Omega Owners Forum
Chat Area => General Discussion Area => Topic started by: Mister Rog on 07 July 2017, 12:04:24
-
We do AirBnB, which is an online B&B booking service. I need to say that I am not a cyclist.
We have just had a young French lady staying with us, cycling from Southern France to Edinburgh around the coast of Ireland. This is part of what is known as Eurovelo 1 route. She's not doing the whole route but nevertheless it's quite an impressive undertaking
http://www.eurovelo.com/en/eurovelos/eurovelo-1
Normally in France and Europe she feels completely safe. On arrival in Plymouth, she was warned about the dangers of cycling in the UK.
Yesterday just outside Swansea a hatchback of young men overtook her, then fell back so she passed, and repeated this a number of times almost hitting her. Her comment was that she has never ever felt at risk or afraid while cycling, until yesterday. In the UK.
Bring on the mass cull
-
Big, hard lads eh? A young female cyclist, just about right for them to bully.
-
Perhaps they liked the rear view? :P
Ron.
-
It's Swansea, Rog.. you can't expect much, there!
-
It's Swansea, Rog.. you can't expect much, there!
But, but, but . . . . . they should be annoying the wooly ones, not nice French ladies minding their own business
-
Little tattood pricks in a Saxo with a big exhaust...... Where's that cull list? ??? ::)
-
Little tattood pricks in a Saxo with a big exhaust...... Where's that cull list? ??? ::)
Not the best place for a tattoo I would have thought. :)
-
It's Swansea, Rog.. you can't expect much, there!
But, but, but . . . . . they should be annoying the wooly ones, not nice French ladies minding their own business
;D ;D
-
It's not just the issue of the Swansea oiks, she thinks that we generally drive too fast and with little consideration for cyclists. And I agree. She's in Ireland soon and asked if they drive the same there.
I'm not sure if she's ever cycled in Germany, but if she thinks that we drive fast, they are real nutters
-
I'm not sure if she's ever cycled in Germany, but if she thinks that we drive fast, they are real nutters
I was going to say the same about Ireland! Last time I was there it seemed like 100% of the locals drive like every journey is a rally stage..
-
That's the way it should be. :y 8) ;D
As for bicycles, they shouldn't be on the roads anyway, they just keep getting in the way. :)
-
....... she thinks that we generally drive too fast and with little consideration for cyclists.
Like the French are good and considerate drivers..... ::) ;D
-
she thinks that we generally drive too fast and with little consideration for cyclists
Most cyclists reciprocate regarding motorists plus highway rules/laws
-
Sadly that is my experience also. I have cycled many miles in France and can confirm the distinct difference. Here in Germany and Austria (still on my holibobs) they are even better than the french towards cyclists. The amount of patience drivers here have for pedestrians and cyclists puts us to shame. The same regard is not given to fellow motorists though, sitting 2 feet from your bumper even though you are doing 10kmph more than the limit and overtaking a long line of traffic in lane 1.
I am thinking about doing a Lyon to London unsupported ride next year for charity, it's the Dover-London part which worries me.
-
The French are not very kind to Chris Froome, unless throwing piss over someone is an old French sign of respect ;D
-
she thinks that we generally drive too fast and with little consideration for cyclists
Most cyclists reciprocate regarding motorists plus highway rules/laws
I beg to differ. I find that motorists and cyclists generally cherry pick which rules are important to them and which deserve vehement hatred towards another person. If I follow every single rule in the highway code while cycling almost every motorist I come across will be breaking one rule or another. The ones that count for me on two wheels generally involve safe passing distances, giving way/overtaking correctly and observing infrastructure meant for cyclists (ASLs and lanes with a solid line for example). When I am driving a car the world I am in changes and so does the rules I consider important. The difference is that when you have Car Vs Cyclist and the latter makes the error, the cyclist loses. In the same scenario if the former makes the mistake, the cyclist loses. And there is the rub which is why you will find some cyclists adhere to some rules and not others, just like motorists but each in their own little bubble. Once you step outside and look at things from another perspective you get a whole new appreciation for how things are.
-
The French are not very kind to Chris Froome, unless throwing piss over someone is an old French sign of respect ;D
Oh they do not like him at all. Their tabloids are always full of some spurious allegation of mechanical doping, chemical doping, rule breaking, ad nauseum....
Thing is, I don't care for him either. He can be a pretty arrogant and obnoxious fella but he is a fantastic cyclist.
-
she thinks that we generally drive too fast and with little consideration for cyclists
Most cyclists reciprocate regarding motorists plus highway rules/laws
I beg to differ. I find that motorists and cyclists generally cherry pick which rules are important to them and which deserve vehement hatred towards another person. If I follow every single rule in the highway code while cycling almost every motorist I come across will be breaking one rule or another. The ones that count for me on two wheels generally involve safe passing distances, giving way/overtaking correctly and observing infrastructure meant for cyclists (ASLs and lanes with a solid line for example). When I am driving a car the world I am in changes and so does the rules I consider important. The difference is that when you have Car Vs Cyclist and the latter makes the error, the cyclist loses. In the same scenario if the former makes the mistake, the cyclist loses. And there is the rub which is why you will find some cyclists adhere to some rules and not others, just like motorists but each in their own little bubble. Once you step outside and look at things from another perspective you get a whole new appreciation for how things are.
Very well said.
I would also add that just like politics, there is some tribal thinking, a fixed and totally inflexible mindset about certain things. Like which party to vote for, and cars vs cyclists.
-
Personally I`m not against cyclists but you always get a bunch of idiots riding three abreast with scant regard for other road users and that is where a lot of hatred probably comes from along with ignorance of junctions and traffic lights.
You do get a few that go to single file when traffic is coming up behind them but they are a rare breed.
-
Yes, I think that is sheer bloody-mindedness; if they want to chat amongst themselves, get a car!
Ron.
-
Personally I`m not against cyclists but you always get a bunch of idiots riding three abreast with scant regard for other road users and that is where a lot of hatred probably comes from along with ignorance of junctions and traffic lights.
You do get a few that go to single file when traffic is coming up behind them but they are a rare breed.
It is actually safer for the cyclists and easier for you to overtake if they are 2-abreast as the line to pass is shorter :y
-
Personally I`m not against cyclists but you always get a bunch of idiots riding three abreast with scant regard for other road users and that is where a lot of hatred probably comes from along with ignorance of junctions and traffic lights.
You do get a few that go to single file when traffic is coming up behind them but they are a rare breed.
It is actually safer for the cyclists and easier for you to overtake if they are 2-abreast as the line to pass is shorter :y
Providing the road at that point is conducive to being able to pass...
-
I followed one today, as the road got twistier and had double white lines, he SLOWED DOWN to block me.
-
I followed one today, as the road got twistier and had double white lines, he SLOWED DOWN to block me.
Maybe the fact that the road became twistier and had double white lines, is an indication that that section of road is a little more hazardous, and the cyclist needed to slow down to make it safe for himself? Obviously it is safer to turn when going slower. How do you know the cyclist slowed to deliberately block you?
If he did, maybe he was doing you a favour. That's perfectly acceptable, a road user that is, commanding the road to make conditions safer for all, particularly a vulnerable cyclist. With double white lines you shouldn't be overtaking anyway.
GUFFER, as someone who is relatively new to road biking and who needed some tips, thank you for the links in your signature; very helpful. :y
-
And as Guffer alludes to it's perfectly acceptable to ride two abreast should conditions allow. It's in the Highway Code.
-
I saw two yesterday ride to the front of a queue of cars at red lights. When the lights changed they had a queue of about 15 cars behind them accelerating from 0 - 15 mph in 25 seconds or so, with the cars further back in the queue not even getting through the lights before they changed again. Good PR for the cycling community - not.
As for riding two (or more abreast), its often so dangerous its bordering on the kamikaze. Lots of narrow roads round these parts, and its common to come round a tight bend at moderate speeds to find two or three of them ambling along, having a chat, and assuming all car drivers will be slow and careful enough not to plough into them.
Even at 2omph, its still unnerving to come round a bend to find three of them at 5 mph, paying no attention to whats going on around them.
I'm sorry, but I'm becoming more convinced that our roads which are already overcrowded with too much powered traffic, is completely unsuitable for bicycles to be randomly scattered all over the roads as well.
As for horses on he roads. Please dont get me started. ::)
-
I followed one today, as the road got twistier and had double white lines, he SLOWED DOWN to block me.
Maybe the fact that the road became twistier and had double white lines, is an indication that that section of road is a little more hazardous, and the cyclist needed to slow down to make it safe for himself? Obviously it is safer to turn when going slower. How do you know the cyclist slowed to deliberately block you?
If he did, maybe he was doing you a favour. That's perfectly acceptable, a road user that is, commanding the road to make conditions safer for all, particularly a vulnerable cyclist. With double white lines you shouldn't be overtaking anyway.
GUFFER, as someone who is relatively new to road biking and who needed some tips, thank you for the links in your signature; very helpful. :y
No it isn't, its insufferably selfish. If a vehicle behind you is likely to normally travel twice as fast as you on your bicycle, its ludicrous to take a position to prevent it from passing you. The only reasonable thing to do is to get out of its way, and let it carry on its way.
If someone did it in a powered vehicle, they would probably be committing an offence. I don't see why it should be any different for cycles. But to me, it only reinforces the point that cycles shouldn't really be on the roads in this day and age.
-
As road users they are just as entitled as you to be there. If they happen to go a little slow for your liking, that's unfortunate, but tough. Sometimes I get stuck behind tractors, or in a jam, or a red light.
If the roads are narrow, maybe they are too narrow for a car to pass safely, in that case what's wrong with riding two abreast? It's safer for them and you, it stops overtaking. Think commanding the road.
If the roads are as twisty as you say, and you go round the bend at "moderate" speeds, maybe you're the one driving too fast and possibly in a dangerous fashion. After all you should be able to stop in the distance you can see.
If they assume car drivers will see them, car drivers should see them, through use of good observation, anticipation, road positioning, awareness and appropriate speed. If they don't it could be argued they shouldn't be driving.
-
I followed one today, as the road got twistier and had double white lines, he SLOWED DOWN to block me.
Maybe the fact that the road became twistier and had double white lines, is an indication that that section of road is a little more hazardous, and the cyclist needed to slow down to make it safe for himself? Obviously it is safer to turn when going slower. How do you know the cyclist slowed to deliberately block you?
If he did, maybe he was doing you a favour. That's perfectly acceptable, a road user that is, commanding the road to make conditions safer for all, particularly a vulnerable cyclist. With double white lines you shouldn't be overtaking anyway.
GUFFER, as someone who is relatively new to road biking and who needed some tips, thank you for the links in your signature; very helpful. :y
No it isn't, its insufferably selfish. If a vehicle behind you is likely to normally travel twice as fast as you on your bicycle, its ludicrous to take a position to prevent it from passing you. The only reasonable thing to do is to get out of its way, and let it carry on its way.
If someone did it in a powered vehicle, they would probably be committing an offence. I don't see why it should be any different for cycles. But to me, it only reinforces the point that cycles shouldn't really be on the roads in this day and age.
It is.
If in the circumstances you describe. Twisty, solid white lines. You shouldn't be overtaking anyway.
As for thinking cyclists shouldn't be on the road, whenever I hear that it sounds like the egocentric unreasoned ramblings of someone who dislikes the fact someone else is using the roads in a way not to their liking but ok nonetheless.
Cyclists have just as much right to be there as you.
-
Entitled - legally of course they are. I maintain though, that its common decency to get out of the way of someone who is obviously going to be normally travelling faster than you are.
Itsvery obvious with some cyclists that they take pleasure in holding up traffic behind them. They get a childish pleasure from it.
Commanding the road sounds like a phrase from the handbook of "Cycliists have the moral high ground". Trying to stop someone from overtaking you, because you deem it to be preferable,safer, or any other reason is ludicrous. Pull over and let them past.
I'm in no way driving too fast or remotely dangerously. Hence I haven't ploughed into any of these groups of cyclists. Its just disconcerting and annoying to come round a bend and have to anchor up then sit behind them for as long as they want you to sit behind them, just because they can.
If they assume drivers will see them, bearing in mind their vulnerability, they are people who are not long for this world, unless the are lucky.
I know this as a motorcyclist from 1975 - 2010.
-
I didn't describe anything twisty with solid white lines. ::)
-
I didn't describe anything twisty with solid white lines. ::)
My mistake, it was scimmy man. But what I said still stands.
It seems like a lot of ppl have hang ups about cyclists. If ppl don't like them that much why don't they just keep themselves right and accept the shortcomings of others? A sure sign of intelligence.
As a driver and cyclist I know which group behaves more responsibly on the road. Perhaps motorists (not all of course) should put their self importance to one side and understand the vulnerability of cyclists.
-
Defensive positioning is fine, do it in trucks all day long, especially at roundabouts/junctions.
It is perfectly legal to overtake on double white lines under certain conditions... Not least to safely pass a slower vehicle/obstruction ::)
129
Double white lines where the line nearest you is solid. This means you MUST NOT cross or straddle it unless it is safe and you need to enter adjoining premises or a side road. You may cross the line if necessary, provided the road is clear, to pass a stationary vehicle, or overtake a pedal cycle, horse or road maintenance vehicle, if they are travelling at 10 mph (16 km/h) or less.
Laws RTA 1988 sect 36 & TSRGD regs 10 & 26
Crack on.
-
Crack on? :(
If as described the roads are twisty, with solid white lines, I can only reiterate that someone shouldn't be overtaking, unless they want to feature on cyclist's camera compilation on YouTube entitled 'douchebag drivers part 126
I don't think I've ever seen a cyclist doing less than 10 mph in such conditions. I generally go faster than a lot of cars when I'm cycling round urban areas.
Clearly alot of drivers have hate to others on the road from their more important than you attitude. If car drivers don't like the roads and conditions on them, get off them.
There, cracked! ;)
-
I'll be sure to wave to you when you're stuck in a jam in your gas guzzling box, as I pass with my thigh muscles bulging 8)
-
That would involve visiting the north east... :D
-
GUFFER, as someone who is relatively new to road biking and who needed some tips, thank you for the links in your signature; very helpful. :y
You Sir, are very welcome. I am not an official instructor but I have a lot of experience cycling across the UK and France in different situations, bike mechanics, etc so if you have any questions just fire away :y
-
Entitled - legally of course they are. I maintain though, that its common decency to get out of the way of someone who is obviously going to be normally travelling faster than you are.
I often find myself walking faster than many people in town, so I should barge them out of the way because I am faster, bigger and more entitled than they are?
-
Crack on? :(
If as described the roads are twisty, with solid white lines, I can only reiterate that someone shouldn't be overtaking, unless they want to feature on cyclist's camera compilation on YouTube entitled 'douchebag drivers part 126
I don't think I've ever seen a cyclist doing less than 10 mph in such conditions. I generally go faster than a lot of cars when I'm cycling round urban areas.
Clearly alot of drivers have hate to others on the road from their more important than you attitude. If car drivers don't like the roads and conditions on them, get off them.
There, cracked! ;)
This is a sticky point in the highway code and it illustrates how out of date it is. I says that you can cross the double white line for a slow moving vehicle such as a cyclist if they are travelling slower than 10mph. Now, even on the hills I barely get below that speed but do I want a motorist stuck behind me for several miles while they stick to the letter of the code? Nope, defo no way. It is about sharing the space. Some can, some cannot. Some misinterpret a helpful gesture as a somewhat spiteful move.
There is a rather difficult road near me where you have a steep climb with a very blind summit and a chicane to boot. It's an old B road but well looked after so the motorists give it some welly. As you approach the chicane you are doing barely 8mph and you have a possible scenario of a fast moving motor vehicle misjudging the situation and thinking that they can go for it. Now as a cyclist you are in front and sitting higher so you can just about see over the summit to see if it is clear, the driver cannot but you know that some of them would risk it and put you in danger. If it is not clear you have a really bad scenario unfolding. Now this is where it gets interesting because it can require a big set of balls to take the Primary position (centre of the lane) to block said vehicle (with enough notice and not so as to cause heavy braking) with such a speed differential and a vehicle closing in on you behind you (that you cannot see). So I also put my hand out to indicate stop, I make the deliberate gesture of craning my neck over the horizon and keep my hand up to say Stop. Now at this point drivers sometimes gets very irate until they see said vehicle thunder past in the opposite direction and you move over to let the driver behind you through and gesture thanks to them.
This is what I mean when I talk about people misunderstanding other people's actions on the road. It is easy to understand why a motorist does something, because you are one yourself and you have likely been in a similar situation once. If you have never cycled* you cannot fully comprehend the actions a cyclist will take to make their ride safer, such as slowing down through a twisty section or riding in the middle of the road where the traffic island creates a space that is too narrow for a car to pass safely.
So, can we leave our opinions of that one/two/three bellends we came across one day and who we still channel our anger towards and talk about this rationally? I think that there is value in proper discussions on the topic rather than bleating on about 'this guy did me wrong!' (sob sob, woe is me sh!te) ?
Please? ;)
*riding a bmx when you 6 doesn't count, I mean doing hundreds if not thousands of km a year on a bike. :y
-
Road racing on the local dual carriageway always causes issues... Cutting/straightlining a roundabout on a pushbike at 25-30 mph on a busy nsl dual carriageway is suicidal, yet I experience thus scenario on every roundabout between Crawley and Horsham every Sunday morning between March and October...
Like the red light jumpers in Lundun,it is this sort of behaviour that riles other road users...
No different to suicidal Sunday motorbicyclists...
-
A question for the serious cyclists on here: why, when they are smartly togged up in lycra, do the never seem to have mudguards on their bikes, especially not on the rear - thereby leaving a great sh*t-streak all up their backsides in dad weather, ruining the "image"?
Ron.
-
Personal choice? ???
-
Dr G, the hjghway code says to cycle around the outside of a roundabout and that motorists should give way to cyclists crossing the junction that they are exiting on....... yeah right! Like that's ever going to happen!
I try to keep to the lane if traffic is busy and i am, err, hoofing it. If the traffic is heavy i will try to keep my speed up anyway but i will absolutely take the lane and robustly defend my position. If there is no traffic and i am hitting it at speed then i will take it like a motorist does ;)
-
And here is today's latest story about deliberate attacks on cyclists. This happened at the weekend. If you like have a gander at Road.cc's "close pass of the day" feature. The motorcyclist passing at over 100mph leaving just inches is particularly scary.
http://road.cc/content/news/225744-video-teens-push-bike-path-dunwich-dynamo-riders-causing-crash
-
Dr G, the hjghway code says to cycle around the outside of a roundabout and that motorists should give way to cyclists crossing the junction that they are exiting on....... yeah right! Like that's ever going to happen!
I try to keep to the lane if traffic is busy and i am, err, hoofing it. If the traffic is heavy i will try to keep my speed up anyway but i will absolutely take the lane and robustly defend my position. If there is no traffic and i am hitting it at speed then i will take it like a motorist does ;)
Agreed, I will always stay in lane unless I am 100% certain that I am the only vehicle within 100 yards of the roundabout... however trying to cut the roundabout with a car in lane two immediately next to you is simply begging to die... even at 25-30 mph, the cyclist is going straight into an ambulance...
-
And here is today's latest story about deliberate attacks on cyclists. This happened at the weekend. If you like have a gander at Road.cc's "close pass of the day" feature. The motorcyclist passing at over 100mph leaving just inches is particularly scary.
http://road.cc/content/news/225744-video-teens-push-bike-path-dunwich-dynamo-riders-causing-crash
Not sure about the motorbike clip... yes he was opening it up as he passed through the nsl, but was nearer to the white line than to the cyclists... I suspect the biggest issue was the surprise factor rather than the manoeuvre itself. Would I be happy if it were me? Probably not, but have been passed by bikes travelling much faster and closer in a car.
Urban cycling makes a degree of sense, but recreational road cycling is an accident waiting to happen. Not questioning the legal entitlement, but at some point, self preservation must surely come into play :-\
-
Fellas, fellas.. fear not.
When the only things legally allowed to use the roads are self driving vehicles, bicycles will be banned just like everything else. Then there'll be one less thing for you all to give yourself an early heart attack about on an internet forum ;)
-
Fellas, fellas.. fear not.
When the only things legally allowed to use the roads are self driving vehicles, bicycles will be banned just like everything else. Then there'll be one less thing for you all to give yourself an early heart attack about on an internet forum ;)
That'll be when they've prised the keys to the Westfield from my rigour-morticed fingers, then. :y
Or maybe I'll have taken up horse riding? They're self-driving. ::)
-
Crack on? :(
If as described the roads are twisty, with solid white lines, I can only reiterate that someone shouldn't be overtaking, unless they want to feature on cyclist's camera compilation on YouTube entitled 'douchebag drivers part 126
I don't think I've ever seen a cyclist doing less than 10 mph in such conditions. I generally go faster than a lot of cars when I'm cycling round urban areas.
Clearly alot of drivers have hate to others on the road from their more important than you attitude. If car drivers don't like the roads and conditions on them, get off them.
There, cracked! ;)
Exactly describes the very busy main road between Fleet and Yateley. It is twisty with double white lines, so cyclists climbing in the uphill sections will mainly be doing less than 10mph and there are two blind bends that are totally unsuitable for overtaking on but in between several shallow left-right bends which have enough visibility to do so. Like all sensible driving uncommon sense required. :y :y :y
What motorists need to remember is in a collision it is ALWAYS the cyclist that loses and is injured as the motorist has a steel protection cell all around them. This is why I have very little time for arrogant motorists who have no patience with cyclists where they have been held up for 10ms in their desperate dash to get home as fast as possible to DO NOTHING. Now if cyclists behave like idiots and some do, then I don't have a problem with them inviting Darwin to win.
Pelican crossings are particularly dangerous in the Sandhurst area where about 1 in 10 don't see the red lights and don't slow down in the slightest or stop. :(
-
I generally treat cyclists like horses, ie they are slow and unpredictable so it's best to give them a wide berth! ::) ;D
My 2 observations about cyclists are however:
1) Round here there are lots of twisty A & B roads where the trees hang over the road casting deep shadows, and it gets my goat whenever and often I see someone clad in dark lycra. (or a Barbour jacket etc) ::) Wear some hi viz FFS it might save your life!! :y
2) As slow road users it would be nice if cyclists showed some consideration for their fellow travellers, and if they are holding up a long line of traffic they should pull over and let everyone go by. Tractors and horses generally do, why not cyclists? ::)
-
Both occasions I was knocked off I was wearing hi viz, full lights (one was in the daytime but I still had them on) and a helmet:
1) Car overtook and the immediately turned left, no indication, cue a short flight over the top of said car in to the road. Apparently I wasn't visible (with 2 red lights facing rear, one flashing and one flashing front light) and I should have given way. I didn't even have time to brake.
2) Turning right at a roundabout, road position good, no other vehicles around me to obscure my visibility and had eye contact. Wheels weren't turning (good tip for cyclists that, watch the wheels at junctions) all of a sudden car speeds forward, cue a low speed collision with me splayed on the bonnet. Apparently he didn't see me!
+about 300 near misses over the past 10 years (by near miss I mean that I had to brake heavily or swerve to avoid an accident). Hydraulic disc brakes are now a must for me (ruddy awesome for stopping when some whoopsit decides to pull out in front of you.
I always follow the rules. I never go through a red light, always have at least 1 light, normally 2 in case one fails, helmet, hi-viz. I use my road position sensibly to make things safer for all of us (just trying to preserve my life and your license peeps) I let cars and trams past when it is narrow and an opportunity strikes. I will use a safe cycle path when one is available (the unsafe ones get ignored, I cycle too fast for their design). I follow all the police and cycling safety advice on roadcraft, cycling techniques and position yet I do not get the same back from many motorists.
However, I did notice late last year when the West Midlands Police campaign 'Space for cyclists' started that things got a bit better. Many more were giving lots of room when passing, but you would always get the lazy or deliberate types who either cant be bothered or want to make some sort of statement for being held up for 0.2 seconds. I often catch up with these guys at the next light too so there was no reason to put my life at risk in the first place.
Yes some cyclists are idiots and one day Darwinism will win, but why should I pay for their transgressions? It is very rare for a cyclist to put a motorist in harms way, but it is very easy to Kill or Seriously Injury a cyclist either through accidental or intentionally poor driving. All I am asking is that I can ride on the roads, share it with you, you share it with me and we all get home safely. :y
-
All I am asking is that I can ride on the roads, share it with you, you share it with me and we all get home safely. :y
That's not too much to ask Guff! :y
Sadly there are idiots on or in all sorts of transportation that give everyone using that particular mode of transport a bad name. ::)
-
Sorry, just realised quite a few typos and errors there. Currently running a fever and shivering despite this heat :(
-
Sorry, just realised quite a few typos and errors there. Currently running a fever and shivering despite this heat :(
No need to apologise Guff, most of them are illiterate anyway and won't notice! ;D
And I wasn't having a go at you personally with my 2 observations BTW! ;) However, your response did make me wonder how many 'offs' you might have had, if you went round in black or Navy Blue lycra and no lights like a lot seem to. ::)
-
No worries, I am not sensing any personal attacks here. Some viewpoints I do not agree with but nothing personal :y
I have some photos of how visible I am when cyclings and I have some choice videos too. Let me break this fever and dig them out ;)
-
No worries, I am not sensing any personal attacks here. Some viewpoints I do not agree with but nothing personal :y
I have some photos of how visible I am when cyclings and I have some choice videos too. Let me break this fever and dig them out ;)
I think we can take your word for it! :P ;D
-
No worries, I am not sensing any personal attacks here. Some viewpoints I do not agree with but nothing personal :y
I'll how you a personal att.. no I won't, you're bigger than me ;) ;D (Get well soon!)
-
Attack now! For I am weak! ;D ;D
-
.....
Twisty, solid white lines. You shouldn't be overtaking anyway.
......
Have a look in your highway code. Double white lines do NOT mean no over taking.
-
....
I have some photos of how visible I am when cyclings and I have some choice videos too. ....
You're a big lad so should be visible any way ..... even without hi-viz ;)
-
....
I have some photos of how visible I am when cyclings and I have some choice videos too. ....
You're a big lad so should be visible any way ..... even without hi-viz ;)
Good job you're three hundred miles away :D
-
I once stopped [not sharply or hard]behind another car-I was in the Senator-who'd stopped behind some parked cars to allow an oncoming vehicle to pass when there was a bump,bump thud at the back of the Senator.A look in the rear view mirror showed a cyclist sliding down the rear window and off the boot lid.Happily he was unhurt and simply said I'd stopped too quickly for him[he was taking part in some kind of road race I assume as he had a bib affair on with a number on it]Anyway there were no recriminations on either side,no injuries and only a buckled front wheel on his bike where he'd hit the towbar.I'm always prepared to hang back and await a safe passing opportunity when it comes to cyclists I have no wish to cause injury to anyone by impatience.
-
I followed one today, as the road got twistier and had double white lines, he SLOWED DOWN to block me.
Maybe the fact that the road became twistier and had double white lines, is an indication that that section of road is a little more hazardous, and the cyclist needed to slow down to make it safe for himself? Obviously it is safer to turn when going slower. How do you know the cyclist slowed to deliberately block you?
If he did, maybe he was doing you a favour. That's perfectly acceptable, a road user that is, commanding the road to make conditions safer for all, particularly a vulnerable cyclist. With double white lines you shouldn't be overtaking anyway.
GUFFER, as someone who is relatively new to road biking and who needed some tips, thank you for the links in your signature; very helpful. :y
No it isn't, its insufferably selfish. If a vehicle behind you is likely to normally travel twice as fast as you on your bicycle, its ludicrous to take a position to prevent it from passing you. The only reasonable thing to do is to get out of its way, and let it carry on its way.
If someone did it in a powered vehicle, they would probably be committing an offence. I don't see why it should be any different for cycles. But to me, it only reinforces the point that cycles shouldn't really be on the roads in this day and age.
It is.
If in the circumstances you describe. Twisty, solid white lines. You shouldn't be overtaking anyway.
As for thinking cyclists shouldn't be on the road, whenever I hear that it sounds like the egocentric unreasoned ramblings of someone who dislikes the fact someone else is using the roads in a way not to their liking but ok nonetheless.
Cyclists have just as much right to be there as you.
I think you missed my point, I wasnt trying to pass him, he slowed from about 30mph to around 15mph as he knew I couldnt pass him on the twisty bit,
it was a deliberate act.
-
His fault entirely, Baza: road racing is illegal, even for a protected, immune-from-all-laws species like cyclists.
It's no wonder he didn't see you since in my experience thay ride arse-up, nose on the front wheel and are therefore only able to see two inches in front of them.
Albs, can I join your "rid our roads of them" group, please?
Ron.
-
Of course, I don't want to make any enemies here..... :-*
Ron.
-
Cycling is dangerous.
3 yrs last Jan, a lad from work, cycled into a parked car ..... he's still in a wheel chair.
Met a bloke the other day on a caravan site who was wearing a brace around his neck attached to a back brace. 5 weeks ago he went over his handle bars (no idea of the detail) .... damaged 2 vertebrae in his neck & 1 in his back. He's keeping his fingers crossed.
-
we had a guy locally the other year, killed himself riding into a parked caravan.
http://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/10613867.Cyclist_hit_caravan_in_road_crash_tragedy/ (http://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/10613867.Cyclist_hit_caravan_in_road_crash_tragedy/)
-
Quod erat demonstrandum!
Ron.
-
I will use a safe cycle path when one is available (the unsafe ones get ignored, I cycle too fast for their design).
A bit of a funny comment that, cyclists wanting motorists to slow down for their safety yet won`t use a slower cycle path which would keep them safe :-\
-
Quod erat demonstrandum!
Ron.
Of course, I don't want to make any enemies here..... :-*
Ron.
You sure about that Ron lad. ;D
-
Thanks for the "Lad", ronnyd.
I used to cycle daily to work in the 60s, which ain't bad considering I'm only 29 now. :P ::)
Ron.
-
I will use a safe cycle path when one is available (the unsafe ones get ignored, I cycle too fast for their design).
A bit of a funny comment that, cyclists wanting motorists to slow down for their safety yet won`t use a slower cycle path which would keep them safe :-\
You see that regularly here, they prefer to take on a 4 lane by-pass instead of using the cycle lane that takes them slightly out of their way
-
I will use a safe cycle path when one is available (the unsafe ones get ignored, I cycle too fast for their design).
A bit of a funny comment that, cyclists wanting motorists to slow down for their safety yet won`t use a slower cycle path which would keep them safe :-\
You see that regularly here, they prefer to take on a 4 lane by-pass instead of using the cycle lane that takes them slightly out of their way
Leeds City Council have spent quite a bit of money putting in some decent cycle lanes on the major routes in and out of Leeds but I see one lad on a morning using the A64 dual carriageway instead of the excellent cycle lane provided, risking his life with buses and HGV`s and to a lesser extent cars. :-\
-
Either a lack of knowledge or stupid... :-\
-
Either a lack of knowledge or stupid... :-\
I think it`s the latter as it is easily visible, it`s a good size and off the main road, everything a cycle lane should be.
-
Either a lack of knowledge or stupid... :-\
I think it`s the latter as it is easily visible, it`s a good size and off the main road, everything a cycle lane should be.
Well designed junctions? Decent, maintained road surface clear of obstructions? All the road complaints apply to cycle lanes too.
Just because it's there doesn't necessarily make it safer.
As a cyclist, I would rather they stopped playing with cycle lanes, and spent the money on maintaining the roads better.
-
Either a lack of knowledge or stupid... :-\
I think it`s the latter as it is easily visible, it`s a good size and off the main road, everything a cycle lane should be.
Well designed junctions? Decent, maintained road surface clear of obstructions? All the road complaints apply to cycle lanes too.
Just because it's there doesn't necessarily make it safer.
As a cyclist, I would rather they stopped playing with cycle lanes, and spent the money on maintaining the roads better.
It`s a brand new tarmac purpose built cycle lane Nick so it shouldn`t need any maintenance in the short term :y
-
I will use a safe cycle path when one is available (the unsafe ones get ignored, I cycle too fast for their design).
A bit of a funny comment that, cyclists wanting motorists to slow down for their safety yet won`t use a slower cycle path which would keep them safe :-\
You see that regularly here, they prefer to take on a 4 lane by-pass instead of using the cycle lane that takes them slightly out of their way
Leeds City Council have spent quite a bit of money putting in some decent cycle lanes on the major routes in and out of Leeds but I see one lad on a morning using the A64 dual carriageway instead of the excellent cycle lane provided, risking his life with buses and HGV`s and to a lesser extent cars. :-\
From a local motorway junction to a local massive industrial park there is a 10/12 ft wide cycle lane adjacent to the road. It's there because the road is used almost exclusively by HGVs. Recently I saw half a dozen lycra clad knobs riding along the road followed very closely by one of said HGVs that couldn't pass. The cyclists gained nothing other than frustrating the following traffic, the cycle lane was empty.
-
Cycle lanes just serve to give motorists another reason to moan about cyclists whilst allowing the council to tick their "cycle friendly" box. ::)
I've certainly never come across one around here that's of any practical use for a cyclist. They are either much too twisty to maintain a sensible speed, require you to dismount and cross a side road every couple of hundred yards, have pedestrians wandering around on them, or simply don't go anywhere you'd want to go, or anywhere at all.
We would indeed be better off abandoning any idea of separating cyclists and other traffic and instead upgrade to road so it's free of pot holes right to the kerb and free of traffic calming features that endanger cyclists.
-
You have it spot on, Kevin. Not only uiseless, but a danger: paramedics hate the Segregated type because motorists now have nowhere to move over to in order to let them and other emergency services pass, so are lobbying to have them removed.
London is a case in point - well done, Boris!
Non-segregated lanes, such as those on FOOTpaths, are the work of the devil; not only are they another source of needless danger, but because cyclists are allowed on SOME footpaths, they feel that that have every right to cycle (often recklessly) on any pavement.
Ron.
-
Cycle lanes just serve to give motorists another reason to moan about cyclists whilst allowing the council to tick their "cycle friendly" box. ::)
I've certainly never come across one around here that's of any practical use for a cyclist. They are either much too twisty to maintain a sensible speed, require you to dismount and cross a side road every couple of hundred yards, have pedestrians wandering around on them, or simply don't go anywhere you'd want to go, or anywhere at all.
We would indeed be better off abandoning any idea of separating cyclists and other traffic and instead upgrade to road so it's free of pot holes right to the kerb and free of traffic calming features that endanger cyclists.
They do exist. There's the one as in my previous post, one along side parts of the 'East Lancs' & there were some excellent cycle lanes alongside a 'bus way' (I'd never heard of one before) in Cambridge
-
Unfortunately, this country just isn't big enough to cater for the needs of all road users, so those who own and pay for the roads (the motorists) must take priority.
If cyclists want dedicated road space, they must pay for it, as do motorists, in the same way - via licensing and taxation. No contributu=ion = no road space.
Those who are also motorists will claim that they already pay, which 9is true, but ONLY as motorists, not cyclists, in which role they are freeloading! :P
Ron.
-
I mostly use the cycle lanes, but as Guffer says, some ain,t fit for purpose. The worst ones, for me that is, are when shared with stupid pedestrians with their i-pods, phones, 100 yard long doggie leads etc. Also the markings have now worn away so no one knows which is bike lane and which is for pedestrians. Not that they cared if they could see the markings anyway >:(
-
"Stupid" pedestrians, ronnyd? What, for using FOOTpaths provided for their use?
Come now.....
Ron.
-
I did say shared Ron lad. ::)
-
I still like the "Lad", but i disagree with this dangerous shared thing - feet and pedals are incompatible, especially when those feet belong to children and the infirm.
Surely only a politician/self-serving councillor would argue otherwise?
The cycle lobby, in their persistent claims to privileges that they are not entitled to are well on the way to developing a climate in which they will be banned from everywhere except private parks and trackways.
Ron.
-
I agree 100% with you Ron lad ;) Shared space for riders and walkers just doesn,t work for me, for the reasons i stated earlier. :y
-
Good; I'm glad I didn't upset you but this "war" isn't going to end soon because our several needs are quite different - but it's good to tease! ::)
Ron.
-
You really believe that as a cyclist i haven't paid anything towards the roads? Do you live in 1936? Because that was the last year in which road tax existed in its entirety (was abolished in 1937) at which point VED came in to effect and roads were paid for out of general taxation. That income, corporate, value added as well as things like VED. I dont want to disclose how much tax i pay but lets put it this way, i am a company director, i get a decent salary and pay full tax, i also pay corporation tax as well as a hefty vat bill. I pay ved on 2 cars, a spend way too much (according to the missus) on bikes, parts, accessories and services. But hey, i suddenly become a freeloading tax dodging scrounger once i get on 2 wheels.
Coincidentally, guess how much the VED was for the leaf i used to have? £0. Yup the aqure root of sweet fa.
Also consider that a decent road bike can cost 4k. That's 800 quid in vat right there and then. Plus if you get nee tyres, a few inner tubes and an annual service you can add a couple of hundred a year to that so there another 40 squids.
Still think that cyclists dont pay for the road?
-
Look here, Matt, you're on our road. If you want to pedal about the place, get yourself a cycle lane. That's that, no more to say. :P
-
Monsieur le Guffer, I DO think that as a cyclist you do not pay for the road. Paying a lot in other taxes and for cycle expenses is irrelevant to the issue.
Much as I admire Churchill as a wartime PM, I think he. like so many politicians, robbed a ring-fenced tax (which was set up solely for road funding - Road Fund Licence) and vired it off into other purposes. That started the rot and the huge breakdown in trust of our politicians that we experience today. Do you know anyone who trusts them?
Roads may now be paid for out of general taxation, but so many other things are paid for out of motoring taxes, last recorded as being in excess of £52,000,000,000 per annum, with a mere £5,000,000,000 of benefit being returned to motoring services - less than 10% - with the rest being vired of into the NHS (worthy cause, but hidden taxation), Education, pointless wars abroad and MP's inflated salaries/expenses.
I still love you, despite your being wrong! :-*
Ron.
-
It is Vehicle Excise Duty... not car tax and is paid into a general pot.
The roads are maintained by Highways, Councils and Private companies... all funded from the general pot and through Council Tax and Tolls.
What you're suggesting Ron, would imply that National insurance directly funds the NHS ;D
-
If cyclists want dedicated road space, they must pay for it, as do motorists, in the same way - via licensing and taxation. No contributution = no road space.
Most of us don't want dedicated road space, as it's bloody dangerous!
The real problem here is that there are lots of road users(whether they're vehicle drivers, cyclists, pedestrians, horse riders or other) that are temperamentally unsuited to the task in hand. These are the people who insist on going down the inside of trucks, speeding past schools at 60mph, running red lights on cycles, get furious when someone dares to overtake them etc, etc.
As for who pays to use the roads, consider this: a cycle does less damage to the road than a car and takes up less space whether it's in use or not. In heavy any urban traffic it's usually the most efficient way of getting across town. Sometime we are all going to have to accept that personally owned motorised transport is unsustainable. I hope it isn't any time in the next thirty odd years, as it will require a bigger sociological change than the growth of the motor car 80 odd years ago
-
Look here, Matt, you're on our road. If you want to pedal about the place, get yourself a cycle lane. That's that, no more to say. :P
I thought you were happy playing with yourself in the corner and the stack of german gay porn? :-*
-
Ah Nick, I need to clarify: by dedicated, I didn't mean the segregated abortion that Boris introduced in London, creating dangerous and life-threatening problems for the emergency services - I'm with you on that one - but an entirely separate road network. Yes, I KNOW that is unfeasible on this small island of ours, so it was a debating point rather than a serious policy!
DG, I KNOW how the roads are fuinded now, but that is not what we were promised before Churchill did the dirty on us. A promise is a promise to most of us, but an ephemeral thing to our politicians, of whatgever colour.....
Ron.
P.S. Just think; if ALL the monies collected in motoring taxes (£52,000,000,000 remember) went into roads and other motoring benefits, we would be the envy of the motoring world - even the Yanks!
-
Ron, a little research goes a long way...
https://www.retail-week.com/sectors/sports-and-leisure/wiggle-pedals-to-higher-full-year-profits-as-uk-sales-soar-26/7001466.article
That £153 MILLION... from a cycling based retailer. The tax revenue on that buys alot of roadspace and that's just one company. :-X
-
Ah Nick, I need to clarify: by dedicated, I didn't mean the segregated abortion that Boris introduced in London, creating dangerous and life-threatening problems for the emergency services - I'm with you on that one - but an entirely separate road network. Yes, I KNOW that is unfeasible on this small island of ours, so it was a debating point rather than a serious policy!
If only there was some other method of transport we all could use as an experiment to see if a separate network would work/be cost effective/usable. We could call it a railway ::)
-
OR, Plan B - tarmac over the entre rail network, but keep the signalling, and use it for cars? Direct and fuss-free, with maybe a side section for cycles, fenced off - very gentle gradients on the railway network, to ease the strain on the pedallers! :y 8)
Ron. (Prospective Minister for Transport).
-
I like the way they lay out the N roads in Ireland.
A broad hard shoulder either side for use by tractors, cyclists, breakdowns etc.
-
Monsieur le Guffer, I DO think that as a cyclist you do not pay for the road. Paying a lot in other taxes and for cycle expenses is irrelevant to the issue.
Much as I admire Churchill as a wartime PM, I think he. like so many politicians, robbed a ring-fenced tax (which was set up solely for road funding - Road Fund Licence) and vired it off into other purposes. That started the rot and the huge breakdown in trust of our politicians that we experience today. Do you know anyone who trusts them?
Roads may now be paid for out of general taxation, but so many other things are paid for out of motoring taxes, last recorded as being in excess of £52,000,000,000 per annum, with a mere £5,000,000,000 of benefit being returned to motoring services - less than 10% - with the rest being vired of into the NHS (worthy cause, but hidden taxation), Education, pointless wars abroad and MP's inflated salaries/expenses.
I still love you, despite your being wrong! :-*
Ron.
Love you too big fella, but you talk piffle here. As Al stated, funding for the roads comes from general taxation. Are you saying that a road user that pays no VED for that one vehicle (disregarding that they might pay it on others that they own) should not use the road?
-
Your Plan B might have worked ok before Beeching killed the railways Ron (lad ;D) But now there are miles between stations and tracks now so i reckon it,s back to the drawing board. :P
-
Re-instate what Beeching destroyed?
Ron.
-
Here is an example of the types of behaviour I see when I try to be courteous and follow the rules:
Near miss of the day (http://road.cc/content/news/225873-near-miss-day-15-tractor-driver-holds-line-almost-hits-cyclist)
-
We could go round in circles all day providing example of the bad behaviour of all road users. ::)
I thought of this thread yesterday when I came up to some temporary road work traffic lights which were on red. I stopped, but the cyclist in front sailed straight through without a care in the world! ;D
-
We could go round in circles all day providing example of the bad behaviour of all road users. ::)
Indeed - I watched a middle aged gentleman (OK, perhaps a little more than middle aged - 60s, I'd say) in an older Jag cut across the motorway to use the joining slip road to undertake a line of traffic, then use the hatched area separating that slip road from the next ...
Unfortunately for him he also sailed past a (marked, estate, 5 series) Police car who immediately pulled him over for a chat ;D ;D ;D That cheered me up no end having spent 90 minutes on the M25 between the M4 and M1 junctions! </thread drift>
P.S. Guffer, you know the only electric vehicles that should be on the roads are those delivering milk, so yes, that Leaf-blower thing you have should be banned :P :P
-
Jealousy isn't attractive Aaron ;D
-
I think there must be a cycle sharing scheme going on round here as people just seem to dump them near to where they want to be[after having "borrowed"it in the first place]and then it's ready for the next person to "borrow" to get near where they want to be ;D ;D