End to End Via Cycle Routes
-
Ian F
End to End Via Cycle Routes
I am in the process of organising an End to End (Bottom to Top) charity event. the twist being that as far as possible we will tarvel via the Sustrans Cycle routes. Has anyone done this before if so have you a proven route. If not but have advice please let me know. Ian F
-
Manu
Re:End to End Via Cycle Routes
Please let me know how you're getting on with that project or read my post in "Thinking of next year"
Manu
Manu
-
Guy
Re:End to End Via Cycle Routes
If you're thinking of using Sustrans' cycle routes take plenty of spare inner tubes and a good puncture repair kit with you. Many of these so-called cycle routes are unmade tracks in terrible condition. If Sustrans really do care about cyclists perhaps they could show it by ensuring their non-road routes are kept in a reasonable state of repair.
-
Lizb.bird
Re:End to End Via Cycle Routes
I have cycled the route from John O Groats to Newcastle Upon Tyne, no punctures on that trip. I have also done the Glasgow - Inverness sustrans and had 1 puncture. The Sustrans route from Inverness to John O Groats I think is my favourite route, I just love the remotness and once you leave Carbisdale Castle heading to Tongue the scenery is stunning even in the rain.
-
Marc
Re:End to End Via Cycle Routes
Guy
Thankfully your experience and opinion don't seem to be borne out by the the majority of users of cycle and pedestrian paths put together by Sustrans and its leagues of very willing volunteers, myself being one.
Yes, their pathways do vary in quality, but your advice about inner tubes and patches is a little selective. I hear far more need of them on publicly paid for roads after councels 'Norwegian flail' the hedges and so too farmers hedge trimming.
I note also from the date you posted your reply that it preceded Sustrans Heritage Lottery fund award over the Eden project and Tate Modern for its work, surely based upon its all encompassing access and enablement unlike the two other entrants which had very selective audiences.
As for IanF contact Sustrans directly for route advice and I'm sure they will put in touch with the rangers on the ground if they have the knowledge you require.
Happy cycling to you both.
Marc S Taylor
CTC Right to Ride Member
Swindon BUG member
Sustrans Volunteer Ranger R45 Swindon to Marlborough
Ps I'm a fat boy 19-20 St I pump my tyre up like bullets on or off road I get very few punctures and nearly always they are thorns, never as was surely alluded to in the description of the paths being in a 'terrible state' from under inflation causing 'snake bite' type punctures!
Thankfully your experience and opinion don't seem to be borne out by the the majority of users of cycle and pedestrian paths put together by Sustrans and its leagues of very willing volunteers, myself being one.
Yes, their pathways do vary in quality, but your advice about inner tubes and patches is a little selective. I hear far more need of them on publicly paid for roads after councels 'Norwegian flail' the hedges and so too farmers hedge trimming.
I note also from the date you posted your reply that it preceded Sustrans Heritage Lottery fund award over the Eden project and Tate Modern for its work, surely based upon its all encompassing access and enablement unlike the two other entrants which had very selective audiences.
As for IanF contact Sustrans directly for route advice and I'm sure they will put in touch with the rangers on the ground if they have the knowledge you require.
Happy cycling to you both.
Marc S Taylor
CTC Right to Ride Member
Swindon BUG member
Sustrans Volunteer Ranger R45 Swindon to Marlborough
Ps I'm a fat boy 19-20 St I pump my tyre up like bullets on or off road I get very few punctures and nearly always they are thorns, never as was surely alluded to in the description of the paths being in a 'terrible state' from under inflation causing 'snake bite' type punctures!
-
JS
Re:End to End Via Cycle Routes
Before I write any further let me say that everyone is different, so I am not attempting to claim that the comments that follow should apply to everyone!
One of the things I detest about Sustrans is that by focussing attention on their set cycle routes they take half the fun out of a touring holiday: the fun of looking at a blank map and deciding on your own route from the myriad possible alternatives. I can think of few things more depressing (in a cycling sense) than thinking: where shall I cycle today? Oh, I know, I'll follow this thick green line that someone else has drawn on the map, I'll start following it this morning and I'll still be following the same single green line this evening and the next day as well.
(The other thing, of course, I detest about Sustrans is their reinforcement of the idea that the road network is not the right place for cyclists.)
One of the things I detest about Sustrans is that by focussing attention on their set cycle routes they take half the fun out of a touring holiday: the fun of looking at a blank map and deciding on your own route from the myriad possible alternatives. I can think of few things more depressing (in a cycling sense) than thinking: where shall I cycle today? Oh, I know, I'll follow this thick green line that someone else has drawn on the map, I'll start following it this morning and I'll still be following the same single green line this evening and the next day as well.
(The other thing, of course, I detest about Sustrans is their reinforcement of the idea that the road network is not the right place for cyclists.)
-
Marc
Re:End to End Via Cycle Routes
JS
I would like to address the points you raise. Sustrans have created routes, others create routes. What is a route? A set of places to travel as offered by another, in Sustrans case they build Cycling and pedestrian routes. By their building you choose to personally interpret that as an unwritten comment by Sustrans to suggest ‘the road network is not the right place for cyclists’. Please check and then forward me any comment that is issued by Sustrans that back your comment up. I feel you won’t. By building these paths there is a gain in the number of cyclist, by the simple virtue that many who use them would never dream with their level of confidence to ride on road. So how do you address that, are you suggestion that no-one build cycling paths and you’d be happy seeing on road cycling continue to diminish. Before continuing, if you doubt my total commitment to this issue, my opinion is it will take the sort of campaigning of the like we saw and support over drink driving, but based on driving considerately both in the context of speed reduction and proximity awareness when overtaking and a junctions that it needed, before we will see the choosing a non road users at present changing their minds based upon a tangible change in cycling conditions on road. That sadly will take similar lengths of time to show effect as the drink driving campaigning and we have not seen the public campaign begin by any publicly funded organisations yet. Why is it that to ride in road is seen a the only ‘right place’?
As to your freedom to choose where you place a green line on the map go on and do it, describe your route to me and in some small way you place your green line on my mental map of where someone else suggested was ‘good’ to ride. I’m not bound to ride it but you have alluded to it being suitable for the sort of experience we all seek. One of the most common threads on number of cycling fora (?) I subscribe to is fellow cyclists asking others ‘I plan to cycle to XYZ, has anyone done it, suggestions or tips’. Let’s face your and my organisation the CTC offer pre-package End to End advice, does that cause you any feelings of detestation?
To find anyone detesting a first rate organisation whose record of achievement in getting people cycling and walking when they would not have previously done, to be pitied. As a member of both organisation never have I heard Sustrans folk knock CTC, regularly, even at my local DA level do I hear CTC denigrate the work of individuals who add to the overall amount of people who cycle and stroll out, but have dared to do so off public highways. My DA profile is of a slowly dwindling number of post 50 yr olds who cannot find younger members, so I feel based upon local conditions there will be a time when the high minded on road fraternity will truly diminish to the point of closure whilst, others who are more selective based upon their comfort zones and confidence levels will be seen as they are now to increasingly use cycling facilities which they have judged to suit them.
I use both and build for and support both organisations, can I extrapolate some portion of ‘detestation’ for myself? I trust the only sentiment that I used - ‘pitied’ will not vex you more than you appear to be already.
Yours very puzzled as to why cycling folk project factionalisation to all viewers over the on/off road debate, without allowing for individuals to choose.
Marc S Taylor – Memberships listed above
I would like to address the points you raise. Sustrans have created routes, others create routes. What is a route? A set of places to travel as offered by another, in Sustrans case they build Cycling and pedestrian routes. By their building you choose to personally interpret that as an unwritten comment by Sustrans to suggest ‘the road network is not the right place for cyclists’. Please check and then forward me any comment that is issued by Sustrans that back your comment up. I feel you won’t. By building these paths there is a gain in the number of cyclist, by the simple virtue that many who use them would never dream with their level of confidence to ride on road. So how do you address that, are you suggestion that no-one build cycling paths and you’d be happy seeing on road cycling continue to diminish. Before continuing, if you doubt my total commitment to this issue, my opinion is it will take the sort of campaigning of the like we saw and support over drink driving, but based on driving considerately both in the context of speed reduction and proximity awareness when overtaking and a junctions that it needed, before we will see the choosing a non road users at present changing their minds based upon a tangible change in cycling conditions on road. That sadly will take similar lengths of time to show effect as the drink driving campaigning and we have not seen the public campaign begin by any publicly funded organisations yet. Why is it that to ride in road is seen a the only ‘right place’?
As to your freedom to choose where you place a green line on the map go on and do it, describe your route to me and in some small way you place your green line on my mental map of where someone else suggested was ‘good’ to ride. I’m not bound to ride it but you have alluded to it being suitable for the sort of experience we all seek. One of the most common threads on number of cycling fora (?) I subscribe to is fellow cyclists asking others ‘I plan to cycle to XYZ, has anyone done it, suggestions or tips’. Let’s face your and my organisation the CTC offer pre-package End to End advice, does that cause you any feelings of detestation?
To find anyone detesting a first rate organisation whose record of achievement in getting people cycling and walking when they would not have previously done, to be pitied. As a member of both organisation never have I heard Sustrans folk knock CTC, regularly, even at my local DA level do I hear CTC denigrate the work of individuals who add to the overall amount of people who cycle and stroll out, but have dared to do so off public highways. My DA profile is of a slowly dwindling number of post 50 yr olds who cannot find younger members, so I feel based upon local conditions there will be a time when the high minded on road fraternity will truly diminish to the point of closure whilst, others who are more selective based upon their comfort zones and confidence levels will be seen as they are now to increasingly use cycling facilities which they have judged to suit them.
I use both and build for and support both organisations, can I extrapolate some portion of ‘detestation’ for myself? I trust the only sentiment that I used - ‘pitied’ will not vex you more than you appear to be already.
Yours very puzzled as to why cycling folk project factionalisation to all viewers over the on/off road debate, without allowing for individuals to choose.
Marc S Taylor – Memberships listed above
-
JS
Re:End to End Via Cycle Routes
Yipee! A chance to have a serious debate about Sustrans. So thank you Marc.
I am a CTC member and also a Sustrans supporter (I don't think, technically, that those of us who pay them a subscription are "members" as they are not a democratic membership organisation - nor is there any need for them to be to do what they do). I keep paying my subscription to Sustrans each year because, despite growing reservations about some of their activities, I still see them as net positive for cycling.
I made two comments. The first was about preferred styles of route-choosing for touring. That's a purely personal matter. You're absolutely right, the number of organisations/publications, including CTC and Sustrans, providing detailed routes is evidence that lots of people want that service and therefore I’m in a minority. Good luck to them, but it's not for me. On my ideal tour, I wake up and decide roughly where I'm going to aim for that day depending on the weather and how fit I'm feeling. Then I look at the map and out of the thousand and one different white roads and yellow roads and if necessary red roads I choose some that take my fancy. My choice - and for me that's the fun of it, exploring, creating, trying out, choosing. That's how I did my end-to-end, and that's why, for me personally, the idea of following a Sustrans long-distance route where someone else has had the fun of deciding the route does not appeal. But on that score, I'm not claiming my views are anything more than my personal preference, and everyone is different.
For me, this was crystallised partly when we had a fixed base holiday in a farmhouse with young children in N Wales. Several days, we tandemed the children the 5 miles to the beach. True to my own preferences, I tried different routes each time, all unclassified but public roads, and thereby experienced variety, different scenery, different farms and farmhouses and villages, etc. Then one time I saw the signs that showed that the route I'd chosen that day was a Sustrans route. Same standard of road as the half-dozen alternatives between Criccieth and Porthmadog; same gradients; but this particular one was singled out as a National Cycle Network complete with detailed signposts at every single junction. I found those arbitrary-seeming signposts almost claustrophobic, as if they circumscribed that feeling of independence and self-sufficiency which is part of the joy of cycling. But I'm not asking you or anyone else to feel the same.
My second comment, however, isn't about my own personal preference, it's about what's objectively best for cycling. You don't have to convince me that Sustrans has led to many novice cyclists having the confidence, both in safety and in route-finding terms, to do things they wouldn't otherwise have done – I know, and that’s a good thing. You don’t have to convince me that Sustrans have built some beautiful routes that are very pleasant to cycle (if not always very quick) and some very functionally useful short links – I know and I use them. Equally, I don’t have to convince you that it’s a constant battle to preserve the right (“right” as in legal but also moral and also in motorists’ and public perception) to cycle on roads. And I don’t have to convince you that the Sustrans National Cycle Network, however extensive it gets, will never ever replace or even rival the road network in terms of sheer extent and reach into every community.
So it’s a balance. Build cycle paths and publicise them; package them with some convenient roads and market them as cycle routes and a national network: more people cycle, a good thing. Place too much stress on traffic-free, dedicated routes as the norm for cycling, place too much emphasis on the National Cycle Network as the network that it is best for cyclists to use, and it gives justification to the perception that cyclists should only be on traffic-free routes, they should not be on roads, the road network is not a cycling network – a bad thing long term for all cyclists. Where is the optimum balance point? When Sustrans started, I expect everyone would agree that the up side exceeded the down side by a lot, they’ve clearly done a lot of good, and that’s why I’m a supporter. But when they started, they had less emphasis on the national network and more on simply building useful and helpful cycle paths. Now the emphasis is much more on the Network, and I perceive a sense that cycling on roads is increasingly seen as an even more distant second preference to cycle-only routes than it used to be. If they carry on emphasising the Network idea more and more, I personally believe that at some point the balance will be passed and they’ll start doing more harm overall to the long-term cause of cycling than good.
That is my best attempt at explaining rationally my views (and without using emotive words like “detest”!) What say you now I’ve explained rather than just been provocative?
Regards
John
I am a CTC member and also a Sustrans supporter (I don't think, technically, that those of us who pay them a subscription are "members" as they are not a democratic membership organisation - nor is there any need for them to be to do what they do). I keep paying my subscription to Sustrans each year because, despite growing reservations about some of their activities, I still see them as net positive for cycling.
I made two comments. The first was about preferred styles of route-choosing for touring. That's a purely personal matter. You're absolutely right, the number of organisations/publications, including CTC and Sustrans, providing detailed routes is evidence that lots of people want that service and therefore I’m in a minority. Good luck to them, but it's not for me. On my ideal tour, I wake up and decide roughly where I'm going to aim for that day depending on the weather and how fit I'm feeling. Then I look at the map and out of the thousand and one different white roads and yellow roads and if necessary red roads I choose some that take my fancy. My choice - and for me that's the fun of it, exploring, creating, trying out, choosing. That's how I did my end-to-end, and that's why, for me personally, the idea of following a Sustrans long-distance route where someone else has had the fun of deciding the route does not appeal. But on that score, I'm not claiming my views are anything more than my personal preference, and everyone is different.
For me, this was crystallised partly when we had a fixed base holiday in a farmhouse with young children in N Wales. Several days, we tandemed the children the 5 miles to the beach. True to my own preferences, I tried different routes each time, all unclassified but public roads, and thereby experienced variety, different scenery, different farms and farmhouses and villages, etc. Then one time I saw the signs that showed that the route I'd chosen that day was a Sustrans route. Same standard of road as the half-dozen alternatives between Criccieth and Porthmadog; same gradients; but this particular one was singled out as a National Cycle Network complete with detailed signposts at every single junction. I found those arbitrary-seeming signposts almost claustrophobic, as if they circumscribed that feeling of independence and self-sufficiency which is part of the joy of cycling. But I'm not asking you or anyone else to feel the same.
My second comment, however, isn't about my own personal preference, it's about what's objectively best for cycling. You don't have to convince me that Sustrans has led to many novice cyclists having the confidence, both in safety and in route-finding terms, to do things they wouldn't otherwise have done – I know, and that’s a good thing. You don’t have to convince me that Sustrans have built some beautiful routes that are very pleasant to cycle (if not always very quick) and some very functionally useful short links – I know and I use them. Equally, I don’t have to convince you that it’s a constant battle to preserve the right (“right” as in legal but also moral and also in motorists’ and public perception) to cycle on roads. And I don’t have to convince you that the Sustrans National Cycle Network, however extensive it gets, will never ever replace or even rival the road network in terms of sheer extent and reach into every community.
So it’s a balance. Build cycle paths and publicise them; package them with some convenient roads and market them as cycle routes and a national network: more people cycle, a good thing. Place too much stress on traffic-free, dedicated routes as the norm for cycling, place too much emphasis on the National Cycle Network as the network that it is best for cyclists to use, and it gives justification to the perception that cyclists should only be on traffic-free routes, they should not be on roads, the road network is not a cycling network – a bad thing long term for all cyclists. Where is the optimum balance point? When Sustrans started, I expect everyone would agree that the up side exceeded the down side by a lot, they’ve clearly done a lot of good, and that’s why I’m a supporter. But when they started, they had less emphasis on the national network and more on simply building useful and helpful cycle paths. Now the emphasis is much more on the Network, and I perceive a sense that cycling on roads is increasingly seen as an even more distant second preference to cycle-only routes than it used to be. If they carry on emphasising the Network idea more and more, I personally believe that at some point the balance will be passed and they’ll start doing more harm overall to the long-term cause of cycling than good.
That is my best attempt at explaining rationally my views (and without using emotive words like “detest”!) What say you now I’ve explained rather than just been provocative?
Regards
John
-
Marc
Re:End to End Via Cycle Routes
John
Thanks for the response and the chance to discuss this matter.
Para’s 1 to 4 I feel we don’t diverge as its personal opinion, something I fight to uphold the right to.
As to para 5:
You start it’s a balance, of course it is, between encouraging more cycling and pedestrians and the status quo, the car being perceived through road tax as the rightful primary road user, horses, cyclist and then pedestrians being the inconvenient rump to be accorded grudging tolerance and that based upon the cost and inconvenience of hitting them!
A quote of yours ‘Place too much stress on traffic-free, dedicated routes as the norm for cycling, place too much emphasis on the National Cycle Network as the network that it is best for cyclists to use’. How can the printing of a route network a one dimensional process with no volume or moving eye catching portion be lessened in its emphasis, how can publication itself have any stress quotient lessened. I say this as you have not answered my earlier question with any quotes from Sustrans and you again place unspoken statements in Sustrans mouth so to speak, neither of the above ‘the norm’ and ‘the best’ can I find in their literature, press released or future plans. Concerned am I on this in case I’m wrong I’ve forwarded these topics to John G and the media team, to correct me if I’m wrong in my reading of this situation.
Having created short and medium length routes which appeal to a valid portion of the cycling and pedestrian population, it was only a matter of time that both parties then link these up to make the ‘network’. Now you used ‘balance’, if you get it wrong it falls over! Build paths without need they don’t get used, build paths in places where their not ridden they don’t get used. The growth of these paths into a network is organic and as such by need. All along the roads were there and the network users in some part would comprise those who never give them a first thought. This would be I suggest down to confidence and skill levels, hard to acquire on normal road conditions without at least a very supportive, confident and skilled companion.
To close I wait on the quotes of Sustrans from you, I feel that whilst the local bike shop, info centre and library may hold local Sustrans leaflet which allude to a network, they cannot be shown to stress or place emphasis rather inform of the existence of the network, something you must then internally reflect upon then decide to proceed or withdraw from. I cannot see any evidence soon to be available that the success of the network Pied Piper like will lure cyclist from where ever they wish to ride. I for my part choose to compliment your and my ideal by becoming a cycle trainer under the CTC’s and Government’s recent initiative, using my energies in enabling beginners, existing cyclist and network users to feel confident to make the choice of where they ride from the positioning of support, informity and without ever using any stand point which would make them feel they were be used in a political way or the choices they made would some how be deleterious to others non powered travellers.
I have enjoyed this discussion, but I would have enjoyed more the using this time in supporting someone in realising their wish to get out and be active.
Come on John give me these quotes and next lets us join in tackling the government who have just reneged on their cycling policies, surely because they never funded them adequately, using it as a vote winner and thereby treating all of us after taking our taxes as mugs in their self centred and elitist politicians game.
Running parallel with you
Marc
Thanks for the response and the chance to discuss this matter.
Para’s 1 to 4 I feel we don’t diverge as its personal opinion, something I fight to uphold the right to.
As to para 5:
You start it’s a balance, of course it is, between encouraging more cycling and pedestrians and the status quo, the car being perceived through road tax as the rightful primary road user, horses, cyclist and then pedestrians being the inconvenient rump to be accorded grudging tolerance and that based upon the cost and inconvenience of hitting them!
A quote of yours ‘Place too much stress on traffic-free, dedicated routes as the norm for cycling, place too much emphasis on the National Cycle Network as the network that it is best for cyclists to use’. How can the printing of a route network a one dimensional process with no volume or moving eye catching portion be lessened in its emphasis, how can publication itself have any stress quotient lessened. I say this as you have not answered my earlier question with any quotes from Sustrans and you again place unspoken statements in Sustrans mouth so to speak, neither of the above ‘the norm’ and ‘the best’ can I find in their literature, press released or future plans. Concerned am I on this in case I’m wrong I’ve forwarded these topics to John G and the media team, to correct me if I’m wrong in my reading of this situation.
Having created short and medium length routes which appeal to a valid portion of the cycling and pedestrian population, it was only a matter of time that both parties then link these up to make the ‘network’. Now you used ‘balance’, if you get it wrong it falls over! Build paths without need they don’t get used, build paths in places where their not ridden they don’t get used. The growth of these paths into a network is organic and as such by need. All along the roads were there and the network users in some part would comprise those who never give them a first thought. This would be I suggest down to confidence and skill levels, hard to acquire on normal road conditions without at least a very supportive, confident and skilled companion.
To close I wait on the quotes of Sustrans from you, I feel that whilst the local bike shop, info centre and library may hold local Sustrans leaflet which allude to a network, they cannot be shown to stress or place emphasis rather inform of the existence of the network, something you must then internally reflect upon then decide to proceed or withdraw from. I cannot see any evidence soon to be available that the success of the network Pied Piper like will lure cyclist from where ever they wish to ride. I for my part choose to compliment your and my ideal by becoming a cycle trainer under the CTC’s and Government’s recent initiative, using my energies in enabling beginners, existing cyclist and network users to feel confident to make the choice of where they ride from the positioning of support, informity and without ever using any stand point which would make them feel they were be used in a political way or the choices they made would some how be deleterious to others non powered travellers.
I have enjoyed this discussion, but I would have enjoyed more the using this time in supporting someone in realising their wish to get out and be active.
Come on John give me these quotes and next lets us join in tackling the government who have just reneged on their cycling policies, surely because they never funded them adequately, using it as a vote winner and thereby treating all of us after taking our taxes as mugs in their self centred and elitist politicians game.
Running parallel with you
Marc
-
JS
Re:End to End Via Cycle Routes
No specific quotes. I'd be amazed if there were, I'm not alleging Sustrans deliberately set out to create a system where cyclists cycle on their network only and not on roads. My concern is about the effect their well-meaning (and, so far, supported by me) policies have. You don't have to intend something for it to have an effect; you don't have to say something in so many words for that to be the message people here. My job (and, surely, many other people's) involves thinking hard about communicating with the public, and one of the first things you realise is, it doesn't matter what you said, what matters is what people hear.
It's a sad fact of life that well-meaning actions taken for one reason often have unintended detrimental side effects. In cycling we've got the perfect example in compulsory helmet wearing. I don't question your motivation or commitment; I don't question Sustrans' motivation to the extent that you suggest; I do question what the long-term effect of promoting (a) traffic free paths and (b) a National Cycle Network will be.
And, I'll bet you that the Sustrans leadership will have addressed these questions too. You don't run an organisation as successful as theirs without being clever, and if you're that clever you question yourself as well as other people.
PS To prove I do cycle as well as pontificate, today I pumped my front tyre up from a disgracefully low 35 psi to 90 psi and according to my mileometer my commute to work came down from 8.5 to 8.3 miles!
Regards
John
It's a sad fact of life that well-meaning actions taken for one reason often have unintended detrimental side effects. In cycling we've got the perfect example in compulsory helmet wearing. I don't question your motivation or commitment; I don't question Sustrans' motivation to the extent that you suggest; I do question what the long-term effect of promoting (a) traffic free paths and (b) a National Cycle Network will be.
And, I'll bet you that the Sustrans leadership will have addressed these questions too. You don't run an organisation as successful as theirs without being clever, and if you're that clever you question yourself as well as other people.
PS To prove I do cycle as well as pontificate, today I pumped my front tyre up from a disgracefully low 35 psi to 90 psi and according to my mileometer my commute to work came down from 8.5 to 8.3 miles!
Regards
John
-
mike6
Re:End to End Via Cycle Routes
Ian, your original thread appears to have been hi-jacked, if you are not already aware, by following the National Cycle Network you will add many miles to your journey. The NCN will take you to some interesting little places, but will also take lengthy diversions round some feature which someone has considered to be "hazardous", but you as an adult may well consider the risk to be quite acceptable.
Unless you really want to follow NCN, I would suggest you use it in parts, and also use the "white" roads on OS maps.
Unless you really want to follow NCN, I would suggest you use it in parts, and also use the "white" roads on OS maps.
-
Marc
Re:End to End Via Cycle Routes
Evening John
At the risk of 'hi-jacking' the thread any further, thank you for your reply. I too feel an effect will take place, but as its chicken and egg between us I'll hope off road beginners will in time convert, not that others will be tempted never to occupy the road.
As to Sustrans cleverly thinking through their 'unspoken' masterplan, so to must CTC have one to counter it?
Yeh, I too find air helps when riding, preventing puntures, I don't know what 95 psi feels like but I go very hard and had only three punctures in as many years.
Happy cycling
Mike6
Any comments on my desrie to do the North sea cycle route. Will that not be very succint, will it help me avoid 'hazardous' areas or is it just a pleasant suggestion among all other posibilities?
I only ask as its 6k long and any deviation might detract
Cheers
Marc
At the risk of 'hi-jacking' the thread any further, thank you for your reply. I too feel an effect will take place, but as its chicken and egg between us I'll hope off road beginners will in time convert, not that others will be tempted never to occupy the road.
As to Sustrans cleverly thinking through their 'unspoken' masterplan, so to must CTC have one to counter it?
Yeh, I too find air helps when riding, preventing puntures, I don't know what 95 psi feels like but I go very hard and had only three punctures in as many years.
Happy cycling
Mike6
Any comments on my desrie to do the North sea cycle route. Will that not be very succint, will it help me avoid 'hazardous' areas or is it just a pleasant suggestion among all other posibilities?
I only ask as its 6k long and any deviation might detract
Cheers
Marc
-
gerry
Re:End to End Via Cycle Routes
When I make long trips I use Sustrans routes WHERE CONVENIENT. For instance, from Leicester to Raynes Park (London (SW18, I think)), I used:
NCN6
NCN70
White roads to B&B
NCN70
More white roads, but I found that I was actually on NCN40
More white yellow and a RED road
NCN4
London Cycle Network
So you can see it was not just a case of following the Sustrans routes- the chance of finding a route going exactly where you want it is slim.
I went to the west of London, so that I could pick up NCN4 into London- that was really good, and much better than trying to find a road route into London. If you are far from home, the Sustrans routes give you a the advantage of a bit of local knowledge: where to cross 70mph (or even very busy 40mph) dual carriageways, and so on.
NCN6
NCN70
White roads to B&B
NCN70
More white roads, but I found that I was actually on NCN40
More white yellow and a RED road
NCN4
London Cycle Network
So you can see it was not just a case of following the Sustrans routes- the chance of finding a route going exactly where you want it is slim.
I went to the west of London, so that I could pick up NCN4 into London- that was really good, and much better than trying to find a road route into London. If you are far from home, the Sustrans routes give you a the advantage of a bit of local knowledge: where to cross 70mph (or even very busy 40mph) dual carriageways, and so on.
-
mike6
Re:End to End Via Cycle Routes
Marc, I cannot understand the nature of your query regarding the NSCR, but if you can clarify, I would be pleased to help if I can.
-
Marc
Re:End to End Via Cycle Routes
Mike6
I feel the advice you gave, especially the 'Someone has judged hazardous' in relation to NCN End to End must surley be applicable to the NSCR. Do you feel its circuitous, overly protective and better done on the equivalent of white roads on european maps?
Marc
I feel the advice you gave, especially the 'Someone has judged hazardous' in relation to NCN End to End must surley be applicable to the NSCR. Do you feel its circuitous, overly protective and better done on the equivalent of white roads on european maps?
Marc