Clarkson praises cyclists

worried_jim

monalia wrote: »

Jeremy Clarkson: "... cycling in Britain ... is a "political statement" and cyclists all have beards."

Someone who thinks that Britain's cyclists are prettier than what Jeremy Clarkson makes of them is trying to prove a proint with pictures: http://iitm.be/ccyclists - The new face of cycling in Britain.

There are some proper munters in there.

custardy

monalia wrote: »

Jeremy Clarkson: "... cycling in Britain ... is a "political statement" and cyclists all have beards."

Someone who thinks that Britain's cyclists are prettier than what Jeremy Clarkson makes of them is trying to prove a proint with pictures: http://iitm.be/ccyclists - The new face of cycling in Britain.

not just the big smoke

http://edinburghcyclechic.wordpress.com/

Catapa

monalia wrote: »

Someone who thinks that Britain's cyclists are prettier than what Jeremy Clarkson makes of them is trying to prove a proint with pictures: http://iitm.be/ccyclists - The new face of cycling in Britain.

All cyclists are pretty. Being a cyclists is the definition of pretty ;-)

photogeek

@monalia - Thanks for the posting. That are pretty pictures.

NBLondon

The good thing about these pictures is that they are mostly defined cycle lanes away from roads. This is the right solution where the geography and so on permits.

I did notice two of them show cyclists ignoring a "Cyclists Dismount" sign (yes - legal warriors I know it isn't enforceable) but that behaviour feeds the stereotype of "cyclists are arrogant gits who ignore the rules".

There are some shared cycle and pedestrian paths in there too. That's a great idea as long as there is room for both and both respect the other. I see that photos 36613 and 36626 both show a cyclist riding in the pedestrian side demonstrating that a minority are possibly the inconsiderate types that interstellaflyer talks about.

Wanna see that in London? Try Blackheath. Some - I repeat Some of the paths are shared space and they work well if both groups look out for the other. The rest are foot paths - however a number of commuter cyclists have decided they have priority over such annoyances as children walking to school. I used to walk to work across the heath and at least once a week I would be overtaken by a cyclist at full tilt, ringing away or shouting "coming through". The mountain bikers at least would take to the grass to go around pedestrians but the summer commuters would curse if they had to lose some precious momentum.

Now that I drive through there; there's a new excitement. Where those footpaths cross the roads there are some zebra crossings, some islands (like http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?hl=en&biw=1024&bih=614&q=blackheath%20village&gbv=2&safe=images&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=il) and some nothing at all. I ease off at all of them because of the number of cyclists who think they can aim for a gap in moving traffic and shoot across without slackening speed. Usually they get away with it but I'm dreading the day for one to get it wrong. Last night, just after torrential rain, one zipped across ahead of me. If he'd hit a pothole or a spillage and lost speed or come off then the best emergency stop in the universe wouldn't have helped.

Those are the cyclists who get the rest of you a bad name.

custardy

NBLondon wrote: »

The good thing about these pictures is that they are mostly defined cycle lanes away from roads. This is the right solution where the geography and so on permits.

I did notice two of them show cyclists ignoring a "Cyclists Dismount" sign (yes - legal warriors I know it isn't enforceable) but that behaviour feeds the stereotype of "cyclists are arrogant gits who ignore the rules".

There are some shared cycle and pedestrian paths in there too. That's a great idea as long as there is room for both and both respect the other. I see that photos 36613 and 36626 both show a cyclist riding in the pedestrian side demonstrating that a minority are possibly the inconsiderate types that interstellaflyer talks about.

Wanna see that in London? Try Blackheath. Some - I repeat Some of the paths are shared space and they work well if both groups look out for the other. The rest are foot paths - however a number of commuter cyclists have decided they have priority over such annoyances as children walking to school. I used to walk to work across the heath and at least once a week I would be overtaken by a cyclist at full tilt, ringing away or shouting "coming through". The mountain bikers at least would take to the grass to go around pedestrians but the summer commuters would curse if they had to lose some precious momentum.

Now that I drive through there; there's a new excitement. Where those footpaths cross the roads there are some zebra crossings, some islands (like http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?hl=en&biw=1024&bih=614&q=blackheath%20village&gbv=2&safe=images&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=il) and some nothing at all. I ease off at all of them because of the number of cyclists who think they can aim for a gap in moving traffic and shoot across without slackening speed. Usually they get away with it but I'm dreading the day for one to get it wrong. Last night, just after torrential rain, one zipped across ahead of me. If he'd hit a pothole or a spillage and lost speed or come off then the best emergency stop in the universe wouldn't have helped.

Those are the cyclists who get the rest of you a bad name.

Cyclists dismount
well its a funny one
Edinburgh coucil likes these
they plonk them up in weird places (bear in mind this is a city going for world class cyling city status)
Princes street in Edinburgh is a perfect example
closed yet again for tram work. a lane left for "emergency" vehicles and a cyclist dismount sign
delivery vehicles still allowed and block the lane while stopped?
now that lane has been closed to cars but the dismount sign remains
also where are the cyclists remount signs?
you get off and then what?

As for shared paths and what side. well half the time you ill find peds on either side,especially when the markings wear out.
Again in Edinburgh they have a new idea
on the ped side they have fitted rumble strip type paving slabs
on the bike side. straight ridges
a raised kerb with sloped sides in the middle
in theory the bike goes over the smooth side (while they install them,they leave lovely big trenches as well)
in practice it tramlines the wheels and leads to dangerous unsettling of the bike.
Ive been over on 23 to 35c tyres
not been on with 26" MTB wheels though

Lum

thelawnet wrote: »

It's a bit silly IMO to blame cyclists for going through red lights: when you get a road that people drive like tw@s on, they re-engineer it, they don't say 'motor morons', they say it's a 'dangerous road', when usually the only thing that's dangerous is the driving.For some reason this standard isn't applied to cycling.

You realise that pro-car campaign groups (ABD, SafeSpeed etc.) also complain about the "dangerous road" declaration. The mantra you'll often hear is "There are no dangerous roads, only dangerous drivers", followed by a call for improved driver (re)training. Admittedly this is usually about government resorting to traffic calming and lower speed limits as they claim this just further dumbs down driving and makes it easier for crap drivers to continue being crap.

I often think that the pro-car and pro-cycling lobby should try and stop the bickering and actually sit down and talk to each other. They have a lot more in common than people would think and some joint campaigning could be beneficial to both.


I do agree about the dumbing down thing. Take a drive down a major single carraigeway A-road in Oxfordshire or Buckinghamshire for example. It will be a 50 limit and every slight bend will have gigantic roundabout-style chevron signs and sharp bend signs with neon yellow borders. Drivers will quickly learn to ignore these signs as the bends aren't sharp at all, and many will choose to ignore the 50 limit, as most of the road was perfectly safe back when the limit was 60.

Then when you encounter the one bend on the road that's actually sharp and needs to be taken at < 40 well.... if you've ever read The Boy who Cried Wolf, you know how it turns out.

Compare that to how things are done in South Wales, land of the 60mph single carriageway mountain road, if you see a sharp turn sign around here, you bloody well slow down and take it cautiously.... unless you're an English tourist from the Home Counties.

custardy

Lum wrote: »

You realise that pro-car campaign groups (ABD, SafeSpeed etc.) also complain about the "dangerous road" declaration. The mantra you'll often hear is "There are no dangerous roads, only dangerous drivers", followed by a call for improved driver (re)training. Admittedly this is usually about government resorting to traffic calming and lower speed limits as they claim this just further dumbs down driving and makes it easier for crap drivers to continue being crap.

I often think that the pro-car and pro-cycling lobby should try and stop the bickering and actually sit down and talk to each other. They have a lot more in common than people would think and some joint campaigning could be beneficial to both.

lol,you should follow the Edinburgh press
recently it has been mooted that Spokes has illuminati levels of influnce on Edinburgh council. :rotfl:
too many drivers simply cannot see the wood for the trees
the other day at work I raised the opinion that large areas of the city centre should be car free. people looked at me as if i was a demon.
however we are a massivly congested city yet rely on tourism and much of the Old Town for that income.

Marco_Panettone

Lum wrote: »

I often think that the pro-car and pro-cycling lobby should try and stop the bickering and actually sit down and talk to each other. They have a lot more in common than people would think and some joint campaigning could be beneficial to both.

That would be an interesting conversation - most cyclists also drive, and I'm sure most (at least many) drivers also own a bike.

Personally I think the main problem with the car vs bike argument is that neither piece of machinery is dangerous until in the hands of someone who operates it dangerously. There needs to be a change in how we see other road-users. They're human beings trying to get home to their families. Once you see this every journey becomes less stressful!

Lum

custardy wrote: »

large areas of the city centre should be car free

I think a lot of disabled people would have issues with this.
So would any business that deals in large or bulky goods, such as independent hi-fi shops.
Would you also ban delivery trucks?