The German take on the cycle super highway...

Vorpal
Moderator
Posts: 18752
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 3:34pm
Location: Not there ;)

The German take on the cycle super highway...

Postby Vorpal » 5 Mar 2016, 9:57pm

A new, 60 mile route will connect 10 western cities including Duisburg, Bochum, and Hamm and four universities.

http://www.bicycling.com/culture/advoca ... icycling__
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom

User avatar
gaz
Posts: 14164
Joined: 9 Mar 2007, 12:09pm
Location: Kent, lorry park of England

Re: The German take on the cycle super highway...

Postby gaz » 5 Mar 2016, 10:57pm

I want one, no make that n+1 :D
There'll be tarmac over, the white cliffs of Dover ...

TonyR
Posts: 5390
Joined: 31 Aug 2008, 12:51pm

Re: The German take on the cycle super highway...

Postby TonyR » 6 Mar 2016, 4:13am

Really? A bi-directional cycle autobahn that is just 4m wide? That's just a standard 2m wide in each direction. Room for one cyclist to cycle each way. Not room for two to cycle along side by side chattin or room to overtake unless there is nothing coming the other way. Its not an cycle autobahn its a cycle country lane. Mix in a few pedestrians and dog walkers and you have your standard British cycle track. To meet the Dutch CROW standard it would need to be double that width.

Stevek76
Posts: 722
Joined: 28 Jul 2015, 11:23am

Re: The German take on the cycle super highway...

Postby Stevek76 » 6 Mar 2016, 3:15pm

Guess that depends if it's 4m surfaced plus some verge at the side so part of the cyclist can overhang. Eg the Bristol-bath path is mostly 3m + verges and sightly squeezy overtakes are done. It's far from ideal though and really should be aiming for more if it's going to be worthy of the 'autobahn' label.

Vorpal
Moderator
Posts: 18752
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 3:34pm
Location: Not there ;)

Re: The German take on the cycle super highway...

Postby Vorpal » 6 Mar 2016, 5:56pm

4m? That's wider than many Dutch facilities, let alone British ones.
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom

Steady rider
Posts: 2288
Joined: 4 Jan 2009, 4:31pm

Re: The German take on the cycle super highway...

Postby Steady rider » 6 Mar 2016, 7:07pm

Is the surface made up from small blocks? Any other examples?

User avatar
pjclinch
Posts: 4124
Joined: 29 Oct 2007, 2:32pm
Location: Dundee, Scotland
Contact:

Re: The German take on the cycle super highway...

Postby pjclinch » 6 Mar 2016, 7:38pm

Vorpal wrote:4m? That's wider than many Dutch facilities, let alone British ones.


But it's dedicated cycle infrastructure, and thus whatever it is and wherever it goes Tony will find something that "proves" it's rubbish...
Often seen riding a bike around Dundee...

reohn2
Posts: 40711
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: The German take on the cycle super highway...

Postby reohn2 » 7 Mar 2016, 4:57pm

Vorpal wrote:4m? That's wider than many Dutch facilities, let alone British ones.


It is even for four bikes(two abreast in each direction)to pass each other in the opposite direction(unless there's 2m high peripheral fences on each side),I really don't know what to say.
I sometimes wonder what people want :? or expect.
Realistically,like overtaking in a car,if I can't get past a slower vehicle than mine I wait until there's a safe gap in oncoming traffic then overtake with a safe margin between my vehicle and the one I'm overtaking.I can't see why that's such a hard concept to understand and put into operation for a cyclist with any degree of competence :?

To put things into perspective,cars travel on an awful lot of roads that are no more than 6 to 7m wide,average family cars are about 2.05m wide(with a Range Rover measuring 2.22cm :? )and HGV's slightly wider at 2.55m maximum allowable.
These vehicles can and do on a regular basis pass each other in opposite directions with a combined speed of 60mph.
Most bikes(MTB's aside) are no more than 600mm wide so for wobble room due to their two wheeled nature 1.2m is a generous width for bikes passing bikes IMO,which makes a 4m wide dedicated cycleway ample IMHO.
-----------------------------------------------------------

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 16726
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: The German take on the cycle super highway...

Postby mjr » 7 Mar 2016, 6:13pm

reohn2 wrote:Most bikes(MTB's aside) are no more than 600mm wide so for wobble room due to their two wheeled nature 1.2m is a generous width for bikes passing bikes IMO,which makes a 4m wide dedicated cycleway ample IMHO.

I don't understand how you're fitting two bikes passing in 1.2m as "generous" when the dynamic envelope of a bicycle at typical speed is normally taken as 1m (it gets wider if you go slower). We have some awful Highways England 1.2m cycle track around the A47/A10/A149 junction and two cycles cannot safely pass unless one takes to the grass verge... so I often ride on the road in the "with flow" direction and only use the track in the contraflow direction - and as some of you know, I much prefer cycle tracks to busy roads.

However, based on the varying track widths I've ridden, I feel 4m is just enough for comfortable side-by-side cycling - if two groups of side-by-side riders pass, they'll have to interleave, but that seems to just work in practice without much conflict - and I suspect many English councils would build inadequate 2m for long-distance interurban in that situation. Norfolk would probably 3m with narrower sections whenever it got difficult. Highways England 1m.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.

User avatar
[XAP]Bob
Posts: 18065
Joined: 26 Sep 2008, 4:12pm

Re: The German take on the cycle super highway...

Postby [XAP]Bob » 7 Mar 2016, 6:39pm

I took 1.2m to be a generous envelope, you still fit more than three of those on the track...
A shortcut has to be a challenge, otherwise it would just be the way. No situation is so dire that panic cannot make it worse.
There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.

reohn2
Posts: 40711
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: The German take on the cycle super highway...

Postby reohn2 » 7 Mar 2016, 7:09pm

We were discussing a dedicated cycleway 4m wide,in light of that,my post seems reasonable to me.
YVMV.
-----------------------------------------------------------

Stevek76
Posts: 722
Joined: 28 Jul 2015, 11:23am

Re: The German take on the cycle super highway...

Postby Stevek76 » 7 Mar 2016, 8:53pm

But that's 4m to take 50,000 car trips worth of people a day, and presumably a mix of cyclists and pedestrians. Obviously they won't be all in the same place given the length but consider that the daily cycle flow on the Bristol-bath path (mostly 3m plus verges) is in the very low 4 figures and that gets very uncomfortably busy in the morning peak.

I don't think it's unfair to point out that the aspirations of the path could be higher, particularly for something calling itself an autobahn for which the car equivalent would be 2x 13.95m of surfacing, not a 6m rural road.

Steady rider
Posts: 2288
Joined: 4 Jan 2009, 4:31pm

Re: The German take on the cycle super highway...

Postby Steady rider » 7 Mar 2016, 9:12pm

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/archive ... ing_en.pdf
Near the front figures are shown, 14k cyclists per hour 3.5m wide space.
the 60km length would also have a bearing, they probably know what they are doing.

I cycled from the bottom to top of Germany and found they have some idea, at least more useful then the UK approach.

reohn2
Posts: 40711
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: The German take on the cycle super highway...

Postby reohn2 » 7 Mar 2016, 11:30pm

Steady rider wrote:http://ec.europa.eu/environment/archives/cycling/cycling_en.pdf
Near the front figures are shown, 14k cyclists per hour 3.5m wide space.
the 60km length would also have a bearing, they probably know what they are doing.

I think you're right,they do know what they're doing.I can't recall a single cycleway in NL being 4m eide and their bicycle use is one of,if not the largest,cycle using countries in europe.

I cycled from the bottom to top of Germany and found they have some idea, at least more useful then the UK approach.

Nothing beats experience of their facilities. :)
-----------------------------------------------------------

Pete Owens
Posts: 1938
Joined: 7 Jul 2008, 12:52am

Re: The German take on the cycle super highway...

Postby Pete Owens » 8 Mar 2016, 1:28am

mjr wrote:
reohn2 wrote:Most bikes(MTB's aside) are no more than 600mm wide so for wobble room due to their two wheeled nature 1.2m is a generous width for bikes passing bikes IMO,which makes a 4m wide dedicated cycleway ample IMHO.

I don't understand how you're fitting two bikes passing in 1.2m as "generous" when the dynamic envelope of a bicycle at typical speed is normally taken as 1m (it gets wider if you go slower).

And that is figure even quoted in the rubbish british standards.

Add to it a minimum clearance of 0.5m either side of a cyclists (again from the UK standard) and you get a minimum requirement for a 2 way cycle-path of 3.5m - which the described path would meet assuming it is unsegregated shared use rather than
We have some awful Highways England 1.2m cycle track around the A47/A10/A149 junction and two cycles cannot safely pass unless one takes to the grass verge... so I often ride on the road in the "with flow" direction and only use the track in the contraflow direction - and as some of you know, I much prefer cycle tracks to busy roads.

But managing to improve on the worst crappness of UK (or even German) farcilities is hardly a ringing endorsement.
However, based on the varying track widths I've ridden, I feel 4m is just enough for comfortable side-by-side cycling - if two groups of side-by-side riders pass, they'll have to interleave, but that seems to just work in practice without much conflict - and I suspect many English councils would build inadequate 2m for long-distance interurban in that situation. Norfolk would probably 3m with narrower sections whenever it got difficult. Highways England 1m.

[/quote]
Indeed, so long as the whole width is available to cyclists, rather than subdivided with 2m for pedestrians and 2m for cyclists then a 4m wide path is sufficient for a lightly used recreational cycle path. However, this is being hyped as a "bicycle autobahn". The proposed volume of traffic - 50000 cars worth (presumably to justify the 180 million euro price tag) would be very busy and would indeed involve single file riding with no opportunities to overtake. Tony R is quite right to point out that it is more "country lane" than "autobahn".



Indeed - 4m is perfectly adequate for a lightly used recreational path