Pro red light jumpers

[400bhp]

I use it and I've absolutely no idea why there is a No Cyclilng sign there, although in fairness the blue cycle route sign is about 80 yards before that and directs you round the plot of land you can see in the background. In order to negotiate the roundabout without using the bridge you would have to pass on the inside of the white truck in the image. At a rough guess, around 75% of the traffic in the left hand lane is taking the 1st exit onto the M60 and it's fairly common for traffic in the right hand lane to (wrongly) take that route as well which would mean the cyclists could be completely blind to that driver and vice-versa. Having seen a number of near misses at this junction, frankly it scares the living c**p out of me. Maybe I need to be braver. The surface over the bridge is quite good and although you do come down onto a 3 lane per side dual carriageway it is into a wide parking area which can be followed for some distance before merging with the traffic.

As for antagonising drivers, those lights typically let around 4-5 vehicles at a time through on green and as a result tempers become frayed as the queues build, consequently almost as many will jump the lights as go through on green which (to my way of thinking) just raises the risk factor for cyclists there even further.

As for the "I pay my road tax brigade", although I know there is no longer any such thing, but as a neighbour said the other day: "Cost a ble**ing fortune to build that bridge and the t**ts don't use it." People with this kind of attitude often take out their frustration by trying to intimidate cyclists.

Really?

How do you know?

 

[fudgepanda]

Since when has there been a bridge for cyclists there?

Ridiculous argument "got in the way of traffic".

Jesus

The bridge is clearly visible in the photo above and has been there since the M60 was completed about 15 (a guesstimate)years ago. Think that's put that one to bed.

As for got in the way of traffic, well that's a matter of perspective. If you are a driver, and not a cyclist you will have a different point of view from a cyclist who doesn't drive. As for those who do both, that opinion could come somewhere in between.

Drivers will often look to rationalise whatever their woes are by blaming other types of road user. They blame trucks for holding them up on the Motorway while they're overtaking one another and I've often heard the argument that they shouldn't be allowed to overtake when the motorway is busy!

They curse bus/cycle/taxi lanes for making them late for work when leaving 5 or 10 minutes earlier would have avoided the problem in the first place.

Car drivers often move out aggressively to block motorcyclists (and probably cyclists too) when they are riding between lanes, not because they object to two-wheelers per se, but because they resent the fact that the bikers are making progress when they are not.

A learner driver who stalls and holds up traffic is physically fairly safe but is frequently then "cut up" by a driver behind who then overtakes aggressively which can be intimidating to a learner. Even pedestrians are at times intimidated by drivers even when they cross the road at a pedestrian crossing because the car driver objects to being held up for a minute.

This evening, at that very junction, there was a truck turning left onto the M60 while overtaking it in the right hand lane was a VW Golf. As the truck slowed to allow a cyclist to go ahead, the Golf turned left ahead of it to also join the M60. I couldn't see how close he came to killing the bloke on the bike, but it must have been pretty close as the wagon had to brake hard.

 

[fudgepanda]

Really?

How do you know?

First of all, the bloke I quoted is aggressive to virtually everyone else on the road, cyclists, motorcyclists and pedestrians are simply the most vulnerable.

Unfortunately I have also had to deliver a Death Notice on one occasion along with a Force Liasion Officer, which was to a family in Greater Manchester whose daughter had been killed while riding a cycle in London. I saw a copy of the interview that was conducted under caution in a Police Station. In it the driver displayed a lot of hostility towards the girl and blamed her for the collision despite the fact that he turned across her while she was riding on a straight road. He also said....."It wouldn't be so bad if she paid some ****** road tax. I won't go on.

I was simply describing a scenario that I'd witnessed and asking whether I was over-reacting. Although it would be quicker to follow the road rather than take the bridge, personally I'd take the bridge every time, others may choose the road. There's nothing illegal in following the road, and in fairness I've no idea if there have been any collisions between cyclists and vehicles but it looks too dodgy for me.