I think one of the big differences between the UK and Holland is not so much the bike-friendly infrastructure, but the default assumption in law that in a bike-car incident, the driver is automatically wrong. Even if he isn't.
So Dutch cyclists can behave like cocks (which they do) and annoy the hell out of people, but at the end of the day drivers have accepted that that's the way it is, like the weather - crap, but you can't change it.
UK drivers, with the active help of the police, assume that the cyclist is always wrong, and if he's dead under the wheels of a white van, no big deal.
Hi everyone, I bought a Highway Code, just so I could look this point up? (Sad, yes, I know). It says we don't HAVE to ride on bike paths. It says that where they have unbroken lines cars should not pass over the line onto the bike path, and where there are broken lines cars can cross the line "when unavoidable" - although I would say that parking directly outside a nail bar probably counts as "avoidable" lol (not me BTW).
Anyone been on the cycle lane which goes under the A10/M25 roundabout? It's dark, flooded and has its very own tramp!. My fave is the one by the Tottenham Hale one way system; isolated, underground, dark, flooded, bestrewn with shopping trolleys and other council estate ephemera... nice.
I bought a Highway Code, just so I could look this point up
It's available online for free...
[i]It's available online for free... [/i]
Graah. Worst grammar offence EVER. 😉
AndyP - Member
It's available online for free...
Graah. Worst grammar offence EVER.
:WTF?:
great trolling BlingBling
Graah. Worst grammar offence EVER.
❓
'for free'. Hideous.
I'm sure their are worser offences of grammar.
Just to jump back in - sure in utopia we could have totally dedicated infrastructure and perfect cycle lanes etc, the link above with "this, not this" pictures illustrates the point that causes it's own downfall - ignoring the fact that there are studies showing cycle lanes in NL are more dangerous than the road, just look at the buildings and roads around the "good examples" - in the good examples (tend to be newer cities/towns etc) there is a lot of space, the existing roads are not clogged with cars (partly due to the bikes!) and it's a perfectly acceptable solution if you can have 50% extra road width to start with. Most roads/roadworks in the UK knit around existing towns, anchient buildings and fit down narrow lanes. In order to provide things like the good examples in the UK would require a rip up and redesign of the roads, pretty much from scratch. Where they try to combine off-road cycle paths with existing carriageways in the UK they tend to cram both parties into too small a space respectively.
Knowing you're starting from a position of few cyclists and little space, surely the way forward is to teach people how to tolerate and respect rather than accepting people are idiots and having to rip up and rebuild (or at least moan because they don't) half of the roads in the country?
There's plenty of space out there, cyclists just need to obey the same rules as everyone else and tolerate drivers, drivers need to accept that bikes require a bit more care and take a few seconds longer to get past, but both can share the roads safely if we don't act like idiots. What happens when people get onto roads where there can't be extra lanes - like the thousands of miles of country road - do we widen all roads? Outlaw cyclists on such roads?
I feel all kinda hippy now <shudder> - but at the end of the day it just seems like common sense to me. Pay billions for a compromise of roads infrastructure or millions on teaching a little more respect and tolerance and making the roads a nicer place to be for all.
Thanks al 😉
Coffeking - I am going to have to disagree with you about the feasibility of building good cycle lanes in old towns and cities. Amsterdam has plenty of well designed cyclepaths / lanes in the older part of the citie. I have cycled on them. The main difference IMO is that the road planners will accept a reduction in space for cars in order to provide safe passage for cyclists whereas in the UK they won't.
I do not advocate wholesale separation of cars and bicycles - but some simple road design incorporating the needs of cyclists can make cycling so much safer
I always find it hard to accept that on a cycling website so many folk are antibicycle and pro car
When cycling on the road my first prioritys are towards 'self preservation', rather than what my 'rights' are.
If that means slowing down, stopping, riding in the gutter, dismounting etc. to avoid being clipped by a car or another incident then so be it.
It is precisely because safety is paramount that you should NOT ride tucked away apologetically. Assert your right to be there and be seen, then move to the left to allow cars past [i]when [b]you[/b] judge it to be safe[/i] - but don't go too close to the kerb (I think 60cm is the suggested minimum, and cars should allow you a metre or so to your right - so cars must be roughly 2m + from the kerb themselves, which is about twice as far out as a lot of cycle lanes are marked).
Hiding from cars will make you less safe, not more.
JP is spot on. Our brains are constantly doing a risk asessment as we go along and if cycling the wrong way down a one-way street is safer then I would do it.
Scenario.....Its full dark and raining.... my lights have gone.....then i would rather ride against the oncoming cars so I can see them and hop onto the pavement if I have to (given the one way street goes where I want to go).
Its survival out there...
and cars should allow you a metre or so to your right - so cars must be roughly 2m
Key word there being 'should'. It just doesn't happen in reality. I would rather take evasive action and thus avoiding consequenses of an incident than to go back to the scene with broken bones and a tape measure banging on about who was in the right.
(*[i]caveat[/i]* Unless a compensation claim is in the offing, then my 'avoidance attitude' won't get you very far) 😉
For those who might know its from Thatcham Station going up towards Lower Way...
I know it, and I'd use the road.
But to be fair, coming from Thatcham you've got to expect the abuse 😉
JP - it sounds like you could do with a little on-road cycle training, as what you are describing is fairly typical of a rider who believes that the cars have a greater right to be on the road than you do.
And I totally agree about the points made re riding on the road even when there is a cycle lane provided, IF I have decided that it will be safer and quicker for me.
I once had a slightly odd experience when I was finishing off a really cool ride with some friends around Hayfield/New Mills area in the Peak one Sunday. I was climbing fairly steeply up a narrow lane with cars parked all the way down one side, so the useable road width was about 2m - maybe 2.5m max. I heard a car racing up behind me, and looked around to see a Jaguar closing fast. I kept on pedalling, then he started peeping his horn and yelling for me to get off the road. At this point he started trying to bump my back wheel, at which point I stopped in the middle of the road and invited him to get out and explain what he was doing. He didn't, I got his registration as well as a good description of him and immediately phoned the Police. They then made a nice little visit and warned him that he was behaving unacceptably, so not a massive win, but probably proportionate given that he hadn't actually hit me.
So I guess what I'm saying is stand your ground and don't be put off by ignorant or dangerous drivers.
My commute takes me over [url= http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=d&source=s_d&saddr=54.530197,-1.543794&daddr=&hl=en&geocode=&mra=mi&mrsp=0&sz=16&sll=54.530209,-1.543772&sspn=0.01011,0.01929&ie=UTF8&z=16 ]a railway bridge[/url] which is a blind summit and very narrow and has railings on the kerb, so there's to escape onto the pavement if you're clipped.
I ride in the middle of the lane, to stop cars trying to squeeze past. I cringe when I see people riding so near the kerb they're actually on the double yellow lines.
On bike paths: if they're done properly, they're brilliant. My 2.5 mile ride to work is now almost all on bike paths and it's ace.
I don't believe that at all (and where have I said that I don't ride assertively)?JP - it sounds like you could do with a little on-road cycle training, as what you are describing is fairly typical of a rider who believes that the cars have a greater right to be on the road than you do.
I think we should be mindful of how our actions can be construed. To drivers trying to overtake a cyclist who is riding outside of a cycle lane, it looks like a willful 'up yours'. Creating divisive attitudes.
Every day I cycle to work, and every day I'm held up by cars. Perhaps I should start dragging drivers out from behind the wheel, give them a beating, and tell them that they should be walking or cycling instead.
Completely unreasonable? Of course, but no more so than the actions of the driver in the OP.
On a related point, I seem to recall that "official" guidance for cycle paths was that you shouldn't use them if you are cycling at a relatively high speed? Is that true, or have I made it up?
I think we should be mindful of how our actions can be construed. To drivers trying to overtake a cyclist who is riding outside of a cycle lane, it looks like a willful 'up yours'. Creating divisive attitudes.
Isn't that just apologising for your presence? You shouldn't have to actively inconvenience yourself just to prevent random strangers from misconstruing your perfectly reasonable actions. I could say that every person I see driving a passenger-less car in rush hour (rather than car sharing or biking, or going by train or bus) looks like a wilful 'up yours' but who am I to judge whether any individual's journey is justified or not? And if the driver does jump to the wrong conclusion, is it they, the cyclist or the mere existence of the bike lane that is 'creating a divisive attitude'?
yep i ride roughly where the passenger in your average car would sit -
IVe had a week of "almosts" but looking ahead has prevented them - you know where they all happened - in the ****ing cycle lane
I ride on the road 60cm-1m out from the kerb and i ok get tooted at but at least ive been noticed.
The one that gets me is roundabouts - highway code says we can use the outside lane only if we want to - in my eyes thats more dangerous than treating them as if you were in the car - esp if your going out exit three - as the cars coming out of/and going into exit 2 assume your going out exit 2 if your on the outside lane.
I just ride in as if in the car - be extra vigelent - make eye contacts and make clear hand signals. again the only issues ive had on roundabouts are when ive stuck to the outside lane !
I always find it hard to accept that on a cycling website so many folk are antibicycle and pro car
I'm not anti-bike, if thats what you're suggesting, nor pro car. I'm pro both, both are required and both are a good idea, and they can coexist unless you take the victim stance or have a superiority complex. Being a cyclist does not require a complete dismissal of other forms of transport.
By crushing the lane sizes to fit bikes into existing spaces I've found most roads are compromised from both sides - there's no need. Just use the road as it's designed and you'll be fine. I've never yet met a road design that didnt work as well on a bike as it did in a car. Sure it might intimidate people but thats their problem, not the road design.
Coffeking - I could show you plenty of roads that with a bit of consideration for cycles could be made much much safer. This is what is done in other countries.
here the car is king and cycle provision is only made if it does not compromise the cars at all. In holland and other countries a real comprimise between the needs of all road users is made - not cars 1st 2nd and 3rd
have you cycled in the low countries? If not you should give it a try
I am not dismnissing all other forms of transport - I just want my fair share of road space - and road design is a part of this.
I used a cycle lane once. I hit a van, so haven't used one since...
I'm with you coffeeking. I'm neither pro or anti either modes of transport, both are equally valid. A bit of consideration from both motorists and cyclists is all that's needed. (I thank drivers who have given way to me regardless of whether they had to or not).However I certainly don't apologise for my presence on the road (driving or cycling).
The cycle lanes in my local area only seem to have been painted in as a traffic calming measure.
There was an interesting post on David Hembrow's blog recently, comparing his two recent bike commutes. On was his commute in Cambridge where he rode on the road, the other a similar distance in similar circumstances in Holland on Dutch bike paths. Guess which one had the highest average speed...
EDIT: here it is: http://hembrow.blogspot.com/2009/11/commuting-speeds.html
Now I know exactly which bit of road the OP was referring to - I use the road too. I didn't even realise there was a cycle path on that bit anyway. Fairly narrow shared pavement, plus lots of side turnings make the road far safer.
Wow. Three people on STW who know Thatcham. I reckon there's at least one more (Keva?).
I believe unless you have ridden where there is decent cycle provision like the low countries and Germany you really don't understand how good cycle provision can be - dramatically improving things for cycles without causing cars an great hassle
Miketullys link explains a bit.