I drove over to Brighton to seea friend and
watcxhed carefully for errant cyclists or good ones.
1) A racing woman cyclist who knew exactly what she was doing on a busy "A" road near Bournemouth.
2) A 10 year old wearing an important helmet
which obscured a good deal of his vision, who was cycling in the midle of the carriageway on the busiest part of the narrowest part of the A259 near Bognor/Bersted. Now this was a special helmet, black, down to his ankles, but only protecting the hair on his head and little else.
Fast moving and obscured traffic in BOTH directions. Thick white lines in the middle of the road.
3) Near Bognor on a busy "A" road with a well marked cycle track alongside it; the part I saw about 3 miles long. An adult male of about 45 using the road instead of the cycle track conscientiously avoiding it, and wihtout any knowledge that the cycle track was what it was.
For him it was a 3 mile long pavement which pedestrians never use.
The cycle track was not marked on the track which ALL cycle tracks should be , which are more than a few years old.
Two Idiots one of 45 one of 10 years old.
One throughly sage woman using the "A" road and knowing full well what she was about, and the possible hazards entailed.
I saw no other cyclists on mainly motorway and mainly "A" dual carriageway.
Three incidents
-
TATANAB
Re:Three incidents
What are vyou talking about? An IMPORTANT hemet that reaches to his knees!!!
Cycle track the rider was exercising his right to use the road. Perhaps, in his view the track was not suitable for his needs - narrow, poor surface, litter etc. Saturday I rode slightly less than two miles under similar conditions. The available path was all the things I've described, plus it would have presented me with two major conflicts with traffic (getting on and off the path) whereas the road gave me a speedy and safe ride.
Cycle track the rider was exercising his right to use the road. Perhaps, in his view the track was not suitable for his needs - narrow, poor surface, litter etc. Saturday I rode slightly less than two miles under similar conditions. The available path was all the things I've described, plus it would have presented me with two major conflicts with traffic (getting on and off the path) whereas the road gave me a speedy and safe ride.
-
gar
Re:Three incidents
Cycle track the rider was exercising his right to use the road. Perhaps, in his view the track was not suitable for his needs
TATANAB,
Yes I was wondering whether those were his thoughts. Another cyclist was using it
for the full length and it WAS signposted as a cycle path. The other cyclist not linked at all was about 400m away from him.
I suppose there is only a minor wrong in being suicidal, the failed suicidee only receiving help
under voluntary sections of the mental health act
on the whole. It was far from suicidal to use the road and he does indeed have the right to use it, so he did.
The cycle path seemed wide enough for two cyclists to pass each other in opposite directions, and I could not see glass on it and presumably the path cyclist could not either..
The Child's helmet covered the whole of his face and now I think ,it was NOT a cycling helmet at all. It was not a motorcycle helmet either,
so I don't know what it was, but being used to protect him from fast traffic in both directions on a narrow, winding road.
TATANAB,
Yes I was wondering whether those were his thoughts. Another cyclist was using it
for the full length and it WAS signposted as a cycle path. The other cyclist not linked at all was about 400m away from him.
I suppose there is only a minor wrong in being suicidal, the failed suicidee only receiving help
under voluntary sections of the mental health act
on the whole. It was far from suicidal to use the road and he does indeed have the right to use it, so he did.
The cycle path seemed wide enough for two cyclists to pass each other in opposite directions, and I could not see glass on it and presumably the path cyclist could not either..
The Child's helmet covered the whole of his face and now I think ,it was NOT a cycling helmet at all. It was not a motorcycle helmet either,
so I don't know what it was, but being used to protect him from fast traffic in both directions on a narrow, winding road.
-
TJ
Re:Three incidents
On my daily commute of 11 miles (each way), I use a cycle path which runs alongside a dual carriageway, it is in very poor condition and usually covered with cr@p of all descriptions, but it is still a better option than the road, and in the years I have lived in this location, I have NEVER seen a cyclist use this road.
However, upon leaving the 'A' road, my journey takes me onto some 'B' roads with cycle paths. These paths are in a terrible state with broken surfaces, tree roots exposed, blind corners with vegetation obscuring the view in both directions, so I use the road, which is well surfaced with clear views. Horses for courses.
However, upon leaving the 'A' road, my journey takes me onto some 'B' roads with cycle paths. These paths are in a terrible state with broken surfaces, tree roots exposed, blind corners with vegetation obscuring the view in both directions, so I use the road, which is well surfaced with clear views. Horses for courses.
-
Scott
Re:Three incidents
I agree, sometimes a really bad cycle path 'designed' (this word often has to be applied in the loosest possible sense) by someone who went to Halfords to learn about cyclists needs, is more dangerous than a main road.
I don't personally think a "holier than thou" attitude is all that helpful and as long as the cyclist is not breaking the law it's surely their business where they choose to cycle.
I don't personally think a "holier than thou" attitude is all that helpful and as long as the cyclist is not breaking the law it's surely their business where they choose to cycle.
-
gar
Re:Three incidents
There is a certain type of cycling path which is entirely umarked and just looks like a pavement
for nobody.
If I could define when and why they were built(!)
under what auspices, I would be able to urge the cycling "logo" to be put painted on them at strategic places.
I also discovered that many footpaths are cycling permissive but absolutely nobody is aware of it.
What kind of paint marking defines a cycling permissive path, other than just one lamp post notice, is anybody's guess.
If cycle paths are overgrown, which is frequently why they are not used, CC/DC
normally clear them on request, possibly repeated two or three times, or an annual call!
To sweep a rural cycle path may be "quite a big job" in terms of taking the mechanical sweeper out there on a truck and taking it back after a couple of hours.
Do the police have special equipment towed in to
clear glass from a road, after a road accident?
I doubt it. They get brooms out and get on with it, bless them.
You would not find a council operative to do it.
"Union rules to do it with a machine!" Status of the operative!
for nobody.
If I could define when and why they were built(!)
under what auspices, I would be able to urge the cycling "logo" to be put painted on them at strategic places.
I also discovered that many footpaths are cycling permissive but absolutely nobody is aware of it.
What kind of paint marking defines a cycling permissive path, other than just one lamp post notice, is anybody's guess.
If cycle paths are overgrown, which is frequently why they are not used, CC/DC
normally clear them on request, possibly repeated two or three times, or an annual call!
To sweep a rural cycle path may be "quite a big job" in terms of taking the mechanical sweeper out there on a truck and taking it back after a couple of hours.
Do the police have special equipment towed in to
clear glass from a road, after a road accident?
I doubt it. They get brooms out and get on with it, bless them.
You would not find a council operative to do it.
"Union rules to do it with a machine!" Status of the operative!
-
mel
Re:Three incidents
I think Local Authorities are just "going through the motions" with the cycle tracks they lay out, usually on roads which are wide enough to be safe, no tracks at the narrow dangerous sections. They do the bear minimum in order to qualify for any grants they get from the Central Government. Surely if they were serious they would involve local serious cyclists to find out what is necessary, a lot of the tracks they lay around here are a waste of public money and no good to cyclists. Sustrans planners leave a lot to be desired too. When you meet these people and tell them that it is not unusual for a touring cyclist to cover 100 miles in a day they are gob smacked, they thought they were laying tracks for folks to do 5 miles slowly on a supermarket ATB. Having said that I must say I admire the North Wales coast path (Route 5), when it's completed it will be brilliant.
-
TATANAB
Re:Three incidents
"The Child's helmet covered the whole of his face and now I think ,it was NOT a cycling helmet at all. It was not a motorcycle helmet either"
That sounds like a BMX or MTB down hill hemet. They are like scaled down motorcycle off road helmets complete with chin guard.
That sounds like a BMX or MTB down hill hemet. They are like scaled down motorcycle off road helmets complete with chin guard.
-
Andy Tallis
Re:Three incidents
I've just got a letter published in the local paper to point out the dangers of cycle tracks. Long live our right to the road! "Cyclecraft" by John Franklin actually recommends against using almost all tracks.
-
gar
Re:Three incidents
Thanks for the TAT. That is precisely what it was.
Absolutely great for giving nil vision on a very busy "A" road for a ten year old. "We Hey ! I've got a helmet!!"
Actually all three of these above posts are very interesting. I came across the same problem at
Poole .gov where a woman cycling officer did not know that it was possible to do more than
3 or 4 miles a day. I was able to bully her in to granting rights along the front with very precisely graded signposting for Route 2 users.... from minor misdemanour to big one!
Andy Tallis, who seems rather professional to me, has a good many answers. The tracks are for a very different species of cyclist indeed,
and when they were built not even the builders knew who they were for, and even now it is not easy even for me to distinguish between the class of user.
If you are doing 200km on road you are not going to use the cycle track.
I am trying to work out the mechanics of
cyclists using the same carriageway as speeding cars going say 20mph faster but also meeting less cars going in the same direction because of the cyclist's velocity. It is logistics AND mechanics. If there is an average of 1000 cars an hour on a particular road you are going to be passed by far fewer vehicles at your speed of 25mph than you are if you go at 5mph.
This may represent the difference between serious danger to somebody going at 5mph
and very little danger to somebody going at 30mph.
If that is the case AT is talking to the wrong class of cyclists by writing to his local paper
to condemn cycle track use, unless he is on a personal ego trip!
It seems to me that the above little problem is only solveable on the basis of constant assessment by he experienced speed merchant cyclist. As above the woman ( triathlete probably) knew what she was doing and was making a constant assessment of risk as she went along. It showed.
Absolutely great for giving nil vision on a very busy "A" road for a ten year old. "We Hey ! I've got a helmet!!"
Actually all three of these above posts are very interesting. I came across the same problem at
Poole .gov where a woman cycling officer did not know that it was possible to do more than
3 or 4 miles a day. I was able to bully her in to granting rights along the front with very precisely graded signposting for Route 2 users.... from minor misdemanour to big one!
Andy Tallis, who seems rather professional to me, has a good many answers. The tracks are for a very different species of cyclist indeed,
and when they were built not even the builders knew who they were for, and even now it is not easy even for me to distinguish between the class of user.
If you are doing 200km on road you are not going to use the cycle track.
I am trying to work out the mechanics of
cyclists using the same carriageway as speeding cars going say 20mph faster but also meeting less cars going in the same direction because of the cyclist's velocity. It is logistics AND mechanics. If there is an average of 1000 cars an hour on a particular road you are going to be passed by far fewer vehicles at your speed of 25mph than you are if you go at 5mph.
This may represent the difference between serious danger to somebody going at 5mph
and very little danger to somebody going at 30mph.
If that is the case AT is talking to the wrong class of cyclists by writing to his local paper
to condemn cycle track use, unless he is on a personal ego trip!
It seems to me that the above little problem is only solveable on the basis of constant assessment by he experienced speed merchant cyclist. As above the woman ( triathlete probably) knew what she was doing and was making a constant assessment of risk as she went along. It showed.