Two Tings

[Djuwenda]

And I can assure you that whilst boots cause minimal wear to such surfaces, cycling causes considerable wear.

 

So, cycling means one of three things happens;

1) The towpath becomes impassible to pedestrians

 

This topic is displaying a distinct tendency to get silly... altho I would love to know where you get your data from...

[honey ryder]

Their contribution is alike.

 

The wear that they cause is not.

 

A bike causes FAR more wear on the surface than a foot.

Most towpaths are not tarmac or concrete.

 

They are compressed earth, shale or limestone.

 

And I can assure you that whilst boots cause minimal wear to such surfaces, cycling causes considerable wear.

 

So, cycling means one of three things happens;

1) The towpath becomes impassible to pedestrians

2) BW have to repair it more often - costing money

3) BW have to install a durable surface - costing money.

 

you clearly havent got an idea what you are talking about, bicycles cause no more wear than walkers, dogs, pushchairs or anything else that might roll or stroll along a towpath.

if you roll a tyre along a surface, in a straight line what do you think happens? there is very low friction, not a lot of resistance and since the tyre is rolling along, not being dragged then it doesnt cause very much friction, hence not a lot of damage. The foot-print contact patch area of a bike is actually smaller than that of an adult human

when a human walks they need to grip and accelerate from a point for every step, causing more friction and more wear.

 

so I say give everyone wheels...

the towpaths could be wheely good for everyone then... no, I wheely mean it.

 

im going to go home now and ride my motorbike down the towpath, all 20 meters of it, just because I can.

[Machpoint005]

you clearly havent got an idea what you are talking about, bicycles cause no more wear than walkers, dogs, pushchairs or anything else that might roll or stroll along a towpath.

if you roll a tyre along a surface, in a straight line what do you think happens? there is very low friction, not a lot of resistance and since the tyre is rolling along, not being dragged then it doesn't cause very much friction, hence not a lot of damage. The foot-print contact patch area of a bike is actually smaller than that of an adult human

when a human walks they need to grip and accelerate from a point for every step, causing more friction and more wear.

 

we already do pay for the canals, cyclists and pedestrians pay tax too you know! I doubt my bike causes the concrete, gravel and tarmac any more damage than my boots do.

 

It seems that three of us agree then! Thanks Redstar and Honey Ryder for the injection of rationality.

[magnetman]

Edited.

Edited May 11, 2007 by magnetman

[mayalld]

you clearly havent got an idea what you are talking about, bicycles cause no more wear than walkers, dogs, pushchairs or anything else that might roll or stroll along a towpath.

if you roll a tyre along a surface, in a straight line what do you think happens? there is very low friction, not a lot of resistance and since the tyre is rolling along, not being dragged then it doesnt cause very much friction, hence not a lot of damage. The foot-print contact patch area of a bike is actually smaller than that of an adult human

when a human walks they need to grip and accelerate from a point for every step, causing more friction and more wear.

 

If you roll a tyre, I'd agree that there would be precious little difference.

 

However, when riding a bike, you aren't rolling a tyre, you are using the friction between tyre and surface to impart forward motion.

 

The one part that you did get right was that the contact area is smaller.

 

As a consequence, the force applied per square inch (or square milimetre if you prefer) is greater on a bike. Additionaly, the force from a cycle tyre is applied near parallel to the surface, rather than at an angle.

 

The upshot is that there is a far greater chance of a cycle tyre breaking down the cohesion between the particles that make up the towpath surface.

 

It seems that three of us agree then! Thanks Redstar and Honey Ryder for the injection of rationality.

Clearly 3 people agreeing trumps the science of it.

[fender]

If you roll a tyre, I'd agree that there would be precious little difference.

 

However, when riding a bike, you aren't rolling a tyre, you are using the friction between tyre and surface to impart forward motion.

 

The one part that you did get right was that the contact area is smaller.

 

As a consequence, the force applied per square inch (or square milimetre if you prefer) is greater on a bike. Additionaly, the force from a cycle tyre is applied near parallel to the surface, rather than at an angle.

 

The upshot is that there is a far greater chance of a cycle tyre breaking down the cohesion between the particles that make up the towpath surface.

Clearly 3 people agreeing trumps the science of it.

 

I dont think I'm impressed by this. Whilst in some ways cycles DO NOT cause as much erosion as walkers, a regular passage of cycles along a path might cause a linear rut, whilst a lot of footfalls would cause damage over a more generic area. It all depends and is nothing to do with the wheel itself. It actually is dependent on the rider's charateristics.

 

Where there are a lot of walkers, and cyclists on an unmetalled towpath, the constant braking and skidding by cyclists to avoid the walkers will lead to more erosion that the walkers themselves can do. And the combined effects result in considerable surface destruction.

 

This contributes to the arguement why few cyclists on an unmetalled towpath, rather than a lot, is better.

 

On the Regents Canal none of this erosion stuff matters. What matters is that the Regents Canal towpath has become nothing less than a glorified cycling M25.

[cugsey]

If you roll a tyre, I'd agree that there would be precious little difference.

 

However, when riding a bike, you aren't rolling a tyre, you are using the friction between tyre and surface to impart forward motion.

 

The one part that you did get right was that the contact area is smaller.

 

As a consequence, the force applied per square inch (or square milimetre if you prefer) is greater on a bike. Additionaly, the force from a cycle tyre is applied near parallel to the surface, rather than at an angle.

 

The upshot is that there is a far greater chance of a cycle tyre breaking down the cohesion between the particles that make up the towpath surface.

Clearly 3 people agreeing trumps the science of it.

 

I fully agree blah blah blah blah harumph harumph blah blah harumph harumph cant stop off to trash the wife blah blah blah

[mayalld]

This topic is displaying a distinct tendency to get silly... altho I would love to know where you get your data from...

 

Any reputable physics text book would equip you to reach the same conclusions about towpath damage

[aread2]

Surely banging two foot metal spikes into its margin and tying a twenty ton boat up to them is going do more damage to a towpath than walkers and cyclists.

[malc1110]

Just come to this thread (working away for a couple of days). For pete's sake, what's up with you lot? Whatever happened to tolerance and relaxation? Presumably the reason for a Code of Conduct is so that responsible, considerate cyclists (and boaters, and anglers, and joggers) have some basis for deciding what is, and is not, responsible and considerate behaviour. I think it's perfectly reasonable for a cyclist to give two polite 'tings' and wait for a response: the 'thank you' almost invariably comes next.

 

No, a code of conduct is never going to stop a pillock behaving like a pillock, but get a grip! I use the waterways, as a boater, as a means of relaxation, and I welcome the increased awareness of the waterways that follows from more people using them - whether walking, running, cycling, fishing or gongoozling.

 

As for the 'we pay our licence fee so it's our right' brigade, everyone pays for the waterways (through taxation, whether on fuel, VAT or income tax) but boaters pay a bit more: after all, we are the only ones who need a constant supply of enough water. An angler will happily drown worms in a stagnant pond, but that's no good to a boater. Similarly, a cyclist will trundle up the towpath of a derelict canal, but we can't navigate without water and operational infrastructure (locks to you).

 

If there were an accident on the towpath, and a cyclist (say) caused it by not following the code of conduct, it becomes more likely that he or she would be successfully sued for damages (could be important if it involved loss of earnings, alleged contributory negligence, counter-sueing and so on).

 

I welcome the idea, and think BW should carry on promoting the idea that on the canals, we are nice to each other, by mutual consent.

 

A speeding and inconsiderate cyclist is just asking to be tipped into the cut accidentally on purpose, though (sorry, reverted to type there!).

 

Finally, I'm no supporter of the New Tories (sorry, New Labour) but the removal of the derogation for red diesel was nothing to do with UK government - they fought to keep it, but failed. There are more important issues...

 

Best post I have seen on here for ages!!!!!! I totally agree Machpoint005. You saved me a lot of typing .

 

Patrick Moore is right, nothing worse than a female Captain on a starship. Heaven forbid, we will have women piloting narrowboats next, instead of working the locks and making tea and bacon sarnies.

[JohnO]

"Its not what you do its how you do it"

towpaths should be used not abused

ting...ting...

bbrmm..bbrmm...

[Jim Riley]

"Its not what you do its how you do it"

towpaths should be used not abused

ting...ting...

bbrmm..bbrmm...

 

 

poop poop

[JohnO]

I only PooP PooP when passing dog walkers

Edited May 12, 2007 by JohnO

[CanalWalker]

I saw about 20+ cyclists this weekend on the towpath, no trouble at all and no damage at all. I did however see a large petrol/deisel slick about half a mile long, and also saw some boaters digging a large trench in the canal bank. I guess all boaters should be banned from the canal....

[buccaneer]

Just been walking on towpath this evening nearly run over by a youth on a motor bike, no number plates and towing his pal who was on his mountain bike.