Cycling UK Forum

.

IME is you use the mapping on the Sustrans website it will highlight any problems, poor surfaces or whatever. If anything they verge on the overcautious.

I have only ever come across one short section of the NCN which wasn't doable on a bike with tyres of 25mm or greater and panniers.

As far as the barriers are concerned blame local councils in a misguided effort to stop teenaagers using them to ride motorbikes. (Misguided in that barriers aren't effective).

jamesofyorkshire wrote:I travel a lot...I go to, and have been, to many dodgy places in the world....when people ask me...'isn't it dangerous to go there?'......my usual reply is - "the most dangerous place I go is on British roads on my bicycle."

What utter rubbish.

Britain's roads (at least measured in terms of the numbers of deaths per million inhabitants) are among the safest in the world. It's more difficult to make comparisons of cyclist fatalities because participation rates vary so greatly, but there's no evidence to support your claim.

andymiller wrote:
What utter rubbish.

Britain's roads (at least measured in terms of the numbers of deaths per million inhabitants) are among the safest in the world. It's more difficult to make comparisons of cyclist fatalities because participation rates vary so greatly, but there's no evidence to support your claim.

But that's only because vulnerable road users are deterred from using them. If people avoid somewhere because they see it as unsafe, the absence of casuaties does not then make it somehow safer.

andymiller wrote:IME is you use the mapping on the Sustrans website it will highlight any problems, poor surfaces or whatever. If anything they verge on the overcautious.

I have only ever come across one short section of the NCN which wasn't doable on a bike with tyres of 25mm or greater and panniers.

As far as the barriers are concerned blame local councils in a misguided effort to stop teenaagers using them to ride motorbikes. (Misguided in that barriers aren't effective).

That's fine until someone wants to transport children or shopping, use an adapted bicycle or tricycle, or has a disability that means s/he cannot maneuver around, over, or under barriers. And the barriers are not always on the maps. Many of them were added after the routes were established.

[quote]"What utter rubbish.

Britain's roads (at least measured in terms of the numbers of deaths per million inhabitants) are among the safest in the world. It's more difficult to make comparisons of cyclist fatalities because participation rates vary so greatly, but there's no evidence to support your claim."
[/quote]

Yes indeed. How mistaken I am..................

Perhaps AndyMillar........ Wiggins, Cavendish, Sutton and now Heffernan might disagree with you.

I think if you examine the figures on the eu stats site you will find that british roads are only safer for vehicle occupants and that the ksi rates for peds and cyclists are as high as anywhere .

http://www.ecf.com/wp-content/uploads/2 ... harter.pdf

page 9 graph shows deaths per billion miles cycled per country, and that the worse that is the fewer miles people cycle.

Sorry to resuscitate an old thread but I rode part of route 6 this weekend and was rather dismayed at what I found in parts - riding through Northampton is pretty horrendous, although I half expected it to be.

Having to go from cycle path to shared use pavement to simply crossing the road at lights to then using the one-way system was pretty unsettling. The roadworks around the station at the moment are very ugly and it's tricky to follow the pavement/footpath through to the next ridable section. Not sure how long the station's roadworks will continue for, but it looks terrible at present.

There is also a closed section directly north of Northampton which I wasn't aware of. Unfortunately the 'diversion' was rather unclear from the south, and not signposted at all from the north. Heading southwards, riders simply get to a fenced-off section saying the route is closed and are left to fumble their way via a footpath back to the main road and along until the route picks up again.

The Brampton Valley Line section I rode along was decent enough. Some of the gravel is very fine and smooth, but at times the stones are rather sharp and larger, making for a slightly uncomfortable ride.

It was interesting for me to read some of the above posts before setting out. I have mixed feelings about Sustrans National routes. Some have been wonderful, while others definitely suffer from issues similar to those noted above. I'll try and do a bit more research from other users of national routes next time rather than just blindly following what I hoped would be a good-quality, well-signposted route from A to B.

boris wrote:I think if you examine the figures on the eu stats site you will find that british roads are only safer for vehicle occupants and that the ksi rates for peds and cyclists are as high as anywhere .

http://www.ecf.com/wp-content/uploads/2 ... harter.pdf

page 9 graph shows deaths per billion miles cycled per country, and that the worse that is the fewer miles people cycle.

As far as I can see that graph is saying that the UK rate at 29 fatalities per billion miles is significantly better than in other European countries - with the exception of the Netherlands, Denmark, and Sweden.

But maybe I read it wrong.

jamesofyorkshire wrote:The 'National Cycle Routes' ....and Sustrans ....are a joke. A really pathetic effort at doing something to help cycling in this country.
I wish Wiggins & Co. had talked about it in the media whilst they were in the limelight.

The NCN isn't perfect by any means but go to a country that doesn't have one and you'll see what a valuable contribution Sustrans (a charity) and its *volunteers* make.

jamesofyorkshire wrote:Perhaps AndyMillar........ Wiggins, Cavendish, Sutton and now Heffernan might disagree with you.

Hmm. And you presumably have exclusive have access to what they think.

andymiller wrote:
The NCN isn't perfect by any means but go to a country that doesn't have one and you'll see what a valuable contribution Sustrans (a charity) and its *volunteers* make.

Many of the Sustrans volunteers do great work with limited resources. But it shouldn't depend upon volunteers. The routes also shouldn't exclude cyclists who cannot get through a variety of barriers.

IMO, only about 20% of the Sustrans network (based on the bits I've used) is anything like 'a valuable contribution'. Use decent sign posting, and take down the infernal barriers, and I might accept that Sustrans make a valuable contribution.

jamesofyorkshire wrote:Perhaps AndyMillar........ Wiggins, Cavendish, Sutton and now Heffernan might disagree with you.

They all had nasty accidents with vehicles on our bike-friendly roads........I don't think you need to be a rocket scientist to figure out they weren't happy about the state of play........

MrLeadfoot wrote:Route 6 is good through Nottinghamshire.

The rural sections are good, but I'm not too impressed with the urban part. It wanders about all over the place and much of it is actually on road (albeit mostly quiet residential roads).

andymiller wrote:

jamesofyorkshire wrote:The 'National Cycle Routes' ....and Sustrans ....are a joke. A really pathetic effort at doing something to help cycling in this country.
I wish Wiggins & Co. had talked about it in the media whilst they were in the limelight.

The NCN isn't perfect by any means but go to a country that doesn't have one and you'll see what a valuable contribution Sustrans (a charity) and its *volunteers* make.

And then go to the Netherlands and see what a hash the UK has made of things. This may not be Sustrans "fault", but the end result is crap cycle routes that aren't fit for purpose.