"Radical eco-warrior on bike evaded police in chase on M5"

[Tangled Metal]

If hard shoulders aren't dangerous then why do you get the advice to leave your broken down car and get behind the crash barrier? If you call recovery they first tell you to get out of your car and wait behind the barriers before they proceed with your details.

So if it's dangerous to sit In a big metal box on the hard shoulder, why is a cyclist safe riding on it?

BTW I know how dangerous a hard shoulder can be from an.acquaintance who witnessed a HGV drive over a car broken down on a hard shoulder. He needed counselling as did the truck driver.

Of course it's still wrong to stop a cyclist even for his/her safety. I reckon his attitude led to the enforcement not the fact he's a cyclist.

[Ellieb]

https://www.newsflare.com/video/98224/c ... junction-6

[[XAP]Bob]

the hard shoulder isn't infinitely dangerous - yes, I'd rather not be standing there, but that's the case on the side of an A road as well.

At least you get the ability to be a couple of metres away from the traffic on a blue signed route (I mean motorway blue, not the identical cycle path blue)

[thirdcrank]

Motorways - in terms of design standards - are safer than general purpose dual carriageways. I suspect that this tends to lull drivers into a false sense of security in that they are less ready for the unexpected. I've no idea if this has ever been researched but it might explain why drivers with good sight-lines sometimes plough into stationary vehicles on the hard shoulder. If I'm right, a cyclist or pedestrian on the hard shoulder would not present the same risk in that no driver would mistakenly assume that they were moving normally in the first lane. However, a cyclist on the hard shoulder is either lost or deliberately misbehaving and there's no way of knowing whether that confusion or misbehaviour might cause them to do something even sillier like crossing the carriageways. Also, any distraction to drivers can cause crashes through "rubbernecking."

I fear that saying that cycling on DC's is equally dangerous just risks increasing the pressure to remove cyclists from them; it's not going to lead to acceptance of cycling on motorway hard shoulders.

[[XAP]Bob]

Motorways - in terms of design standards - are safer than general purpose dual carriageways. I suspect that this tends to lull drivers into a false sense of security in that they are less ready for the unexpected. I've no idea if this has ever been researched but it might explain why drivers with good sight-lines sometimes plough into stationary vehicles on the hard shoulder. If I'm right, a cyclist or pedestrian on the hard shoulder would not present the same risk in that no driver would mistakenly assume that they were moving normally in the first lane. However, a cyclist on the hard shoulder is either lost or deliberately misbehaving and there's no way of knowing whether that confusion or misbehaviour might cause them to do something even sillier like crossing the carriageways. Also, any distraction to drivers can cause crashes through "rubbernecking."

I fear that saying that cycling on DC's is equally dangerous just risks increasing the pressure to remove cyclists from them; it's not going to lead to acceptance of cycling on motorway hard shoulders.

I don't object to there being motorist only roads, I just wish that many motons would stick to them.

The correct response (because that's obviously what we'll get - right?) is to put in high quality segregated lanes alongside major routes which are otherwise potentially hazardous.

I don't find DCs particularly hazardous - I take lane one, and anyone overtaking can take lane 2 (or higher). If it's a single lane DC then it becomes less obvious.


The banning of cycles from motorways has nothing to do with their safety - it is a road designed for limited traffic.
The fact that even without any consideration to cycles they manage to come up with a design that is, if anything, slightly *better* for cyclists than the common design where cyclists *are* allowed is irrelevant to whether or not cyclists should be allowed on the hard shoulder. The road is designed without them.

The common A-class dual carriageway should be designed for all road users - but is almost identical to a motorway, although it doesn't have a hard shoulder normally. The cyclist is therefore frequently poorly catered for, particularly at junctions (which let's be fair isn't somewhere a motorway hard shoulder comes up trumps either).


Suggesting that the hard shoulder is more dangerous than it is would then drive people to think that a DC is a very dangerous place. But importantly the motorway isn't actually as dangerous as it seems - the rate at which motorists plough into static objects is relatively low (but devastating when it happens - hence the advice to get to a segregated area, it's very easy to move ten feet so there is little advantage to not doing so).

[brooksby]

Have to admit, I always wonder how quickly the authorities would come down on a cyclist using the hard shoulder to cross the Avonmouth (M5) motorway bridge. Many's the time I've looked, and wondered how much trouble I'd get into if I tried....

There's a footpath and cycleway on the bridge, cycled over it myself a few times.

I know. I use it most evenings on my commute home.

My point was that if I tried to cycle over the hard shoulder the police would be down on me like a tonne of bricks in about thirty seconds flat.

But they are not interested in kids on motor scooters zipping along the cycleway at well over the posted 15 mph limit, and they're not interested in the fat dockers going to work on ******* huge motorbikes but too lazy to go out and use the motorway so they use the cycleway.

I guess its back to that whole "enforcement" thing people are discussing up=thread...

[landsurfer]

My point was that if I tried to cycle over the hard shoulder the police would be down on me like a tonne of bricks in about thirty seconds flat.

But they are not interested in kids on motor scooters zipping along the cycleway at well over the posted 15 mph limit, and they're not interested in the fat dockers going to work on ******* huge motorbikes but too lazy to go out and use the motorway so they use the cycleway.

I wonder how much a tonne of bricks weighs ?
I take it slim dockers are ok to use their huge motorbikes on the cycleway then ....

[Pete Owens]

I don't think there is any particular danger on a hard shoulder. Indeed if they were genuinely believed to be dangerous why would they be installed at all? One of the reasons for the superior safety record of motorways is that the hard shoulder provides a safe place to stop in an emergency. The problem is that once people start to use the hard shoulder routinely (not just to cycle, but perhaps to overtake slow moving traffic on route to the next junction) then the shoulder ceases to provide its normal function as an emergency refuge or route for emergency vehicles.

The danger for cyclists on motorways (and roads inappropriately designed as such) is not the hard shoulder, but the filtering across the high-speed spear-point junctions. If it were legal, I would happily ride on a motorway hard shoulder from one junction to the next

[tykeboy2003]

I know. I use it most evenings on my commute home.

My point was that if I tried to cycle over the hard shoulder the police would be down on me like a tonne of bricks in about thirty seconds flat.

But they are not interested in kids on motor scooters zipping along the cycleway at well over the posted 15 mph limit, and they're not interested in the fat dockers going to work on ******* huge motorbikes but too lazy to go out and use the motorway so they use the cycleway.

I guess its back to that whole "enforcement" thing people are discussing up=thread...

Only done it on weekend visits to my mate (he lives in Bedminster) so I can only imagine what it's like when you're using it.

I suppose you've reported the motorcyclists to the police? If you did I bet they did naff-all.....

How about writing to the highways agency and just maybe they would put some cameras on it?

[Vorpal]

Only done it on weekend visits to my mate (he lives in Bedminster) so I can only imagine what it's like when you're using it.

I suppose you've reported the motorcyclists to the police? If you did I bet they did naff-all.....

How about writing to the highways agency and just maybe they would put some cameras on it?

They're more likely to put barriers up.

[brooksby]

The police said speak to the Highways Agency, the council (North Somerset) said speak to Bristol council, Bristol council said speak to the Highways Agency, the Highways Agency said speak to the police. Seriously.

As regards fat dockers/thin dockers - I guess some of the younger thinner blokes might also be dockers, but I just get very het up at the big fat blokes on huge motorbikes.

The only time I have ever seen police on the cycle path there is when NATO were meeting in Newport: they had police at both ends checking (properly searching, as in empty them on the floor) bags ("Do you have anything that might materially affect the structure of the bridge, sir?" "Well, I've got a multitool - does that count?").

[bigjim]

I've always thought that it would be wonderful if motorways had a single cycle path just the other side of the hard shoulder, especially if it was high, solid fenced. Plus a tunnel system under the junctions. I'm sure it would be very well used. Mostly flat, simple gradients. It can't cost that much extra in the great scheme off things when you consider motorway budgets. The service roads in Mallorca are great to ride alongside the motorways.
The hard shoulders around here are about to disapear with the introduction of Smart Motorways. Death traps IMO. BY the way I don't think this guy is a nutter just because he does his own thing and is different from the mainstream. Quite admire him actually.

[tykeboy2003]

They're more likely to put barriers up.

Sadly true.

[Username]

Report at http://www.devonlive.com/eco-warrior-on ... story.html

I can't make out whether he rode on the M5 as a deliberate challenge to authority or simply because he didn't know any other way to his destination. I'm reminded of a nun I met at a YH, who had been escorted off the M25 by the police while trying to cycle from one convent to another. Due to her sheltered life in convents she had not known what a motorway was.

Why is it that when I try to play the video, it just shows a man tying up his bike bag? astonishing? has the video been trolled or somethin?