Cyclists and other road users

[Charles Morgan]

BTW - I'm 45

Ah, someone else with a mid-life crisis at the same age then....

 

[LTD]

Ah, someone else with a mid-life crisis at the same age then....

Not really. Here's the long story .............

In my teens, I was an avid club cyclist and was training / racing five nights out of seven in a week. Probably doing about 250 miles per week.

In the December of 1981 that all came to an abrupt end when I ran into an open trench in an unlit road at over 30 mph and ended up fracturing my skull etc.

It took until 2003 and a house move near the countryside for me to get the courage and desire to buy another bike as we have the National Cycleway 75 on our doorstep.

Was using the bike as a leisure tool then as a commute device until Christmas Eve of 2009 when a close friend and work colleague died. He simply didn't turn up for work ........

2010 was a really tough year at home and at work as his death impacted on every day. It's been tough but I've managed to get through the other side.

This year I am devoting to my health, fitness and well-being. Hence the commute on my bike. Rather than going to the gym, I'll get 60 -80 minutes hard exercise each day. I have never forgotten how to train seriously and how to discipline myself on the road to protect the space I ride in.

I'll save the petrol money from the S500 and put it towards having a great holiday in the summer with my family.

Not so much a MLC but a realisation of mortality.

 

[finisterre]

Not so much a MLC but a realisation of mortality.

Ahh I see, not a MLC then

.

 

[LTD]

Not so much a MLC but a realisation of mortality.

Ahh I see, not a MLC then

.

If it was, it would be a Harley Fat Boy and more dead animal than most can wear

 

[Noodle-Pulp]

Mortalisation is a wonderous moment.

 

[Charles Morgan]

I had my first MLC 5 years ago, so bought the Boxster. Thereafter it was known to the wife of a friend as my MenoPorsche.

The liver disease and drawn out demise of a good friend and wine drinking companion last year (albeit he was a fully fledged alcofrolic), caused me to cut out the booze on all bar high days and holidays which also helped me not eat so much, so lost almost 6 stone, and now the exercise (cycling no, too many people here in London out to kill me) has become addictive. After two hours jogging and intensive (for me) working out this Wednesday I had the most extraordinary endorphin high all afternoon. The next day was a bit grim though!

 

[LTD]

Mortalisation is a wonderous moment.

I've seen it from both sides.

People wonder why I look at things in a black/white fashion with no grey (well, apart from the hair )

Love me or loathe me, I'll say it as I see it and never regret anything. Life is way too short for theoretical bolox.

 

[LTD]

... so lost almost 6 stone

I'm only 12st 9lbs

 

[Charles Morgan]

So somewhere between a light snack and elevensees on the *** scale then.

I was last 12st 9 25 years ago. As Orwell said, inside every fat man is a thin man trying to get out. I must have had twins inside...

 

[renault12ts]

So somewhere between a light snack and elevensees on the *** scale then.

I was last 12st 9 25 years ago. As Orwell said, inside every fat man is a thin man trying to get out. I must have had twins inside...

I was last 12st 9 25 minutes ago.

 

[Stratman]

So somewhere between a light snack and elevensees on the *** scale then.

I was last 12st 9 25 years ago. As Orwell said, inside every fat man is a thin man trying to get out. I must have had twins inside...

He forgot to add "And outside every thin woman is a fat man trying to get in"

 

[Noodle-Pulp]

I've seen it from both sides.

People wonder why I look at things in a black/white fashion with no grey (well, apart from the hair )

Love me or loathe me, I'll say it as I see it and never regret anything. Life is way too short for theoretical bolox.

I refuse to only see black and white.. I savour the shades in between.

 

[jefrs]

I agree - but the point is that a great many people on bikes flout all the rules and get away with it because they are anonymous and can disappear in traffic with little chance of ever being traced .

But only a very small number of cyclists flout the rules, whereas a large number of motorists do, both as a proportion and an absolute figure.
True, you don't see many cars driving on the pavement, but how about failing to indicate on a roundabout?

Now, don't go thinking I have any sympathy for bad cyclists, but most are well behaved. No, I do however see so very many bad drivers.

I agree , for adult cyclists - but would never want to see young children on small bicycles out in the road amongst cars , buses , trucks etc. Although difficult to know where to draw the line , I think once of secondary school age , youngsters ought to be able to ride on the road , with primary school children sticking to the pavements.

I was taught to ride on the road, after age of about 8yo we would get reprimanded for riding on the pavement - by parents and authorities, my dad was once fined half a crown for cycling without lights.

I , and many others , think it is high time the law was changed on this particular point . A great deal of money is spent on these paths/lanes for the benefit of cyclists who then in a confounding demonstration of ingratitude refuse to use them . Any cyclist who is hit by another vehicle whilst cycling on a road where they could have been on a separate cycle path deserves not one penny in compensation and ought to be held automatically at fault since any collision would not have occurred had they been using the provided lane .

In the view of most cyclists, the cycle lanes/paths are not fit for purpose and woefully inadequate and often dangerous imo too narrow and give-way too often. It takes effort to start and stop and start a bike, cyclists do not like to stop: this is not efficient.
So these lanes are designed by idiot non-cycling committees to fulfil a government quota, miles and miles of under-used white lines in all the wrong places. There are websites devoted to idiot-lanes e.g. 3 meters length terminating in a steel barrier. A dreadful waste of our money.

Road layout and available space may not always allow for optimum lane width - it is unlikely the designers are idiots , but usually have their hands tied by conflicting regulations .

It is not an optimum lane width they are under-cutting but a minimum width of 1.5 metres - it takes 0.75m just to ride a bike in a straight line due to the way that a two-wheel vehicle balances. Therefore anything below 1.5m is not a cycle lane/path.
Therefore change the road layout to make it safer for everyone: roundabouts do not suit bicycles - they should not be used as constant punctuation - but nugatory mini-roundabouts seem to be proliferating.

Cyclists can also cause plenty of damage when they cycle badly , either by knocking down pedestrians or by causing other road users to avoid them when they flout the rules of the road - so the case for them receiving proper training and taking a test is no less compelling.

Yes they cause damage to pedestrians, which is why bikes have long been confined to the road for their safety.
I agree with the training, the responsibility for that being the parents.
But not mandatory training and testing. Will your 2yo have to have L-plates? ;-) Do remember that the vast majority of adults are licensed/tested motor drivers.
The RoSPA test used to be a requirement for cycling to school.

Simple enough - unlike roads , car parks are one of the few places where pedestrians walk willy nilly amongst moving vehicles with no separation or regulation - blame for these incidents are probably pretty equally divided between pedestrians who are not looking out for moving vehicles and drivers either reversing without proper observation ( especially those who drive into spaces then reverse out without being able to see properly ) or travelling at inappropriate speed for the surroundings .

Apparently studies have found the cause is that the peds are motorists, they get out of the car and behave like a motorists, expecting to still be invulnerable in their metal box. Wrong mind set, the motorist has got to think car park = pedestrians = gormless people. These same gormless people drive cars too.

A pedestrian on a crossing is entitled to step out - it is the responsibility of the driver/rider to take proper observation on the approach to a crossing and be prepared/able to stop - a bike can stop a lot quicker than a car ! Moreover , motor vehicles can generally be heard coming , cycles ( and electric vehicles ) approach in silence - and lots of bikes these days have no bell/horn with which to warn of their approach .

A pedestrian is entitled to step out when safe to do so, they must look! (in the Hwy/C rules). A bicycle takes longer to stop than a car from the same speed. A bike travels between 12mph and 24mph (or more) minimum speed for a bicycle is about 8mph = wobble and fall over (ok, so I can track stand but I'm a clever clogs). Personally I really object when some oik cycles along pavement and straight over a zebra without giving the cars a chance - candidate for a Darwin.

Road Fund License , as it used to be called , was originally brought in to pay for road infrastructure . VED as it now is just goes into government collective coffers .

Road Fund License was discontinued in the 1930s - it never went into road repairs anyway! (came to an end in 1937 under the 1936 Finance Act).
It is Vehicle Excise Duty i.e. it is a tax like what we pay on a bottle of booze (mutters... blood sucking parasites).

Six feet of clearance required which , depending on road width , may or may not mean crossing the centre line .

It may not mean the centre line but usually means the lane line. You can kill a cyclist if you pass too close. We give horses plenty of room because they can kick the car off the road (seen that done!), should we not give the cyclist the same consideration, or do we want to flatten the blighter. There is a Hwy/C rule here that motorists do not obey.
The clearance is generally interpreted as being the height of the cyclist on the bike, laid out sideways on the road, plus some clearance = about 2 to 3 metres from kerb (the cyclist is not at the kerb) i.e. 10 feet - pretty much the entire lane width.

I can't speak for other peoples' children , but my son will be taught (by me) to ride responsibly , won't go on the road for a while yet ( he's only two just now ) and only under my direct supervision to begin with . For now , he'll ride his small bike with stabilisers on the pavement without harming nor endangering anyone .

Jolly good and that's nice and proper. Well done.
Me, yes I did pass the Cycling Proficiency Test (RoSPA) which I still ride for sport/fitness and some local transport, and passed the motorcycle test and car, plus licensed to drive big lorries too (not that I often do).

 

[oldcro]

Interestingly, I have read here in the past complaints about cyclists hogging the road when they pay nothing towards road maintenance. Then the complaints about trucks taking miles to overtake each other and hold up traffic doing so, but no mention is made about those trucks paying 5 to 10 times more to be on the road.

 

[Spinal]

In the view of most cyclists, the cycle lanes/paths are not fit for purpose and woefully inadequate and often dangerous imo too narrow and give-way too often. It takes effort to start and stop and start a bike, cyclists do not like to stop: this is not efficient.

Correct me if I'm mistaken, but that sounds like you're saying that the reason cyclists don't like cycle lanes is that (amongst other things) there are rules they need to abide by...

Just like any other road user...

On that note, stopping isn't efficient in my car either...so from now on, I will resort to not stopping, drive through red lights,and make absolutely sure next time I see a cyclist changing lane randomly weaving through traffic breaking and damaging other peoples property, I will be as efficient as possible...

M.

 

[jefrs]

Interestingly, I have read here in the past complaints about cyclists hogging the road when they pay nothing towards road maintenance. Then the complaints about trucks taking miles to overtake each other and hold up traffic doing so, but no mention is made about those trucks paying 5 to 10 times more to be on the road.

Neither you, me, nor the trucks or the pay anything towards road maintenance from the VED.

Road upkeep is paid for from our income tax etc.

So don't complain that cyclists don't pay for the road because you don't either. Or rather you both do...

 

[MOCAŠ]

Neither you, me, nor the trucks or the pay anything towards road maintenance from the VED.

Road upkeep is paid for from our income tax etc.

So don't complain that cyclists don't pay for the road because you don't either. Or rather you both do...

Er, Council Tax. Unless you're referring solely to national routes...

 

[jefrs]

Correct me if I'm mistaken, but that sounds like you're saying that the reason cyclists don't like cycle lanes is that (amongst other things) there are rules they need to abide by...

Just like any other road user...

On that note, stopping isn't efficient in my car either...so from now on, I will resort to not stopping, drive through red lights,and make absolutely sure next time I see a cyclist changing lane randomly weaving through traffic breaking and damaging other peoples property, I will be as efficient as possible...

M.

Many cycle lane are obliged to give way at every side road. Would you like to stop every 100 metres?

In future we shall expect you to stop your car at every side road, and then get out and push start it ;-)

Maybe then you will get some idea that cycles lanes are designed by idiots.




How many times have I seen a car randomly weaving through traffic? Failing to indicate?
How many times have I see a car/van/lorry overtake a bike, fail to get past and pull in to the left smashing into the cyclist?
Perhaps you don't like seeing the humble bicycle going faster than you in city traffic. There, the average car speed can be as low as 8-12mph, the bike is twice as fast and the cars are now the obstruction cluttering up the road.
Just saying, you need to get on a bike to see how dangerous this attitude is to law-abiding cyclists.

 

[jefrs]

Er, Council Tax. Unless you're referring solely to national routes...

Not round here it ain't, they don't do "upkeep".


(hence the "etc")

 

[MOCAŠ]

Many cycle lane are obliged to give way at every side road. Would you like to stop every 100 metres?

In future we shall expect you to stop your car at every side road, and then get out and push start it ;-)

Maybe then you will get some idea that cycles lanes are designed by idiots.

Of course cyclists need to stop (or at least give way) when they reach a side road, just like we all do. If they don't, they can look forward to spending more time in hospital than on the road.

Except where there is provision for fully segregated cycleways or 'altered-priority' lanes at controlled junctions (both of which are very diffucult to achieve in bulit-up urban areas), the best that can be done is to demark areas of the road for use by cyclists. Ultimately, the main purpose of a cycle lane is to indicate to cyclists - who would probably be using the road anyway - where best to position themselves, while at the same time alerting other road users to their presence.

I also get rather annoyed with people who have nothing better to do than display their ignorance by claiming that short stretches of cycle lane are "pointless". The basis of their argument is usually that cyclists would need to wheel their bikes to where the lane starts, cycle for a few yards, and then dismount again. This is plainly nonsense - if the lanes weren't there at all, would these same people claim that cyclists would need to wheel their bikes for their entire route?

These 'positioning' lanes are normally installed to help ensure cyclists negotiate junctions in a consistent and predicatable way, which is to the benefit of all road users.