Cycling UK Forum

Posted: **30 Nov 2011, 1:13pm**

Having ridden on that path myself, it is fairly wide in some parts. Nothing wrong with doing 20 in the right places. The OP clearly stated that that there wasn't anyone around. So long as you don't do that speed on the cattle grids and you stay alert, I don't see a problem

Posted: **30 Nov 2011, 4:58pm**

But there was someone around - the other cyclist. The OP stated he was doing 20mph as he passed him. And a touring bike loaded with panniers looks quite big perhaps intimidating when approaching at speed - think 'lorry' :roll:

.

I don't know the path, and maybe it is wide enough with clear enough sightlines - but clearly some of the other users don't agree...

Posted: **30 Nov 2011, 5:47pm**

recumbentpanda wrote:
The section through Fishponds is particularly tricky, as, even where there are no actual entrances and exits, there is a good deal of undergrowth and other points from which a pedestrian can emerge without warning. Also it is as much for pedestrians as cyclists, and being an urban route, gets a lot of foot traffic.

Turning to the OP's original point: Even if it is apparently quiet I would consider 20 way too fast for the conditions pretty much all the way from the summit tunnel down to the Bristol terminus. If you are being passed at 20 and even only going ten or 15 yourself, that's a 30 or 35mph closing speed: Accident and Emergency Dept for sure.

To quote the OP, people's perceptions of risk are funny, and not always shrouded (sic) in reality.

(I think 'shrouded in reality' has just become my new favourite phrase

I think there is a problem with the Bath-Bristol and the clue is in the name: Its an intercity route, and if one is going to use it for that kind of trip (as I have often done) the temptation is to want to keep up a high average speed. In fact, all the publicity from Sustrans and from councils implies that it is a liesure/pootling facility foremost, and that is reflected in its design and mixed use status.

Posted: **30 Nov 2011, 6:01pm**

Duh - previous post refers - clicked send too soon.

I think the point about the name implying it's use as transport route is an excellent one and not something i'd considered before. Coming from the bath end, I suspect the earlier you join it the more you perceive it as such, whilst perhaps those you encounter towards the other end may see it differently. I certainly have viewed it as a transport route - and as such it needs to offer a viable alternative to mechanised transport - if I was to go at 12mph for the length then it would be too slow (with time spent locking up, traipsing to the office shower etc) door to door and I'd probably drive more. You could justly argue about going on the road is more appropriate but I love cycling on the longer fatter (generally) quiet bike path in the morning, returning home through brislington and keynsham.

You're right, it does get busier in Fishponds - this incident (for want of another term) was actually before the approach tunnel. My speed generally drops from then on, decreasing the closer I get to the end.

I can see why others would be inclined to voice their concerns though if someone was going obnoxiously fast, I'm not convinced it would make much difference shouting at them. As I probably prove all to well, most people believe that their behaviour is justified and will make their argument to rationalise this.

Even if it's not shrouded in reality.

:-)

Posted: **30 Nov 2011, 7:00pm**

stewartpratt wrote:And having checked this as well,

Ayesha wrote:It's a pedestrian RoW.

The OS map does not mark it as such. Again: source? The official website says "The Bristol & Bath Railway Path was constructed on the bed of the former Midland Railway by cycling charity Sustrans" - it seems unlikely they'd have instated a pedestrian-only ROW at that point.

You might want to look a little closer. Top right:

# The Bristol and Bath Railway Path is a shared space to be used by pedestrians, disabled people and cyclists with consideration for all
# Everyone has equal priority
# Cyclists - please pass pedestrians and disabled people slowly and carefully, and warn them by bell or voice if they haven't seen you.

Also as a matter of general principle a 'bridleway' is for horses, bicycles and pedestrian. In other words paths for bicycles are also for pedestrians in nearly every case.

I think the OP's arguments read like those of speeding motorists - it's ok to go fast because I'm a safe driver/rider, speed itself is not dangerous.

This ignores the fact that speed tends to make a particular facility less pleasant for others, even if it is not unsafe per se.

Posted: **30 Nov 2011, 7:34pm**

Oh, I thought by "pedestrian ROW" you meant a path which was a ROW for pedestrians but permissive for other users, rather than an equal-rights path.

A "shared space" is not the same as a ROW, either.

Posted: **30 Nov 2011, 7:42pm**

I blush when I remember how fast I used to go down the slight gradient from Fishonds towards Eastville, particularly through the chicane near Greenbank cemetary. I commuted that route from Eastville to Bath regularly for a few years but having mellowed with age I doubt I'd take that chicane at full tilt anymore :oops:

Out in the sticks it's perfectly wide enough for 20mph+ and there aren't any attractive road options.

Posted: **30 Nov 2011, 11:31pm**

thelawnet wrote:

I think the OP's arguments read like those of speeding motorists - it's ok to go fast because I'm a safe driver/rider, speed itself is not dangerous.

The difference of course being that speeding implies breach of an enforced speed limit, which we've already established isn't the case here.

If, in a car, I'm driving 55 in a 60 limit but someone else perceives this to be too fast, who's right?

Serious question, I don't know.

If we all adjust our behaviour to the lowest, or most cautious, common denominator, we would surely crawl everywhere in full body armour. Or not leave the house.

To contradict this caution is not reckless or excuse making. Life should not be about eliminating risk, but balancing the reduction of risk with the impact that doing so has on day to day life.

To the reference that a 35 mph closing speed is a&e territory, what closing speed would avoid this? I guess less than 20mph, or lower, so less than 10mph each?

Again, serious question, I don't know.

Posted: **1 Dec 2011, 10:09am**

Posted: **1 Dec 2011, 10:29am**

My first post on here so please be gentle.

I have been riding for the last 30 years and have done a lot of cycling both in the UK and across Europe. In the late 80's I cycled in the Netherlands for 2 summers. My girlfriend at the time lived there rather than cycling destination of choice.

I would say in terms of cycling that the infrastructure in the Netherlands then was further on than in the UK now.

To be honest I found it terrible - Most of the mainish roads have cycle paths along the side and seperated from the road with a verge. If there is a cycle path it is illegal to use the road but anything above 10mph was dangerous as no one had any road sense on the cycle path with people pulling out etc.

I wish that the money in the UK that has been spent on these paths had instead been spent on educating all road users that the road is a shared place for all and to treat each other with respect.

The more cyclists are seperated from other road users the less practice they get of interacting and the more motorised vehicles think the road is their domain.

On a similar but different note - I was once out running with someone on a path beside the road. A car parked at the side of the road opened his door and my friend ran into the door. He broke his wrist and caused over a 1000 pounds damage to the car bending the door back on itself and creasing the wing.

Should we have speed limits for runners too?

Posted: **1 Dec 2011, 1:18pm**

Andybg wrote: I wish that the money in the UK that has been spent on these paths had instead been spent on educating all road users that the road is a shared place for all and to treat each other with respect.

The more cyclists are seperated from other road users the less practice they get of interacting and the more motorised vehicles think the road is their domain.

I completely agree with you with regard cycle paths that run parallel, or in close proximity to roads. Around me, they only seem to exist in shortish sections anyway so you end up merging with and diverging from footpaths and roads at numerous points. I can't back it up with evidence but I'd have thought these points are the most dangerous, given the risk of pulling onto a road either unnoticed, or not noticing other traffic.

I do think there is still a place for completely stand-alone shared use paths like the bath <> bristol route - it's a super environment to cycle and doesn't really have a viable road alternative along the same route.

Posted: **1 Dec 2011, 2:04pm**

I do a lot of shouting on the path - mostly it's at people with badly-adjusted or no lighting.

It does depend entirely on time of day etc.
Even fat old middle-aged me will do 20mph on the Railway path - but in the right place and at the right time.

Here are some examples I've caught on camera in order of stupidity - coincidentally all three have Lycra involved :-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JhMWgo5wlME

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDsGucI-MyM

This one so shocked me, it features blasphemy :evil:

:-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DMR1Ja3dZOA

One day I may produce a cleaned-up version.

Posted: **1 Dec 2011, 2:16pm**

Andybg,
Welcome to the forum, and well done with your first post!

It conforms EXACTLY to the way I feel about cycle paths. As far as I'm concerned, they should all be dug up and got rid of. The more we cyclists use the roads, the better off we will all be.

Posted: **1 Dec 2011, 2:24pm**

Mick F wrote:It conforms EXACTLY to the way I feel about cycle paths. As far as I'm concerned, they should all be dug up and got rid of. The more we cyclists use the roads, the better off we will all be.

Agreed. They're ghettoisation, simple as that. The one time I think they're valid is to allow cyclists to avoid fast (50mph+) dual carriageways, which are designed only for motorised traffic (regardless of what the theoretical criteria are) and are inherently extremely dangerous for cyclists.

Posted: **1 Dec 2011, 2:42pm**

The Bristol to Bath is a stunning exception though. As has been said, there's no sensible alternative, and it's a delightful linear park.

Cycling UK Forum

Militant shouters

Re: Militant shouters

Re: Militant shouters

Militant shouters

Militant shouters

Re: Militant shouters

Re: Militant shouters

Re: Militant shouters

Militant shouters

Re: Militant shouters

Re: Militant shouters

Re: Militant shouters

Re: Militant shouters

Re: Militant shouters

Re: Militant shouters

Re: Militant shouters