Pedestrian called 999 to report me cycling on a cycle path...

[BalkanExpress]

They work better when there's no line.

If there is a line cyclists have to keep to their side, (Highway code rule 62), but I have a recollection that pedestrians can use both sides, Incannot find the source, so I may be wrong.

 

[Alan O]

Round us, at the entry and exit for such paths, the two halves are marked by rumble strips. The pedestrian one has the corrugations transverse to the path, the cycling one they are longitudinal. If there are no pedestrians around, I will always prefer the transverse corrugations, so enter the path on the pedestrian side, and am quite likely to remain on it by default.

There's one like that near me, along a major A road - a section of the East Lancs road, A580. But the transverse and longitudinal strips are also repeated regularly (guessing at approx every 100 metres) so you're repeatedly riding over them. The longitudinal ones feel unsettling to me, especially on a narrow-wheel road bike, and I go for the ~6-inch smooth bit between the two as it seems safer. Ironically, this section of path is almost always otherwise deserted when I ride along it - I think I've only ever seen one other cyclist, and never any pedestrians.

 

[winjim]

Round us, at the entry and exit for such paths, the two halves are marked by rumble strips. The pedestrian one has the corrugations transverse to the path, the cycling one they are longitudinal. If there are no pedestrians around, I will always prefer the transverse corrugations, so enter the path on the pedestrian side, and am quite likely to remain on it by default.

There's one like that near me, along a major A road - a section of the East Lancs road, A580. But the transverse and longitudinal strips are also repeated regularly (guessing at approx every 100 metres) so you're repeatedly riding over them. The longitudinal ones feel unsettling to me, especially on a narrow-wheel road bike, and I go for the ~6-inch smooth bit between the two as it seems safer. Ironically, this section of path is almost always otherwise deserted when I ride along it - I think I've only ever seen one other cyclist, and never any pedestrians.

We discussed this on the forum a while ago. I think the longitudinal strips are dangerous; I was surprised by how many people disagreed with me.

 

[Alan O]

We discussed this on the forum a while ago. I think the longitudinal strips are dangerous; I was surprised by how many people disagreed with me.

Ah, didn't see that. And yes, I think there's a clear risk of throwing the front wheel to one side, and even a slight movement could cause a crash depending on position/direction/momentum.

 

[DaveReading]

If there is a line cyclists have to keep to their side, (Highway code rule 62), but I have a recollection that pedestrians can use both sides, Incannot find the source, so I may be wrong.

I may be wrong, too, but I have a feeling that as it's technically a public highway, pedestrians have a common law right to walk on any part of it.

 

[Lozz360]

In 1970s parlance when I was a lad, a racing bike , or "racer" was pretty much any bike with drop handlebars. Roughly equivalent to "road bike" these days.

We have many more micro-categories these days though. But, being old-fasioned, I still think "racer" when I see dropped bars and derailleur gears

Absolutely. In the 70s there were only two types of bikes. "Racers" (anything with drop bars) or "Roadsters" which were any bike that didn't have drop bars. They would be called hybrids today. Okay there was also the Raleigh Chopper which you would have referred to as just a Chopper but that was it.

 

[Mugshot]

which you would have referred to as just a Chopper

I seem to remember them being referred to as "Bloody dangerous!"

Particularly the gear shifter.

 

[Andy in Germany]

Round us, at the entry and exit for such paths, the two halves are marked by rumble strips. The pedestrian one has the corrugations transverse to the path, the cycling one they are longitudinal. If there are no pedestrians around, I will always prefer the transverse corrugations, so enter the path on the pedestrian side, and am quite likely to remain on it by default.

Thankfully German paths increasingly just continue over the road they are crossing. Much easier for everyone.

 

[MontyVeda]

If there is a line cyclists have to keep to their side, (Highway code rule 62), but I have a recollection that pedestrians can use both sides, Incannot find the source, so I may be wrong.

like i say... they work better when there is no line. There's no 'you're on the wrong side'. The cyclists tend to ride a lot more respectfully amongst the pedestrians rather than tearing down 'their half'.

 

[Tizme]

Where I live there are a lot of narrow lanes, no paths and not much traffic, when I approach a walker I usually say/shout "Hi, I'm cycling on your left/right" they will invariably jump to the same side! I've only had a few mutterings about a bell, to which I normally reply that I think a bell is less polite.

On my ride a couple of days ago I came across a lady leading her horse to a field with a second, unharnessed horse following in its' own good time. She was quite flustered when she saw me approach and very grateful when I stopped and said I would wait for her to sort the horses out, it took all of 2 minutes and I went on my way, all of us happy.

On the other hand, using a shared use path (something I rarely do, but for some reason the new bridge over the Taw at Barnstaple has incredibly narrow lanes and very impatient drivers) and a male pedestrian deliberately stepped in to my path, still haven't worked out why, I just moved across to the pedestrian side, gave him a "cheers mate" and a smile (I thought that would annoy him more than anything else - I could see he was itching for me to get aggressive) and carried on.

 

[Alan O]

On the other hand, using a shared use path (something I rarely do, but for some reason the new bridge over the Taw at Barnstaple has incredibly narrow lanes and very impatient drivers) and a male pedestrian deliberately stepped in to my path, still haven't worked out why, I just moved across to the pedestrian side, gave him a "cheers mate" and a smile (I thought that would annoy him more than anything else - I could see he was itching for me to get aggressive) and carried on.

Hehe, yes, I do something similar if anyone acts aggressively or shouts at me (it's rare, but it's usually from a car). I just reply with a cheery "morning" or "afternoon" as appropriate (or even as inappropriate - I'm terrible with time).

 

[clippetydoodah]

Shared paths can be challenging. I find shouting 'On your left' or 'Heads up' if they are on
their mobiles. The worst though are people with dogs off leads, or on extending leads.
It's so hard to predict what a dog will do. I've learnt my lesson recently and now I just
slow right down until I can pass the dog safely. The responsibility seems to be clearly
with the cyclist rather than the owners who of course, have perfect control over their
daft dogs at all times!

 

[mjr]

Hehe, yes, I do something similar if anyone acts aggressively or shouts at me (it's rare, but it's usually from a car). I just reply with a cheery "morning" or "afternoon" as appropriate (or even as inappropriate - I'm terrible with time).

It's very rare that I can distinguish whether a shout from a car is aggressive or not, so I usually just wave. Cars usually make far too much noise for their occupants to be heard. Maybe that's why so many of them seem so frustrated

 

[Andy in Germany]

It's very rare that I can distinguish whether a shout from a car is aggressive or not, so I usually just wave. Cars usually make far too much noise for their occupants to be heard. Maybe that's why so many of them seem so frustrated

I just assume they're encouraging me or expressing admiration of my manly cycling prowess and wave in acknowledgement.

 

[GuyBoden]

Given the option, I'd prefer to ride on a busy road than a shared path.