CTC Forum - On the road

Syndicate content
Discussion boards hosted by CTC, the national cycling charity
Updated: 1 hour 37 min ago

Re: Pushing a bike on a footpath.

23 February 2015 - 10:57am
Bicycler wrote: The judge in Mathias considered things carried amongst the accompaniments to pedestrians so if you subscribe to the view that a bicycle isn't a 'usual' one then it isn't one when on your shoulder either.

I can see this leading to some very silly arguments. Would walking along a footpath carrying a pair of cycle wheels be lawful (e.g. while carrying them from a shop to the new owners home)? Would walking there carrying a bicycle frame, stripped of all components, be lawful? If the answer to both is 'yes' then would carrying a cycle with its wheels dismounted (i.e. carrying the frame with attachments plus the dismounted wheels) then logically also be lawful? If that is legal then why would carrying the cycle with the wheels attached in the usual places not be so? Or if either a frame or wheels may be carried but not both, might we see determined cyclists dismounting their wheels and carrying their de-wheeled machine along the path then returning for the wheels?

Re: Filthy Drivers: Roadside Rubbish

23 February 2015 - 10:52am
pwa wrote:Mjr

if I thought they would get blown around I would be concerned. My intention is that they remain trapped by the surrounding vegetation at the base of the hedge. Plastic (degradable or not) is good at getting stuck in hedges but not so good at freeing itself. I must stress again that we are talking about tucked it at ground level, out of sight, to compost. I hate seeing bags hanging from branches like alternative Christmas decorations. And I hate dog poo being left where others can come into contact with it.

Pualatic, I'm a bit disturbed by your experience of degradable bags not degrading too well. I am having a rethink.

The problem comes in when they are parlty decomposted, disturbed by hedge cutting, etc. little bits will come off the bags as they disintegrate and leave a mess. It probably isn't a huge problem with one or two bags, but I knew of a place where someone regularly did this, and there were little scraps of degraded doogie poo bags fluttering around.

The problem went away not long after I noticed it. Gossip warning: It was near a village, and I heard that the problem went away when the landowner began returning the little bags to the dog walker

Re: Filthy Drivers: Roadside Rubbish

23 February 2015 - 10:41am
Mjr

if I thought they would get blown around I would be concerned. My intention is that they remain trapped by the surrounding vegetation at the base of the hedge. Plastic (degradable or not) is good at getting stuck in hedges but not so good at freeing itself. I must stress again that we are talking about tucked it at ground level, out of sight, to compost. I hate seeing bags hanging from branches like alternative Christmas decorations. And I hate dog poo being left where others can come into contact with it.

Pualatic, I'm a bit disturbed by your experience of degradable bags not degrading too well. I am having a rethink.

Another contentious are is apple cores, orange peel and banana skins. Chuck em in the hedge? Banana skins take an age to compost, so I've always told my kids to find a bin or hide them really well (eg under a log) to avoid visual mess while the thing composts. Orange peel also looks a bit of a mess if it is chucked where it can be seen, though it too will compost. Apple cores disappear faster, though it's still good to keep them out of sight.

Re: Filthy Drivers: Roadside Rubbish

23 February 2015 - 10:39am
Wonder if I could have used crap? c**p

Re: Filthy Drivers: Roadside Rubbish

23 February 2015 - 10:37am
Speaking as a retired farmer, I don't suppose they will notice and neither will anyone else once the grass begins to grow. This time of year everything is visible. On farms it's usually black plastic and empty feed buckets adorning the hedgerows.

Speaking as a dog owner, I wish all dogs, like mine, were on a cereal diet. I just hate [inappropriate word removed] from tinned meat fed dogs. Those same dogs have a tendency to [inappropriate word removed] on paths. Bag it! Our own Lab will never [inappropriate word removed] on paths and always goes off and chooses a rough area to do the business. Can never be seen and usually breaks down and is used by other creatures down the line for food.

Speaking as a gardener, those supposed biodegradable compost bags are rubbish. I began by using them years ago and evidence of them ten years on are still there. I just use newspaper or kitchen towels among the compost now along with all the junk mail shredded. Bed the hens with it then onto the compost, wonderful stuff.

Re: Filthy Drivers: Roadside Rubbish

23 February 2015 - 10:15am
pwa wrote:the farmers won't mind (I know them) and the bags won't fly around when they are tucked low down in the grass/nettle zone. I'm interested to learn that these bags don't decompose quickly, though.
Oh they do once warm enough and dark enough, but tucked under a hedge will probably only trigger decomposition of the underside. Why won't the tops get blown away? The wind fairly whips through the grass here...

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

23 February 2015 - 10:03am
Pete Owens wrote:mjr wrote:Are those factors still the oft-cited ones from the debatable 30 year old Lund data that is rather hard to obtain? The headline figures draw no distinctions for cycleway types, junction layouts and so on and are used to wrap it all up into one answer which is "clear, simple and wrong."

The fact that cycle paths increase the danger at junctions has been well established for much longer than that - it is the reason why use of cycle paths was never made compulsory in this country in the '30s despite the best efforts of the motor lobby, unlike the rather more authoritarian regimes on the continent. It is not just one study. Indeed, most of the research has been conducted by believers in segregation who were surprised by the supposedly counter intuitive results. The effect is not marginal - we are talking about an order of magnitude here which is far more clear cut than most road safety interventions. And it does distinguish between junction layouts in that bi-directional tracks are identified as particularly dangerous.
It? It? Again, I think this seems to be describing primarily the Lund research, plus distinguishing track direction isn't really distinguishing junction layouts - relatively, bidirectional tracks are more dangerous and so we should prefer unidirectional in general, unlike most of what's being built in London - but that doesn't tell us anything about particular junction layouts. It falls into the oft-repeated trap of lumping crossroads in with forks and so on, then ignoring those differences, so it gives only generalities.

I've read quite a bit of research on this and it doesn't seem clear at all. In some cases, what seems clear at first glance is much less certain once you get to the bottom of it, like the notorious "11.3 times more dangerous" headline. In other cases, such as Jensen of Trafitek's work, an absolute fall seems to be presented as an increase mainly because it isn't as large a fall as predicted!

"An order of magnitude" is a cute way of saying it's still only a multiplier on a very small number (because cycling is generally safe). If done carefully, I suspect the benefits of increasing ridership and reduction of conflict from higher-top-speed vehicles behind would outweigh any reduction in safety from junctions - and in many cases, especially off quasi-motorways, the right tools to use will be things other than protected spaces.

There are undoubtedly design features that may mitigate this to a minor extent but that is tinkering at the edges of the problem and certainly quibbling about whether the path is shared with pedestrians or not makes no difference whatsoever.
And yet, no study I'm aware of has found that shared cycle/footways are as safe and as popular as dedicated cycleways.
I agree that there is inevitable conflict where carriageways and cycleways would cross at junctions, but it should be easier to manage,

The fact that the conflict is inevitable this means it is not possible to manage - it is a fundamental feature of the geometrical arrangement. If you arrange for a stream of left turning vehicles to approach a junction to the right of a stream of vehicles heading straight on then expext collisions at the junction.
Don't be silly! Traffic conflicts are managed all the time: priority markings, traffic signals, grade-separation and plenty more. At some point, a cycle in the stream will have had to join the stream and in a busy system, they will have had to overcome a conflict to get there - if we should expect collisions at any junction with conflicting movements, we'd just be moving the collision to where they join the stream, or where faster vehicles reach their back wheel.
so in a well-managed junction, the tipper truck driver would have had the truck crunching on bollards or similar, rather than a person.

This is getting silly. If you place a line of bollards across the mouth of a junction then it ceases to be a junction.
And in this case, there was a left-turning cycle and a left-turning truck: there was conflict only because the road design put them into the same lane (Edit: and I realise the rider may have made an ill-judged attempt to override our current default solution to such conflict: wait in line). It is, as you say, silly, but that's where the century of thinking that every rider should defend their own space on roads dominated by ever-larger motor vehicles has left us. It's a very silly approach indeed and I want it to change as soon as possible, looking at such junctions and how we can learn from history instead of endlessly repeating it.

Re: Filthy Drivers: Roadside Rubbish

23 February 2015 - 10:01am
pwa wrote:Squeaker

how's your breakfast going?
Better since I diverted into the 'No more technical officer..' thread

Good point about biodegradeable plastic though: try one in you compost heap for a few years...

Re: Filthy Drivers: Roadside Rubbish

23 February 2015 - 9:41am
Mjr

the farmers won't mind (I know them) and the bags won't fly around when they are tucked low down in the grass/nettle zone. I'm interested to learn that these bags don't decompose quickly, though.

Squeaker

how's your breakfast going?

Re: Filthy Drivers: Roadside Rubbish

23 February 2015 - 9:40am
Oi! I was enjoying a late breakfast

Re: Filthy Drivers: Roadside Rubbish

23 February 2015 - 8:24am
beardy wrote: they did the decent thing....

You mean hung it off a tree a few hundred metres further on.
Or they found the way to our house and thrust it into the bushes in our front garden? They wouldn't have been the first.....

Yes - by pure coincidence, earlier in the walk we fell in with a couple of other walkers yesterday (sans chien) who briefly chatted to us: they went on at some length about the problem of the abandoned poo-bag. Maybe it's not the right answer. Certainly we see the dog-bins in the area full to overflowing - yuck! - with no apparent timetable for emptying them.

However I'd not like to see a return to the bad old days and the inadvertant "I trod in something"...

Re: Filthy Drivers: Roadside Rubbish

22 February 2015 - 11:20pm
they did the decent thing....

You mean hung it off a tree a few hundred metres further on.

Re: Filthy Drivers: Roadside Rubbish

22 February 2015 - 11:16pm
Off at a slight tangent on the subject of littering - I was astonished today, while walking along the Downs near the top of Ditchling Beacon (on the South Downs Way LDP), to be accosted by a family with a couple of dogs, with the question: "do we have to pick up dog poo here?" The implication being, I suppose, that if it isn't a legal 'must', we ain't going to bother.... And this is a popular path, used by many walkers and riders, a lot of them with children.

The question was driven by the added urgency that one of their dogs had just 'performed'.

I presume they took me for a 'local' (which I am) who would be competent in such legal niceties (which I'm not).

Anyway, my response was uncharacteristically polite "Well I would prefer it if you did." I wish now, I'd put it a bit stronger - my face-to-face persona is probably a bit milder-mannered than my on-forum persona! But no matter: they did the decent thing....

Re: Cycling into the sun

22 February 2015 - 10:43pm
Lets be honest, certain mags have been running "best lights" articles, most of these bike light sets cost more than my bike !!!!
A fool and his / her money ...etc.

Re: You'll Never Guess What Passed Me Today!

22 February 2015 - 9:47pm
I've hit 55 mph a couple of times on my bent trike.

I think a bent trike has a couple of advantages over a velomobile around corners.
First:- it's easier to lean further, this helps keep the inside front wheel on the ground.
Second:- It cheaper to repair when things go wrong. I've found out a couple of times my streamer fair and the back of my seat make a fairly good roll cage ...........

Re: You'll Never Guess What Passed Me Today!

22 February 2015 - 9:07pm
I certainly wasn't bottling it at 50 on a welsh descent a couple of years ago on a trike.

That despite having one wheel on gravel and one on grass - and a 5' flag flapping in the not inconsiderable breeze.

Get three wheels and you just have *so* much more confidence. Of course if it all goes wrong at that speed then it hurts, alot. But even a front wheel puncture doesn't cause it to go wrong on a trike.

I can only imagine that the ease with with a quest will get to that speed will give you more opportunity of getting confident at that speed, and higher

Richmond Park (London)

22 February 2015 - 7:39pm
Hello,

I was just wondering if anyone was cycling around Richmond Park this morning.

If so, do you know if the guy that was hit by the blue Prius okay?

Didn't see the incident myself but saw the aftermath

Re: You'll Never Guess What Passed Me Today!

22 February 2015 - 7:25pm
have to admit that I bottle it @ 50mph on a semi laden tourer on twisty alpine descents but I wondered why my pilot eased off at the start of a tandem tt (long downhill) - he bottled at @ 50mph too!

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

22 February 2015 - 1:49pm
John Hartfree - thank you!

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