[Closed] Time Trials, on a dual carridgeway, at rush hour, in the fog?

Does sound a little daft.

(Beef with red peppers, mushroom and black bean sauce stir-fry)

Hmmm. Timetrialling in the UK is very, very odd. All this use of dragstrip courses to get good times, traffic assisted records and so on, yet other than Chris Boardman, every international competition as far as I know sees the brits get hammered...

Messers Miller & Wiggins might have issue with that list.

I agree though, does not have much appeal to me any more.

[i]Messers Miller & Wiggins might have issue with that list.[/i]

I meant other than professionals...

Odd folk, testers...

I've seen them a couple of times on the A19 [Saturday Tea-time] when the conditions were far from ideal IMO
Very low visibility and only a handful of them with any sort of light

when I was an 'orrible little chav.. many many years ago.. if I was getting on me mums nerves she would tell me to go and play in the traffic...

nice cuppa rosie lee.. chinese special fried rice and sweet potato dhansak FWIW

Is it anymore stupid than the various mountain bike activities that have resulted in the despatch of air ambulances as detailed on some recent threads?

TT's course are all risk assessed for safety and traffic flow, the organiser or timekeeper will and do stop tt's if conditions warrant it. It may be the organiser and timekeeper weren't aware of conditions down the course and weren't expecting afternoon fog - I don't know. I do know that if conditions are poor on the events I organise they get stopped
It may seem counterintuative but dc courses can be safer than courses through country lanes as drivers have clear views and should be able to see a large cyclist with a bloody great fluorescent number on their back, sometimes what looks odd from a car is fine.

Unfortunately as a depressing aside it seems that most of the testers killed in the last few years have been murdered by motorists in clear conditions;

http://www.timetriallingforum.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=58084&hl=tragic+death

http://www.timetriallingforum.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=46838&hl=tragic+death

http://www.timetriallingforum.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=48872&hl=tragic+death

http://www.timetriallingforum.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=42622&st=0&start=0

http://www.timetriallingforum.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=42622&st=0&start=0

Not wanting to be callous or anything,

The driver allegedly never saw us

Is perfectly feasible. There was no way I was expecting a cyclist doing ~22mph to be on the road where I'd happily been cruising allong at ~70mph for the last 3 hours,

But every time I came up behind one I had my heart in my mouth, and I'm a slow driver, god knows what kind of shock some of the repmobiles doing 90 would be getting coming accross either cyclists or car drivers that have braked to 30 and swerved out into the fast lane to avoid cyclists?

It just struck me as incredibly stupid, selfish and iresponsible. If you did anything similarly dangerous at work it'd be banned and I'd be lucky not to get fired for gross misconduct!

Curry was very nice BTW.

tinas, so if a cow, sheep, child etc runs out, and it does happen what do you do, your driving pay attention if your on a motorway you wouldn't expect to see bikes, but i have seen fence panels, dropped exhausts etc. you can't just switch off and assume nothing is going to happen.

On the point of TT's never really appealed, particularly fast dual carriageways. Although i would agree that a dual carriageway can be safer than a single carriageway because they tend to have better sight lines.

I would never do a TT on a dual carriageway. The speed differential is just too great.

well if it is foggy and visibility is that poor then people should be driving like there could be a stationary, broken down, glass coach full of kids with haemophilia but no it is rush hour and tv is waiting

was on A19 (driving) weekend of Royal Wedding and must admit a bit surprised to see a time trial as was pm and thought early morning the norm - despite sunshine and excellent sight lines many drivers couldn't deal with this unexpected hazard in a safe way - very very late braking/tailgating and procratination/squeezing by and late lane changes whilst those in outside lane maintained (excess) speed irrespective

question i have is at what point did it become unacceptable to ride on a particular road? recall a death last year on the A20 and consensus was that it is a road you shouldn't ride on (and personally i wouldn't) but is the number of roads that are dangerous for walkers and cyclists actually increasing? - i think so - attitude seems to be that on any [i]through[/i] route (irrespective of classification) motorised vehicles have an absolute priority. (that is a full stop) all other users have to keep to the grass and bushes or be demonised for using or as is happening simply accept this intimidation and drive with the kids in the back and the bikes on the roof

"have been murdered by motorists"

Now i'm all for harsher penalties for dangerous / careless / selfish-aggressive driving, but murder charges need proof of intent. There have been a disproportionate number of deaths among time triallers in recent years but i'm not aware of any of them involving actual intent, they've been caused by downright carelessness or failure to read the conditions and poor awareness.

I wouldn't advocate banning riding on a-roads, but i do wonder why people do it, i'd prefer a quieter road and a 'sporting' tt rather than chasing sub-20s. Riding among 80mph traffic seems bonkers.

Is it anymore stupid than the various mountain bike activities that have resulted in the despatch of air ambulances as detailed on some recent threads?

we organise mtb races that see riders needing medical attention, including ambulance trips to the local A&E, their injuries are always due to rider error/ mechanical failure.

The biggest "risk" on our risk assessment is vehicle movements on the site, the max likely speed is 20mph

deaths in TT events are tragedies and my thoughts go to their families

The nearest time trial route is a dual carriageway route on a 3 lane road ... i dont cycle the road normally and wont do it for a TT.

I'm not a fan of using such roads for TT events personally.

Notaspoon, Glad the curry was ok, manflu and haddock down here, now back to debating.

. There was no way I was expecting a cyclist doing ~22mph to be on the road where I'd happily been cruising allong at ~70mph for the last 3 hours,

... god knows what kind of shock some of the repmobiles doing 90 would be getting coming accross either cyclists or car drivers that have braked to 30 and swerved out into the fast lane to avoid cyclists?

I don't know this course but I'll be out this evening doing the warning signs on a dc course, you can't get onto the course without passing a warning cycling event sign, I would hope it is the same there, so why aren't motorists looking at road signs?

car drivers that have braked to 30 and swerved out into the fast lane to avoid cyclists?

Back to poor driving, if you can see cars swerving, brakelights why are other motorists not able to adapt their driving plan for a perceived hazard. As has been mentioned there is always a risk of debris etc so why are people driving with little room for error.

It just struck me as incredibly stupid, selfish and iresponsible. If you did anything similarly dangerous at work it'd be banned and I'd be lucky not to get fired for gross misconduct!

So doing something, which is legal, has been risk assessed, has warning measures put in place and which the participant & organiser feels is safe to do is s,s&i because motorists can't drive properly and use fairly basic observation skills? Bit of a transfer of responsibility. At work I do things which normal memebers of the public, and indeed myself on occassion might think are dangerous things but the risks are minimised and up until recently I loved my job and nowadays I am paid to do it so i get on with it. Life is full of risk.

I would never do a TT on a dual carriageway. The speed differential is just too great.

As has been mentioned the speed difference may be a little greater - not that that's going to make any difference if they're trying to remove a 40 tonne Scania from just behind your ear if you get hit - but dc course have better sight lines and more room for overtaking. The cheekiest tt course I've ever done was a single carriageway course in Surrey - I wouldn't go on it again and I ride dc course throughout the summer with no qualms because they're safer roads.

jameso - I was being a bit provocative but if you want to off somebody running them over seems to be the way to go for minimal payback.

i'd prefer a quieter road and a 'sporting' tt rather than chasing sub-20s. Riding among 80mph traffic seems bonkers

Jesus I wish I was chasing sub 20's, i'm there for the post race cake. I've no problem with sporting tt's our club runs a sporting 14 as it's open tt but where I am the vast majority of open TT's in summer are on safe DC courses. I think I've covered perceived risk on dc course v sporting courses.

Brownbacks. My point was not to have a dig at mtb races or people injured but as to what society accepts as acceptable risk taking, if people are being airlifted or stretchered off hill sides at potentialy considerble cost through either rider error or mechanical failure there might be an argument from non-participants as lumping that in as an activity that is stupid, selfish and irresponsible. However as you say it's risk assessed, actualy reasonably safe otherwise your risk assesment would call for the activity to cease, down to the organiser / individuals choice and presumably legal which is what I'm saying about tt'ing

A'm now going to shave my legs and get my lycra skinsuit and bike ready for tonight if the manflu disipates, if you're driving along the Holmwood bypass / A24 tonight look out for a safe 2up club TT, feel free to wave, point, etc

My point was not to have a dig at mtb races or people injured but as to what society accepts as acceptable risk taking

if someone falls off on the mountain they hurt no-one but themselves and their family..
if a cyclist is killed in a TT on a foggy a-road.. the poor driver will have all sorts of emotional issues to deal with..

I don't like the idea of grown men inflicting themselves on the public this way personally.. pocket billiards would be fairer

My name is convert and I am a reformed dual carriageway time trialist....

My rule of thumb now is - "would I ride on that road for pleasure?" If not I don't ride it in a race. Partly for safety reasons, partly for reasons of enjoyment.

I don't hold much by the risk assessment argument - I do enough of them at work to known that subjective judgement about the categorisation of the risk and consequence could make anything seem justifiable if you really want it to be. Until the worst actually happens in any case.

"if you want to off somebody running them over seems to be the way to go for minimal payback."

too true.. the biggest danger we all face on any road comes from a lack of accountability from drivers and the legal system is the cause of it. the cycling silk's blog had a legal review of the year a while back where his basic point came down to 'there but for the grace of god go i' - in other words everyone who drives, the judge, the lawyers, the police, can relate to that 'momentary lapse of concentration' that results in death on the roads, so they're unwilling to lay down a real deterrent level of penalty. one day it could be them.

You're probably right about DC TTs being more of a perceived risk, i'm just thinking of the kind of roads that from experience i avoid at all costs. strength in numbers i guess. and signage, if enough drivers pay attention or moderate their driving because of road signs.

anyway, just ride safe..

Doesn't matter if it's a TTer or a commuter whose been caught out by the conditions, everyone has to drive/ride to the conditions.

If it's foggy and the visibility is really poor the cyclist should probably be moving around the same speed as the rest of the traffic. No one should be going faster than a speed they could stop from if they come across something unexpected.

I get what you're saying about the event organisers should have looked at the conditions but not being there can't comment on whether it should have been run or not.

But, drivers having to swerve because they never saw the cyclist through the fog is p!ss poor driving and not adjusting speed to conditions.

I actually think a quiet stretch of dual carridgeway seems like a decent place to run a TT, gives drivers somewhere to go to overtake.

But, drivers having to swerve because they never saw the cyclist through the fog is p!ss poor driving and not adjusting speed to conditions.

Really?

Hitting them would be piss poor driving, but seeing them in time to take avoiding action sounds like good driving to me. If you are riding in conditions where the cars around you are electing to use their lights and you are a bike and don't have a rear light you are not making the job of the driver any easier.

I don't know the road in question but many DCs are actually pretty safe. Most traffic is only going 10-15% faster, but you often have a big hard shoulder in which to ride so you end up with far more room than on a SC. A driver can not notice you at all and you'll be safe, which is not true on an SC typically.

I got stopped by a copper once riding down the A470 towards Cardiff (the bit where cyclists are allowed). She was apparently just concerned for my safety, but I explained my case and told her that this road was safer provided I handled the sliproads appropriately. That is, go down the slip road, and then cross it back onto the carriageway when no-one's coming.

you know how dirt jumpers go to great lengths to build jumps in forests and stuff.
Couldn't TT organisers just get their s**t together and start tarmacking fields next to DC's?

The thing is with riding on a DC is that it moves slow drivers, lorries and so on into the overtaking lane.

This has the effect of slowing down and bunching up traffic in that lane making it increasingly difficult for drivers catching the cyclists up to get into a decent gap and overtake.

yunki I agree don't do tt's in the fog, I think I had mentioned that already and someone else mentioned the need to reduce speed increase braking distances in fog, the debate seems to have moved on to don't tt on dc's.
Convert, the dc courses I ride - i'd ride along them if I had too at the times I race, indeed the h10/8 quite often has cyclists on it but they're obviously not as pleasurable as tootling along lanes. Re risk assesmnets I find tt organiser's tend to be more considered than "employers" in risk assesments, plenty of courses have been lost over the years. TT courses still have traffic counts, unfortunately you can't risk assess for eejit river who is not paying any attention at all otherwise all roads would be out of bounds

I'll put my point a different way. As soon as people dont need to conentrate on keeping their car between the white lines to avoid oncoming traffic they switch off.

I agree with the OP.

People playing private games, in a very dangerous public places…. I’m very uneasy with it.

Others have mentioned broken down vehicles etc all very well, but those things are not their out of choice are they?

As people cycling on the road for FUN you are involving other non players in your games… doesn’t seem very fair to me.

Re risk assesmnets I find [b]tt organiser's[/b] tend to be more considered than "employers" in risk assesments, plenty of courses have been lost over the years. TT courses still have traffic counts, unfortunately [b]you can't risk assess for eejit river[/b] who is not paying any attention at all otherwise all roads would be out of bounds

You see that's exactly my problem with RAs - the RA is being done by the tt organiser (and approved by rttc) both of whom have a vested interest in slowing the inevitable march of time and hanging on to courses for as long as possible. Also, I'd say poor driving is exactly what you are risk assessing for (similar to RAing a piece of machinery in a workshop to limit hazard to a worker who looses concentration with the addition of guards etc) - if everyone is on top of their game virtually anything is possible. You are right, if you took it to the nth degree bikes and cars would never mix but it is that subjective judgement as to where to draw the line that creates the problem.

They sometimes use a motor racing track for TTs around here - seems a better solution all round TBH

It allows the riders to concentrate on what they're doing without worrying about traffic.

The sad truth is that people treat DCs like motorways, and with the vast majority of traffic doing well over 55mph, drivers switch off to the possibility of stopped or slow moving traffic.

On a number of occassions I've driven past TTs on quiet DCs. As a cyclist, I see the signs, know exactly what's going on and there really is no danger. Unfortunately, there are enough drivers who managed to miss the signs and then get surprised by the cyclists.

The right answer would be proper driver training, pointing out the obvious differences between a DC and a motorway (possibly even raising the motorway speed limit to underline the distinction) so that people actually think a bit harder about what hazards they might encounter on a DC.

Unfortunately, the "right" answer is a bit academic after you've been wiped out by a car.

ro5ey - good troll (by good I mean rubbish)

Convert I see your point and having written risk assesments where results are massaged am fully aware of the issue. But with regard to tt'ing most of the courses I ride are low traffic count during the day or ridden at 06.00 to avoid traffic, by doing so one is limiting ones interface with traffic and reducing the odds of being hit so steps are taken by District Committees and RTTC. However poor driving can happen anytime anyplace, if you're off at 06.00 will you meet someone still over the limit from a session the night before, like you say it's a subjective desicion.

I feel I should point out that the vast majority of tt's, including dc's, are incident free and a good way to experience racing and the camaradarie of club riding. Fatalities are probably more striking because they are infrequent and often so stupid - insofar as it's drivers on safe, clear, empty roads hitting highly visible cyclists that they should have seen.

Uplink, a nice idea but there are hundreds of tt's during the year and not enough suitable venues to cater for the demand

tinas, so if a cow, sheep, child etc runs out

We're not talking a 2 lane carridge way with house on one side and fields on the other or a town center where I'd happily ride.

We're talking a dual carridge way with slip roads, no roundabouts, crash barriers etc. Basicly 2 lane motorway linking the M1 and Teesside for anyone heading to/from the South.

As for the broken down vehicle. That would likely be on the hard shoulder, or at least be bigger (and more visible) than a cyclist, and have its lights on, and hazzard lights, and probably a warning triangle if the drivers got one.

I don't buy the risk assessment argument for one simple reason.

Risk number 1: Poor driving by drivers not expecting cyclists on that road.

Mittigation to risk 1: ??????????????????

You can't decide to hold an event then blindly ignore the risks in the assessment to allow it to take place. I wouldn't even say you needed to be a poor driver to hit a TT'er, plenty of cars were coming up behind them, registering them at the last minute, pulling over without indicating, then the car behind's suddenly having to brake sharply (he can stop in the distance he can see, and suddenly theres a cyclist in it).

How many of the TT supourters in this thread genuinely drive on DC/motorways and genuinly drive for hours on end convinced the car in front will suddenly stop. You'd be;
a) having a nervous breakdown before you get anywhere.
b) causing an accident as you'd run out of mental capacity to process any other infomration.

Even the 2 second rule doesn't account for cyclists/kids/balls suddenly appearing within your braking distance. Accidents happen, the driver might have done everything by the book. The TT'er was legaly allowed to be there, but the TT'er is still dead, and the car driver and the riders family still have to live with that.

I'm with the OP. I ride thousands of road miles a year and generally won't touch DC's. It might be legal, and there might be a small shoulder, but how often do you drive on a motorway and see a truck just drift onto the hard shoulder and drift back again.

I also have an issue with the huge selfishness of [b]SOME[/b] TT's. I was driving in the Midlands last summer and came across a TT on a section of DC. The course involved several roundabouts and the chaos the riders caused as they went for gaps on roundabouts that really weren't safe just to get a good time was frankly terrifying. Lots of damage done to the reputation of cyclists by drivers that day.

if a cyclist is killed in a TT on a foggy a-road.. the poor driver

I'm not arsed about the TT races but plenty of people ro5ey in particular seem to be saying cyclist shouldn't be there at all. Well cheers fellas, cycling forum and all that.

TINAS Sorry that sounds like poor driving;

"plenty of cars were coming up behind them, registering them at the last minute, pulling over without indicating, then the car behind's suddenly having to brake sharply (he can stop in the distance he can see, and suddenly theres a cyclist in it)."

Unless the cyclist came from the side the distance he can see to be clear isn't clear because theres a cyclist in it. Pulling over without indicating - do their brakes not work?

"Even the 2 second rule doesn't account for cyclists/kids/balls suddenly appearing within your braking distance"

The two second rule relates to gaps between moving traffic - leave two seconds between vehicles which you can gauge against fixed points by saying "only a fool breaks the two second rule" (say it twice in the wet). However the overarching rule is that you drive at a speed that enables you to stop in the distance you can see to be clear whilst remaining on your side of the carriageway and that does allow for other road users and debris in your carriageway and is more appropriate in this example.

How many of the TT supourters in this thread genuinely drive on DC/motorways and genuinly drive for hours on end convinced the car in front will suddenly stop.

When I drive I am constantly evaluating the conditions and formulating an ongoing driving plan based on this, I try to leave sufficient breaking distance so I can stop and if possible enough distance so that those who stop behind me won't pile into me. I'm not expecting the vehicle in fron to stop but I make allowances for sudden halts. I've seen a multi-car pile up happen in front of me and seen cars that were behind me go sailing past me in the outer lane and hit other vehicles

It's not difficult but it something that requires attention and thought, I don't tootle along at 40mph either and have used the techniques for very high speed driving.

Took a while for this topic to heat up didn't it - might have to go and buy some biscuits with my nurofen cold and flu.

Stabiliser has a good [url= http://aseasyasridingabike.wordpress.com/2011/06/03/dual-carriageways-and-how-cyclists-get-hit-on-them/ ]anatomy of a crash post[/url], basically showing how, otherwise inoffensive, ignorant drivers team up to kill cyclists. Certainly worries me.

For those who don't want to read the full article, idiot A drives along see's cyclist but either from just being a tool or because there isn't a space in the next lane waits till the last minute to swerve around him. Idiot B who was driving to close to idiot A and hits the cyclist.

Idiot A could have slowed and overtaken safely, Idiot B could have left more space. Both at fault, both contributed to someone dying, both probably walk out of court with their licences intact, cyclist blamed for lack of helmet.

I remember being very surprised to see some sort of cycling event ( not sure if it was a time trial, one guy was on some sort of trike ) on the A50. Struck me as madness.

The thing is KILO, [b]you[/b] might drive safely and leave sufficient gap, but many (most?) don't.

If I'm killed when riding on the road, it's no consolation to me/my family that the person that killed me [b]should[/b] have left a bigger gap and been more alert.

When I was doing my motorbike training 20 years ago the instructor taught us this rhyme:

Here lies the body of Edwin Grey
Who died while defending his right of way
He was right, dead right as he sped along
But he's just as dead as if he was wrong

And on a separate note, don't even get me started on cyclists who wear dark clothes when riding on the road and just rely on a tiny strip of reflective material. Brilliant. That works really well on a cloud day under tree cover doesn't it. Morons.

Good point boriselbrus, being right doesn't matter if you're dead but you're helping perpetuate it all with that attitude. People get killed whilst out for a drink at night, people get killed walking round the shops, people get killed (by cars) whilst on the pavement. Are you going to stop doing those things too?

Kilo... If you think I’m troll presumably you don’t consider my argument at all possible.

You are out on your bike doing a TT, having fun, playing a game, having a bit of a laugh really. But all those people in cars aren’t messing about. If one hits you, they have broken the rules of YOUR game…. They didn’t even know they were playing!!

If one hits you, they have broken the rules of YOUR game…. They didn’t even know they were playing!!

Agreed, would be better if roads were closed for TT events to go ahead. Surely the "game" a driver is playing is getting to their destination safely tho?

As people cycling on the road for FUN you are involving other non players in your games… doesn’t seem very fair to me.

boris you seem to have missed the point running through this thread that dc courses are risked assessed, safe and fine for tt'ing on. You went ahead with motorcycle training but motorcycles are a more dangerous transport mode than cars presumably you carried out your own 2risk assesment" and were happy to gon ahead. Take your ditty to logical conclusion and one would never cycle on the road if cars are present.

“logical conclusion don't cycle on any road for fun”

So riding on the road is fun, is it?

Ask any driver the same question.

Ask yourself as a driver the same question… Do you find driving fun?

So are DCs chosen for courses because they are the safest roads for cycling on?

Idiot A could have slowed and overtaken safely, Idiot B could have left more space. Both at fault, both contributed to someone dying, both probably walk out of court with their licences intact, cyclist blamed for lack of helmet.

SHHHHHHHHH you'll wake TJ!

riding on the road is sometimes fun and sometimes it's just to get you where you want to go.

Exactly the same as driving then. Stop trolling.

it actually terrifies me when I see cyclists on dual carriageways (TT or not). the fact remains that DC's are extremely fast roads (arguably too fast in some cases) and some drivers (rightly or wrongly) don't have the foresight to assume there might be cyclists there.

Sure, some drivers are dangerous but riding on a 60+mph road because its legal to do so is just plain dangerous IMO

So just because a TT course is risk assessed does that make it safe? My concern is that you are assessing the risk based on your own high standards of driving not the average standard of driving.

Believe me, I do risk assessments for a living and I know how easy it is to come up with the result which you want, not the actual result. I'd be very interested to see some of these risk assessments to do a little professional review. 🙂

And the point of the little rhyme is that you may be in the right (legally) when you do 70mph on a wet motorway, you might be in the right when you sit at 50mph in a trucks blind spot, you might be in the right when you filter at 50mph through stationary traffic. It doesn't mean that it's safe or sensible to do so.

Likewise you are in the right if you ride a bicycle down the centre of lane 1 of a DC wearing grey clothes doing a TT. But if you get hit, you still (IMO) bear some of the responsibility.

Sure, some drivers are dangerous but riding on a 60+mph road because its legal to do so is just plain dangerous IMO

but thats the legal speed limit in most of the country lanes around here, do we stop using these roads? Any difference in outcome being hit at 40 rather than 60 - no so thats those roads gone as well to cyclists. it's not the speed limit that creates the danger it's a whole host of factors which is why some dc's are used for tt'ing and the vast majority of dc's in the uk aren't

So are DCs chosen for courses because they are the safest roads for cycling on?

No they're chosen for a wide variety of reasons but to become / remain tt courses they have to be safe which is why some dc's are used for tt'ing and the vast majority of dc's in the uk aren't

 

Sure, some drivers are dangerous but riding on a 60+mph road because its legal to do so is just plain dangerous IMO

There are PLENTY of 60mph single carriage way A-roads, are we not suppoed to ride on these either? how the hell am i supposed to get out of town then?

Lets face it, this is the argument.

Rding/racing on DC's is legal and should be safe.
Majority of drivers on DC's do not expect cyclists (for many reasons).
So... should should TT's continue to use (busy) DC's when they know there is a significant increased risk.

Personally, i dont do TT's on the busier DC's but do race on a DC course that is quiet (ring road around industrial estate).

Many people i know are happy to race on the Busier DC tho, and that is there choice, and legal. However there have been 2 cyclists killed on that road in last year (not TT'ers) so its pretty obvious that some drivers on that road are not driving safely.

Country lanes are completely different to DC, they share the same speed LIMIT in some cases and thats where the similarity ends. most country roads are dangerous to drive at 40 let alone at the Nat. Limit (which is not 60 as it varies depending on the type of road)

2 cyclists killed on that road in last year (not TT'ers) so its pretty obvious that some drivers on that road are not driving safely.

So just because a TT course is risk assessed does that make it safe?

Well one would hope that the risks have been identified and measure put in place to minimise risk, hence warning signs, early start times etc or the course is not used. I'm fairly happy that those who carry out the risk assesments have the competitors safety as the number one prioirity - I personaly don't risk assess courses but utilise the one created for the course we use.

Risk assesment is subjective and as has been said throughout, the subjective risk assesment of the people riding these courses is that it's fine.

And the point of the little rhyme is that you may be in the right (legally) when you do 70mph on a wet motorway, you might be in the right when you sit at 50mph in a trucks blind spot, you might be in the right when you filter at 50mph through stationary traffic. It doesn't mean that it's safe or sensible to do so.

But as mentioned throughout the thread tt'ing on a dc is not a clear cut invitation to the grim reaper and can be a consideraby safer option than the examples you mention. I'm not arguing for tt'ing on dangerous roads or in dangerous conditiuons juts pointing out that tt'ing on a dc is not something that is an automatic no no.

Cyclists should be able to ride safely anywhere they are legally allowed to otherwise they should be barred from doing so as on the motorway.

Drivers should take care when driving but plenty think they're safe in their tin boxes with all the airbags and other safety features most cars have now.

I fully support the idea of manditory re-tests for drivers and if you bring it into a conversation it's scary how many people admit they'd be worried about keeping their driving licences if this was the case.

Ro5ey stop trolling. Driving can be enjoyable. IMHO the reason it's normally not is due to other ignorant/aggressive/careless/don't give a shit drivers who only care about themselves.

But to answer the OP's question, surely if the riders have any care for their own safety they can stop chasing a personal best, inform someone of the (changing) conditions and try again another day.

yes and what we keep hearing is "woah there's cyclists on a dual carriageway? well more fool them, bloody idiotic!" and completely ignoring the dangerous drivers.

But we as individuals can't change the dangerous drivers. We can choose not to ride bikes where these drivers are most dangerous to us.

It's like this. I live in Kent - one of the busiest counties in Britain for traffic. When I ride on the road I can choose roads where I can go out for 5 hours and get passed by maybe 20 cars. Or I can choose the A26 where 5 cyclists have been killed in the last 5 years within 10 miles of my house.

Now choosing these quiet roads does not make me immune from being hit, but it substantially reduces the chances.

I fully accept KILO's point about some DC's being chosen for being the safest places. My own experience of coming across a TT on a DC is that all the roundabouts and the ensuing conflict between cyclists gunning for a PB, and drivers made it bloody dangerous.

Boriselbrus sums it up perfectly.

The obession with chasing fast times on dual carriageways is bizarre.

Keep telling yourselves it's because these courses have good sight lines and are safer than country lanes - you're only kidding yourselves, no-one else

Some DCs are fine, to be fair.

And it's not only good for setting a PB, it's also easier and more satisfying I reckon to ride on steady gradients.

grantus - Member
Boriselbrus sums it up perfectly ... these courses have good sight lines and are safer than country lanes - you're only kidding yourselves, no-one else

boriselbrus I fully accept KILO's point about some DC's being chosen for being the safest places

*chuckles* chapeu kilo 🙂

You think I'm trolling

So you completely disregard my argument and think its silly. Maybe it is as an argument, what about as an observation?

You are playing and messing about... others road users aren't and do not want to.

Could you answer me one question... which other road users should be allowed to race on the road?

Cars? Of course not. Motorbikes?(don’t get me started on colour coded leather clad motorcyclist) How about horses?

None of the above are…. so exactly why are cyclists?

In fact it doesn’t even matter why we are allowed to play in the road, I got a road bike recently and love it.... shhhh but it's better than mtb... I’ve started because I want to have a crack at triathlon. Even contemplated riding the 20miles to work as training... but 5 minutes off of my bike spilt in a tri is for me not worth facing the potential dangers through East London for myself and my indirectly my family.

And the point is you ARE playing a game with a very dangerous opponent. And its super dangerous opponent who (and I’m sorry to labour the point) does not even want to play or aware that they are in a game.

Be safe out there guys.

so you've got a road bike but you are too afraid to ride it on the road, and you think that's acceptable?

Your last post was more aimed at TTs in particular which I can't defend (never having done one let alone organised one) but kilo seems to be successfully defending.
Your earlier posts were much more along the lines of any cyclist riding roads which *you* consider dangerous (despite being legal to ride) are idiots and/or being wilfully dangerous just for laughs - thats what I object to.

which other road users should be allowed to race on the road?

TTing isn't racing. It's just riding as fast as you can. That is not illegal, provided you keep below the speed limit.

TTing is no different to being on a commute and passing a slower rider.

TTing isn't racing.

You may want to read this

Phrases like [b][i]"There are a number of other points that will help everyone to enjoy safer racing:"[/i][/b] in particular

http://ctt.org.uk/Beginners/BeginnersGeneralInfo/tabid/81/Default.aspx

So in summary;

Those against - it looks a bit dangerous, and causes trafic caos

Those for - its safe*, its legal**.

*Well TBH I dont see it being safe, yes I can legaly do 70 on a DC, and 60 on a country lane, but on average on a country lane I'll be going a lot slower (my car says I've averages 35mph on A/B roads this week and thats mainly country driving) , and if I come accross a cyclist I can wait behind him and overtake when safe, on a DC everyone is doing 70 (so double my country roads average) and there isn't really the option to slow down and wait for a gap in the fast lane, so you get trafic chaos. Yes if every driver was perfect we'd not have a problem, but drivers arent perfect (and neither are cyclists, just because we're slower doesnt make us in the right).

** There was a thread on here about how we should legalise drugs recently, just because its legal(or illegal) doesn't make it right (or wrong). My personal view would be that bikes should be banned from DC's for our and others safety. When the laws were drawn up bikes probably overtook cars!

so we ban bikes from unsafe roads? where does that leave [url= http://aseasyasridingabike.wordpress.com/2011/06/04/the-village-of-cowfold-moves-one-step-closer-to-total-car-dependency/ ]residents of cowfold*[/url]? If you start banning bikes from unsafe roads at some point it's going to cause non-drivers a substantial problems. My commute involves a short section of DC (50mph) or an extra 1.5miles with lots of junctions some of them quite badly planned/thought out, it's pretty close as to which is scaryest, the DC with line of sight and a whole 2 extra lanes for cars to use to overtake me [i]should[/i] be safer.

That view TINAS is too car centric (as are most road rules/designs) sort out the dangerous road users not penalise the harmless ones.

*only 2 roads out of cowfold not actually DCs but bad roads for bikes and pretty soon no public transport either.

Bikes are already banned from some DCs

just back from a club 10 - all on a dc, no incidents whatsoever on the course, one girl fell off warming up on a nearby country lane, maybe we should only ride on dc's tonight they were safer

Lets not forget, plenty of people get mown down whilst on the pavement, several hundred per year die from cars whilst not themselves on the road (including grass verges, traffic islands etc I think it's ~400pa). Ban walking too. Oh yeah a few months ago a load of people queueing to get into a nightclub were ran into by a car, ban queueing for nightclubs too. Carry on like this and we'll have tunnels from our front door to our parking spot, drive to works underground car park none of us ever have to get in the way of the fast shiny shiny cars.

2000 people per year die from cars (not including secondary stuff like pollution) and not much is being done about it, the numbers are falling but I'll wager it's the occupants of the cars getting better survival chances than those outside. It's a messed up situation, then we get well meaning but shortsighted people (and cyclists!) suggesting removing the soft squishy objects from the roads to make things safer..... 😈

Now I've vented I may actually be able to get some sleep.
ps I do drive a bit, I like having a car, it gets me to nice places to ride, but our car culture is well ****** up.

yes I can legaly do 70 on a DC, and 60 on a country lane, but on average on a country lane I'll be going a lot slower (my car says I've averages 35mph on A/B roads this week and thats mainly country driving)

I did once contact a cycling club to comment about their TT - was being held on the A49 S of Ludlow on a sunny midsummer Saturday afternoon. Silly amounts of traffic, with drivers getting frustrated and doing stupid things - did the image of cycling no good whatsoever (and I'm normally one of the first to defend cycling on the road to those who complain about us "getting in the way").

Well we're not allowed on motorways, I can't think of a legitimate reason to be allowed on DC's, same speeds as motorways, similar trafic densities.

I'm not car centric, if it wasn't for living away from home I do more miles by bike than by car, it's only the 550mile round trip home that tips it the other way.

When the laws were drawn up cars and bikes shared unsurfaced roads, and neither would be much faster than the other, since then cars have gotten significantly faster and the roads have evolved to allow for this with DC's, slip roads, motorways etc. These roads were never intended for use by bikes, presumably its a bit like the laws originaly drawn up to ban homosexuality, being lesbian was never illegal becasue Queen Vic couldn't comprehend that anyone would do such a thing so saw no need to legislate against it, similarly I'm sure no one ever thought when the A1 (or whatever came first) was built that people would want to ride bikes on the thing.

By all means ride infront of a truck doing 70mph and hope to god that his subconcious hasn't chosen that exact moment to distract him with thoughts of dinner/wife/mistress/pukka pies, but at the end of the day it's the rider thats putting himself in the trucks way, and as kilo's post on the first page shows, far too often the driver is only 99% perfect*.

And just to prove a point, taken from the DFT website, it only goes as far as A/non-A roads, but lets assume its a trend that follows from tiny minor road to A road tripple carridgeway, a reasnoble assumption given the actual figure for the difference is about 4x more casualties per mile traveled on a vs non-A roads.

when allowing for the amount of pedal cycle traffic, casualty rates are lower for non-A roads than for A roads, and

If you've a statistic showing its save for all involved then lets see it but that report looks pretty damming.

*This doesnt make them murderes as someone up there put it, it makes them human.

Reminds me of Melbourne, on Sunday mornings (generally) you will find large groups of cyclists on the motorways, the inside lane becomes their track for the duration. They've even been known to close down the odd motorway for the benefit of them.

Now thats open minded policy making ....

I can't think of a legitimate reason to be allowed on DC's, same speeds as motorways, similar trafic densities.

Except often they aren't the same speed as motorways and don't have similar traffic densities. Occasionally it's useful to be on a DC if it's going in the same direction you are, rather than minor roads which aren't. That said, I'm not sure I've ever ridden on an NSL DC.

I always used to prefer TTing on dual-carriageways as there was so much room for other traffic (and I'd often stay in hard shoulder area anyhow). Racing around B-roads and single carriageway A-roads I felt more at risk.

Most TTs are also done in the morning to try and avoid traffic but obviously if it's a 50 or 100 miler then people are still going to racing into the afternoon.

At the end of the day if a car hits a TTer and claims they didn't see him then the driver is at fault, chances are they were just on autopilot cruising at 70+ and thinking about many things other than actually driving (I know this as I'm guilty of it myself - being distracted that is not hitting someone...).

I can't think of a legitimate reason to be allowed on DC's

I acknowledge your points tinas, I personally don't want to go and ride every 70mph DC in the country just cos I can, 50s are scary enough for me and pretty boring to ride TBH (ignoring near death experiences) but if you start banning cyclists from roads without a damn good reason you're marginalising cyclists even more than they are now.

Well designed DCs should be reasonably safe places to be, good sight lines, few junctions, multi lane so fairly easy to overtake properly. All we need is for people to drive appropriatley, these aren't Mways, there are slow moving vehicles about watch what you are doing and drive safe. Not rocket science.

I acknowledge your points tinas, I personally don't want to go and ride every 70mph DC in the country just cos I can, 50s are scary enough for me and pretty boring to ride TBH (ignoring near death experiences) but if you start banning cyclists from roads without a damn good reason you're marginalising cyclists even more than they are now.

Well designed DCs should be reasonably safe places to be, good sight lines, few junctions, multi lane so fairly easy to overtake properly. All we need is for people to drive appropriatley, these aren't Mways, there are slow moving vehicles about watch what you are doing and drive safe. Not rocket science.

Yes but TTers are using roads such as the A12 which [u]are[/u] basically 2 lane motorways. Even overnight, early in the morning, or at weekends that road is often congested.

Of course banning cyclists from every DC would be stupid, but equally there is an element of responsibility on the part of organisers and individual cyclists to avoid dangerous routes where possible. Going back to the OP, in my humble opinion fog + rush hour would meet that criteria.

trying not to get wrapped up in all this but can't help myself. Sorry not trying to get in an argument with [i]everyone[/i] retro but do you mean the A12 near great yarmouth? This highlights my earlier point if you ban* bikes from it how the hell do you get from GY to lowestoft? either to the west of A12 on country roads miles out of your way or east of the A12 which includes, from the looks of google maps, a dirt road through a golf course, both routes probably lovely for a weekend jaunt but not for people who just want to travel from one to the other.

roads such as the A12 which are basically 2 lane motorways

*I know you didn't suggest banning bikes from it but it sounds like the sort of DC that some would want a ban on.

http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/statistics/datatablespublications/accidents/casualtiesgbar/suppletablesfactsheets/pedalcyclist2008.pdf

Not seen this before! Some of those stats are worrying - especially the one about the number of hit and runs involving cyclists. Seems far more common that other collisions. Time to start using that helmet cam i think...

D0NK - Member

trying not to get wrapped up in all this but can't help myself. Sorry not trying to get in an argument with everyone retro but do you mean the A12 near great yarmouth? This highlights my earlier point if you ban* bikes from it how the hell do you get from GY to lowestoft? either to the west of A12 on country roads miles out of your way or east of the A12 which includes, from the looks of google maps, a dirt road through a golf course, both routes probably lovely for a weekend jaunt but not for people who just want to travel from one to the other.

roads such as the A12 which are basically 2 lane motorways

are motorways or are (mis)treated as motorways?

*I know you didn't suggest banning bikes from it but it sounds like the sort of DC that some would want a ban on.

No, not at all - I should have have been clearer in my post. I meant the bit in Essex. It goes from a single/small dual carriage way at the Suffolk end into a much larger/faster road around Colchester/Chelmsford and continues like this until it reaches the M25.

Cyclists should be able to ride safely anywhere they are legally allowed to otherwise they should be barred from doing so as on the motorway.

agreed... [u]playing[/u] with your friends on a busy carriageway is another matter entirely however..

http://www.hartlepoolmail.co.uk/news/local/breaking_news_lorry_driver_arrested_after_cyclist_killed_on_a19_1_4170059