Why Don't Cyclists Use Cycle Lanes....

geordie_ben

Altarf wrote: »

So do you recommend removing any cycle infrastructure that doesn't meet the perfectionist demands?

No, but I do recommend removing you and your drivel from this site.

Altarf

geordie_ben wrote: »

No, but I do recommend removing you and your drivel from this site.

The door is that way. Don't let it hit you on the way out.

Marco_Panettone

Altarf wrote: »

So do you recommend removing any cycle infrastructure that doesn't meet the perfectionist demands?

Pretty much, yes - it isn't fit for purpose. Build proper cycle infrastructure by reallocating urban road space away from motor vehicles back to people through a programme of filtered permeability and integrated, segregated cycleways alongside busy roads. A large number of car journeys are made by people travelling less than 2 miles. These should be eliminated as much as possible. Children should walk or cycle to school, and the environment should be built to ensure it is safe for them to do so.


Other countries and cities have done it. Why not here?

esuhl

Altarf wrote: »

And I do ride on enough of them to know that the vast majority are not "crap", but work fine for their intended purpose.

That just shows how little experience of cycle paths you have. Or how tediously slowly you like to ride. Or how oblivious you are to common-sense dangers...

KidLawnMoe

Altarf wrote: »

Dotted white line down the stretch of road, cars drove down the road around 1.5 meters away from kerb (i.e. treated the dotted line as a kerb), and moved out a little further as they approached cyclists, so no problems.

No dotted white line, cars drove down the road around 0.5 meters away from kerb, and only moved out a little further as they approached cyclists. So now passing cyclists much closer than before.

However the cyclist "victim" campaign are now happy that things are more dangerous now this hazardous marking has been removed.

No, what actually happens is that drivers see the white line on the road and assume that because they are in "their" lane, any cyclist in the cycle lane has enough room, regardless of how much room they actually have. They also are far more intolerant of cyclists who choose to ignore the cycle lane in favour of taking a proper primary or secondary riding position. Furthermore, inexperienced cyclists will often blindly follow the lane into danger instead of considering the road and traffic conditions themselves

Unsegregated, narrow cycle lanes are a horrible, dangerous idea.

Cloudydaze

KidLawnMoe wrote: »

Furthermore, inexperienced cyclists will often blindly follow the lane into danger instead of considering the road and traffic conditions

Exactly! Where should you never go on a bike? Down the left side of a lorry of course.
Where do lots of cycle lanes lead you? Down the left hand side of a lorry....

hugheskevi

Exactly! Where should you never go on a bike? Down the left side of a lorry of course.
Where do lots of cycle lanes lead you? Down the left hand side of a lorry....

Every fool knows it is dangerous to go down the left-hand side of a lorry. Even if it isn't taught, it should be common-sense. Cyclists injured/killed by left turning lorries really have only themselves to blame. I'm sure many think that when the issue of lorries and left-turns come up.

So with that in mind, here is an example of some of our potentially lethal cycling infra-structure.

Firstly, looking at this junction, consider where you would cycle to go straight on.

Now look at this YouTube clip from 40 seconds onwards.

That nice blue paint (which isn't a cycle lane, just nice blue paint) repeats an error which isn't uncommon across the country by encouraging cyclists going straight on to be the left hand side of vehicles turning left. That invites incidents like the one in the YouTube clip.

And this isn't some backwater cycle infrastructure built years ago, but one of the much vaunted cycle-superhighways.

So many mistakes, so much money wasted.

KidLawnMoe

hugheskevi wrote: »

Every fool knows it is dangerous to go down the left-hand side of a lorry. Even if it isn't taught, it should be common-sense. Cyclists injured/killed by left turning lorries really have only themselves to blame. I'm sure many think that when the issue of lorries and left-turns come up.

Perhaps, but people do stupid things all the time. It's still poor practice to design cycle lanes that put people in danger.

j0nathon2

KidLawnMoe wrote: »

Perhaps, but people do stupid things all the time. It's still poor practice to design cycle lanes that put people in danger.

I agree. Not everybody is intelligent, and some people are led by the fact that paint says its fine to creep up the left of any vehicle whatsoever.

I always hold back behind anything taller than me or longer than a car, or anything clearly intending to turn left.

But this is another problem cycle lanes cause:

1. I get strange looks sometimes for staying in the line of traffic and not filtering down the left - it's that same mentality that why am I not using the lane?

2. As said above, cycle lanes, especially at junctions and roundabouts, often want to take you off into left turn lanes despite the fact you're going on. This is dangerous. But what is also dangerous is cars expect you to follow that lane, so they make their decisions based on you doing something you're not. (i.e. I would never take the left turn lane of a roundabout if I am not going left).

esuhl

j0nathon2 wrote: »

But this is another problem cycle lanes cause:

1. I get strange looks sometimes for staying in the line of traffic and not filtering down the left - it's that same mentality that why am I not using the lane?

2. As said above, cycle lanes, especially at junctions and roundabouts, often want to take you off into left turn lanes despite the fact you're going on. This is dangerous. But what is also dangerous is cars expect you to follow that lane, so they make their decisions based on you doing something you're not. (i.e. I would never take the left turn lane of a roundabout if I am not going left).

Like at this roundabout, you mean? If you don't want to turn off at the exit in front of you, you either use the cycle lane and try to cross a line of fast-moving traffic trying to cut you up (if you're crazy)... Or you stay in the right-hand lane, where there is plenty of room for cars to bully their way past on the left, thus pushing you into the right-hand lane and making it tricky to get into the correct lane for the subsequent exit.



Ignorant car drivers have no idea how to approach such inherently unsafe junctions. And non-seasoned cyclists are led into a trap. The only sensible approach is to ignore the road markings. When cyclists become used to ignoring road markings and breaking the law (when necessary) for their own protection... Is it any wonder that a minority assume that red traffic lights just don't apply to them...?