CycleCraft - a discussion...

Tobster86

Well what can I say, must be all the ganger!

But seriously, besides the current increasing trend of using cameras to protect ourselves, I don't know what else to suggest. Everyone knows that dedicated cycle infrastructure will never be adequate here; who will pay for it and where will it go?
I think much of the problems are more deep rooted in our increasingly rude, judgemental and intolerant society.

spokesrider

Sometimes I think that a lot of the furious argument about primary position results from inaccurate hearsay about the contents of Cyclecraft, and it’s worth getting hold of a copy and reading through it (some snippets from chapter 7 pp 101-106 in the 2014 paperback edition … an important rule of road sharing is that no-one should unnecessarily impede the passage of anyone else … because the primary riding position can result in some inconvenience to following drivers, it is reasonable to ride further to the left when this could help others … on lightly trafficked roads where you use the primary riding position, keep aware of conditions behind you, using both eyes and ears … as soon as you sense a following vehicle, plan your move to the secondary position … on busy roads, it will be necessary to keep to the secondary position most of the time … on some country lanes, do try to let traffic pass as soon as a suitable opportunity occurs, even if this required you to slow down a little …)

I also recommend searching for a blog called ‘!!!!-you-john-franklin’ (it’s not for the faint-hearted, and you’ll need to re-insert the four-letter word!) … before you ask, it wasn’t written by me, but I think many of the silent majority of cyclists would agree with a lot of the content even though they might struggle to understand the tone.

DKLS

esuhl wrote: »

Motorists in Amsterdam seemed a lot more relaxed and courteous towards cyclists.

Dutch roads aren't dissimilar to here, when I worked in amstelveen I saw examples of bad driving from all types of road users, with exactly the same sort of undertaking turning lorries behaviour I see from cyclists regularly in London.

I did have one incident with a cyclist where we had a zero mph crash, I was at the light and a poor Japanese student came up next to me, I heard a bang and he had fallen over into my car as it turned he was too stoned to be upright.

No harm done, he was laid in the road laughing, I suggested a cup of strong coffee and to lay off the space cakes for a bit.

brat

spokesrider wrote: »

Sometimes I think that a lot of the furious argument about primary position results from inaccurate hearsay about the contents of Cyclecraft, and it’s worth getting hold of a copy and reading through it (some snippets from chapter 7 pp 101-106 in the 2014 paperback edition … an important rule of road sharing is that no-one should unnecessarily impede the passage of anyone else … because the primary riding position can result in some inconvenience to following drivers, it is reasonable to ride further to the left when this could help others … on lightly trafficked roads where you use the primary riding position, keep aware of conditions behind you, using both eyes and ears … as soon as you sense a following vehicle, plan your move to the secondary position … on busy roads, it will be necessary to keep to the secondary position most of the time … on some country lanes, do try to let traffic pass as soon as a suitable opportunity occurs, even if this required you to slow down a little …)

This is all common sense, and a balance of controlling, accommodating and acknowledging is IMO vital, not only for the individual cyclist's safety, but for an improvement in the relationship between road user groups.

I also recommend searching for a blog called ‘!!!!-you-john-franklin’ (it’s not for the faint-hearted, and you’ll need to re-insert the four-letter word!) … before you ask, it wasn’t written by me, but I think many of the silent majority of cyclists would agree with a lot of the content even though they might struggle to understand the tone.

I've seen that blog come up on Google searches before but haven't read it. i'll have to have a look.

Marco_Panettone

Tobster86 wrote: »

Well what can I say, must be all the ganger!

But seriously, besides the current increasing trend of using cameras to protect ourselves, I don't know what else to suggest. Everyone knows that dedicated cycle infrastructure will never be adequate here; who will pay for it and where will it go?
I think much of the problems are more deep rooted in our increasingly rude, judgemental and intolerant society.

Maybe take an evidence-based approach, where you identify the problem and look at ways that improve that situation. You could use examples from across the world to support your statements, or to suggest solutions you currently don't think work.


In my opinion the 'problems' that need tackling boil down to a couple of things:
1. Conflict between users of different transport types.
2. Low numbers of people using bicycles for short journeys (<5 miles)
3. Unpleasant riding conditions in the current environment.


ALL of these can be either resolved, or at least massively improved through a sustained infrastructure rollout, like the Dutch did in the 70's and continue to do.


How do we pay through it? The same way we pay for roads - centralised or local taxation. Where will it go? Everywhere, eventually, prioritising urban areas to begin with (due to the greater number of short journeys taken).


Anything else is not "protecting ourselves" - it's moving the furniture on the Titanic.

brat

Marco_Panettone wrote: »

ALL of these can be either resolved, or at least massively improved through a sustained infrastructure rollout, like the Dutch did in the 70's and continue to do.


How do we pay through it? The same way we pay for roads - centralised or local taxation. Where will it go? Everywhere, eventually, prioritising urban areas to begin with (due to the greater number of short journeys taken).


Anything else is not "protecting ourselves" - it's moving the furniture on the Titanic.

The Utopian idea of a segregated cycling infrastructure is in my opinion an fantastic directive to support, but it doesn't do much to resolve safety issues for many in the short to medium term. It's unlikely to change my cycling at all because I cycle mostly on rural roads in the North West.

This is why we need added awareness of the safety needs of cyclists, and added awareness by cyclists, not only of their own cycling style, but the strategies they need to use to maximise their safety.

These are not two mutually exclusive strategies, they need to run concurrently.

Would I love my cycling to be devoid of risk from third parties? Yes.
Will that risk stop me enjoying my cycling here and now? No.

modsandmockers

Marco_Panettone wrote: »

In my opinion the 'problems' that need tackling boil down to a couple of things:
1. Conflict between users of different transport types.
2. Low numbers of people using bicycles for short journeys (<5 miles)
3. Unpleasant riding conditions in the current environment.

Marco - there are possibly some good reasons why the Netherlands has a better cycling infrastructure than the UK - eg, Holland is flat, and probably is less susceptible to Atlantic storms.

The decades of reconstruction following WW2 allowed a huge variation in national priorities and budgetary options, and hindsight is a wonderful thing.

The ‘short journey’ thing is key - I would guess that most of the silent majority of UK cyclists would regard 5 miles as an absolute maximum for any one trip. And, in my experience, they are increasingly rejecting vehicular cycling, and aligning themselves with pedestrians by riding on the pavement.

Johnmcl7

modsandmockers wrote: »

Marco - there are possibly some good reasons why the Netherlands has a better cycling infrastructure than the UK - eg, Holland is flat, and probably is less susceptible to Atlantic storms.

Neither of those have anything to do with building cycling infrastructure.

John

Tobster86

Ref the f***-you-john-franklin blog;

It's given me a better realisation of the current situation, which is that cycling as a mode of transport can generally only appeal to assertive & physically better-off adult males. I'll completely admit that there is a big fear factor with my commute; some days it's stressful and some days it's a rush. Ultimately I set off knowing that, whether I like it or not, I'm likely to come into some degree of conflict with people, and they're wearing armour and I'm not. The physical and mental benefits of the activity outweigh the fear, but ultimately as things stand I appreciate that you need big dinosaur balls to do much cycling on roads.

What the blog isn't, is critical of the reasons for this; i.e. a minority of dangerous impatient drivers, who make everyone's life miserable. I'd go so far as to say it almost excuses them.

This is not acceptable. We cannot have a society that accepts that children will likely be subject to manslaughter just for using a legal mode of transport!

If infrastructure can be cost-effectively provided that is better than the token s***e we have in Worcester, by all means provide it if only to encourage an uptake of the activity; but for god's sake, let's not just do NOTHING about dangerous driving!

fred246

People that haven't cycled in Holland don't seem to be able to appreciate why it is so much better. I think the key points are
1)You are segregated
2)You have priority. Traffic stops for you. Very strange to get used to. at first.
UK motorists will be furious to read this, but it is better for motorists because there are a lot less vehicles on the road. A cyclist just takes up the minimum amount of road space. Having queues of traffic with empty cars except the driver doesn't make sense.
The UK just doesn't seem to have any direction or clue as to what it is doing. Just look at the latest 20MPH speed limits. What is that about? You can't expect motorists to follow the rules of the road without cameras to enforce them.