CTC Forum - On the road

Syndicate content
Discussion boards hosted by CTC, the national cycling charity
Updated: 2 hours 11 min ago

Re: More than a little red faced?

3 hours 10 min ago
Grandad wrote:http://road.cc/content/news/125268-anti-cycling-dales-councillor-banned-drink-driving

More of a menace than the cyclists he castigated.


Oh the irony "He also ran a small business, offering health and safety advice to large construction sites."

What was that advice I wonder - don't go driving around on a bulldozer when you're P1ssed???

Re: More than a little red faced?

3 hours 57 min ago
He won't be encouraged to do anything. He'll just bill a chauffeur to the council and/or carry on driving.
Minor inconvenience for a shade over a year, then he'll carry right back on.

</cynic>

Re: More than a little red faced?

4 hours 43 min ago
Here's the earlier discussion.

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=73582

The spectator turnout and impeccable organisation surely silenced the nay-sayers. Perhaps he'll be encouraged to get on his bike.

Re: 50 mph for lorries

8 hours 32 min ago
I don't understand why the car driver should be under any obligation to travel at a higher speed than the lorry. I'm also not sure why the posted speed limit should dictate a minimum acceptable speed. If it is unacceptable to travel more slowly than others on the roads we should all hop off our bikes and let the mr toads have their way, unhindered by our presence.

Re: 50 mph for lorries

8 hours 46 min ago
No I don't, far from it, I know there are times when for some the judgement time/distance as well as making the manoeurvre is just too tight, I also know when there's a ridiculous amount of time/distance to overtake but a fair few just can't/don't. I also understand that there are differing levels of driving skill, BUT the fact we have people behind the wheel of a motorvehicle quite easily capable of killing people (1700+ in 2012) and severely injuring in the tens of thousands every single year we MUST have a standard that drivers be tested/re-checked for constantly.
It's clear to me those that
If a driver is incapable of making a basic assessment of passing a much slower moving vehicle and by doing so is hindering and creating a huge tailback due to driving at 40% less than the posted speed then they should be given further training. Driving is NOT A RIGHT, it is a priviledge and if people are just not able to make simple basic manoeuvres/assessments then they shouldn't be on the road..what if they are trying to overtake a cyclist..then what?? It's these types that drive too close to you (as a cyclist0 when they come past and pull in too quick because they have a fear of using the other lane and because they are rubbish at overtaking & can't plan their overtake 9or any other manoeuvre for that matter!)

This why partly I have no problem with speeds of HGVs being upped to 50 in a 60 zone WHERE THE 60 IS APPROPRIATE IN THE FIRST INSTANCE..what i don't agree with is the previous carte blanche posting of national Speed limits on roads that one could struggle to do 50 in places even in a car (though this is getting better)

Re: 50 mph for lorries

31 July 2014 - 11:58pm
Ellieb wrote:Put it this way: if cycling on the road took 20 minutes but going by cyclepath took 30 minutes for the same distance, there would be plenty on here who would decry the path as being not fit for purpose and complain that segregationists didn't understand why people should always stay on the road....
But they wouldn't complain about traffic lowering the road speed which is more comparable to this situation. The objection some cyclists have to roadside cycle paths is that they are expected to use them instead of the road. If that is the case, the provided cyclepath should be neither less convenient nor less safe than the road.

Tony, I think you're succumbing to the sense of entitlement drivers tend to feel. They feel that they have a right to proceed unhindered, their speed facilitated by those up ahead. The vehicle in front should not be going unnecessarily slowly (ie. slower than me!)

Re: 50 mph for lorries

31 July 2014 - 11:29pm
Ellieb wrote:Put it this way: if cycling on the road took 20 minutes but going by cyclepath took 30 minutes for the same distance, there would be plenty on here who would decry the path as being not fit for purpose and complain that segregationists didn't understand why people should always stay on the road....

While that is a common trope of segregationists, those of us who keep to the road tend to do so for safety rather than speed.

Re: Caught on camera

31 July 2014 - 10:27pm
Unfortunately he (assumption) may change his plea to guilty at the last moment...

Re: Caught on camera

31 July 2014 - 10:16pm
+1

And since it is a car being forced off the road and not a mere bicycle the police might actually do something about it.

Re: Caught on camera

31 July 2014 - 10:06pm
Yes !!

Re: 50 mph for lorries

31 July 2014 - 9:43pm
Tonyf33 is not in the world I see in Norfolk and south Lincs, where it's the nutters who gallop up to roundabouts at sixty who don't have time to react and merge on smoothly and get in dangerous pickles, not Mr Forty mph behind a truck. There's a reason why the A17 and A15 have big red signs saying how deadly they are... and it's not because a few people hesitate: it's because a few pushy idiots don't realise a 60 limit doesn't mean all the road is always safe for 60.

Re: 50 mph for lorries

31 July 2014 - 9:08pm
Mark1978 wrote:....however a lot of dual carriageways are designed to be motorways and these should be redesignated as such.
But that would require expensive alternative routes/bridges etc for the road users who would be forbidden:
I suspect lowering the limit and fixing layouts dangerous to slow users (eg slip roads) would be cheaper. And perhaps making some sort of obvious (subconscious?) visual reminder that its an ordinary road containly slow or squishy road users.

Re: 50 mph for lorries

31 July 2014 - 9:02pm
I do agree with the principle that most drivers don't know or understand that there is any difference between a dual carriageway or a motorway.

A difference in speed limit would underline that ; however a lot of dual carriageways are designed to be motorways and these should be redesignated as such.

Re: 50 mph for lorries

31 July 2014 - 8:59pm
As this seems a fait acompli I would suggest that in return that the speed limits on single and dual carriageway public roads be reduced to 50 and 60mph respectively. On single carriageways that would reduce overtaking, and allow more time to see cyclists/pedestrians etc ahead. On dual carriageways it allow more time to see cyclists/pedestrians/etc ahead.

IMO 70mph is too fast for non-motorway roads shared with slow road users like pedestrians and cyclists, even at 60 mph preceding pedestrians/cyclists are approached quickly, 70 is asking for trouble IMO:
the requirement for flashing amber beacons on mobility scooters (rule 46 HWC) is an indication the dual carriageway ( a public road open to all) speed limit is too high.
It makes no sense to have the same limit on a dual carriage way and motorway.
Even 60mph probably deserves more concentration than is supplied by a lot of drivers.
Dual carriageways should be designed to make clear that they are not motorways and are just like a single carriage way except that overtaking involves no oncoming traffic: that should make them safer for slower traffic--- instead they are allowed to be more dangerous by allowing drivers to treat them as motorways !! Bahhh.

Also, the driver alone is responsible for their decision to overtake: I don't like this "it was partly their fault for driving at 40 in front of others" idea. 40mph isn't that painfully slow anyway. What about us cyclists: we're "slow"?

Should drivers unhappy at driving at 60 and overtaking everything possible (when properly safe of coarse) to maintain it be forced off the road, even if happy at 50/40? Would you rather the car behind your bike was doing 60 or less than 60?

I would prefer if the IAM and similar would concentrate more on patience and calmness than "making progress"?

Re: 50 mph for lorries

31 July 2014 - 8:43pm
Put it this way: if cycling on the road took 20 minutes but going by cyclepath took 30 minutes for the same distance, there would be plenty on here who would decry the path as being not fit for purpose and complain that segregationists didn't understand why people should always stay on the road....

Caught on camera

31 July 2014 - 8:26pm
Two weeks ago, the price of all my action camera kit finally paid off.
I was cycling to work and approaching a bend with high hedges, so you could not see round the bend. This White Transit came from behind at high speed and overtook me at the start of the bend..... Just as another car appeared the other way. I have a perfect recording of this car being forced off the road, then spinning out of control. The transit did not stop. The car driver was most pleased when I told him it was all videoed. The recordings are now with the Police, and his insurers, and my written Police statement was posted shortly afterwards.
Looking at the recordings that evening, I was greatly shocked by what I saw. I have no doubt that the car drivers quick action in going off the road prevented an offset head-on crash. If this had happened, I am in no doubt that I would not be telling you all about it. I would like to post the recordings for you all too see, but it's Police evidence and you can see the registration numbers, so I don't think that I should.
Oh I do so hope it goes to Court. I want my day in Court! I want to see this driver and give evidence against him.

Re: Camera question - what do you use

31 July 2014 - 8:20pm
I have two Muvi HD Camcorders by Veho. Both in their waterproof cases, one mounted on my helmet facing forwards, the other affixed to my seatpost facing rearward. Endurance is 2-3 hours. For those situations when I need to recharge the batteries when I am out, I also bought a 'Pebble' by Veho, it's a battery which will give several recharges to the cameras.
I have more to say on this, but have relegated it to a new topic.

Re: Bonnet surfing

31 July 2014 - 8:09pm
Glad to hear you're OK Bob and that things seem to be going the right way for you. I trust that there was shiny paint on your shoe cleats? The one time I did a spot of bonnet surfing, I had a good hold onto the wiper blades

Re: Ten Miles a Day

31 July 2014 - 7:40pm
By the way, I've just started a new spreadsheet including feet per mile per day.
I'm aiming for 1,300 feet per day for 2014.

1,263ft so far.
I need even more hills.

Archive

  • Patron: Her Majesty The Queen
  • President: Jon Snow
  • Chief Executive: Paul Tuohy
  • Cyclists' Touring Club (CTC): A company limited by guarantee, registered in England no.25185. Registered as a charity in England and Wales No 1147607 and in Scotland No SC042541

 

Terms and Conditions