[Closed] commuters, why so apposed to cycle paths/cycle lanes & lights!!??

So, where is this nirvana? I can't think of one...

You must be thinking of the National Cycle Network.

[URL= http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a177/midlifecrashes/IMG_20150212_103955_398_zpsncntkpmt.jp g" target="_blank">http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a177/midlifecrashes/IMG_20150212_103955_398_zpsncntkpmt.jp g"/> [/IMG][/URL]

define "good"
I was one of those that would mix it up on the Bristol Ring Road. Sure there was some pretty acceptable segregated cycling facilities in the vicinity of Filton, Abbey Wood, etc. even if it was shared use. But then at the end of the bit of civilisation (MOD, UWE, Business Park) it spits you out on to a crappy bit of footpath that nobody would even walk along. So you have a whole section right along to M32 junction that may be classified as Avon Cycle Path that ultimately links in with the main Bristol Centre to Bath cycle path, but in reality it was just a narrow piece of ancient pavement probably installed at the time the road was built. Maybe it's been renovated since?

Then you get a slightly better footpath declared as a cycle path when it goes past the next bit of civilisation.

So anyone living in a big residential area, and working at Filton (a big employment area), have (or at least had, when I lived there) the choice of riding on the A4174 dual carriageway, riding on glass and thorns, or taking a long back road.

I expect most people drove alongside the cycle path.

I know of two people who've been killed whilst cycling along cycle lanes by motorists.

But it's about time we adopted StVZO lighting regulations, IMO.

i don't tend to use cycle path's as its a pavement (normally) and its unsafe to go more than 3mph on a pavement....generally they seem more unsafe than safe...

aP - Member

I know of two people who've been killed whilst cycling along cycle lanes by motorists.

I dont contest that this happens at all but the vast majority that i have used and will use again once Tinyhorse Jnr starts school are fully segregated..........i must be lucky to have a whole load of national cycle network that i used to use for work and will start to use again when the time comes.

I can only speak from experience and i only know the situation in my local area thus my original post. I used to commute and now drive for reasons i have outlined.

Most of my route to work follows National Route 1 into Edinburgh for 8 or so miles. You would imagine this would be the M1 of cycling paths. However, about 2 miles are completely unlit. One mile of this is a remote walled in old railway line, not the nicest when you pass unsavoury types in the pitch dark. There are other potholes, obstacles, cars illegally parked accross path, bags of dog sh1t hanging off trees, fly tipped crap, a rough schemey bit ect.

It's no wonder a lot of folk would either choose the road (which isn't particularly bad as it goes) or just drive / bus it.

I'm not a fan of most cycle lanes. In Ireland, like in a large part of the UK, they're a painted on after thought. This means they're either parked in or they're used by pedestrians as an extension of the footpath. Much safer, if you keep your wits about you, to dodge traffic. The amount of times I've been t-boned by a van while having the right of way on a cycle path is more than I care to remember.

No lights/dark clothing is the most foolish thing I see regularly. The 'no helmet' is one of two things... either a) They're so uncool or b) a double bluff. There was a study in 2007 that indicated that UK drivers give more room when overtaking cyclists not wearing helmets. The study said 8.5cm more, and even more if you wear a wig. ( [url= http://www.bhsi.org/walkerstudy.htm ]Sauce[/url] ) I used to not wear a helmet for that very reason. Now I do, but mostly because when I'm on my bike on the roads I'm usually going somewhere that contains roots or is a skatepark.

A road route I use to ride, ran through a hamlet which had a dual use footpath/cycle path. The surface of the path was so uneven it really was too uncomfortable to ride. However, the real deal breakers were the dog walkers. Effectively it was a pedestrian only foot path and I was happy to yield and ride on the road....

Oh no!, that's when car drivers would pass me without pulling out to go round me, some hit the horn and would point, furiously, at the foot/cycle path. There was no way I could explain my decision, but this didn't stop them making an instant judgement, resulting in them sentencing me to death, by driving so close to me.

I don't ride that route anymore.

"Here, use this 'Cycle Lane' we created for you"

"But it looks exactly the same shape as a lorry drivers blind spot and it's encouraging me to cycle up the inside of large vehicles"

"USE THE CYCLE LANE!!!"

Sod. That.

timthetinyhorse - Member

Clearly you missed the whole part when i said i used to commute on my bike then??

i read it, but dismissed it as a classic 'i'm not anti-cyclist, but...'

it's exactly the kind of thing people say to me, seconds before ranting about a cyclist they claim they saw.

i could start ranting about the number of cars i see, with only one working headlight. A driver more interested with facebook than looking where they're going. Speeding. Running red lights...

but i'm old, and need to watch my blood pressure.

We have them on pavements, every 100m it has a give way to a blind junction for a side road. Useful for kids, useless for commuting.

Oh, and they end, as in literally take you as far as there's enough room and then dump you on a dual carriageway. This proves they've been put in by people who don't give a toss about the users, hardly surprising people don't use them is it.

Imagine the moral indignation if roads popped up that suddenly stopped halfway to nowhere.

I'd like to ask the OP why he he thinks he's more entitled to use the road network than other users.?

so many reasons why they may be riding on the road rather than the cycle lane/path. Some of them you may agree with some you may disagree with, why don't you try asking them?*

It may be interesting to find out their reasons, certainly cycle lane planners should be interested, but on the whole I'd prefer we concentrate on making the road network a safer place for vulnerable road users rather than concentrate on getting them off the scary dangerous roads. Even if we had really good cycle infra you'd still have to go on roads occasionally.

*be prepared for the same answer I tend to get from drivers when I ask WTF they just nearly killed me which is "**** off dickhead"

ahwiles - Member

timthetinyhorse - Member

Clearly you missed the whole part when i said i used to commute on my bike then??

i read it, but dismissed it as a classic 'i'm not anti-cyclist, but...'

it's exactly the kind of thing people say to me, seconds before ranting about a cyclist they claim they saw.

make of it what you will, i still ride a lot but just not to work, i ride very little on the road as im not a fan of it, if you choose to do so thats fine with me however i know in my local area there are most certainly better options...........i dont claim i saw, i know i did, are you now saying i have fabricated this whole thing and that all of what i have said does not happen?

i have no idea, but we're all capable of confirmation bias.

you say you don't ride on the road (or very little), so in your valid opinion, the cycle lanes are better. Other people have obviously decided otherwise.

3 miles of my commute is on a traffic free route, it's bloody great.

The only serious accident I've had commuting was on the cycle lane through Shadwell from Tower of London to Canary Wharf. Separate cycle lane but crossed by 5-10 side roads where the cars are expected to give way to the cycle lane, but don't as they are either not interested or just un-used to such an odd arrangement.

You have the choice of (literally) stopping every 200m to give way to the side roads or else risk what happened to me - car coming from side road didn't bother looking or giving way and I went over the bonnet. Luckily unhurt. After that I used the road which was a lot less dangerous, fitted in with the usual road rules about who had right of way (and hence drivers observed those rules better) and I got there significantly faster. Badly designed cycle paths are a waste of pavement space.

most of the paths on my commute are great: they are long enough to pay off for the entry / exit points which are almost all shit.

doing 20 mph in the road. theres a cycle path which you can do 20 mph along. better slow to 2 mph because they've put a gate in which you can't get a bike through! 😯

a couple are s0o short they aren't worth getting on.

Boardman said it quite well...

futon 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.?

never once said that, the question is if there is a safer alternative as i have outlined why not use it?

D0NK - Member

so many reasons why they may be riding on the road rather than the cycle lane/path. Some of them you may agree with some you may disagree with, why don't you try asking them?*

It may be interesting to find out their reasons, certainly cycle lane planners should be interested, but on the whole I'd prefer we concentrate on making the road network a safer place for vulnerable road users rather than concentrate on getting them off the scary dangerous roads. Even if we had really good cycle infra you'd still have to go on roads occasionally.

*be prepared for the same answer I tend to get from drivers when I ask WTF they just nearly killed me which is "**** off dickhead"

I agree the road network should be made safer and also the fact that people have no option bar the road at times, i have never said the opposite to this.

Unfortunately stopping to ask people just isnt an option in the real world as im sure it would just result im me being called "anti-cyclist" and most likely cause a hazard myself.

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

ahwiles - Member

i have no idea, but we're all capable of confirmation bias.

you say you don't ride on the road (or very little), so in your valid opinion, the cycle lanes are better. Other people have obviously decided otherwise.

3 miles of my commute is on a traffic free route, it's bloody great.

indeed traffic free routes are great as are the cycle paths in my local area, i cant speak for the rest of the UK as i don't know but i can get between a few local towns with no road work at all on either good cycle paths or surfaced national cycle network tracks/trails, love it, when my office moves and tinyhorse jnr transport is no longer an issue i shall be riding my 8 mile commute on national cycle network almost fully, perhaps i just have it good.

@binners i don't dispute that there is some crap out there, the wiggly one almost looks fun in its own way though

You think?

I'm calling troll on this.

[i]A driver more interested with facebook than looking where they're going[/i]

Good point! IME, today it must be 95% of all women under the age of 30yrs are constantly looking down as they drive, when they sit waiting at traffic lights, pretty much anytime they are in the car, behind the steering wheel.
It would seem they believe if they hide their phone on their lap, then nobody else will know what they're doing. I suppose that they are constantly looking into their lap doesn't seem to be a "give-away" as to what really has their attention while in charge of a motor vehicle.
Crazy!.

And yes, I know there's a significant proportion of men who flout the law too. It's just that in my experience, recently, nearly all women in that age group seem to be busy on their phones while driving.
Flame me if you want to!

No need to wear a helmet, will do jack if you are hit by a car or lorry. It is 1" of polystyrene.

What about when you lose the front wheel on a bit of ice, or a patch of oil?

Do people genuinely believe that cars and lorries are the only threat to ones head when out on the bike?

I had a mate who most certainly would have been dead or left with serious life changing injuries if it wan't for his helmet, he wasn't hit by a car or a lorry.

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.

No flaming required phones in cars is a huge problem for both sexes it would appear........I'm sure its a huge contributor to road traffic accidents both with cyclists and cars.

scandal42 - Member

No need to wear a helmet, will do jack if you are hit by a car or lorry. It is 1" of polystyrene.

What about when you lose the front wheel on a bit of ice, or a patch of oil?

Do people genuinely believe that cars and lorries are the only threat to ones head when out on the bike?

I had a mate who most certainly would have been dead or left with serious life changing injuries if it wan't for his helmet, he wasn't hit by a car or a lorry.

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.

a very well made point also, I don't like riding anywhere with no helmet and thus find it hard to believe that others don't use them, if clipped by a car and you come off hitting your head on the floor could the helmet not save your life? im fairly sure it may play its part

phones in cars is a huge problem for both sexes it would appear........I'm sure its a huge contributor to road traffic accidents both with cyclists and cars.

with the problem that it's very hard to prove...

phone records will show if someone was talking or texting at the time of a crash, but not if someone was just looking at crap on facebook.

ahwiles - Member

with the problem that it's very hard to prove...

indeed, a very similar point to the one made in the article about speed cameras on the home page. If you don't get caught is it ok??

The first (slightly trollish) comment is if you're a keen cyclist why ae you not taking Junior to nursery in a child seat or tagalong if you have all these wonderful cyclepaths to use?

Ultimately, I have a RIGHT to use the road (arguably more so than motorised vehicles, which along with their operators need to be licensed to do so). I WILL obey the laws of the road and I EXPECT everyone else to do the same.

Practically I'll use whatever route is fastest and least faff. "safety" barely comes into it. If there's a clean unbroken section of bike lane that goes where I want it to, great. Anything else, I'll use the road, as I'm entitled to.

However I'm not interested in shared use pavement routes. peds/kids/dogs are just too blind/unaware/unpredictable to be trying to share with them and try and do a decent pace.

I'm not interested in cycle routes where you're forced to give way to sideroads every 50m - they should be giving way to me, but no, the car HAS to be king.

Bike lanes that are on roads also need to be kept clean. The nearest one to me -Hope Valley cycleway is essentially unusable on a road/commuter bike. It's covered in 1/2" of mud/grit/broken glass and big puddles. There's a parallel pavement shared use cycleway (see above), so I end up riding mostly in primary. If the drivers don't like it, sorry - tough.

...and lets not even get onto the "comedy" bike paths purely put in as a box ticking excercise...

I generally find dealing with cars on roads fairly easy (certainly in urban environments - it's only the speed differential in rural situations thats dangerous). For the most part they're relatively slow reacting, and there's a standard set of rules that, actually, most people work to, which adds a large amount of predictability to any given situation. There's always a dick quotient, but there's the same proportion of cyclists and motorbikes who are dicks as there are drivers. If we ALL play the game, obey the rules and THINK, then all the bike lane stuff should be completely superfluous.

I think the OP's position on this could be translated to:

"I'm not anti cyclist, but... "
And
"Some of my best friends are cyclists and I even sometimes cycle too"

Try swapping some of those "cyclists" for descriptions of other segments of the population and then it's pretty clear what a good attempt at trolling this has been.

Also, I did some research at university on pedestrian route choice and safety very rarely figures in route choice. For peds route choice centres around local route knowledge, comfort and convenience. I'd hazard a guess to say that the same is true of cyclists and motorists.

I have a track bike for track
I have a mountain bike for mountains
I have a road bike for roads
I don't have a "cycle path bike"

Do car drivers only use motorways? I like most other road users, use the facilities most appropriate for the journey I am making.

I do however subscribe to all lighting and traffic regulations because I am a responsible road user. This is irrespective of the mode of transport (bike and car).

JonEdwards - Member

The first (slightly trollish) comment is if you're a keen cyclist why ae you not taking Junior to nursery in a child seat or tagalong if you have all these wonderful cyclepaths to use?

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.

pjt201 - Member

I think the OP's position on this could be translated to:

"I'm not anti cyclist, but... "
And
"Some of my best friends are cyclists and I even sometimes cycle too"

Try swapping some of those "cyclists" for descriptions of other segments of the population and then it's pretty clear what a good attempt at trolling this has been.

I think your have no clue who i am at all, i ride plenty, love my bikes and enjoy getting out, the fact that at the moment i don't ride to work makes no odds........This is not a troll post at all no matter how your brain figures.

I 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.

[url= http://www.warringtoncyclecampaign.co.uk/facility-of-the-month/ ]This shows why cycle lanes aren't always worth using[/url]

What about when you lose the front wheel on a bit of ice, or a patch of oil?

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 - Member

I 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

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.