Cycling UK Forum

If I ever feel at risk I will cycle in the centre of the lane if need be, sure some drivers will toot or be noticeably frustrated when they overtake but I'd rather annoy someone for 10 seconds than potentially be knocked off my bike or worse.

1982john wrote:...I don't know if this is something that has got worse or I'm just noticing them more...

It is a fact that traffic levels have been steadily increasing for nearly a decade, and more road danger, aggressive driving, and close passes are a logical consequence of more cars on our roads. As long as cyclists tend to think that it is just them getting more sensitive to it then we are much more likely as a society to tolerate the progressively worsening conditions for cyclists on our roads.

Wanlock Dod wrote:

1982john wrote:...I don't know if this is something that has got worse or I'm just noticing them more...

It is a fact that traffic levels have been steadily increasing for nearly a decade, and more road danger, aggressive driving, and close passes are a logical consequence of more cars on our roads. As long as cyclists tend to think that it is just them getting more sensitive to it then we are much more likely as a society to tolerate the progressively worsening conditions for cyclists on our roads.

Cars seem to be getting bigger as well. At least 1 in 4 cars, when i'm in the countryside, are these massive 4x4s or some variant of. I've never driven one but it must be harder to be aware of the dimensions when in something that much bigger than a normal car like the one you'd probably use a driving test in.

I think that high traffic density also increases driver frustration, thereby increasing the likelihood of overtaking in dodgy cicrumstances.

It is a fact that traffic levels have been steadily increasing for nearly a decade, ...

Pure nitpicking on my part but this has been the case since I learned to ride a bike aged 13 in in 1958 and probably before that.

thirdcrank wrote:

It is a fact that traffic levels have been steadily increasing for nearly a decade, ...

Pure nitpicking on my part but this has been the case since I learned to ride a bike aged 13 in in 1958 and probably before that.

Whilst I am sure that overall this is true has it really been so consistent in more recent decades? I have a feeling that government policy, at least for a period prior, to 2010 was to manage traffic levels, and that as such there was relatively little traffic growth for a while. Since 2010 there have been general government policies aimed at generating more traffic, some of which have taken a while to bear fruit. Consequently I suspect that the rate of increase in traffic levels between 2013 and 2018 has probably been greater than that between 2008 and 2013.

The likelihood of there being oncoming traffic whenever a car might wish to overtake a cyclist these days is much higher than it was in the past. There does seem to be a perception that removing cyclists from at least some roads would free up the traffic and allow higher traffic flows or speeds.

Wanlock Dod wrote:I have a feeling that government policy, at least for a period prior, to 2010 was to manage traffic levels, and that as such there was relatively little traffic growth for a while. Since 2010 there have been general government policies aimed at generating more traffic, some of which have taken a while to bear fruit. Consequently I suspect that the rate of increase in traffic levels between 2013 and 2018 has probably been greater than that between 2008 and 2013.

Since the 1980s, government policy has overestimated traffic growth and thereby induced traffic by buliding more road space than needed. See the attached graph.

When analysing traffic growth as it affects cyclists then the huge increase in miles travelled on motorways isn't really part of the calculation, except that motorway access routes make other roads much busier.

In no particular order, the things which I've noted as appearing to make a difference have been the massive increase in road distribution (partly as a result of transferring freight from rail to road, partly as a result of more stuff travelling further) out-of-town retail combined with Sunday trading; reduction in reliance on public transport (chicken and egg here) parental choice of schools and an increasing use of motor vehicles to increase the productivity of people like postal workers.

(I should have put more semi-colons in there but they don't go well with a bracket

Satnav systems and google maps on phones haven't helped any. Once upon a time, if there was a problem on a trunk road, many drivers were doomed to sit in queues. Only locals and cyclists knew the back lane alternatives.

Now, everyone knows them, and the minute there is an indication of a slow up, mapping systems start recommending alternatives, many of which are not fit for significant levels of traffic, even if they are fine for a single vehicle, or even a few.

I assume there will also be many many more courier trucks, vans and cars driving around too.

Postboxer wrote:I assume there will also be many many more courier trucks, vans and cars driving around too.

That's what I meant by an increase in road distribution ie increased distribution of goods by roads, rather than the roads themselves being distributed. Perhaps delivery might have been a better word.

mjr wrote:

Wanlock Dod wrote:I have a feeling that government policy, at least for a period prior, to 2010 was to manage traffic levels, and that as such there was relatively little traffic growth for a while. Since 2010 there have been general government policies aimed at generating more traffic, some of which have taken a while to bear fruit. Consequently I suspect that the rate of increase in traffic levels between 2013 and 2018 has probably been greater than that between 2008 and 2013.

Since the 1980s, government policy has overestimated traffic growth and thereby induced traffic by buliding more road space than needed. See the attached graph.

Whilst this BBC "News" item is titled and written as a magazine piece, it could have been written as an examination of the failure of government's prediction of traffic levels: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-44849381

The Commission on Travel Demand is an independent group of academic experts on travel forecasting. It's funded by the government-backed Research Councils UK.

So will driving increase or not?

It depends on how much you believe the government's traffic forecasts. A spokesman said the planners had registered the changes in travel habits in its three-yearly forecast of future traffic.

But the Commission says the forecast is a huge overestimate that will lead to a boom in controversial road-building. It says the forecasters have not properly taken into account that people generally are driving much less.

etc.

Vorpal wrote:Satnav systems and google maps on phones haven't helped any. Once upon a time, if there was a problem on a trunk road, many drivers were doomed to sit in queues. Only locals and cyclists knew the back lane alternatives.

Now, everyone knows them, and the minute there is an indication of a slow up, mapping systems start recommending alternatives, many of which are not fit for significant levels of traffic, even if they are fine for a single vehicle, or even a few.

Spot on. I have previously mentioned the frequency of commercial vehicles on certain back roads. All of them following a 'common' algorithm sourced path to tie in all the random collection and pick up points in the local area

peetee wrote:

Vorpal wrote:Satnav systems and google maps on phones haven't helped any. Once upon a time, if there was a problem on a trunk road, many drivers were doomed to sit in queues. Only locals and cyclists knew the back lane alternatives.

Now, everyone knows them, and the minute there is an indication of a slow up, mapping systems start recommending alternatives, many of which are not fit for significant levels of traffic, even if they are fine for a single vehicle, or even a few.

Spot on. I have previously mentioned the frequency of commercial vehicles on certain back roads. All of them following a 'common' algorithm sourced path to tie in all the random collection and pick up points in the local area

What I don't get is this; there is a limit to the amount of space on the roads, but absolutely no limit to people going for driving tests. Surely the only thing to be done is to block people from going for their car tests unless they can prove they have a good reason. This may sound biased, but there's no point in even having a car if you got nowhere to drive it. Our government won't do this tho, probably for the same reason Henry VIII refused to be nice to women. The bath is full now, turn the **** taps off!

I always like to think I should be able to anticipate any hazard in front of me, but there's nothing you do to prevent someone taking you out from behind. Whenever we cycle on the road we are relying on people in charge of 2 tons of metal not to kill us. Unfortunately many drivers are lacking.