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

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?

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.

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.

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 this.

Ropey concrete surfacing like this.

Wonderfully convenient moments like this.

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

whoops.

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 😀

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1IlhWwTiPfY[/video]

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 some of the cycle lanes along my commute route, but not all, and certainly not the cycle paths (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?

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 – Member

Who 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 – 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.

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 – Member

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.?

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…

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

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?

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 😉

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.

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 can justify it all they want, usually using some ‘they dont, so why should I’ ridiculousness,

people (ime) use that line as an argument against compulsion not as a reason to choose not to wear a helmet.
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 insanity 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.