Page 1 of 8

Superhighway

Posted: 4 Feb 2015, 5:34pm
by Ned Ludd
Well it seems that the superhighway in london has been given the go ahead and according to the papers the work could start in April. Seems a pretty significant event I reckon?

Re: Superhighway

Posted: 4 Feb 2015, 6:02pm
by pwa
What is it?

Re: Superhighway

Posted: 4 Feb 2015, 6:45pm
by Ned Ludd
Well according to some its crossrail for bikes.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/transpor ... 23198.html

other links are available!

Re: Superhighway

Posted: 4 Feb 2015, 6:51pm
by pwa
Ta.

Re: Superhighway

Posted: 5 Feb 2015, 12:27pm
by fluffybunnyuk
lol i live near ele&castle...does nothing for me...I'm sure the politicians think its great though.
Why? too many ways into central london, all of them more convenient, and go where i want not where boris wants...

Re: Superhighway

Posted: 5 Feb 2015, 1:15pm
by AlaninWales
Well, obviously they will not cater for every London cyclist. When I lived there, the (then) new CS routes didn't serve every journey I wanted to make (I never bothered even to learn which one I was on at any time); but they coincided with parts of some and were at least a statement that we were supposed to be there (even if 'there' was an idiotic road position :twisted: - which I ignored unless it was useful).

The intent of these two routes is that where built, they should (according to current plans) be a great improvement (in places) over blue paint which is worn out by motor vehicle tyres.
As it says here http://www.ctc.org.uk/press-release/2015-02-04/go-ahead-londons-cycle-superhighways-game-changer-cycling-says-ctc they "are not perfect" but let's see what is built?

Re: Superhighway

Posted: 5 Feb 2015, 2:12pm
by Ned Ludd
It will be interesting to see if this initial foray into Dutch style provision informs the debate as to whether its possible to roll it out around the UK....

Re: Superhighway

Posted: 5 Feb 2015, 5:27pm
by tb
well it certainly will have a significant backlash which has already started and as if cyclists are not unpopular enough already......

see the headline on tonight's London Evening Standard ' Cyclist's are their own biggest danger '.

In my humble opinion ( as a road cyclist of some 40 years and 25 of those in and around London ) it's not necessary to spend £160 million on this superhighway at all. Spend the money on health care / provision for the elderly / education.
We don't need a superhighway for goodness sake. It's simple to ride safely around London if you have your wits about you and you accept that we share the roads with other road users.
Personally I don't feel the need to be shepherded down a segregated cycle lane that costs so much and will cause so much inconvenience for everyone else who doesn't happen to travel by bicycle!

I sincerely hope that for the sake of London and cycling this superhighway doesn't happen !

Re: Superhighway

Posted: 5 Feb 2015, 8:49pm
by ArMoRothair
tb wrote:It's simple to ride safely around London if you have your wits about you and you accept that we share the roads with other road users.


My six-year-old begs to differ.

Re: Superhighway

Posted: 5 Feb 2015, 8:55pm
by aspiringcyclist
And the two cyclists killed this year due to tipper trucks beg to differ, as well as the cyclist seriously injured because of a UPS van driver today. You cannot deny that cycling is in the Netherlands is statistically safer, involving a far wider cross section of the population.

Re: Superhighway

Posted: 5 Feb 2015, 11:28pm
by Ron
tb wrote: It's simple to ride safely around London if you have your wits about you

That's not at all reassuring!

Re: Superhighway

Posted: 6 Feb 2015, 8:22am
by TonyR
ArMoRothair wrote:
tb wrote:It's simple to ride safely around London if you have your wits about you and you accept that we share the roads with other road users.


My six-year-old begs to differ.


And this will do nothing to help your six year old unless they like getting off and pushing as soon as they leave the super-highway or even on the bits up around KX.

Re: Superhighway

Posted: 6 Feb 2015, 8:27am
by TonyR
aspiringcyclist wrote:And the two cyclists killed this year due to tipper trucks beg to differ, as well as the cyclist seriously injured because of a UPS van driver today. You cannot deny that cycling is in the Netherlands is statistically safer, involving a far wider cross section of the population.


Welll the tipper truck issue is being addressed without creating a cyclists' ghetto.
http://road.cc/content/news/142312-lond ... omes-force

And yes, cycling in the Netherlands is statistically safer, but by no more than the "safety in numbers" effect would predict and has always involved a far wider cross section of the population even before they built their cycle network.

Re: Superhighway

Posted: 6 Feb 2015, 9:33am
by Richard Fairhurst
I think this debate is a couple of days late for Groundhog Day.

Re: Superhighway

Posted: 6 Feb 2015, 9:55am
by aspiringcyclist
I'm fairly sure not being around HGVs not fitted with guards is safer than being around HGVs fitted with guards.

Where is the evidence that 'safety in numbers' is a real phenomenon? The fact is cycling in the Netherlands was marginalised post war up to the 1970s until a turning away from car-centric policies, something we never had in Britain. Could it be feasible that the increase in cycling was due to the safer cycling conditions, not the other way round?

Clearly cycling infrastructure has to start somewhere, or else you could use that excuse to stop anything being built.

This reminds of these images, showing Dutch cyclists being overlaid on British roads.

Image

Image

Image