National Cycle Network - some paths not very good?

[ColinJ]

There's a chance you could make it doen then.

EXCEPT that there are usually people meandering about, and at this time of year there is going to be leaf mulch, moss and twigs on the cobbles, which will often be damp. The walls may have been repaired since I was last up there, and usually there ISN'T a fool driving a car or riding a motorbike up it (or even attempting to cycle up it!) but there are nearly always cars parked at the bottom and the road is usually open to traffic.

So, having chickened out and crashed on my one and only descent, I am not trying again!

I've never tried riding up it. If I ever get fit enough to give it a good go then I'll try it when the surface is clean and dry.

 

[classic33]

The last 50 feet are the worst, on two wheels.

 

[ColinJ]

The last 50 feet are the worst, on two wheels.

Indeed - after a lot of 15-20% you suddenly hit a drainage channel and then it is immediately a scary 25-30%. If you misjudged it you could take off when you hit the channel and see the path just drop away beneath you. If you didn't manage to keep your front wheel up when you landed you could easily be tossed over the bars and things would be very nasty...!

 

[classic33]

Indeed - after a lot of 15-20% you suddenly hit a drainage channel and then it is immediately a scary 25-30%. If you misjudged it you could take off when you hit the channel and see the path just drop away beneath you. If you didn't manage to keep your front wheel up when you landed you could easily be tossed over the bars and things would be very nasty...!

That's where you're going wrong, attempting it on only one wheel.

 

[ColinJ]

That's where you're going wrong, attempting it on only one wheel.

I never got that far... I lost my nerve by the time I'd drawn level with the little grave yard on the left at the top. (I think it's where they bury the cyclists who die attempting the descent! ) I dabbed the front brake and went straight over the bars. Fortunately I managed to grab the handrail on the wall as I fell so I only ended up with a sore arm/shoulder!

 

[Andy in Germany]

There's a chance you could make it doen then.

Oh, you'll get down. Gravity will see to that...

 

[Aravis]

Good call.

I've mentioned this previously, but if I cycle less than a mile from home I can join NCN 66 which will take me all the way to Wetherby.
(For the purposes of this exercise, we'll ignore the fact that there is a significantly shorter route to Wetherby, virtually all on quiet and well tarmacked country lanes).
The first bit of 66 is straight forward on street cycling. It then turns a 90 degree corner onto a rough packed bridleway which is frequently overgrown and unsuitable for a road bike. This deposits you onto a large and busy office / retail park road network.
Across this and then eyes peeled for the almost hidden turning, virtually on the roundabout that takes traffic from the office / retail park onto the motorway.
It's then a shocking poorly surfaced climb up a steep muddy slope onto another bridleway, which has a horse gate thing at the top, then round a couple of narrow turns (hope there are no horses about!) and onto the bridleway proper, which is fairly well packed earth and normally in reasonable condition, the odd few puddles excepted.
This takes you to a junction - NCN 66 turns right over a steeply arched bridge over the M1. (Were you allowed to go straight on and then left you could descend across a field and join another existing bridleway (and traffic free route) to where you're heading, but this missing link is a footpath so no bikes allowed )
Instead you cross the bridge and descend into woods on the bridleway which is a fun ride on an MTB (if there are no peds / dogs about), but again totally unsuitable for a road bike. This brings you out onto a short stretch of cinder road, which soon becomes tarmac and you're then on the road for well over a mile, including a relatively busy section used as a rat run over the motorway (this is also part of the west Yorkshire Cycle Route, something that appears to be a local council initiative and nothing to do with Sustrans).
Eventually you reach a right turn down a farm access road (gated) which is where you'd arrive opposite if the earlier mentioned route was available to you.
Down the smoothly surfaced access road to another gate and you're then onto a rocky rutted bridleway which climbs up and is definitely a no-go for an MTB.
This levels off and continues to be rocky, rutted and potholed / puddled for some distance (still good fun on an MTB) before reaching here:
View attachment 438448
You can see how muddy it is - and this was after a fairly dry spell. You can just make out where a small stream runs to the side of the route and this regularly overflows.
The route goes through the tunnel which has an inch or two of standing water in it for much of the year, more in winter, and is unlit and curves off to one side so you need lights, no matter how sunny it is.
Out the other side the standing water is normally deeper and muddier and this continues for a couple of hundred yards beyond the tunnel in all but the driest spells.
It's then decent-ish packed earth for a good way, before turning back to a rocky / rutted surface where it drops down into Aberford.
This was the bike at the end of this section:
View attachment 438447
The route now takes to the road, through the village and then running parallel to the A1(M) for around two miles mainly uphill to Bramham Crossroads, which is a large and busy roundabout where the A64 crosses the A1(M) which you'll need to negotiate at least 4 slip roads depending on your choice of direction.
Shortly after the roundabout you have a choice of staying on the fast road, or taking to the parallel shared path. Bramham is around 2 miles north.

Once in Bramham NCN 66 continues as a shared path separated from the A1(M) by acoustic fencing, with an interesting and unavoidable dogleg on a flinty / rutted farm track, before taking to another bridleway to where the A659 crosses under the A1(M). Negotiate that roundabout safely and it's another shared tarmac path down the hill to Wetherby where after negotiating another large roundabout you're back on the road to get into the town.

So, most of the route on tarmac (and a significant amount of that on busy roads) making it a bind to be on an MTB with knobbly tyres, but linked by other sections that are effectively impassable on a road bike.
And nothing on the Sustrans website (or anywhere else that I can see) to advise what the surface will be before you get there.

According to the report published yesterday, none of the 5273 off-road miles of the network have been classified as "very poor".

On the other hand, 62% of the 11302 miles which are on-road are "very poor". It therefore follows, in the opinion of the report compilers, that the abomination you've featured is better than any of these thousands of miles of road.

Opinions are what they are; Sustrans doesn't appear to speak for me.

 

[rogerzilla]

Sustrans wouldn't get a penny of my.money voluntarily but it gets a lot of taxpsyers' money. I want smooth tarmac and they're still building for the MTB generation.

 

[srw]

On the other hand, 62% of the 11302 miles which are on-road are "very poor". It therefore follows, in the opinion of the report compilers, that the abomination you've featured is better than any of these thousands of miles of road.

YOu could always do the unthinkable and read the original report, where you'll find that "Inadequate surface accounts for 28% of the issues, with 831 miles of traffic-free Network currently unsuitable for a narrow-tyred hybrid bike to pass comfortably". And that one respondent, asked what they would change if they could only change one thing said "Better surface. Ours is a mud bath so you can’t go anywhere useful on it – like work or meetings where you have to turn up looking clean. It’s leisure only on the mountain bike.". And that "Adopt a new quality standard to ensure path widths and surfaces are built for everyone." is an outcome of the review.

You'll also discover that "69% of the issues for on-road sections are related to traffic safety – these are roads where the traffic speeds and/or flows are too high to be deemed acceptable for an unaccompanied 12-year-old to cycle alone. This traffic safety assessment has been based on a comprehensive and empirical traffic speed and flow dataset using actual vehicle numbers and speeds from commercial fleets, GPS, cell towers and mobile devices." And they've recognised that where they can't reduce traffic speeds or reroute they need to be able to decommission sections.

You can disagree with the proposed standard, but it is what it is - the aim is to provide routes that inexperienced cyclists who are not particularly traffic aware can ride safely. The proposed on-road solutions - to reduce speed on a lot of roads - will benefit even the grey-haired grumpy old men who seem to make up the majority of CC's users these days.

 

[Andy in Germany]

The proposed on-road solutions - to reduce speed on a lot of roads - will benefit even the grey-haired grumpy old men who seem to make up the majority of CC's users these days.

I don't have grey hair.

 

[swansonj]

I don't have grey hair.

I do. And I am grumpy about Sustrans. But I like to think it’s because I see the bigger picture. By plugging the concept of a National Cycle Network that is different from (a) roads and (b) bridleways, they give a strong nudge to the surrender of the concept that (a) roads and (b) bridleways are part of the shared public infrastructure at the disposal of cyclists (and pedestrians). Short term gains at the risk of a potentially much bigger long term loss.

 

[Aravis]

YOu could always do the unthinkable and read the original report, where you'll find that "Inadequate surface accounts for 28% of the issues, with 831 miles of traffic-free Network currently unsuitable for a narrow-tyred hybrid bike to pass comfortably".

The report which I was quoting from. Sure, Sustrans recognises the problem of "inadequate" surfaces, but when they imply that a track which is practically impassable due to deep mud or standing water is less bad than a road on which motor vehicles might pass at over 40mph, they show themselves to be out of touch with a large proportion of cyclists.

I'm not disagreeing with the standards Sustrans are using, just pointing out that they're relevant only to a subset of cyclists. But Sustrans always seems to want to give the impression it speaks for everyone.

 

[Andy in Germany]

I do. And I am grumpy about Sustrans. But I like to think it’s because I see the bigger picture. By plugging the concept of a National Cycle Network that is different from (a) roads and (b) bridleways, they give a strong nudge to the surrender of the concept that (a) roads and (b) bridleways are part of the shared public infrastructure at the disposal of cyclists (and pedestrians). Short term gains at the risk of a potentially much bigger long term loss.

I see the problem. We are fortunate here that we have a dense network of Feldwege which are similar in concept to a Bridleway, except that they are generally paved, or at least gravel, and open to all non-motorised traffic. They are also all open for public use unless there's a good reason to close them off.

This means that in rural areas there's generally a traffic free or at least minimal traffic route between towns. In our area it is even more direct than the road, although that's more luck than judgement...

 

[srw]

Sustrans always seems to want to give the impression it speaks for everyone.

By conducting surveys which demonstrate that the majority of people want traffic free riding?

Like it or not (and like @swansonj I'm not entirely convinced, though if I take his words at face value unlike him I've noticed that the national cycle network is being proposed as a shared use supplement to, not an alternative to roads, bridle ways and other shared use ways to get around) the charity whose name my phone refuses to let me type is speaking to, and for, the general population who want to ride and walk more, not the minority of us who already cycle regularly. And in particular not to the subset of that minority who are agitated enough to post about it online.

 

[NorthernDave]

For clarity, I don't particularly want to see a cycle network of pristine motorway smooth tarmac cutting through the countryside.
And I quite enjoy riding the bridleway sections I've outlined up thread - when I'm on the right bike, because I know local non-NCN routes that minimise time on the road to get to them.

What we need is a bit of logic being applied, routes being colour coded based on surface / accessibility, so people know what they will find when they get there rather than getting stuck and unable to proceed, or finding themselves on the wrong bike.