Cycling UK Forum

It's not just the right. As I've posted elsewhere "My Lords, the Minister says that her department is carrying out a review of road safety. Will it cover cyclists, who often travel with no lights, go through red lights, travel at high speeds and cause danger to the public?" Lord Watts - Labour

The House of Lords debate on the subject of headlight glare prompted Lord Watts to utter the totally irrelevant question" My Lords, the Minister says that her department is carrying out a review of road safety. Will it cover cyclists, who often travel with no lights, go through red lights, travel at high speeds and cause danger to the public?" Travel at high speeds Danger to the public

Audax67 wrote: ↑3 Apr 2024, 8:41am Isn't it the clever Dutch who open a car door with the opposite hand, so that they have to swivel in the seat to reach the handle and so can see anything approaching from behind?

I've tried to get into the habit but I usually forget.

I think about 75% people are right handed - some strongly so. Therefore it would seem "normal" for most Dutch people to open the door with their right hand ie the hand away from the door. For right hand drive vehicles the opposite applies.

rualexander wrote: ↑3 Apr 2024, 1:03am

mjr wrote: ↑2 Apr 2024, 11:22pm

MikeF wrote: ↑2 Apr 2024, 9:57pm Yes it's not clear is it?

Well, it's clear in one way. The door was opened into the cyclist's path, else they could not have hit it. The unclear bit is how much time elapsed between door opening and cyclist arriving.

The door might have been left open for some time before the cyclist appeared on the scene, the cyclist may have been distracted and not noticed the door.
We don't know the details.

Indeed. Too many people on here making 2+2=5. The only facts are the door was open and a cyclist hit the open door. We don't know if the door was left open eg whilst the person went indoors or if it was opened into the path of the oncoming cyclist. Nothing in the report implies the latter - it's not unknown for a cyclist to hit a parked car with all doors shut.

The usuall government political pretence of doing something, but in reality frittering money away. Just think how this would be presnted if it were a road project.

rualexander wrote: ↑2 Apr 2024, 6:59pm Did the cyclist crash into the open car door or did the car driver/passenger open their door into the cyclist's path?

Yes it's not clear is it?

My Regatta workwear trousers wear very little with cycling and they cheap and everyday.

wjhall wrote: ↑29 Mar 2024, 6:51pm

Stevek76 wrote: ↑29 Mar 2024, 12:43pm
Not sure if NS has any local walk/cycle campaign groups that might be worth talking to, however do not have multiple people submit identical, or very nearly identical objections to TROs as these will often be treated as a duplicates by the council.

This is a point worth emphasizing, partly in relation to the earllier discussion of bullet points. Brevity and clarity are very desirable, but councillors do assess letters on the amount of individual effort put in, and in my experience will read detailed documents, possibly because they welcome anything that gives an alternative to what they get from officers, who drown them in bullet points.

To whom??
Detailed documents yes, but your letter should not be verbose or opinionated.

wjhall wrote: ↑23 Mar 2024, 1:30pm
I am drafting a letter to the council to urge them not to waste public funds, ...............

Your draft is rambling. You need to make your points concisely to make the letter readable - bullet points are good way to make them. By readable I mean that whoever reads the letter can quickly see your objections without reading an "essay". Remove unnecessary words, and your opinions - stick to facts. Essentially make them read it and not file it!

Most of those who have opinions on what cyclists should or shouldn't be doing are "armchair cyclists" sitting effortlessly coccooned in a metal box and who have never ridden a bike on the road.

Note - first post.

gazza_d wrote: ↑31 Jan 2024, 7:58pm Newcastle have just pulled an ltn in Jesmond (one of the richer bits of Tyneside)
Consultation had 9 months left yet caved to a noisy minority. https://www.newcastle.gov.uk/citylife-n ... be-removed

I'm guessing that it's because many are too posh to walk and have influence against a weak council.

"The council has confirmed the measures will now be removed and learning from this scheme used in future transport schemes."
I wonder what it has learn't and what the future transport schemes will be?

Cycling along a public footpath is an act of trespass against the landowner unless the landowner has allowed cycling, as otherwise you haven't any right to be riding a bike there. Having said that I often ride along a short twitten which then leads to a public road and then to an access road that becomes a track over which there runs a public footpath. This then leads to a private estate road where the public footpath continues. This is a very convenient access from our house to places further afield,but I'm always very careful if there are pedestrians using the PROW.

Chris Jeggo wrote: ↑27 Feb 2024, 11:09am Not 'fart backside' then?

pjclinch wrote: ↑15 Mar 2024, 5:56pm

Pinhead wrote: ↑15 Mar 2024, 3:04pm I only use these there are NO issues

My experience of crud catchers and high floating mudguards is an issue of the much less effective as mudguards than something closer in.

On my MTB having the rear guard underneath a rack gives it plenty of mud clearance, keeps it in place, and helps it stop me getting covered in mud. Plus the rack makes carrying stuff a lot easier.

Pete.

+1