Vehicular Cycling Reality

[Jezston]

WVM was definately out of order in that clip with all the evidence recorded for future reference. However confronting drivers and telling them they're on camera and being reported to the police could backfire if the driver is some nut job who flips and gets violent.

Interested to hear if that has ever happened to anyone.

 

[snorri]

Anyway, a couple more budgets and only the rich or politicians will be able to afford petrol.

Drivers were saying that when petrol hit the 5 shillings per gallon (25pence for 4.5 litres)mark, yet a lot more of us can afford to drive nowadays.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Greg. I see I will not convince you. Thanks.

what is it that you are trying to convince me of?

you raise a complete strawman, comparing a stretch of the A1 with the road in your clip. I could simply have just called you out at that point.

Instead, trying to better understand your point I went along with your invitation to advise a presumably hypothetical cyclist in a hypothetical situation, of your choosing ,which included reference to a 'direct route'. I chose to disregard your requirement for a direct route and went for a pleasant one instead. As I would in real life 95 times out of 100.

I provided said advice in a lighthearted way (see the pisstake of the accent I used to have as a kid) and you use it in your next post as a demonstration that there is a de facto ban on cycling on the A1. Feels like someone trying to wind someone up to me....

Cyclists can and do use the A1. I've seen them do it. I prefer not to. Some cyclists can use such roads in safety. But can ALL cyclists? Of course not.

If you are suggesting that to encourage people to take up cycling we need, as a high priority, to install off carriageway cycle paths alongside the A1 then I'd have to say that yes, you have failed to convince me.

 

[middleagecyclist]

Would you not agree that the very definition of a 'cycle lane' propogates the notion that a cyclist belongs only in that space ?

No. Just that a cycle lane should only be for cyclists (rather than shoot, potholes, grids, glass, parked cars, delivery vans, etc). Generally, I think most cycle paths are an abomination, although in some places I would be happy if the provision of a high quality, segregated cycle path went hand in hand with the restriction of cyclists using NSL dual carriageways. I certainly do not want to see/hope to achieve cyclists becoming restricted from the highway in general if that is what you are angling at?

 

[middleagecyclist]

WVM was definately out of order in that clip with all the evidence recorded for future reference. However confronting drivers and telling them they're on camera and being reported to the police could backfire if the driver is some nut job who flips and gets violent.

I'd like to see him try!! Anyway, I have been dealing with potentially violent people for years and I've never been assaulted yet. Don't see any reason to stop now.

 

[middleagecyclist]

I have my opinions too, and I think you guys could be considerably more constructive, rather than willy waving. Lots of posters comment on what a fighty place commuting is, and that it's often not a pleasant place to hang out. All of us must take some of the blame for that.

I'll accept my portion.

 

[middleagecyclist]

I wouldn't be so sure on that one! I've been told to "get in the f**king cycle lane*" when in middle of the road marked for a right hand turn.

Me too! Crap infrastructure which is neither fish nor fowl IMO. Kind of confuses some motorists.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

I'll accept my portion.

and me mine.

and apologies for the troll comment. It felt like it, you've explained it wasn't, I accept I misinterpreted.

I think we actually agree on more than we disagree on but we disagree strongly on the stuff we don't agree on. Let's agree to differ on that and concentrate on the stuff we value in common.

Greg

 

[middleagecyclist]

and me mine.

and apologies for the troll comment. It felt like it, you've explained it wasn't, I accept I misinterpreted.

I think we actually agree on more than we disagree on but we disagree strongly on the stuff we don't agree on. Let's agree to differ on that and concentrate on the stuff we value in common.

Greg

I too think we are not that far apart. Just sometimes a narrow gap can be a deep one I suppose. And thanks for apologising re the troll comment. I can be quite argumentative when I feel I need to but never want to do it just for the sake of it. I apologise for getting too carried away with my self.

Happy pedalling.

 

[Linford]

No. Just that a cycle lane should only be for cyclists (rather than shoot, potholes, grids, glass, parked cars, delivery vans, etc). Generally, I think most cycle paths are an abomination, although in some places I would be happy if the provision of a high quality, segregated cycle path went hand in hand with the restriction of cyclists using NSL dual carriageways. I certainly do not want to see/hope to achieve cyclists becoming restricted from the highway in general if that is what you are angling at?

Now to play devils advocate here...

The thing with this mentality is that for drivers, the gutter is a place to put the car when it isn't being driven, and to avoid when driving. Cycle lanes are perceived as constricting the lane width and even though only a dotted white line in most cases will make the drivers feel like they have to drive to the apex of the road and thus risk putting them into conflict with oncoming vehicles who are also being squeezed by a cycle lane on their side of the road. It also make them think that just because they are driving between the lines, they have carte blanch to whistle past the elbows of riders at 40mph with impunity - you stay in your lane, and I'll stay in mine etc etc. Cycles are vehicles at the end of the day and should be treated with just as much respect for the space they move in as a car, bus, lorry, horse etc

Peds also get resentful about cycle paths as they feel that the pavements which were exclusively their domain has been taken away and which they have replaced with a 'shared space' and they now have to contend with faster moving cyclists who may not realise how intimidating it is when they are walking with the toddlers or dog to have someone come blasting past at 20mph in their quest to beat their personal best (etc) On top of this, a cycle path means that every time it crosses a side road, the cyclist is forced to stop and give way to cars turning into it as they have ceased to be part of the traffic using the main carraigeway and have become effectively wheeled pedestrians.

Like the appraisal or not, not everyone will see it the same as a keen cyclist as they all claim these spaces for their own modes

 

[middleagecyclist]

Instead of what? being knocked off your bike by the same idiot & run over by him & the vehicle behind? please get a clue! As I said my wife finds that using primary at 5-10mph is most effective. If the guy is on 'leaning on the horn' 5cm from your back tyre that means he's following you, rather hitting you with his wing mirror at 30 or 40mph.

Do I follow you correctly? Are you advocating primary at all times then? Surely not when there is room to ride in secondary (cycle lane or not) and safely let faster vehicles pass?

Anyway, almost the last place I want some immature and arrogant driver is a few cm behind me (the last place being on top of me!). I'd much rather they were in front where I can see them!

 

[Linford]

Do I follow you correctly? Are you advocating primary at all times then? Surely not when there is room to ride in secondary (cycle lane or not) and safely let faster vehicles pass?

Anyway, almost the last place I want some immature and arrogant driver is a few cm behind me (the last place being on top of me!). I'd much rather they were in front where I can see them!

They have to make that decision whether it is safe to attempt an overtake though. If you assume the position of the primary on the approach to a pinch point, then you proactively manage that situation (IE: - is it is blatantly obvious you both won't squeeze through it together, and you get there first, then they have to wait behind you)

 

[middleagecyclist]

They have to make that decision whether it is safe to attempt an overtake though. If you assume the position of the primary on the approach to a pinch point, then you proactively manage that situation (IE: - is it is blatantly obvious you both won't squeeze through it together, and you get there first, then they have to wait behind you)

Thanks Linford

Of course I would go with Primary if needed and make the traffic wait behind if it was safest. Still not something I enjoy doing when moving slowly though.

I did that a few weeks ago at a pedestrian island PP. Checked behind, one car coming up fast but lots of room and time so I clearly moved into primary and took the lane. He (pretty sure it was a he with the driving) then went past the island on the opposing lane!

Anyway, how about this? If a cyclist was going up a 1 in 4 narrow 60 mph limit road and moving at say 8 mph and there was a segregated path of great quality running alongside would you still suggest taking primary or using the path?

 

[GrasB]

Thanks Linford

Of course I would go with Primary if needed and make the traffic wait behind if it was safest. Still not something I enjoy doing when moving slowly though.

I did that a few weeks ago at a pedestrian island PP. Checked behind, one car coming up fast but lots of room and time so I clearly moved into primary and took the lane. He (pretty sure it was a he with the driving) then went past the island on the opposing lane!

Anyway, how about this? If a cyclist was going up a 1 in 4 narrow 60 mph limit road and moving at say 8 mph and there was a segregated path of great quality running alongside would you still suggest taking primary or using the path?

Depends on the path, typically I take the road in primary & don't have problems! Your premise is that there's a problem, the fact of the matter is that most people find there isn't a problem.

 

[middleagecyclist]

Depends on the path, typically I take the road in primary & don't have problems! Your premise is that there's a problem, the fact of the matter is that most people find there isn't a problem.

Maybe there is no problem for "most people" that cycle but what about those that won't consider cycling in such an environment and so don't cycle at all?