Cycle paths

Commuting, Day rides, Audax, Incidents, etc.
User avatar
Morzedec
Posts: 340
Joined: 11 Jul 2016, 6:03pm
Location: Cornwall/Deux-Sevres

Cycle paths

Postby Morzedec » 6 Feb 2020, 9:04am

Hello all; I did wonder if I ought to have headed this post 'eat your heart out, Sustrans'.

A picture of what the French are now doing when a road gets upgraded: this one is the D760 to the west of Loches.

Anyone watching from the Highway planning guys?

Happy days,
Image Attachments
D760 cycle path near Loches.png

reohn2
Posts: 39916
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Cycle paths

Postby reohn2 » 6 Feb 2020, 9:38am

There'll be those who'll claim such good cycling infrastructure is unnecessary and that all cyclists should be using the road,however fast and or dangerous drivers are.
-----------------------------------------------------------

rotavator
Posts: 498
Joined: 6 Jun 2016, 9:50pm
Location: North Wales

Re: Cycle paths

Postby rotavator » 6 Feb 2020, 9:51am

But is that post in the middle of the cycle track safe or necessary?

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 16204
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Cycle paths

Postby mjr » 6 Feb 2020, 9:56am

rotavator wrote:But is that post in the middle of the cycle track safe or necessary?

Not safe, although risk looks minimised with white paint and reflective band.

Probably necessary, because motorists will drive anywhere physically possible, especially tarmac. The posts, signs and ditch look to make it impossible to use as a bypass of a traffic queue.
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.

Pete Owens
Posts: 1897
Joined: 7 Jul 2008, 12:52am

Re: Cycle paths

Postby Pete Owens » 6 Feb 2020, 10:04am

Ah, the classic two-way cycle path crossing a priority side road crossing that increases the risk of collisions by a factor of ten.
This one has the added bonus of a post to crash into - carefully sited slap bang in the middle of the path just at the point where you need to be looking over your shoulder the check that vehicles on the road behind you are not about to turn across your path.

John Holiday
Posts: 508
Joined: 2 Nov 2007, 2:01pm

Re: Cycle paths

Postby John Holiday » 6 Feb 2020, 10:16am

Some new Cycle paths have been installed on Deeside Industrial Park which are slightly elevated & actually give priority to cyclists ,rather than vehicles turning across the path into the factories.
There are signs indicating 'changed ' priority on road.
So far,unaware of any incidents.
Only problem so far is idiot drivers using cycle paths to park on!

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 16204
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Cycle paths

Postby mjr » 6 Feb 2020, 10:24am

Ah, the classic two-way cycle path crossing a priority side road crossing that increases the risk of collisions by a factor of ten.

Ah, the classic old chestnut of an ancient dodgy risk calculation from a different design being applied to everything!

This one has the added bonus of a post to crash into - carefully sited slap bang in the middle of the path just at the point where you need to be looking over your shoulder the check that vehicles on the road behind you are not about to turn across your path.

It would be better with the post a few metres further back, but it's far better than many in the UK. As far as I can see, the crossing is a car length into the side road and the corners are fairly square, so you're looking sideways more than over the shoulder, unlike the poor typical UK/TfL design which bends the crossing to right on the mouth of the junction, requiring a 270° field of vision.
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.

mercalia
Posts: 14189
Joined: 22 Sep 2013, 10:03pm
Location: london South

Re: Cycle paths

Postby mercalia » 6 Feb 2020, 1:10pm

I wonder what the surface is like? bumpty -bump?

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 16204
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Cycle paths

Postby mjr » 6 Feb 2020, 1:42pm

mercalia wrote:I wonder what the surface is like? bumpty -bump?

They were smooth tarmac in the Loire area last year and the Bordeaux area a few years ago. Sometimes a bit vulnerable to tree roots, similar to here, or to powerful landowners (Chambord) insisting on rolled stone roads instead of tarmac, but most seem to be built as mini-carriageways now.

The new bit of EV4 rail trail through Dunkerque built up to 2018 was concrete panels so yes, a bumpty-bump train effect, and the bit along the D601 between Loon-Plage and Grande-Synthe was tarmac which was smooth except for the crap sprayed onto it by passing motorists. I've seen complaints that the new parts (some rail trail, some D601) also have surfaces with vibration problems. I'll find out for myself later this year.

I suspect that D road cycleways are built to a higher spec than Voie Vert rail trails, but I don't know the details.
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.

Pete Owens
Posts: 1897
Joined: 7 Jul 2008, 12:52am

Re: Cycle paths

Postby Pete Owens » 6 Feb 2020, 2:55pm

mjr wrote:
Ah, the classic two-way cycle path crossing a priority side road crossing that increases the risk of collisions by a factor of ten.

Ah, the classic old chestnut of an ancient dodgy risk calculation from a different design being applied to everything!

No the compilation of a large body of research over many years and different countries on the relative danger of cycle paths of various designs crossing priority junctions. It is no "dodgy" because it happens not to confirm your bias.

Research does not go off with age like rotting fruit. If you get into a bath today you will still displace your weight in water - just as Archimedes discovered rather a long time ago. Yes, this has been known for a long time since, unlike most road safety initiatives, the effect is so strong that it was obvious soon after they started to build segregated cycle paths that they were killing cyclists. However, since it challenges the deeply held segregationist dogma of the highway engineering profession many studies have been conducted - all confirming the danger.

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 16204
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Cycle paths

Postby mjr » 6 Feb 2020, 4:00pm

Pete Owens wrote:
mjr wrote:
Ah, the classic two-way cycle path crossing a priority side road crossing that increases the risk of collisions by a factor of ten.

Ah, the classic old chestnut of an ancient dodgy risk calculation from a different design being applied to everything!

No the compilation of a large body of research over many years and different countries on the relative danger of cycle paths of various designs crossing priority junctions. It is no "dodgy" because it happens not to confirm your bias.

It's dodgy for many reasons, including: 1. it confounds a wide variety of designs - some are good, some are bad - from a wide range of countries - each with different reporting practices - and a wide variety of collision types, leading to the data having been MUNGed: Mash Until No Good. A classic example of GIGO: Garbage In, Garbage Out; 2. even if you don't accept that, 1993's Pete Owens claimed it was "a factor of 3 to 10" - what's changed? At least it's not the notorious "11.3 times more dangerous" used by 1995's Pete Owens.

But we've had this discussion about this exact dodgy claim many times before, always inconclusively and usually with you stopping replying, like at viewtopic.php?p=870054#p870054 and viewtopic.php?f=7&t=119879&p=1206380#p1206380

Research does not go off with age like rotting fruit.

No, but design standards change (hopefully improve, but not always) among other things. A cycleway built to the current Design Manual for Roads and Bridges will behave differently to 1970s/80s standard crap. One built to the Netherlands current CROW 2016 will be different to CROW 2006 and both will be different to a 1970s CROW one. Do you really want to try to claim that all designs have exactly the same safety?

If you get into a bath today you will still displace your weight in water - just as Archimedes discovered rather a long time ago.

Did he? I thought I'd displace my volume not weight. Have I understood it wrong all these years?

Anyway, we're talking of manmade technology, not unchangeable physical constants like water displacement. Technology develops.
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.

mattheus
Posts: 1564
Joined: 29 Dec 2008, 12:57pm
Location: Western Europe

Re: Cycle paths

Postby mattheus » 6 Feb 2020, 4:12pm

Do you sink in water mjr? That's good news - at least you're not a witch :)

User avatar
Morzedec
Posts: 340
Joined: 11 Jul 2016, 6:03pm
Location: Cornwall/Deux-Sevres

Re: Cycle paths

Postby Morzedec » 6 Feb 2020, 5:05pm

Nice discussion, folks: now try some different cycle lanes, and see which you think best.

Many voie vertes in France are now being tarmacked, as are a number of halage (towpaths). One of the worst remains the Nantes to Brest canal path between Redon and Blain; nasty orange gravillon the size of marbles - you either sink in or slide off, depending on the state of the weather.

I always think that it's difficult to beat riding on baked-hard mud: as smooth as my bottom, that is.

Happy days,
Image Attachments
Mind that tree.jpg
Cycle path.jpg
All clear.png
We can't get no edukashun ......jpg
STPO.png

User avatar
Syd
Posts: 656
Joined: 23 Sep 2018, 2:27pm

Re: Cycle paths

Postby Syd » 6 Feb 2020, 8:51pm

rotavator wrote:But is that post in the middle of the cycle track safe or necessary?

I was riding through France with a group a few years ago and almost collided with a similar post as I’d been unsighted by the rider ahead.

PDQ Mobile
Posts: 3694
Joined: 2 Aug 2015, 4:40pm

Re: Cycle paths

Postby PDQ Mobile » 6 Feb 2020, 9:34pm

mjr wrote:
rotavator wrote:But is that post in the middle of the cycle track safe or necessary?

Not safe, although risk looks minimised with white paint and reflective band.


While I hesitate to do so, I am going to point out that on another thread you have stated nothing is "invisible".
If the white paint and reflectivity are a help here why are they not a help on dark Welsh lanes?