CycleCraft - a discussion...

modsandmockers

From the age of 70, car drivers are required to declare their medical fitness to continue driving, but, of course, there is nothing to stop them switching to a bike, and occupying a primary riding position to their hearts’ content...

frisbeej

modsandmockers wrote: »

From the age of 70, car drivers are required to declare their medical fitness to continue driving, but, of course, there is nothing to stop them switching to a bike, and occupying a primary riding position to their hearts’ content...

Do you actually read what you write? Go away and have a think about what you just posted.

brat

Marco_Panettone wrote: »

The trouble is that the more you use the crutch of VC to promote safe cycling, the more non-cyclists hear "the roads are fine, you just need more training" which is clearly not correct. It's the same as discussing helmets - not helpful or valid as a way to make people feel that riding a bike is something they should do, and let their kids do independently. You cannot create mass cycling with VC, and nowhere ever has. You can (and do) create it with high-quality, protected infrastructure. Instead of focussing on safety we need to make riding a bike for everyday journeys feel pleasant and enjoyable, and that means removing motor vehicles from close proximity where possible, and reducing traffic volume where not.


I agree that the principles of Cyclecraft currently have a purpose, but they really shouldn't! It's a safety-net for an activity that doesn't need one as a result of the environment we have created.

I don't see VC as a crutch, but then I'm not as much of an integrated infrastructure ideologue as you are. I'd love to see more segregation and separate infrastructure for cycling, but I still want to cycle here and now, so I have to make myself as safe as I can, and that means standing up for myself with other traffic.

Safe cycling techniques will still have to be taught within the confines of segregated cycling routes. I've cycled quite a bit with family (10mph) and alone (20mph) on continental cyclepaths, some of which have been so busy that a similar degree of positional awareness and control has been helpful.

esuhl

modsandmockers wrote: »

I have no statistics to support my wild speculations...

Ha ha! Straight from the horses mouth... :rotfl:

modsandmockers wrote: »

The bit about taking to the pavements is taken directly from my own experience.

You claim to be a cyclist, and you claim that cyclists ride on pavements. So... why do you do it, then?

brat

modsandmockers wrote: »

More driver training? How about some compulsory cyclist training?

If there was compulsory training for cyclists, would that put you off cycling?

modsandmockers wrote: »

Bigger penalties? Assumed liability? That’ll apply exclusively to drivers, right?

This is civil rather than criminal liability. The criminal offences would remain unaltered. And despite what you might think, it doesn't mean that the motorist is always liable.

modsandmockers wrote: »

Spending on separate infrastructure? That’s what I’ve been saying all along…

We all want to be as safe as we can be. A holistic plan for safe cycling would be ideal. But hell will freeze over before the routes I ride get any significant money spent to improve cyclist safety, so my safe cycling techniques are unlikely to change for the quarter of a century or more that I hope to be cycling for.

modsandmockers wrote: »

CycleCraft is about Vehicular Cycling, which is becoming increasingly dominated by combative young adult males and less and less accessible for any other group. Those other groups are increasingly getting off the roads altogether, frequently by taking to the pavements instead.

Most cyclists I see are fit 'young' (heart, body and mind) males and females who cycle as a leisure activity to enhance their lives. I include myself in that group as a young, fit 58 year old. Almost every cyclist I pass has a smile and a wave. "Combative" is an almost unrecognisable trait within these groups. We hardly ever chat about problems with cars.
There may be differences in attitude from city commuting cyclists, and I do agree that more money needs to be spent to provide a safe cycling environment for these groups, because the combination of traffic density, proximity, self importance, might is right, moral code conflict etc is much more likely to cause aggravation or misunderstanding between the groups, therefore increased danger.
I think you see "assertive" cycling as "combative". let me know if I've read you wrong. But when you have to ride with traffic, the assertive cyclist is safer than the "guarded" or "opportunistic" cyclist. They have absolutely no interest in fighting with traffic. The only time they will get angry is when their safety is significantly compromised.

modsandmockers wrote: »

I have no statistics to support my wild speculations.

Amen.

modsandmockers

frisbeej wrote: »

Do you actually read what you write? Go away and have a think about what you just posted.

Esuhl - I notice that you 'thanked' this post. Is there any chance that you could explain what it was about, and what I said wrong, and why you saw fit to 'thank' frisbeej's post?

modsandmockers

brat wrote: »

If there was compulsory training for cyclists, would that put you off cycling?

What an excellent question - I shall start a new thread immediately. Since I have already been 'put off cycling', the question doesn't really apply to me personally.

esuhl

modsandmockers wrote: »

Esuhl - I notice that you 'thanked' this post. Is there any chance that you could explain what it was about, and what I said wrong, and why you saw fit to 'thank' frisbeej's post?

Okay, I'll spell it out to you.

You were worrying about the medical fitness of over 70s cycling. Well... I'd say you'd have to be pretty medically fit to be cycling at 70! And you'd be far less likely to cause harm to anyone else by cycling than you would by driving.

Worrying about the over-70s cycling is a bit like worrying about the over-70s wheel-spinning and doing doughnuts in supermarket car parks!

modsandmockers

esuhl wrote: »

I'd say you'd have to be pretty medically fit to be cycling at 70

But that's my point - you don't have to be fit - anybody can do it. Even after a pint or three.

esuhl

modsandmockers wrote: »

But that's my point - you don't have to be fit - anybody can do it. Even after a pint or three.

Sigh. That's my point too. Any 70-year old can do doughnuts in a supermarket car park. (Come on... join up the dots.)

So, without knowing how fit my 92 year-old grandmother is, you'd be confident that she's able to cycle after drinking three pints of beer?

I really wonder what goes on in your head!