Cyclecraft is "destroying" UK cycling

[blockend]

Simply a response to the idea cyclists rode on the gutter before Cyclecraft. I didn't bring up the idea of doffing a cap to motorists, I'm merely pointing out the horns of the cycle campaigner's dilemma a) we should adopt the same space as cars, b) aren't drivers crap. Something has to give in that picture. Presently it's numbers, with a dose of Something Ought To Be Done when the inevitable tragedies occur. The link writer made some fair points which deserve more than instant dismissal.

As for straw men, they're the father of ad hominem.

 

[Dragonwight]

The social democrats of the scandinavian countries are regarded as 'westernised' yet deal with anti-social behaviour, and other crime against the person and community in ways which cause the average Daily Wail reader to rent their clothes and tear their beards.

Let's stick to cycling rather than crime and punishment....

On the Isle of Wight car drivers routinely and generally give way to cyclists, smile and wave at them, allow them lots of space during overtakes, and drive considerately. Compare this, if you will, with Hampshire and Sussex where car drivers generally want, well... shooting to be honest.

Does this mean a high incidence of French genes amongst the natives of Vectis? Cos they certainly drive and behave towards cyclists like Frenchmen.

Fwiw in my opinion road cycling on the IoW, outside Newport, seems to me to be as near to Cycloutopia as anywhere in this green and pleasant land, and, trust me, that ain't because of segregation.

Your experience of island drivers is markedly different to my daily experience of them I have to say both on a cycle and in a car. I would have to say they are some of the worst drivers in the country accompanied by some of the worst roads. And i was born on the IOW and live here.

 

[MrHappyCyclist]

The ones who rode in the gutter then, as now, are generally the ones who take a laissez faire approach to where the pavement begins and highway ends and are untroubled by the distinction.

Oh dear. Have you any evidence whatsoever to support this (bigotted) opinion?

 

[blockend]

Oh dear. Have you any evidence whatsoever to support this (bigotted) opinion?

In what way is it bigoted, if that's the word you were looking for? A cyclist can only ride in the gutter as far as the first parked car then he/she has a decision to make. Once they've decided to pass on the right -leaving room in case of car doors opening- they're at the start of riding properly on the road, i.e. in a position that allows the free passage of any faster vehicle that isn't actively endangering them.

Habitual gutter users (snipes?) tend to move freely between pavement and road. It's virtually impossible to ride in the gutter for more than a few yards in city or suburban roads and not especially easy on country lanes. I fail to see any bigotry, merely logistics and the evidence of my own eyes.

 

[MrHappyCyclist]

In what way is it bigoted, if that's the word you were looking for?

Oh, woe is me! I made a typo!

A cyclist can only ride in the gutter as far as the first parked car then he/she has a decision to make. Once they've decided to pass on the right -leaving room in case of car doors opening- they're at the start of riding properly on the road, i.e. in a position that allows the free passage of any faster vehicle that isn't actively endangering them.

You answered your own question. Many inexperienced cyclists do precisely that: waiting at every parked car for a gap in the traffic, passing parked cars in the door-opening zone, getting off and walking in order to turn right off a multi-lane road, etc.

Habitual gutter users (snipes?) tend to move freely between pavement and road. It's virtually impossible to ride in the gutter for more than a few yards in city or suburban roads and not especially easy on country lanes. I fail to see any bigotry, merely logistics and the evidence of my own eyes.

Again, evidence? You haven't provided any.

 

[blockend]

Have you evidence riders wait behind parked cars for a gap in the traffic? I mean peer reviewed stuff pedants insist on because they don't believe their own eyes and need an academic paper to throw at people in internet debates?
We're back where I came in with stats proving what the hell you want them to.

 

[MrHappyCyclist]

Have you evidence riders wait behind parked cars for a gap in the traffic?

No, but then I am not accusing a whole load of people of committing a crime based on a stereotype that you apply to them on the basis of an unrelated behaviour. Choice of road position has nothing to do with pavement cycling.

In any case, I feel your stereotype does not stand up, based on my own experience; I see lots of cyclists riding in the gutter over drain grates and debris and cycling in the door zone, without their ever cycling on the pavement. Most pavement cyclists I see either never leave the pavement at all, or are so cocky that they just dive out into the middle of the road, jump red lights, and behave in anything but a timid manner.

 

[Richard Mann]

It's completely normal for people to ride about a metre from the kerb, get to a parked car then pull out suddenly without looking, cycle a metre from the car, then pull back in. Entirely legal.

Not entirely safe, because sometimes you will be hit from behind, or given a fright, clearly illegally, by someone overtaking you when there wasn't room.

Cyclecraft shows you how to avoid the risk of being hit from behind or cut up, but that's not a solution to the more general problem - it's too revenue-intensive (it costs too much money to train people, and you keep on having to do it).

The solution is providing a parking bay, or banning parking, or keeping traffic volume/speed down. Or in simple terms - provide a cycle lane on main roads.

Cyclecraft is a distraction. Getting around shouldn't require a masterclass.

 

[dellzeqq]

I'm saying the fact that people come together in one place to create a consensus doesn't make their conclusion right.
The net is festooned with examples of micro-logic, even Safespeed makes sense if you remove a sufficient number of social conditioners and read Clarkson before bedtime. In my experience the rigour with which a proposition is defended on web fora is inversely proportional to the likelihood of it making sense to the rest of the world.
Pretending to operate like a car while riding a bike in heavy traffic falls squarely into the category of 'extraordinary popular delusions and the madness of crowds'.

ahem! That' micro-logic. Try moving outwards and onwards from the safety and the use of streets and on to the consideration of public space, land values and urban form........

I'm merely pointing out the horns of the cycle campaigner's dilemma a) we should adopt the same space as cars, b) aren't drivers crap. Something has to give in that picture.

I cannot for the life of me see the logic in this. Taking the primary position (which is what I think you're getting at) is a defensive thing. That it also makes life more convenient for the cyclist is a bit of a bonus.

 

[Dan B]

I cannot for the life of me see the logic in this.

Really I'm not sure there is any. We're looking for a consistent statement of position and some evidence that it is a reasonable position to hold or to discuss, and we're attempting to read that into blockend's gnomic utterances. In fact what he's giving us is paintgun spatter shots at random viewpoints that excite his ire, delivered according to no discernable overall goal, but in the apparent hope that the resulting spatter of goop resonates emotionally with his readers.


Which is fine if that's your kind of thing, but clearly in this discussion doesn't seem to be going over so well.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Your experience of island drivers is markedly different to my daily experience of them I have to say both on a cycle and in a car. I would have to say they are some of the worst drivers in the country accompanied by some of the worst roads. And i was born on the IOW and live here.

Come and drive ride in Sussex and Surrey. You may change your opinion.

 

[Mad at urage]

Thats called m-a-n-n-e-r-s dear boy,or have you like a lot of others forgotten what they are ?

Manners? So "I'm sorry, I shouldn't have stopped there! I was in your way" when the choice was stop or ride under a lorry on the roundabout is manners? Offering to pay for the damage to the car that drove into the back of you when you legitimately stopped at a give-way sign is manners?

If you think that I think you need to get a new definition of m-a-n-n-e-r-s. Or perhaps that is the m-a-n-n-e-r-s which you as a motorist require of cyclists?

As a motorist myself, I would find it far better manners had the motorist in the case I refer to simply driven with basic courtesy and road sense.

Edit to add: I do get very annoyed about the suggestion that cyclists should, in any circumstances, be riding in the gutter. I have seen too many who believe this and seen the consequences of the close pass that this invites: Slipstream causes wobble, front wheel hits kerb and cyclist falls under following (also too close) car. The results are nasty and NO-ONE should be telling cyclists to ride in that position.

 

[MrHappyCyclist]

It's completely normal for people to ride about a metre from the kerb, get to a parked car then pull out suddenly without looking, cycle a metre from the car, then pull back in. Entirely legal.

Not entirely safe, because sometimes you will be hit from behind, or given a fright, clearly illegally, by someone overtaking you when there wasn't room.

I agree. I do see quite a few cyclists who never look back before pulling out. It seems weird that they put so much trust in following drivers to anticipate their actions.

Cyclecraft shows you how to avoid the risk of being hit from behind or cut up, but that's not a solution to the more general problem - it's too revenue-intensive (it costs too much money to train people, and you keep on having to do it).

The solution is providing a parking bay, or banning parking, or keeping traffic volume/speed down. Or in simple terms - provide a cycle lane on main roads.

Cyclecraft is a distraction. Getting around shouldn't require a masterclass.

I agree with all of the proposals you mentioned (provided the cycle lanes conform to the DfT guidance), but I still think it's sensible to have some training, such as the Bikeability scheme, in place. Even without the training, books like Cyclecraft provide useful advice - nothing more and nothing less. Even in the absence of parked cars, and speeding idiots, we still have to turn right, negotiate roundabouts, and all of the other stuff that is covered.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Cyclecraft is a distraction. Getting around shouldn't require a masterclass.

True. It shouldn't.

But 17000+ pedal cyclist injuries a year, including 100+ deaths, and 26000+ KSI road users a year suggests some form of defensive riding/driving education might be in order for ALL road users.

Then, given that motor vehicles currently kill 50+ pedestrians every year even though those peds were on the pavement or verge at the time of their fatal 'accident', I'd suggest cycle lanes on or off the carriageway might not be the entire answer either.

 

[blockend]

True. It shouldn't.

But 17000+ pedal cyclist injuries a year, including 100+ deaths, added 26000+ KSI road users a year suggests some form of defensive riding/driving education might be in order for ALL road users.

Then, given that motor vehicles currently kill 50+ pedestrians every year even though those peds were on the pavement or verge at the time of thier fatal 'accident', I'd suggest cycle lanes on or off the carriageway might not be the entire answer either.

You've hit the nub of things there GC. It's difficult to take issue with urban cycling as a combative, hair-trigger thrill because let's be clear, it is. What's harder to swallow is the oft repeated lie that anyone can do it and they'll come through the journey unscathed. Unless you adopt a proactive/ defensive/ in-yer-face mode of bike riding, you will come a cropper, sooner rather than later.

In Darwinian terms the riders currently on the roads are the ones who've evolved to cope with its trials. I don't believe most who can physically ride a bicycle have evolved to the extra level, nor should it be necessary to do so. Neither should those who have be setting the agenda. Once that reality sinks in to the campaigning mind, it's clear we shouldn't be forcing one size fits all strategies onto a variety of skill levels or road conditions. I don't see why utility cycling should be a physically or mentally elitist activity.