CycleCraft - a discussion...

Retrogamer

tight_scotsman wrote: »

So until cyclists are trained to an acceptable standard I will continue to treat them as I have always treated them. Complete novices and an accident waiting to happen.

I'm guessing you've never heard of Danny Macaskill?

cyclistpete

Well Scottsman I've also passed five tests I receive continual training and my driving is assed annually, I've also over the last 40 years ridden in excess of 250,000 miles on my bike and if I come up behind a cyclist who's riding in the primary position I'm quite happy to let them dictate when they think it's ok for me to over take.

tight_scotsman

cyclistpete wrote: »

Well Scottsman I've also passed five tests I receive continual training and my driving is assed annually, I've also over the last 40 years ridden in excess of 250,000 miles on my bike and if I come up behind a cyclist who's riding in the primary position I'm quite happy to let them dictate when they think it's ok for me to over take.

That's up to you mate but with the general standard of cycling in this country I don't trust them to make judgements for me. I am well qualified and experienced enough to take responsibility for my own desisions.

tight_scotsman

Retrogamer wrote: »

I'm guessing you've never heard of Danny Macaskill?

Can't say I have why don't you enlighten me.

Norman_Castle

tight_scotsman wrote: »

I treat every cyclist as a complete novice that way I can keep them safe. Like I say I don't know how competent they are . But with car ,lorry, bus drivers at least they have proved they are trained to a minimum standard.

So yous never answered my question : What training do cyclist have to go through in order to share a road with drivers who have proved they are competent ?

I have no beef with cyclists if they want to kill themselves then that's their affair. But I will not allow them to dictate to me what is safe and what's not. And at the same time I would never endanger any other road user.

You're not expected to keep cyclists safe (very patronising!). You're expected to drive safely.

Cyclists using the primary position are avoiding allowing other to dictate what is safe and whats not. They need to do this because of the many drivers who are incapable or who disregard cyclist safety. Refusing to accept a cyclists judgement simply because they are a cyclist is arrogant.

You would be a better driver if you understood and accepted other road users actions rather than claiming superiority based on passing tests.

I live opposite a school. Coaches regularly reduce the width of the narrow pavement by parking on it and on the yellow school, zig zags. Presumably as a coach driver you're qualified to the same standard as them.

RichardD1970

tight_scotsman wrote: »

With respect brat. A am a superior road user to a cyclist having passed 5 separate driving tests and a CPC then that makes me superior to any cyclist. Adding over 30 years accident free experience driving all types of vehicle.
Can you tell me what training cyclist get to prepare them for driving on our roads amongst qualified road users?

Wow, and people complain cyclists are arrogant. :eek:

You need to get over yourself. There are plenty of people with equivalent or better driving qualifications than yours and many of then will also ride bikes.

Tobster86

tight_scotsman wrote: »

So yous never answered my question : What training do cyclist have to go through in order to share a road with drivers who have proved they are competent ?

Well I'll answer it, honestly no where near enough. For me I'd say it's 50% from what I've learned and experienced as a driver, and 50% from cycling experience. As with driving cars, there's a hell of a lot more to learn than you get taught or is in the highway code, and I'm sure you'll agree the same is true for the other classes of vehicle you're qualified for.

I imagine the cycling proficiency test stuff that I didn't do as a child doesn't teach much more relevant stuff than what you'd learn to pass a driving test anyway.

I actually think everyone starting to use the roads by cycling first would solve a lot of the problems: Pass a cycle test, hold that licence for a relevant period of time, then you can start driving. I can picture a large number of very podgy faces cringing at that suggestion!

esuhl

tight_scotsman wrote: »

That's up to you mate but with the general standard of cycling in this country I don't trust them to make judgements for me. I am well qualified and experienced enough to take responsibility for my own desisions.

And that's exactly what cyclists face. With the general standard of driving in this country, and the general contempt for cyclists, even from someone who has passed five tests and has six swimming badges... I don't trust them enough to make judgements for me ESPECIALLY WHEN THEY COULD KILL ME.

I am qualified and experienced enough to take responsibility for my own decisions. If the car behind wants to push me into the gutter and squeeze past leaving me 15cm of space, then, if I'm in the primary position it's just tough. I'm using that bit of road, and they'll have to wait until there's a gap to SAFELY overtake.

I was briefly followed today by a car on a narrow A-road. There was no space to overtake (and no, I wasn't in the primary position, although again I probably should have been). The car behind moved completely onto the other side of the road, whilst staying behind me because there wasn't a big enough gap to overtake... confusing the hell out of the oncoming cars who had to brake as they waited for the driver to pull in behind me again... slowing everyone down, causing cars to bunch up and delay his overtake. It's things like that that just leave you speechless as a cyclist. After doing that three times, he overtook -- again completely on the other side of the road, very kindly leaving me plenty of room. Very odd. I don't know why he was so desperate to wind up the oncoming traffic.

modsandmockers

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 …)

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.

Maybe cyclists should wear a sign on their backs saying ‘I have read CycleCraft, and I will tell you when to overtake’.

Unfortunately, I would guess that most of them would be lying - as spokesrider says, most of the hot air that is generated by the arguments about secondary and primary riding positions is probably created by secondhand hearsay. Apart from me, spokesrider is the only poster who has offered a direct quote from CycleCraft, and I can’t recall any of the cyclists on here showing any kind of appreciation of the fact that CycleCraft falls a long way short of recommending the inflexible, dogmatic and aggressive behaviour which so many UK cycling evangelists choose to adopt.

Altarf

Nebulous2 wrote: »

That was the most startling thing for me. Pedestrians just don't walk on cyclepaths.

I'm familiar with a path round a lake with a line in the middle and a symbol of a bike on one side and a person on the other. There is often conflict, with pedestrians generally ignoring the line.

Where there is a shared footpath and cyclepath, the line is for the cyclists, not the pedestrians.

Pedestrians are allowed to use the whole of a shared path, but cyclists are only permitted to use the cycle part.

Perhaps some cycle training is needed...