Not a rant about cyclists - just a question
Options
Comments
-
It's the lost art of overtaking.....bomb around in a straight line then.....errr?
Car drivers are a menace, how on earth can they not just do a simple overtake? Granted the odd road is narrow but whatever happened to mirror-signal-manoeuvre? How do car drivers make such a big deal out of something so simple?Funnily, i've been pondering a small Caddy sized van to facilitate a side project i'm going to work on. I havent seen much movement yet, but in theory markets like pickups and vans are likely to be hit by the upcoming downturn.Would be interesting to hear if anyone has direct experience?Why? So you can argue with them?0 -
I am suggesting that a cyclist doing 15 mph and holding up a queue of traffic on an NSL road, where otherwise the traffic could safely flow at 60 mph is indeed an inconvenience.
Cyclists on an NSL road are an accident waiting to happen, which neither the motorist nor presumably the cyclist want to come about.
Cyclists ARE traffic too!
They are not allowed on motorways but they are legitimate traffic on all other roads. Any motorist who regards their presence as an accident waiting to happen should not be driving on the roads.
What an appalling attitude!0 -
The original question from the OP is actually rather odd as he says he sometimes cycles that route.
But if that was the case, he must know the cycle path is very narrow and is shared with both pedestrians and with cyclists going the opposite direction (as pointed about by Adelph) - this is very clear from looking at it on Streetview.
If you follow it along on Streetview, you can actually see a pedestrian who actually takes up quite a bit of the width of the path.
Any cyclists on the path would have to cycle very slowly in order to keep pedestrians and any oncoming cyclists safe.
The OP must know all this if he sometimes cycles this way instead of driving. He must also already know that is why some cyclists choose to cycle on the road instead. So why ask the question?0 -
It's the lost art of overtaking.....bomb around in a straight line then.....errr?
Car drivers are a menace, how on earth can they not just do a simple overtake? Granted the odd road is narrow but whatever happened to mirror-signal-manoeuvre? How do car drivers make such a big deal out of something so simple?
What's been puzzling me recently, is how some drivers refuse to overtake cyclists using an empty overtaking lane. Yes, I'm in the primary position... but the road is empty and there's a spare lane for you! But they sit behind me for a mile before angrily overtaking as close as possible.
It's almost like... they want to slow down for cyclists so they have something to be angry about. :rotfl:0 -
I am suggesting that a cyclist doing 15 mph and holding up a queue of traffic on an NSL road, where otherwise the traffic could safely flow at 60 mph is indeed an inconvenience.
Cyclists on an NSL road are an accident waiting to happen, which neither the motorist nor presumably the cyclist want to come about.
Rubbish! There are plenty of NSL roads where anyone would be crazy to travel at 15mph. NSL just means that no specific speed-limit has been set for the road -- not that it's safe to travel at 60mph!
And besides, non-driving cyclists pay taxes to build big roads for cars, and then to fix all the potholes cars cause. In rush hour, cyclists have to wait while all the cars block the roads so that no one can get past.
It's unfair that cyclists subsidise motorists. If more money was spent on cycling infrastructure, so that cyclists of all ages and abilities could travel quickly and safely away from motor traffic, then cyclists wouldn't need (or want) to use the roads.0 -
I see what you did there - asked a question with the answer in it.Norman_Castle wrote: »Its a very minor inconvenience, have you considered the inconvenience for the cyclist having to find an alternate, possibly much longer route?
Having to slow occasionally to pass a cyclist will make very little difference to journey times. I would prefer not to slow because of slower traffic but I accept it as part of driving.
Slowing from 60 to 15mph for 2 minutes extends a journey by how long?This is just a red herring argument, you can be stuck behind a tractor, on old man in a big car doing 30, a funeral party, a big lorry etc etc. There are any number of vehicles and road users that can slow you down which are much harder to pass than a bike. If your day is so hectic being behind a bike for 30s until a safe overtaking space appears will cause you problems then you need to plan your days better.
60mph is a LIMIT not a target. It won't kill you to not do 60 for a short time period.
Ah - 30s.
Yes, many other things can be slow too; funnily enough, the suggestion was not aimed specifically at bikes, but rather selfish road users who have no consideration for people wanting to get on with their lives.
I know that some cyclists do have an appalling attitude and think nothing of inconveniencing other road users.Cyclists ARE traffic too!
They are not allowed on motorways but they are legitimate traffic on all other roads. Any motorist who regards their presence as an accident waiting to happen should not be driving on the roads.
What an appalling attitude!
There are some roads which I (being a cyclist) would not consider safe to go on. My son's car was at a garage last week and he asked me if I thought it would be OK to cycle his route to work, to which I said no, I did not think so.
My opinion is that cyclists are very vulnerable and there is inherent danger in sharing the same piece of tarmac as cars/lorries driving at 60/70 mph.
Yes, of course you are right about smaller NSL roads not being safe to drive at speed; I had thought it was probably implied that I meant roads where you could sensibly drive up to NSL, as opposed to a single-lane windy track which only a professional in a rally car could hope to negotiate at anything above 15 mph if they had practiced it and knew it was clear ahead.Rubbish! There are plenty of NSL roads where anyone would be crazy to travel at 15mph. NSL just means that no specific speed-limit has been set for the road -- not that it's safe to travel at 60mph!
And besides, non-driving cyclists pay taxes to build big roads for cars, and then to fix all the potholes cars cause. In rush hour, cyclists have to wait while all the cars block the roads so that no one can get past.
It's unfair that cyclists subsidise motorists. If more money was spent on cycling infrastructure, so that cyclists of all ages and abilities could travel quickly and safely away from motor traffic, then cyclists wouldn't need (or want) to use the roads.
So, regarding your "Rubbish", I would amend my assertion to relate to NSL roads when it would normally be safe to drive at 60/70 (were the road clear, conditions OK, etc. and all other permutations of yebbuts).
The general taxation is a red-herring; are you saying that the taxes from motor vehicle use does not amply pay for the roads? And, of course, the non-drivers still make use of and benefit from roads, even if they don't drive themselves.
So no, cyclists do not subsidise motorists.
But I agree that there should be a cycling infrastructure. FYI, I participated in some of the TRL trials of road signage, traffic lights and roundabout systems for cyclists, so I do know that the matter is under consideration.
I also fully agree with you about the value of a cycling infrastructure and I think that it is something we need; my town has many cycle routes which keep bikes and cars apart and that is a good thing, IMHO.
There should also be rules in place for councils to maintain the upkeep of cycle paths.
So, going back to my preceding post, I think that bikes and vehicles on NSL roads (where you could safely travel at speed, caveats, etc.) is an accident waiting to happen and I think it is a credit to the patience and care of drivers in general that there are not more.0 -
-
So larger high speed roads which are often treated as motorways rather than NSL roads. The only fair and reasonable way to remove cyclists from these is to provide a usable cycle route. Again, if the high speed of the traffic is dangerous for other road users reducing the speed will reduce the danger.
So, going back to my preceding post, I think that bikes and vehicles on NSL roads (where you could safely travel at speed, caveats, etc.) is an accident waiting to happen and I think it is a credit to the patience and care of drivers in general that there are not more.
Patience and care is a given for good driving. I don't think drivers deserve credit for driving adequately.0 -
As I said, I agree that cycle routes are the way to go.Norman_Castle wrote: »So larger high speed roads which are often treated as motorways rather than NSL roads. The only fair and reasonable way to remove cyclists from these is to provide a usable cycle route. Again, if the high speed of the traffic is dangerous for other road users reducing the speed will reduce the danger.
Patience and care is a given for good driving. I don't think drivers deserve credit for driving adequately.
I suppose if every car needed someone walking in front of it carrying a red flag, then the danger would be reduced down to near-zero; however, the purpose of the road would be negated.
NSL dual carriageways have the same speed limit as motorways, but if someone goes on to one unable to get anywhere near that, then they are impeding the other road users who simply want to get on with their lives.
I think that drivers deserve a lot of credit for their patience.
Back to the cycle routes - I think that they should be mandatory.
The current situation on many roads is not a healthy one.0 -
In other news... I don't know why cycles can't just be classified as other vehicles on the road, and so be subject to the same laws.
Easy rules:
1. Road rules apply to all road users on wheels.
2. If you can't do 20% of a road's speed limit then don't use it (without a police escort for abnormal loads, etc.).0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.7K Spending & Discounts
- 235.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 608K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173.1K Life & Family
- 247.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards