Feed aggregator

Re: Is it time for radicalism?

CTC Forum - On the road - 25 November 2014 - 2:48pm
Mick F wrote:Some people are idiots, but not people generally.

Some people are idiots all of the time
All people are idiots some of the time
But all people are not idiots all of the time

Re: Using cycle paths

CTC Forum - On the road - 25 November 2014 - 2:25pm
ukdodger wrote:
That's unfortunate but everyone cant be catered for. Would you welcome being scared stiff or even knocked off by a yobbo on a scrambler? And do you have to go through all that every time with these barriers? I seem to recall getting though most of them with removing the panniers and I carry both. At times I stayed put on my bike too. It was just a matter of lifting the bars over.

You really don't get do you?
The point is that motorcycles riding where they shouldn't,should be stopped by policing,(as others have said it's anti social behaviour),not by stopping a greater number of legitimate of users,using so those same paths!!!!!!!

Re: Is it time for radicalism?

CTC Forum - On the road - 25 November 2014 - 2:24pm
On a point of economics, can anyone explain how the GDP/car thing works?

Using cars and paying for petrol/repairs etc is just one way of spending money that people already have. If they didn't drive a car they would presumably spend it on something else (eg. a bigger house/better food/more bikes....).

Or do you think that if people didn't spend money on cars they would save it up and therefore not be spending it at all?

Re: Using cycle paths

CTC Forum - On the road - 25 November 2014 - 2:18pm
ukdodger wrote:Bicycler wrote:We probably all have the same interests at heart. It is wrong to suggest a bias where people differ in opinion. I may be on a cycling forum but I spent a long time as a an active member of a walkers' group and the Open Spaces Society. It did make me aware of the difficulties faced by many people trying to access paths and what is fit for a 20 or 30 year old is not necessarily fit for somebody older, with restrictive movement, or with a dog. The same applies to cycling. How this country hopes to promote utility cycling by making even cycle facilities inaccessible by utility cyclists I have no idea.

Our ancestors in the 17th century had no problem labelling the erection of gates or barriers across highways a "public nuisance". I can think of no more adequate description in the 21st.

But those gates were erected to keep people out for their own financial reasons. Not quite the same thing. I cant help wondering why there isnt a similar hue and cry from walkers about turn stiles or other barriers across their paths not accompanied by a gate. Ok for the able bodied but what about wheelchair users?

IMO there's a difference between hillwalking and walking to the shops,the paths required are completely different.
Wheelchair users who wish to experience the countryside won't be able to get to the top of some of the peaks in say the Lakes,or other such highlands.
I think that's accepted to a large degree by them,and that some places aren't safe for wheelchair use.

Cycling utility routes and national cycling routes should be accessible by all cyclists whatever type of machine they ride,whether that be one,two,three or more wheels.
Most if not all these routes are shared use and therefore should be accessible to everyone from the able bodied to the most disabled who need use of wheeled transport,whether that be elec assist,helper assisted or not.Obviously there needs to be a power limit for those with power assist,there's very good legislation covering cycles and other assisted vehicles that can be used (and already is for all I know) for such paths.

That said there's no need for any kind of barrier other than to prevent motor cars taking wrong turnings but even then a signpost big enough explaining the limitations of use of such paths is all that should be needed in a civilised society.
Anyone breaking such laws should be dealt with by suitable penalty.
I suspect we'd all be agreed on that but I make no assumptions.
Why if that system works in other countries as mentioned by other and BTW, is my own experience,doesn't it work in this country?
Or is it that it does but for some reason the people in charge don't think it would and so erect barriers to prevent motorised vehicles from those paths?
Or is that in the UK we don't think it worthwhile policing such issues,and so erect barriers to stop any chance of perceived lawbreaking?
Either way it's a wrong attitude by those authorities and IMHO is a true human rights issue.
TBH such cries that these barriers are needed is a fallacy and misguided as society is inclusive and should remain so.
IMHO there are laws but only some are being upheld.
It seems to me that the quote ''civilised society should be judged on how it treats it's minorities'' was never more true than in this case and that it,and the law is conveniently forgotten by some in authority.

Re: Using cycle paths

CTC Forum - On the road - 25 November 2014 - 1:57pm
ukdodger wrote:That's unfortunate but everyone cant be catered for. Would you welcome being scared stiff or even knocked off by a yobbo on a scrambler? And do you have to go through all that every time with these barriers? I seem to recall getting though most of them with removing the panniers and I carry both. At times I stayed put on my bike too. It was just a matter of lifting the bars over.

Most of the paths around here have "bypasses" for people on scramblers, and if you look at a scrambler and compare it with a bike then anything one can get past, so can the other.

It's not a valid response to the issue - CCTV and prosecution of offenders would be appropriate.

It's not an issue of access but of antisocial behaviour. I vote that we put anti car barriers at the top of each motorway exit slip - soon all the cars will be in a safe place, and the rest of us can get on with living.

Re: Using cycle paths

CTC Forum - On the road - 25 November 2014 - 1:48pm
mjr wrote:ukdodger wrote:That's unfortunate but everyone cant be catered for. Would you welcome being scared stiff or even knocked off by a yobbo on a scrambler?
How often are people knocked off by yobbos on scramblers on unbarriered cycleways? How often are they even scared by them? I'll bet it's far less than the numbers who are blocked or even crash into barriers.

Barriers aren't unfortunate - they're evil and cycleways could cater for almost everyone.

But how do we know? If petrol vehicles werent a problem why are their barriers to them. I've been scared rigid only once and wouldnt want to be so again.

Anyway we're not going to reach agreement so we'll just have to agree to differ. Good luck with the hips. I only have a neck problem that gets in the way of my cycling and that's bad enough.

Re: UK to Prague via northern Germany

CTC Forum - Touring & Expedition - 25 November 2014 - 1:22pm
Ron wrote:foxyrider wrote: Bikeline guides, although only in German are very good
The Elbe guide is available in English, also some others.

http://www.esterbauer.co.uk/db_rtb_allg ... eihe_id=RB

must be a new one! you can get the Moselle and North Sea route in English too

Re: My worst tour, and why..

CTC Forum - Touring & Expedition - 25 November 2014 - 1:21pm
I've been thinking about this for a day or so and I can't think of a 'bad' tour.
This year we rode Wales end to end into a headwind for the entire trip and up the gospel path was into the end of a hurricane. My partner had to get off and push as she was being stopped in her tracks and was in fear of being blown over. However such things made the cream tea in Hye on Wye taste even better and we really enjoyed the whole trip.

Re: My worst tour, and why..

CTC Forum - Touring & Expedition - 25 November 2014 - 1:03pm
Probably, looking back on it, the one around the West Highlands which constituted my honeymoon with my first wife.

I'll leave you to fill in the details using your unrivalled powers of imagination

Not a long-lived marriage, but I've done much better since, I'm happy to report

Re: UK to Prague via northern Germany

CTC Forum - Touring & Expedition - 25 November 2014 - 12:58pm
Taken me a while, but thanks for all the responses. Gives me a lot to think about

Re: Using cycle paths

CTC Forum - On the road - 25 November 2014 - 12:54pm
snibgo wrote:ukdodger wrote:I seriously doubt that any barrier design that allowed cyclists to go through unhindered would also bar access to a motorcycle.
Agreed.

ukdodger wrote:They dont prevent you cycling on the path they only inconvenience you getting round them.
I have certainly encountered barriers that prevent me from cycling. Some not only prevent me from cycling, but require me to unload my bike to get it through.

Me too. Several times on each C2C I've done. But they dont stop you cycling on the path only through the barrier. I honestly dont find it an issue. What would be an issue is track bikes coming past at speed.

Re: Using cycle paths

CTC Forum - On the road - 25 November 2014 - 12:53pm
We probably all have the same interests at heart. It is wrong to suggest a bias where people differ in opinion. I may be on a cycling forum but I spent a long time as a an active member of a walkers' group and the Open Spaces Society. It did make me aware of the difficulties faced by many people trying to access paths and what is fit for a 20 or 30 year old is not necessarily fit for somebody older, with restrictive movement, or with a dog. It was clear that was wrong. It wasn't by design but sheer inconsideration that these people were excluded. In recent years organisations have been trying to put this right.

The same applies to cycling. How this country hopes to promote utility cycling by making even cycle facilities inaccessible by utility cyclists I have no idea.

Our ancestors in the 17th century had no problem labelling the erection of gates or barriers across highways a "public nuisance". I can think of no more adequate description in the 21st.

Re: Using cycle paths

CTC Forum - On the road - 25 November 2014 - 12:46pm
ukdodger wrote:I seriously doubt that any barrier design that allowed cyclists to go through unhindered would also bar access to a motorcycle.
Agreed.

ukdodger wrote:They dont prevent you cycling on the path they only inconvenience you getting round them.
I have certainly encountered barriers that prevent me from cycling. Some not only prevent me from cycling, but require me to unload my bike to get it through.

Re: Using cycle paths

CTC Forum - On the road - 25 November 2014 - 12:44pm
Bicycler wrote:ukdodger wrote:I seriously doubt that any barrier design that allowed cyclists to go through unhindered would also bar access to a motorcycle.
So don't put barriers in then they are clearly unfit for use on a cycle path.

This trend for putting in barriers on cycle paths is inconsistent with the way we treat all other rights of way. Urban alleyways may be gated only if subject to a legal order which requires consultation and clear evidence of an existing anti-social behaviour problem on that path which cannot be solved in any other way. On a public footpath, new gates or stiles require permission which is only usually given if fencing is required for livestock. On a Public Bridleway obstructions pretty much the same applies to adding gates. Anything which prevents horses from using the route is simply not allowed. On Restricted Byways, Byways Open to All Traffic and normal public roads new barriers are never added.

So lets take them down and let every single user of these paths be subject to yobbos tearing past them at speed on scamblers then. I dont know the criteria they use to ascertain whether or not to install these things but I doubt anyone else here does either.

Re: Using cycle paths

CTC Forum - On the road - 25 November 2014 - 12:39pm
mjr wrote:ukdodger wrote:It seems truly odd I've never encountered motorcycles on any path with these barriers. What's even stranger is that it is apparently Ok for all users of these paths to be subjected to speeding scramblers (yes 'speeding'. It isnt the point to pootle along on these things and it wont be just scramblers. Have you thought about quad bikes too or any petrol vehicle capable of entry?) and the risk of injury they may cause to anyone else simply because they inconvenience us.
I'm still waiting for you to explain how any of the barriers above prevent access by scramblers or quad bikes. Small quad bikes can sail through bike-handlebar-height barriers because their handlebars are so much lower. Scramblers can also fit through, plus they can jump the low barriers.

But have you considered that their installation is only in places where petrol driven vehicles are a real problem? As I said someone must have done their homework. If it were carte blanche they'd be on all cycle paths.
The main reason they're not on all cycle paths is campaigning by CTC, Cyclenation and others that sometimes makes the fools who propose this junk to do their homework and discover that the barriers are worse than nothing.
What's surprised me in this thread is the total lack of public spiritedness among some cyclists. What's wrong for us apparently should not be allowed sums it up.
What's surprised me in this thread is the total lack of empathy or logic among certain crash-barrier fanatics. They must really hate cyclists.

Oh yes I really hate cyclists.

Re: Using cycle paths

CTC Forum - On the road - 25 November 2014 - 12:37pm
ukdodger wrote:I seriously doubt that any barrier design that allowed cyclists to go through unhindered would also bar access to a motorcycle.
So don't put barriers in then they are clearly unfit for use on a cycle path.

This trend for putting in barriers on cycle paths is inconsistent with the way we treat all other rights of way. Urban alleyways may be gated only if subject to a legal order which requires consultation and clear evidence of an existing anti-social behaviour problem on that path which cannot be solved in any other way. On a public footpath, new gates or stiles require permission which is only usually given if fencing is required for livestock. Gates are normally mandated instead of stiles in order to minimise access problems for path users. Best practice favours replacement of old gates and stiles with ones which allow use by a much wider proportion of path users such as the elderly and the disabled.. On a Public Bridleway obstructions pretty much the same applies to adding gates. Anything which prevents horses from using the route is simply not allowed. On Restricted Byways, Byways Open to All Traffic and normal public roads new barriers are never added.

Re: Using cycle paths

CTC Forum - On the road - 25 November 2014 - 12:31pm
ukdodger wrote:It seems truly odd I've never encountered motorcycles on any path with these barriers. What's even stranger is that it is apparently Ok for all users of these paths to be subjected to speeding scramblers (yes 'speeding'. It isnt the point to pootle along on these things and it wont be just scramblers. Have you thought about quad bikes too or any petrol vehicle capable of entry?) and the risk of injury they may cause to anyone else simply because they inconvenience us.
I'm still waiting for you to explain how any of the barriers above prevent access by scramblers or quad bikes. Small quad bikes can sail through bike-handlebar-height barriers because their handlebars are so much lower. Scramblers can also fit through, plus they can jump the low barriers.

But have you considered that their installation is only in places where petrol driven vehicles are a real problem? As I said someone must have done their homework. If it were carte blanche they'd be on all cycle paths.
The main reason they're not on all cycle paths is campaigning by CTC, Cyclenation and others that sometimes makes the fools who propose this junk to do their homework and discover that the barriers are worse than nothing.
What's surprised me in this thread is the total lack of public spiritedness among some cyclists. What's wrong for us apparently should not be allowed sums it up.
What's surprised me in this thread is the total lack of empathy or logic among certain crash-barrier fanatics. They must really hate cyclists.

Re: Using cycle paths

CTC Forum - On the road - 25 November 2014 - 12:15pm
snibgo wrote:ukdodger wrote:They do? You've left out speed bumps and all traffic calming measures which would appear to be very effective.
The equivalent on a cycle path would be as Tigerbiten and grani describe: barriers designed merely to slow cyclists, preventing them from hurtling over railway tracks or whatever. That's fair enough.

But a barrier that prevents me getting through with panniers of shopping, or parents with children, or recumbent trikes, or ... No. These are anti-cycling barriers. I suppose the idiot designers would deny this was their intention. But the result is anti-cycling.

ukdodger wrote:What's wrong for us apparently should not be allowed sums it up.
Barriers that prevent cycling on a cycle path are simply wrong. (Just as barriers that prevent wheelchairs and mobility scooters on footpaths are also wrong.)

I seriously doubt that any barrier design that allowed cyclists to go through unhindered would also bar access to a motorcycle.

They dont prevent you cycling on the path they only inconvenience you getting round them.

Re: Using cycle paths

CTC Forum - On the road - 25 November 2014 - 12:06pm
ukdodger wrote:They do? You've left out speed bumps and all traffic calming measures which would appear to be very effective.
The equivalent on a cycle path would be as Tigerbiten and grani describe: barriers designed merely to slow cyclists, preventing them from hurtling over railway tracks or whatever. That's fair enough.

But a barrier that prevents me getting through with panniers of shopping, or parents with children, or recumbent trikes, or ... No. These are anti-cycling barriers. I suppose the idiot designers would deny this was their intention. But the result is anti-cycling.

ukdodger wrote:What's wrong for us apparently should not be allowed sums it up.
Barriers that prevent cycling on a cycle path are simply wrong. (Just as barriers that prevent wheelchairs and mobility scooters on footpaths are also wrong.)

Re: Using cycle paths

CTC Forum - On the road - 25 November 2014 - 11:57am
Vorpal wrote:ukdodger wrote:So how many motorcycles have you ever come across?

Are you really speaking up for those who these barriers supposedly keep out or is that your own (and others here) annoyance of them leads you to believe that all users must obviously feel the same way. What about other path users who also dont want M/C's causing them an inconvenience. I seriously doubt walkers have any problem at all with them and they may indeed welcome them because they think they keep us out too. You'd have to be one brick short of a pile to take a mobility scooter on the C2C and much of it is impossible to get a trike over even without barriers.

Frankly if you think that allocating space for motorcyclists to play nicely somewhere else will stop illegal entry onto these paths you've more faith in human nature than I have. Skateboard parks did nothing to stop skateboarders doing it where they please and youth clubs never did stop kids collecting on street corners. Part of the fun is doing because you arent supposed too. The idea that the police are going to arrive and trash some riders M/C is fanciful. It would cost far too much to police these paths that way and yes maybe it is a sticking plaster rather than a solution but I say again everybody cant be catered for and it's better than nothing.
The only place I have encountered motorcycles on cycle paths is in places where there are barriers. I have never encountered motorcycles on the paths where there aren't barriers. It is scary and dangerous to encounter them. But the barriers obviously don't help. Or maybe only Essex motorcyclists think they are a challenge to target

TBH, if they actually stopped motorcycles from accessing the paths, I could almost understand it.

And I'm not suggesting that having a safe and legal place for young motorcyclsits to ride will stop all illegal motorcycling. But it will stop casual offenders, and leave it to those who are deliberately setting out to do something illegal and anti-social, rather than just wanting a place to ride.

People used to say that it wasn't possible for the police to enforce laws against drink driving. That it was 'fanciful' to expect the police to do anything about it unless someone had a crash. If that can change, so can this.

I realize that police currently do not set illegal motorcycling as a high priority in most areas. But they deal with it quickly enough when illegal motorcycling occurs in a national park, or on someone's estate, or when people have been killed or injured. Google for 'illegal motorcycling bikes seized' or 'police seize mini motos'. Some councils have videoed having the bikes crushed, then published them on YouTube to discourage offenders.

And I'm sure that some users do welcome barriers. But, I spoke to people in Essex about these things, and only a tiny minority of people actually wanted them. What I found was that when I asked people about them, I was regaled with stories about pensioners being rescued from them. Not just a few people, either. Anything from wheeled shopping bags to mobility scooters stuck in them.

I do realise that not many people hate them as passionately as I do, but I don't think that it is possible to cycle with children in the UK without developing a passionate hatred for these things. And IMO, our cycle paths should be designed for the most vulnerable users; the very people they curently exclude.

Why aren't barriers like this required in other countries? I have never seen them in the USA, Norway, Germany, Austria, Belgium, Sweden, Canada, Mexico, Denmark, or any other place I've cycled. Only in the UK.

It seems truly odd I've never encountered motorcycles on any path with these barriers. What's even stranger is that it is apparently Ok for all users of these paths to be subjected to speeding scramblers (yes 'speeding'. It isnt the point to pootle along on these things and it wont be just scramblers. Have you thought about quad bikes too or any petrol vehicle capable of entry?) and the risk of injury they may cause to anyone else simply because they inconvenience us. And that's my point. It isnt all about us. That's what gets us a bad name.

These barriers are not everywhere. I've only ever seen them on the C2C routes. I cant recall seeing them anywhere else but that doesnt mean there arent any. But have you considered that their installation is only in places where petrol driven vehicles are a real problem? As I said someone must have done their homework. If it were carte blanche they'd be on all cycle paths.

If legislation and policemen in cars made any difference to speeders in vehicles why are there speed bumps and traffic calming measures in use? Is it because they are most cost effective? There cant be many motorists that dont feel the same about these measures too yet I would guess that most motorists see them as a necessary evil for the benefit of all road users.

What's surprised me in this thread is the total lack of public spiritedness among some cyclists. What's wrong for us apparently should not be allowed sums it up.
Syndicate content

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