What Do Cyclists Have Against Cycle Tracks ?

JP08

Johno100 wrote: »

WOW, so they are actually racing on open public roads! You'd think they'd at the very least need police/local authority permission to do that.

.


No, they are not racing - there's no prize for coming first or anything like that. There is a time limit (which assumes an average speed of somewhere sub 10mph), but it is more akin to those classic car events where you are expected to just complete the course and get evidence of passing all the checkpoints.


Example from the Audax website for a ride tomorrow (note the speeds and distances are in km so x 5 / 9 for miles ) :

Riverside to Riverside
118km cycling event starting from Maidenhead. Controls at BENSON, plus 4 information controls.
Distance:118 km in 7h52 Speeds:15-30 kph Date:Wednesday 17th August 2016 Time:10:00 to finish by 17:52 Starting from:Maidenhead Fee: £4.00


Which is a similar format to http://blackcountryclassiccarclub.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/WCBT-RtCd-v26NOV16.pdf

© Smilalot "Worcestershire County Boundry Classic Car Tour" Routecard
Group: Contact: Tel: SMC, MR, BCCCC, NUCCG
Date: Start Time: Est. Rt.
02/04/2-16 09:00 17:00
Est. Hrs Drive Time based on 25mph ave 5.4 Est. hrs rest periods based on 20min/hr 1.8
Time 7.24


Racing events like Time Trials are organised with the local police etc. Bit like road running events which are also rarely on closed roads.

Nasqueron

Johno100 wrote: »

Wait till that changes in c2020.:p

The changes to car tax come in in 2018 actually and it's only for newly registered cars, all old cars will continue to pay VED which doesn't pay for roads.

The new "road tax" is intended for large infrastructure like motorways that bikes can't use anyway, not road repair

Johno100

Nasqueron wrote: »

The changes to car tax come in in 2018 actually and it's only for newly registered cars, all old cars will continue to pay VED which doesn't pay for roads.

Not what I was referring to, but good distraction tactic.

Nasqueron wrote: »

The new "road tax" is intended for large infrastructure like motorways that bikes can't use anyway, not road repair

Not sure where you get that from? £6bn a year on motorways, that'll take some spending.

Marvel1

CHRISSYG wrote: »

WOW ! aybe when cyclists contribute to the roads up keep i will see them a less of an ignorant inconvenience.

Vehicles in band A - https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/508618/V149_170316.pdf

esuhl

Elsewhere wrote: »

The other problem we have are some of the lycra warriors, who I assume are practising for proper races, who zip though our villages at high speed because "speed limits don't apply to cyclists". http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/news/10633437.Woman_remains_in_critical_condition_after_crash_with_cyclist/

I think there are two issues here. One is that pedestrians and motorists typically overestimate the speed of cyclists. A pedestrian yelled at me to "slow down" as I was going uphill on my mountain bike laden with heavy panniers. I double-checked the speed and saw I was doing 12mph. Strange.

The other issue is that most pedestrians simply don't look before crossing the road. They rely solely on engine noise to determine when to cross. I've hit a couple of people who have randomly jumped into the road in front of me.

---

Anyway, to ask the motorists some questions:

Why do so many of you insist on taking rat-runs through congested villages, where you break the speed limit, yet still can't get through any faster than if you had the common decency to use the trunk roads?

Why do you wait until there is oncoming traffic or a blind bend before overtaking a cyclist?

Why do so many of you overtake dangerously, only to park up fifty yards down the road?

Why do you complain about cyclists not wearing helmets when it makes no difference to you, and you don't wear helmets yourself?

Why do you complain about cyclists not wearing high-viz clothing when you are so reluctant to flick a simple switch that the law had to be changed to require new cars to have daytime running lights?

Where does the "cyclists don't pay tax" argument come from?! Cyclists are liable for taxes in exactly the same way as motorists. Cyclists who don't drive are heavily subsiding those who do. It's heavy motor vehicles that cause road damage and expensive repairs.

Why do motorists insist on discarding their cars on the street, blocking wheelchair/pram access on footpaths, impairing visibility on the road, causing congestion as vehicles cannot pass easily around parked cars, and generally causing an eyesore? Why do this when there is ample off-road parking immediately nearby?!

During a lengthy stationary traffic-jam with endless queues, why do some of you see a cyclist approaching and deliberately try to block their progress?

Why do you think that "give way" signs only mean you have to give way to motor traffic?

And why does the level of aggression shown from motorists dramatically increase during the evening rush-hour? Aren't you happy to be leaving work and on your way home?

All tongue-in-cheek, of course, but I think it's funny that the people who get annoyed with cyclists on the road are probably the ones who are oblivious to all the problems that they themselves are causing.

Norman_Castle

Elsewhere wrote: »

Cyclists can be just as bad on bridleways, many times I've had one pass inches away from me when I've been out walking - I don't hear them approaching from behind, they don't ring a warning bell...

I ring my bell if I'm going to end up too close to pedestrians but if there is ample room I often don't because quite often pedestrians will suddenly veer off at a right angle to the direction they were walking in, often to the furthest side of the path from them and directly into where I am safely heading.

Johnmcl7

Nasqueron wrote: »

The changes to car tax come in in 2018 actually and it's only for newly registered cars, all old cars will continue to pay VED which doesn't pay for roads.

The new "road tax" is intended for large infrastructure like motorways that bikes can't use anyway, not road repair

Also many cyclists pay VED anyway, I pay a hefty £270 for my high polluting car (unfortunately no rule bending or cheating from the manufacturer) which spends most of its time on the driveway- strangely no refund on my VED though!

I don't bother using my bell as it seemed to just annoy people as it gave them a fright or they still didn't hear it anyway, I just take it slow and give plenty of room until they've seen me. Or stick to the road for the faster bikes.

John

Norman_Castle

Wait till that changes in c2020.:p

I'm sure the tedious idiots who currently claim they fund the roads through "road tax" will be delighted with this new claim to road ownership contentedly ignoring that a large proportion of motoring taxes are paid indirectly by everyone. VED and fuel duty for business users is either refunded as a business cost or paid indirectly by customers. Commuters commuting to work are paid a wage funded by customers........

The 2020 change is that motoring taxes are spent in full and directly on the highways. This does not mean highways will be fully funded through motoring taxation.

As current, Mr Toad, road owning, motorists have failed to understand that Road Tax hasn't existed for 70 years these new changes are unlikely to be noticed until 2090 which by then all the oil will be gone so all vehicles will be zero emissions and they will have to find another reason to self indulgently claim importance.

Nasqueron

Johno100 wrote: »

Not what I was referring to, but good distraction tactic.



Not sure where you get that from? £6bn a year on motorways, that'll take some spending.

I had to look up the 2020 change as I wasn't aware of it

VED raised £5.63bn in 2009 yes but no plans to change the fact council tax pays for the road repair!

The M1 widering scheme in 2007 cost £21m a mile - the 240 project cost £5.1bn

The Highways Agency in 2011-12 was estimating for just England, £43,000 per lane mile just on maintenance of the strategic road network. The M25 is approx 117 miles around, assume 8 lanes (4 each side) = 936 miles of road add on M1 (193.5 x 6 lanes) = 1161 and M6 (232 miles x 6 lanes) 1392 - just on maintenance of those 3 alone you have £150m a year

So no, it won't take some spending to use the new road fund just on motorways.

And still, VED won't be a fee to use the road, it's there to repair the damage done by 1-2 tonne cars and massive lorries driving at 50-70+ mph.

A bike emits virtually no pollution and doesn't wear the road. The majority of bike riders have cars

Either way you lose

Norman_Castle

Nasqueron wrote: »

And still, VED won't be a fee to use the road, it's there to repair the damage done by 1-2 tonne cars and massive lorries driving at 50-70+ mph.

VED will still be an emissions tax with the intention of promoting cleaner cars. The rates have changed because the uptake of cleaner cars is costing the government to much.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/vehicle-excise-duty/vehicle-excise-duty


The claim that all motoring taxes will be spent on the roads is to appease motorists annoyed by potholes. Its not clear if more or less will be spent. If highways are funded this way I expect other funding will be reduced or cut.
This also only applies to VED gathered in England and will only be spent on English roads.

40% of the £6b will be spent on traffic cones.