CTC Forum - On the road

Syndicate content
Discussion boards hosted by CTC, the national cycling charity
Updated: 1 hour 55 min ago

Re: Too many vehicles!!!

12 February 2016 - 9:18pm
simonineaston wrote:Too many humans, full stop. This morning, I was listening to Bill Gates, on DID - nice bloke, don't get me wrong, but he was banging on about ending malaria and saving lives and I thought, "Weird - for a bright bloke, you just don't get it... we don't need more people on this earth, we need LESS, so spend all that money thinking of ways we could get rid of them some of them!"

Lets keep politics out of this forum; it's surely meant to be about bikes.

Re: Brutal hit & run - Nottingham

12 February 2016 - 8:28pm
If he had done as you suggested, he'd have been done for contempt of court if he'd done it in court during the trial, or he would have compromised the trial if he'd said it anywhere else before the trial.
He has done the only thing he could have done.
And he has certainly not 'failed'.

Re: Why are cycle paths so bumpy? And narrow?

12 February 2016 - 8:21pm
Ripples and bumps? Wish I only had those problems on my commuting route. Apart from the usual bumpy road surface there's bodged utility repairs ranging from depressions through wheel sized grooves where they meet the original surface to whole chunks just disappeared so they're now potholes. Then there's whole stretches where there's so many potholes you can't safely weave around them. Plus later on in my ride home a whole new set of potholes appeared overnight. These are on the most narrow section of main road where it bends consistently for almost a mile. With heavy vehicles going both ways, double white lines and you have to pull out last.minute or ride through 2" deep potholes.

Rant over but I've hit two potholes in the last month each gave a loud bang that I'm not completely sure didn't cause damage. I'm sure I'm not alone with.this experience but if you've got ripples and rough cycle paths apart from roads then it's at least something. My commute only has a canal as the alternative route that's off road for part of my journey. It goes all around the houses taking me half as long again as my road route, double if I try to catch it earlier in my ride home.

AFAIK councils probably have a requirement to provide at least a certain distance of cycle paths. They do not have any regulations as to the minimum standards they have to be to pass planning process. At least not the way most types of highways have standards. There's even regulations over the signage and cones needed for roadworks apparently let alone junction design, etc. To not have something similar for cycle paths is short sighted and results in poor surfaces/narrow paths, very short runs directing cyclists towards dangerous places to rejoin a carriageway and paths that's not even in a useful place. However each of these will still count as cycle paths good enough to be included in any measure of a council's performance in cycle infrastructure.

We're a nation of motorists not cyclists. Unless cycling becomes a normal part of the nation's life you will never get a critical mass to drive infrastructure spend for cycling to improve and create more.

We need the Danish or Dutch attitude to using bikes in day to day life. Until then I'm happy doing my bit 3 to 5 days per week commuting plus weekend leisure rides. We're also giving cycling experience to our young son, with the intention to make it normal to cycle places for him. Think global act local is a good phrase. I prefer think national by supporting CTC or cycle campaigns but act local or personal by getting out on my bike as part of my normal life. Lancaster, IMHO, is not a bad city to cycle in overall, it's just the road isn't maintained which is the LCC's responsibility.

Re: The French are just as stupid?

12 February 2016 - 7:40pm
661-Pete wrote:mercalia wrote:The French are just as stupid?


there was a story about a guy here on his bike had to be rescued from floods after he tried to cycle thru it, remember it any one?

Re: Why are cycle paths so bumpy? And narrow?

12 February 2016 - 7:36pm
cause they are cheaply made, not up to the standard of the main road. Last summer the powers were surfacing a bit of the NCR 1 I think it is, from Dartford to Graves end. Only a small section; and they had a mini roller yet still after all the work it wasnt flat, ripples every so many yards, yes very low level but still bad enough to irritate on your bike. Dont know what they were doing wrong as there were enough workers there ( doing nothing )

Re: Why are cycle paths so bumpy? And narrow?

12 February 2016 - 7:24pm
Coz anyone who hasn't, doesn't or wont ride a bike and hasn't figured out what a joy they are hate cyclists, bikes and everything to do with it. Which pretty much means all the eejits running this country and the rest of the UK/world.
We are the wise few. We're special

Why are cycle paths so bumpy? And narrow?

12 February 2016 - 7:13pm
Why are cycle tracks so bumpy?

Compared to our Birmingham roads (potholes excepted) the cyclepaths are very bumpy - do the local authorities simply lay them as if they were footpaths? (Quite apart, that is, from the tree roots etc!)

Why so narrow?- anyone who uses the cycleways around the QE hospital in Birmingham will know what I mean, not very wide and supposedly 2-way! And bounded by some nice wide white lines that don't seem to be non-slip - exactly the sort of thing I used to avoid in wet weather on 2 wheels (with or without an engine)

And why do they end - well, nowhere? e.g. you have a cycle lane laid along a footway (shared space) - and suddenly you get a sign saying "End of Cycle Path" - with nowhere to go, not even a ramp onto the roadway! Are you simply viewed as a pedestrian who rides a bike along some of your journey?

NB I've looked at some of these with a "Drivers viewpoint" as well as a cyclists viewpoint - and come to the same conclusion, around here they are mostly useless if well-meaning!

Re: Brutal hit & run - Nottingham

12 February 2016 - 6:53pm
Fascinating,telling,and horrifying+++

And this is how the courts and justice system works. Cyclists looks and speaks and educated chap. Sorry,you're too civilised. You accepted what was being put before you without voice++ I don't blame you,I expect I would have done the same,shell-shocked. What you really should have done was speak up and out,a George Galloway type of speech. You deferred to a ineffectual and pathetic excuse of justice,by not speaking up then and there,protesting!,you agreed to the set-up to continue. Again,I can't find it in myself to blame you,but on reflection you will see YOU have failed yourself. on the plus side,you have put your story on this thing(You Tube).

Look on the bright side: everyone gets a cut out of the process: magistrate,prosecutor,police, all get job,£££,kudos,status. You get shafted: well,that's the down side.

I see some judge/adjudicator is now taking legal action against the judicial system for damages,failed clientele taking action against judiciary for wrong-doing,ineptitude. Think she's asking for compo. Guess there might be a little more input into justice for her than that it has gone into injured cyclist. Or better not

Give thanks you didn't end up in the wheelchair of coffin. Its why the Italians go to the Ndraghetta to sort stuff out. Sad but salient

Re: The French are just as stupid?

12 February 2016 - 5:24pm
mercalia wrote:The French are just as stupid?

The French are just as stupid?

12 February 2016 - 5:08pm
Bordeaux floods after heavy rain in south west.

The French are just as stupid?

http://www.thelocal.fr/20160212/in-images-bordeaux-under-water-as-river-breaks-bank

WEATHER LATEST: Much of western France on alert for high winds and coastal flooding on Friday.

Re: Too many vehicles!!!

12 February 2016 - 2:49pm
TonyR wrote:Perhaps closing the lanes will encourage Yodel & Tesco to switch to drone delivery. Of course we'd then all have to wear helmets cycling against the drones falling out the sky or bags of Tesco potatoes rupturing at 5,000ft
Yet again, sports innovations coming to utility cycling, eh?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wPd7H0912Us

Re: Too many vehicles!!!

12 February 2016 - 2:19pm
Perhaps closing the lanes will encourage Yodel & Tesco to switch to drone delivery. Of course we'd then all have to wear helmets cycling against the drones falling out the sky or bags of Tesco potatoes rupturing at 5,000ft

Re: Too many vehicles!!!

12 February 2016 - 1:40pm
On the lanes of Wilts, Glos and Somerset I see more cars (and agricultural vehicles) than delivery vans. One thing's for sure though, the number of delivery vehicles is only going to rise with the growth in internet shopping and particularly supermarket deliveries. I don't know whether the cars I see are mostly locals or long-distance traffic avoiding main road congestion spots. I expect they're mostly locals using the lanes they know as short cuts, and that is the problem. For instance, on this map you can see a lane paralleling the B4040 heading southwest from Malmesbury:
http://www.streetmap.co.uk/map.srf?X=38 ... &ay=185953

That's the kind of lane where traffic heading for, say, Alderton from Malmesbury, should be taking the B road rather than the lanes.

Re: Too many vehicles!!!

12 February 2016 - 1:30pm
pwa wrote:The Tesco driver travelling between small villages will quite reasonably want to use a route that is efficient. When you are doing door to door deliveries in rural communities you are not using lanes as rat runs. The lanes are your network.

I'm sure their routing software will learn to cope. It may take a bit longer but so what? Most of our problems with lanes is drivers in too much of a rush.

Re: Too many vehicles!!!

12 February 2016 - 12:49pm
reohn2 wrote:I don't think anyone is thinking of blocking necessary rural lanes where tens of miles are needed to circumnavigate them.
Network Rail has few qualms about blocking rural lanes and requiring five mile diversions by closing level crossings... but heaven help that we should gate roads to help residents, cyclists and walkers rather than rail passengers thundering through!

Delivery firms use smart software that adapts routes to deal with closures. They would cope.

Re: Too many vehicles!!!

12 February 2016 - 12:37pm
Bmblbzzz wrote:Saying the lanes are the network is simply accepting the status quo of allowing motor vehicles access everywhere without asking whether it's reasonable. But all this talk of deliveries is a bit of a red herring, IMO, most of the traffic on such lanes is cars.

I can only speak with authority about the lanes around here in the Vale of Glamorgan. The motor traffic on most of the lanes (almost all) is either locals going about their business, or deliveries such as the Postie and Yodel / Tesco, etc, all of whom probably have a good reason to be there. Getting to and from villages, schools, etc. I can think of two lanes that are used (not that heavily) by drivers wanting to cut out a major road junction. I'd still feel okay cycling along those lanes, though I rarely do so because they link to the busy and unattractive A48 trunk road. The other lanes are lightly used because it is quicker to stick to the A and B roads for most journeys.

Re: Too many vehicles!!!

12 February 2016 - 12:12pm
Saying the lanes are the network is simply accepting the status quo of allowing motor vehicles access everywhere without asking whether it's reasonable. But all this talk of deliveries is a bit of a red herring, IMO, most of the traffic on such lanes is cars.

Re: Too many vehicles!!!

12 February 2016 - 11:00am
TonyR wrote:pwa wrote:Maybe restricting access might work in a small number of urban fringe situations, but not in the wider countryside. The narrow lanes are the great mass of the road network there, and the main roads are the minority. When I drive from my home I use the main roads where appropriate, but there are journeys where it would take me twice as long if I avoided every bit of narrow road. So I pick-and-mix, making sensible decisions. Only one of our local lanes is a bit of a rat run, so it is almost a non-issue here.

Any restrictions on access will only work if Sat Nav systems can take them on board. All delivery drivers are only able to do their jobs with the aid of Sat Nav. They punch in the postcode and follow the instructions. If the software could accommodate an "access only" factor it might work, but that is a technical issue that I'm not qualified to comment on. Sticking bollards halfway down a lane (with the provision of a turn-around for vehicles) already happens, but can only be appropriate in a small minority of cases.

Hackney in London has done a very good job of blocking side roads to through traffic while allowing local traffic access so that they become pleasant places to cycle. And the results are there. Basically they block a road at key point so that you can get in from one end or the other for access but you cannot drive end to end to transit.

Satnavs are quite capable of dealing with current no-through roads so I don't see why they should be a problem. They have already developed in the haulage sector to avoid the old problem of HGVs getting stuck down narrow lanes thanks to inappropriate short cut routing. Market pressure will do the same if side roads are closed to through traffic because any satnav that persistently causes drivers to have to turn round and backtrack their route will quickly go in the bin.

Yes, closing off through routes works well in some urban situations. In practice it is less appropriate in most rural situations. The Tesco driver travelling between small villages will quite reasonably want to use a route that is efficient. When you are doing door to door deliveries in rural communities you are not using lanes as rat runs. The lanes are your network.

Re: Brutal hit & run - Nottingham

12 February 2016 - 10:16am
Mark R wrote:So Volvo man turns out the be claiming long term disability benefit and with his wife being his carer. Well well, I honestly wasn't expecting that.

What are the chances that his original vehicle, which was in for repair, was provided by the state - in which case he probably doesn't even have to pay his own insurance premium.

It is likely to be a Motability car he drives when it isn't being repaired after other crashes. Motability also provide the insurance which can be withdrawn after serious RTA convictions. Is 6 pts for failing to name a driver serious enough? Will he declare his conviction to them?

About

CTC

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