove my face in... ahhhh ha ha ha ha... 😆
ingrates I can deal with
Cyclists have no chance when they are so hostile and intolerant towards each other. No wonder so many drivers have such a low opinion of us.
And then you go onto be……..
So lets take this in a different direction now then, what can be done to make things better in the UK for us all as a collective??
Drive with consideration for other road users. Realise that other road users have just as much of a right to be on the road as you. Realise that your journey is no more important than anyone else's. Realise that you are the traffic. Take a chill pill, enjoy the view and take a few minutes longer to get where you're going and you'll feel much better!
intolerant of the selfishAnd then you go onto be……..
So lets take this in a different direction now then, what can be done to make things better in the UK for us all as a collective??What small changes can we all make that can have a positive impact for the masses??
Of course as far as cycle paths etc go this is most likely tackled form a local council level (i know very little of the politics involved) but how can this be influenced?
There are most certainly a lot of valid opinions in this thread now so how do we all make them count?
Ride your bike to work and round town. The more people that are seen riding, the better.
Write to your MP, MSPs, local Councillor and your Council to report infrastructure problems or suggest improvements, in exactly the same way you would for any other local issue.
Contact your local cycling campaign group, if you have one, or the CTC or British Cycling nationally.
[i]Ride your bike to work and round town. The more people that are seen riding, the better.[/i]
This, totally. Go down the shops on your bike, use your bike for simple journeys, don't dress like a storm trooper or a building worker when you do it. Normal clothes, normal bike. Make it look as normal as driving a car to go down the shops. It is public perception that needs to change, then the rest will come.
Ride your bike to work and round town. The more people that are seen riding, the better.
Yep. Overwhelmingly, the thing that will make us all safer is more bums on saddles.