CTC Forum - On the road

Syndicate content
Discussion boards hosted by CTC, the national cycling charity
Updated: 44 min 54 sec ago

Re: Nightmare drive

2 July 2014 - 6:06pm
A little birdie has whispered in my ear and pointed out I'm talking about a different road (only several hundred miles away in a different country. ) Forget the bit about closing the road to motor traffic but I think my points about attitudes are still valid.

And thanks to the little birdie for considering my feelings and not using the megaphone

Manchester Ship Canal

2 July 2014 - 4:55pm
Does anyone know of a cycleway that runs alongside the Manchester Ship Canal?
I did a great Wirral loop at the weekend but hit the proverbial brickwall at Ellesmere Port Boat Museum. The route back to Eastham was peppered with the unsuitable and dangerous. Form Eastham its not too bad, not ideal but doable. If only there were a path alongside the canal; using existing access roads etc. It would make for a great day ride encompasing Wirral, Chester, parts of the Shropshine Union Canal, Chester Greenway etc.

Re: Nightmare drive

2 July 2014 - 4:52pm
Apart from any permanent signage and/or temporary restrictions in place, common-sense and courtesy was seriously lacking.

I'm off to write a stern letter to a shop and demand recompense since my doctor told me i was overweight and it's obviously the food to blame ....

Re: Nightmare drive

2 July 2014 - 4:38pm
[XAP]Bob wrote:Obviously when the pass is closed the coast road is used both ways, but when it's open why not use it "one way".

Obviously the big problem is that drivers will go at unsafe speed if it's one way...

Also there are settlements along the coast road route, would they then be forced to drive for 40 miles over a mountain pass to visit the next town which would otherwise be 2 miles away?

But I do take your point, the Bealach Na Ba could indeed be one way, with the coast road open to two way traffic at all times. But I think for the most part apart from the OP breaking his clutch it isn't a particular problem, traffic levels are relatively low and the road copes.

Re: Nightmare drive

2 July 2014 - 4:33pm
Obviously when the pass is closed the coast road is used both ways, but when it's open why not use it "one way".

Obviously the big problem is that drivers will go at unsafe speed if it's one way...

Re: Appropriate License Plate

2 July 2014 - 4:31pm
BlueMeldon wrote:Misrepresentation used to be a hefty fine, but the 'agency' responsible for registrations has it's finger in the <make-a-quick-profit> pie, so where does the line get drawn and who's left to enforce it ?

Perhaps the offence should carry a different penalty, such as loss of the plate and issue of a new one registered as "SAD1", "SAD2" etc.......obviuously "OV3RC0MPENS4T1NG" won't fit on standard plate !




Indigo Delta One Zero Tango?

Re: Appropriate License Plate

2 July 2014 - 4:14pm
Misrepresentation used to be a hefty fine, but the 'agency' responsible for registrations has it's finger in the <make-a-quick-profit> pie, so where does the line get drawn and who's left to enforce it ?

Perhaps the offence should carry a different penalty, such as loss of the plate and issue of a new one registered as "SAD1", "SAD2" etc.......obviuously "OV3RC0MPENS4T1NG" won't fit on standard plate !

Re: Nightmare drive

2 July 2014 - 3:46pm
Yes the pass gets closed by snow in winter. The coast road is fairly modern and was constructed to provide an alternative in winter where previously the only way to get there was by water. Nevertheless it is not a high quality road, it is single track and its route is circuitous. Better than being isolated in the depths of winter I guess... Most mountain passes are frequently closed in the winter months, that doesn't mean it wouldn't be a great inconvenience to close them permanently all year round. In Applecross' case the volume of traffic is likely to be much greater in the summer months than in the winter

Re: Nightmare drive

2 July 2014 - 3:21pm
What do they do in the winter? The pass must close for snow, at least some years?

Re: Appropriate License Plate

2 July 2014 - 3:08pm
Vantage wrote:[XAP]Bob wrote:Vantage wrote:I'll leave it to someone else on the roads to report it. I can't be bothered. I thought it was mildly amusing
If you tell me where/when it was spotted then i'll report it. PM is fine (don't need everyone reporting the same image.)

Pm sent Bob.
I've googled this reporting business and couldn't find any info whatsoever.
I do have to wonder, if the plate is in fact modified illegally, how would the relevant authority dig up the owners address from a plate that doesn't actually exist on record?
It's illegally modified, but the actual character sequence just takes a little parsing, then it will go into the normal dB for looking up people who haven't paid their TV license

Re: Nightmare drive

2 July 2014 - 3:07pm
Mark1978 wrote:It's an extra 20 miles around, again mostly on single track, might be reasonable if the diversion route was of significantly better quality, but then Applecross isn't exactly a major population centre.

http://goo.gl/maps/Ib3Bx it's a pretty amazing road to drive, and not too difficult due it being very open so you can see oncoming traffic a long way off.

I suspect if the road was closed to motor traffic maintenance would drop to zero and we'd get up with a dirt track unridable by road bikes.

So there are two single track routes?

Why not have them both "one way" for motor vehicles?
With big signs saying " oncoming cyclists"

Re: collecting my new bike

2 July 2014 - 2:43pm
easyroller wrote:Flinders wrote:I assume you're joking?

Only half joking actually. The point was he has never ridden a road bike - ever - no idea how to work the brakes or gears, has no cycle maintenance knowledge and has to ride home burdened with a load of accessories either down a 70mph dual carriageway or through a hilly estate with heavy traffic. Probably best put it in the car and then practice somewhere quietly.


Flinders wrote:I've been cycling for over 30 years, commuted every day in Central London for 6 of them, and I've never once had to take wheel off when out. Not once.
Twice I have had to push the bike home- one was an unmendable puncture that wrote of the tyre as well, and the other was a catastrophic derailleur failure that bent the back forks and wrecked the back wheel.

So in 30 years of riding you've never had to replace an inner tube by the roadside?

Not once. Even when I commuted in the Smoke I never got a puncture I couldn't get home on by pumping the tyre up hard once or twice. But I am a lightweight.
I've changed tubes at home, of course, on previous bikes, but with my current HP tyres, I suspect my paws aren't strong enough to get the tyre back on. The OP might have the same problem. I carry the necessary, of course.

I did comment that I thought if the rider had clips on their shoes and wasn't used to them that I thought he should practice on a trainer first. I think that's a necessity. But when it comes to gears, I rode my current bike home with in-brake gears for the fist time with absolutely no problems at all. It's easier than it would be going the other way from in-brake gears to stem levers, I should think.

On the whole, I agree that if it is possible, I'd get the bike home through other means, like a mate's car or van, and play with the bike somewhere safe off the road. But we don;t know how much experience the OP has on other bikes. If the only difference is that they're used to a MTB they may be fine with it. Personally, I'd struggle with a MTB, having only ever had drop bar road bikes!

Re: Nightmare drive

2 July 2014 - 2:18pm
Thanks Pete: "hideous mini": that is just what we need today, make driving less attractive.

Re: 2 LeJog deaths: Death by dangerous driving charge

2 July 2014 - 2:14pm
A year to get to court, but ninth months of that year consumed before the CPS even brought a charge, during which the second offence was committed. Given the guilty pleas, one has to assume that the evidence was pretty conclusive, so it seems unlikely that the CPS was occupied throughout that time in weighing up the pros and cons of a prosecution. Bureaucratic inertia seems the only plausible explanation.

Re: Nightmare drive

2 July 2014 - 1:50pm
brynpoeth wrote:And there is now a car called "mini", the new versions are bigger and bigger, surely the name is wrong. Back then there was a super spacious car called the MAXI with front wheel-drive (pulls you out of trouble instead of pushing you into it). Or the Ro80.
There's only ever been one 'mini' as far as I'm concerned:

I learned to drive in one of those (initially - until I took lessons and switched to a Hillman Avenger) - and have to admit I thought it was hideous. Seats so uncomfortable that a long ride would guarantee you a lifetime of sciatica - starter button on the floor - windows which would barely open - no synchromesh on first gear (I wonder how many of today's motorists know how to double-declutch?) Hideous - but a lovable beast all the same. The modern re-makes are a travesty. They're not 'minis', just look-alikes.

Note: this thread is largely about cars, so not an off-topic digression!

Re: Nightmare drive

2 July 2014 - 1:35pm
I heard the one about vehicles having to reverse up a steep hill (Arthog hill) because the reverse gear is the lowest. Is it true, does anyone from back then know?

I think the old cars were much better than the new ones, I remember cyclng up Bwlch Oerddrws past a Morris Minor that had overheated. The driver could do nothing but wait half an hour and find a stream to top-up the radiator. I was enjoying my tea and sausages in Dolgellau when he got there much later.

And there is now a car called "mini", the new versions are bigger and bigger, surely the name is wrong. Back then there was a super spacious car called the MAXI with front wheel-drive (pulls you out of trouble instead of pushing you into it). Or the Ro80.

No need to develop any new or "better" cars after that.

Re: Nightmare drive

2 July 2014 - 1:00pm
In winter, for bigger vehicles, for those who would end up with £400 bills for clutches ( ) then yes it is a wise choice to go round. For the ordinary residents of Applecross it would mean even greater isolation and a huge blow to the tourist industry on which they depend. Also have we thought about whether it would just make the single-track coast road intolerable for cyclists?

Re: Nightmare drive

2 July 2014 - 12:48pm
Bicycler wrote:I know the pass is no longer the only road to Applecross but all vehicles having to use the coast road instead would involve many of them making a massive detour. Closing the pass to through motor traffic might seem a bit extreme.
I just took a look on Google at the eastern end of the Bealach na Ba road, and there's even a sign suggesting the alternative low-level route to road users! So it must be a viable alternative.

Notice the reference to 'learner drivers'. I reckon it's not the first time one of the motoring organisations has been called out for a burnt-out clutch, on this road!

Re: Nightmare drive

2 July 2014 - 12:34pm
It's an extra 20 miles around, again mostly on single track, might be reasonable if the diversion route was of significantly better quality, but then Applecross isn't exactly a major population centre.

http://goo.gl/maps/Ib3Bx it's a pretty amazing road to drive, and not too difficult due it being very open so you can see oncoming traffic a long way off.

I suspect if the road was closed to motor traffic maintenance would drop to zero and we'd get up with a dirt track unridable by road bikes.

Re: Nightmare drive

2 July 2014 - 12:28pm
Bicycler wrote:I know the pass is no longer the only road to Applecross but all vehicles having to use the coast road instead would involve many of them making a massive detour. Closing the pass to through motor traffic might seem a bit extreme.
It's only a bit extreme in a motor-vehicle-centric culture. It's common in Scandinavia.

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