Jump to content

Cyclists and CRT Code


Featured Posts

40 minutes ago, TheBiscuits said:

I have never seen a better trick than chicane fencing wide enough to easily get a bike through.  No impediment at all to prams, wheelchairs or slowly moving cyclists, and a huge problem for speeding cyclists.  

 

I wouldn't want to see them every few hundred yards but strategically placed ones are fantastic, and as they are only two offset fences they are not that expensive either.  The only real criteria is that there is sufficient path width to install them.

 

A couple of weeks ago I had to manoeuvre my bike through a wooden kissing gate on the River Stort towpath at Roydon. It was a bit of hassle, but I thought at least it would keep the motorbikes away.  But on boating past later in the day I saw that some scrote had removed the gate completely - it looked as if one of the hinges had been unbolted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, David Mack said:

 

A couple of weeks ago I had to manoeuvre my bike through a wooden kissing gate on the River Stort towpath at Roydon. It was a bit of hassle, but I thought at least it would keep the motorbikes away.  But on boating past later in the day I saw that some scrote had removed the gate completely - it looked as if one of the hinges had been unbolted.

Yeah, kissing gates are useless for bikes, wheelchairs and prams - they are really only to allow pedestrians through.

 

The chicane fencing is simply two offset straight or L-shaped fences.  No moving parts, can be made very sturdy or in keeping with heritage or vernacular architecture.

 

cyclestreets10251-size180.jpg

 

Quote

Nasty chicane feature obstruction, presumably intended to stop cyclists emerging onto the road.

 

Heh.  The caption from the feral cyclists brigade says it all, for an obstacle that does not require a cyclist to dismount but forces them to slow down near a blind road junction.

 

Quote

https://www.cyclestreets.net/galleries/121/

 

Engineers love to put barriers on cycle paths. The excuses are myriad - for "safety", to prevent motorcycle access, to keep cows off, to prevent conflict. But it's funny how you never see them across roads, unless they are specifically put there to keep people out. So we know why they are really put on cycle paths.

Barriers have no place on cycle routes. You don't find them in the Netherlands, and there is no excuse for using them here.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chicane fencing may well be a solution to the problem of speeding cyclists and at the same time a deterrent for the motor cyclist or those on quad bikes. Something needs to be done. Even if it is to educate some cyclists to get off their bikes at times and places when and where it matters.

 

I notice the rat run on the foot path from Birmingham Museum to the Library now has a security guard getting the faster cyclists off their bikes. May be the developers there building the new structures there have had enough of those selfish enough to ride despite large signage asking cyclist to dismount in the restricted areas there. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/08/2018 at 18:03, Heartland said:

Chicane fencing may well be a solution to the problem of speeding cyclists and at the same time a deterrent for the motor cyclist or those on quad bikes. Something needs to be done. Even if it is to educate some cyclists to get off their bikes at times and places when and where it matters.

 

I notice the rat run on the foot path from Birmingham Museum to the Library now has a security guard getting the faster cyclists off their bikes. May be the developers there building the new structures there have had enough of those selfish enough to ride despite large signage asking cyclist to dismount in the restricted areas there. 

And that shows that there are many cyclists who refuse to obey signs, be mindful of others or become educated so some form of supervision is needed. My take is that the organization that has put cycle route signs along many towpaths should now be required to provide adequate wardens with some  powers to bite if necessary.

  • Greenie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Nick Freeman wrote a piece for the Thunderer column in the Times (September 3rd) where he noted reckless cyclist are hard to identify and weave away easily. Cyclist often adopt the moral high ground where cycling is considered both a healthy and more environmental way to travel. At present cyclist commit road traffic offences with impunity since they often wear helmets and shaded glasses and are difficult to identify. He suggests that mandatory registration for cyclists (rather than the bicycle) may be the solution. The cyclist would wear a numbered tabard to aid identification and also subscribe to an insurance scheme. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Heartland said:

 He suggests that mandatory registration for cyclists (rather than the bicycle) may be the solution. The cyclist would wear a numbered tabard to aid identification and also subscribe to an insurance scheme. 

So who will police this? There are thousands of cars on the road in UK with no insurance/tax/mot etc that drive around with no care in the world. Bike licensing will never work, suggesting it is one thing, implementing is another. Probably at the bottom of the list of things the UK must do right now.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are a lot of things at the bottom of the list, in this country and the police have so much to do, considering the cuts in their organisation, yet if apathy creeps in, what next. Gangs on bikes robbing boaters as they stop at the locks. Something needs to be done now before this or other nightmares actually do happen.

 

Anyway in the Times article it was recognised that bicycle licensing was not the answer, but may be licensing the cyclist would. 

Edited by Heartland
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 08/09/2018 at 19:08, Heartland said:

Nick Freeman wrote a piece for the Thunderer column in the Times (September 3rd) where he noted reckless cyclist are hard to identify and weave away easily.

"Mr Loophole" is, of course, an entirely reliable observer on matters of road safety, which is and has always been his paramount concern.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nick_Freeman

 

Quote

A motorcyclist was acquitted of a 132 mph speeding charge when Freeman quoted case law from 1922.[11]


Ashley Fitton, was cleared of drunk-driving based on the defence of coercion from the Criminal Justice Act 1925, claiming she was terrified she would be hurt by her husband if she did not drive him.[12]


Freeman "defended a businessman who had crashed his car and was taken to hospital seriously injured", and who was over the drink-drive limit, and was acquitted as "the relevant legislation says that the blood must be taken by someone who is not associated with the driver's care. In this case, it was taken by a surgeon directly involved, and so the man was acquitted."[13]

 

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I disagree, especially concerning tow paths, where 99% of cyclists are of the sort of ‘non-serious’ types. These paths are of course for pedestrians more than us cyclists, but a lot hog the whole path, have dogs off the lead or watch you coming then walk in front of you.

Anybody speeding on a bike on a towpath is an idiot if there are people or animals about, roads are for speed, not canal paths.

 

Ps for anyone who might want to bring up the road tax for bikes nonsense, they are welcome to either come and pay this year’s RFL on my vehicles, or accept that if everyone who cycled took their car instead, your journies are going to take a hell of a lot longer.

 

People ‘hating’ car drivers, cyclists and pedestrians are the problem, they’re the ones most likely to deliberately do something stupid just because they can, or just foster bad feeling between themselves and the other groups.

Live and let live.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Cavcanal said:

Ps for anyone who might want to bring up the road tax for bikes nonsense, they are welcome to either come and pay this year’s RFL on my vehicles, or accept that if everyone who cycled took their car instead, your journies are going to take a hell of a lot longer.

I wouldn't necessarily say tax but I do think some form of recognition system, similar to the number plate idea on cars is long over due.   It would help prevent cyclists riding away from scratch cars, through red lights and away from injured pedestrians.

 

With regard to journey times most of mine would be quicker if bikes were banned, living on one of the C2C routes and tiny country roads.  One size doesn't fit all.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Jerra said:

 

 

With regard to journey times most of mine would be quicker if bikes were banned, living on one of the C2C routes and tiny country roads.  One size doesn't fit all.

Same here. On my 50 mile round trip daily commute there is no congestion or delay except that caused by cyclists holding up long lines of traffic causing delay and pollution. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Sir Nibble said:

Same here. On my 50 mile round trip daily commute there is no congestion or delay except that caused by cyclists holding up long lines of traffic causing delay and pollution. 

Wait, what? You drive(I assume) 12,000 miles a year for commuting and yet are blaming cyclists for pollution? 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, jds_1981 said:

Wait, what? You drive(I assume) 12,000 miles a year for commuting and yet are blaming cyclists for pollution? 

A car running for 2 hours because the journey is slowed by cyclists causes more pollution than a car running for 1 hour.   Even I can see that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, you guys are crazy. Where exactly are these lanes where you are unable to anticipate approaching cyclists well enough so you can't perform a smooth overtake, it's quiet enough that they are the only cause of congestion, but it's still too busy to overtake them so rather than driving along at 40, you're stuck at 20 with your commutes taking 2 hours not 1?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, jds_1981 said:

Wow, you guys are crazy. Where exactly are these lanes where you are unable to anticipate approaching cyclists well enough so you can't perform a smooth overtake, it's quiet enough that they are the only cause of congestion, but it's still too busy to overtake them so rather than driving along at 40, you're stuck at 20 with your commutes taking 2 hours not 1?

B2177. I come up behind a queue of traffic with a cyclist in front. Would you prefer we all cross the double white lines or pass closely?

Talking about the passing closely, how much clearance between car and cycle is enough when overtaking? Experience tells me about a foot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Sir Nibble said:

B2177. I come up behind a queue of traffic with a cyclist in front. Would you prefer we all cross the double white lines or pass closely?

Talking about the passing closely, how much clearance between car and cycle is enough when overtaking? Experience tells me about a foot.

Spot checked about 10 places along the b2177 on Google maps and I didn't come across a single piece of double white line, so unless it has changed significantly lately I doubt it is a significant problem.

Also, let's be frank, if you go out in a pollution causing vehicle and create pollution, that is down to you, not anyone else. If you care that much, go buy a Prius or something rather than point the blame at others. 

Edit - http://everyaccident.co.uk/road-b2177 seems to be about 40 accidents a year on that road, seems to me that they must be causing quite a bit of pollution and congestion? Also seems to have fatalities more years than not. Perhaps the speed limit should be knocked down to 20 or 30?

Edited by jds_1981
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, jds_1981 said:

Spot checked about 10 places along the b2177 on Google maps and I didn't come across a single piece of double white line, so unless it has changed significantly lately I doubt it is a significant problem.

Also, let's be frank, if you go out in a pollution causing vehicle and create pollution, that is down to you, not anyone else. If you care that much, go buy a Prius or something rather than point the blame at others. 

 

I drive that road twice a day and there is plenty of double white lines. Don't you think you are trying a bit too hard to canonise the cyclist? Chip on the shoulder? Not enough people tearfully thanking you for saving the planet lately? Tell you what. Since you are so determined maybe I will forget the 1.5 metres I normally give cycles and just put my offside wheels on the white lines so as not to upset you by being delayed. They don't need more clearance than just missed as they demonstrate daily

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Sir Nibble said:

I drive that road twice a day and there is plenty of double white lines. Don't you think you are trying a bit too hard to canonise the cyclist? Chip on the shoulder? Not enough people tearfully thanking you for saving the planet lately? Tell you what. Since you are so determined maybe I will forget the 1.5 metres I normally give cycles and just put my offside wheels on the white lines so as not to upset you by being delayed. They don't need more clearance than just missed as they demonstrate daily

No, I just think the 'oh, if only for the cyclists, our air would be fresh and clean' argument to be nonsense. Own your pollution. Own your congestion. Drive how you want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, jds_1981 said:

No, I just think the 'oh, if only for the cyclists, our air would be fresh and clean' argument to be nonsense. Own your pollution. Own your congestion. Drive how you want.

Cyclists do cause delays when they bunch up and slow Traffic ,I find that when on my Motorcycle I have to hang back because the Cars close up at 20 MPH and one or two will sit with their Wheels on the  centre line ,would not dare to Pass the Cars as one or more may make a dash for freedom.Tutworthy..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jds_1981 said:

Wow, you guys are crazy. Where exactly are these lanes where you are unable to anticipate approaching cyclists well enough so you can't perform a smooth overtake, it's quiet enough that they are the only cause of congestion, but it's still too busy to overtake them so rather than driving along at 40, you're stuck at 20 with your commutes taking 2 hours not 1?

When you come round a corner and find 5 cyclists across the road overtaking is totally impossible.  Have you ever been to the Lake District and seen some of our back roads?

 

Incidentally you are confusing who said what.  I used the 2 hours one hour example purely to show if a journey is slowed there is more pollution.  It was I think (I haven't looked back) Sir Nibble who was talking of his commute.

30 minutes ago, Sir Nibble said:

. Since you are so determined maybe I will forget the 1.5 metres I normally give cycles

That is a point which interests me.  If it is unsafe for a car to pass a cycle with a gap of less than 1.5m because a large moving metal object might harm them then surely they shouldn't pass large moving metal objects any closer (for the same reason of course).

  • Greenie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

 

 

https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/law/government-consults-on-death-by-dangerous-cycling-law/5067238.article

 

However, from this article:

Total parity between motoring and cycling offences is unobtainable, the document acknowledges. 'We do not intend to introduce a testing, licensing or insurance regime for cyclists; the costs and complexity of introducing such a system would significantly outweigh the benefits. Nor do we propose to introduce penalty points for cyclists. A system of penalty points for cycling offences would require a record to be held or the creation of a new cycling licence regime. This could inadvertently discourage many people from taking up cycling, and unfairly burden the vast majority of law-abiding cyclists.’

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Sir Nibble said:

My car uses about 25% more fuel at 20 in 3rd than 50 in top.

 

That's an interesting claim.

 

Do you mean it use more fuel per mile at 20mph than 50mph? Or do you mean more fuel per hour

 

The wind resistance rises with the square of the speed so lower speeds usually use a LOT less fuel per unit time than higher speeds, but far less distance is covered. 

 

Show us yer figures!

 

 

  • Happy 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.