CTC Forum - On the road

Syndicate content
Discussion boards hosted by CTC, the national cycling charity
Updated: 46 min 18 sec ago

Re: UKIP - get off road, cycle on pavement

24 January 2015 - 11:59pm
Medway already has one elected UKIP MP. His constituency is single figure miles from me.

He attracted 42% of the votes cast, turnout was a shade over 50% so that's about 21% of the overall electorate.

Would 1 in 5 of the local motons prefer me to be on the pavement? I expect the proportion could be higher .

Re: UKIP - get off road, cycle on pavement

24 January 2015 - 10:56pm
I am happy to say that I commute by bike in the Charnwood area and I can vouch for the fact that this UKIP twit's views on cycling at least do not match the opinions of the majority, at least in my experience.

Re: Female Cyclist Death In North London

24 January 2015 - 10:55pm
AndyBSG wrote:There's 2 main reasons tipper trucks are higher risk than other HGV's

1 - Because they deliver to building sites, excavation sites, etc they don't have a lot of the features of other lorries. I believe they don't have to legally have the same standard of mirrors. They also don't have side rails so instead of knocking a cyclist away they're more likely to get pulled under

Construction site lorries are not required by law, as other lorries are, to have safety features like side guards. There seems though to be no reason why they can't. Crossrail for example has demanded they are fitted to any lorries used in the Crossrail construction.

Re: Female Cyclist Death In North London

24 January 2015 - 10:52pm
kwackers wrote:Given there's nothing any more or less dangerous about tipper trucks compared to any other sort of trucks one has to assume there's something else going on and unless someone can suggest something else then my money is on the driver and/or the conditions they're driving under.

It's generally because the drivers are employed on piece rates.

Re: Female Cyclist Death In North London

24 January 2015 - 9:33pm
pwa wrote:I am first and foremost a cyclist, but I am also a white van driver. And I am sure that somewhere out there is a keen cyclist who is also a tipper truck driver. Let's not descend into tribalism here.

I am afraid there is a certain 'dimension' to tipper truck drivers that I think makes them more dangerous on the roads. It ain't just the type of vehicle they drive ...

Re: Don't judge a book by the cover.

24 January 2015 - 7:56pm
I was once walking along a canal path and my friend who I was with said "morning/hello" to those who were passing us in the opposite direction. Most of those people being the same age or older. Then a group of youths approached. My friend didn't acknowledge them at all.
I challenged him on it. How are kids meant to know how to behave socially if we as adults don't lead the way and show by example. He accepted he should have said morning/hello to them. I did and they replied.

Re: Female Cyclist Death In North London

24 January 2015 - 7:45pm
There's 2 main reasons tipper trucks are higher risk than other HGV's

1 - Because they deliver to building sites, excavation sites, etc they don't have a lot of the features of other lorries. I believe they don't have to legally have the same standard of mirrors. They also don't have side rails so instead of knocking a cyclist away they're more likely to get pulled under

2 - Tipper drivers are generally paid per drop rather than a wage so for them driving recklessly means more money

Re: Female Cyclist Death In North London

24 January 2015 - 6:49pm
pwa wrote:I am first and foremost a cyclist, but I am also a white van driver. And I am sure that somewhere out there is a keen cyclist who is also a tipper truck driver. Let's not descend into tribalism here. Bad, dangerous use of our roads should be condemned, but we should not lash out at people simply because of their mode of travel. After all, aren't we cyclists victims of that sort of misplaced anger sometimes?
I think you're missing the point. Tipper trucks ARE dangerous, considering they represent a teeny tiny percentage of vehicles the danger they present must be absolutely off the scale!

It's at this point I like to mention 'Grundy's Skip Hire of Widnes' as IMO probably the worst drivers I've ever come across. Whether a 8 wheeler tipper or a run of the mill skip wagon I would reckon around half the overtakes they make required me to make some adjustment to my positioning to stay safe and a percentage of those demand that I do so otherwise I would have been hit.
I've been fortunate to have never been passing a junction as one wanted to turn left because TBH I reckon that's the only reason one hasn't squashed me so far.

Given there's nothing any more or less dangerous about tipper trucks compared to any other sort of trucks one has to assume there's something else going on and unless someone can suggest something else then my money is on the driver and/or the conditions they're driving under.

Re: UKIP - get off road, cycle on pavement

24 January 2015 - 6:33pm
But we want the motorists who want us off the road, off the road too.

Re: Shared paths road works and red cyclist dismount signs

24 January 2015 - 6:30pm
danhopgood wrote:Chapter 8 of the Traffic Signs Manual gives the definitive guidance on traffic management and this does give a clear requirement that cyclists should be properly catered for...

I thought the "red book" was the definitive guide (which includes the option of requiring cyclists to dismount and use the footway as catering for cycling ).

Re: Shared paths road works and red cyclist dismount signs

24 January 2015 - 6:10pm
This is a very different case from the more usual (blue) CYCLISTS DISMOUNT signs which appear to be there for the sole purpose of scaring cyclists off from joining the carriageway. I agree that there is an obvious safety issue if the path has become so constricted that it is difficult for a cyclist and a pedestrian to pass one another.

But is this really the best advice? One of my most frequent routes takes me along a short stretch of bridle path, so narrow that it is impossible to pass a pedestrian (especially if with dog) in any comfort. If the pedestrian is walking the opposite way to me, I usually stop but do not dismount: that way I allow the most room for the pedestrian to pass - as well as the least risk of daubing them (or the dog) with a chainring tattoo.

But if the pedestrian is walking the same way as me, often the only recourse is to dismount and walk behind them until we reach a wider place. Sometimes the pedestrian notices my approach (usually if they've not got headphones jammed in their ears ) and steps aside. Nice of them!

None of this is enforced by any signage of course. I like to think, my action is defined by considerations of common courtesy. But you'll have to ask the pedestrians...

Re: Don't judge a book by the cover.

24 January 2015 - 6:08pm
Like. Kids are overly demonised.

Re: Name the landmark

24 January 2015 - 5:29pm
Correct. Well done. Took the photo in a rush, if I do another I'll try to get more background in.

Don't judge a book by the cover.

24 January 2015 - 5:17pm
This mornings ride. Wath to barnsley, derne valley via herons reach. Teenagers on motor bikes on the cycle path. Scumbags.
2 miles further on I hit the black ice. . Down like a sack of coal.
as I laid on the ice stunned and self checking for injury when I heard the motor bikes approaching, they stopped and the 2 lads ran towards me, 1 shouting " don't move, stay still", " have you hit your head", " lets help you up". They stayed with me until I had gathered myself. " sure your ok". I thanked them and they returned to their motorbikes, fired up and wheelied off up the cycle path. Neither over 16. But they knew exactly what to do.
I'm battered and bruised but glad they where there.

Re: Shared paths road works and red cyclist dismount signs

24 January 2015 - 3:42pm
Hear hear.

Chapter 8 of the Traffic Signs Manual gives the definitive guidance on traffic management and this does give a clear requirement that cyclists should be properly catered for. The problem is that the roadworks always restricts roadspace, which is already at a premium. Accommodating vehicles and pedestrians along the existing route are normally essential. If something's got to give - it's usually the dedicated space for cycling - if there is any. I do get very frustrated as a cyclist when I'm asked to get off and push - but as someone involved in roadworks, sometimes there just isn't an easy alternative.

Re: Name the landmark

24 January 2015 - 3:37pm
Chuchgate, Bolton. Gold post box for Jason Kenny.

Found by google rather than local knowledge .

Re: Shared paths road works and red cyclist dismount signs

24 January 2015 - 1:52pm
I think a bit of common sense and tolerance is needed from all parties when work has to be done. If the works are essential and result in all traffic (pedestrian and cyclist) being funnelled into a narrow gap, I would probably comply with a "cyclists dismount" sign whether it was advisory or compulsory. If I could see the way through was clear for its whole length I might ride through.

Re: Shared paths road works and red cyclist dismount signs

24 January 2015 - 11:45am
martinn wrote:... Part of my commute is along a shared path, (the road is one way), the path is not a bad width, not ideal but not bad, ...
Therein lies at least part of the problem.

There are guidelines and recommendations on the minimum width for shared use paths, which have changed over the years. Highway authorities aren't bound by the guidelines so we end up with paths that are "not a bad width, not ideal but not bad".

As soon as any kind of works further narrow such a shared path then the reaction is "cyclists must dismount for the safety of cyclists and pedestrians" .

The Highways Agency are repairing a shared use path near me at the moment resulting in its closure to cyclists and pedestrians. The diversion is through an unlit, muddy, potholed Country Park because that's safer than using the lit smoothly paved road.

Cyclists who use cycletracks (in this case as an alternative to an 8-lane pseudo-motorway) can't be diverted onto an adjacent unclassified minor road as they might not be used to riding on roads.

The bulk of the diversion (all but 15 yards out of 1/4 mile) is on a route through the Country Park approved for shared use. The Highways Agency want cyclists to dismount on the diversion for the safety of both cyclists and pedestrians as the diversion route isn't considered suitable for road bikes (which apparently can't be ridden on roads either ).

I haven't taken a look at how it has all been signed yet, I'm assured that the "dismount" is only advisory.

The mind boggles, can't wait for it to all be over.

Re: Female Cyclist Death In North London

24 January 2015 - 11:30am
I am first and foremost a cyclist, but I am also a white van driver. And I am sure that somewhere out there is a keen cyclist who is also a tipper truck driver. Let's not descend into tribalism here. Bad, dangerous use of our roads should be condemned, but we should not lash out at people simply because of their mode of travel. After all, aren't we cyclists victims of that sort of misplaced anger sometimes?

Re: CTC challenge rides

24 January 2015 - 11:27am
Thanks for the pointers, was hoping for somthing a little closer to home, but at least now I know they exist and where to find them, so i can keep looking

Martin

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

Copyright © CTC 2015

Terms and Conditions