A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » Regional Cycling » UK
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

The _Observer_ on "deadly" bike lanes



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old May 24th 04, 09:17 AM
John Hearns
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default The _Observer_ on "deadly" bike lanes

On Sun, 23 May 2004 23:07:10 +0100, Tumbleweed wrote:



One must also take responsibility for ones own safety. If there was a
section of road that you believe was dangerous, why not get off before it
and walk past that bit? Surely its madness to cycle on a bit of road you
believe to be dangerous, just because someone painted the words 'cycle lane'
on it?

True.
However, I've commuted in London a lot, and I have used that lane
when I've gone over that bridge (not commuting). I remember thinking it
was pretty dangerous.
The reason you do want to stay in that lane is the junction at the end.
There are three lanes, the left one is a left-turn-only onto Embankment.
So you stay in the lane to avoid a late cross over to the right.




Another point to make is about beginning cyclists - they will naturally
follow the cycle lanes. They won't have your level of experience in
deciding yay or nay to ignore the lane to keep yourself safe.
Ads
  #12  
Old May 24th 04, 09:24 AM
Velvet
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default The _Observer_ on "deadly" bike lanes

Patrick Herring wrote:

"John Mallard" not_me@all wrote:

| MSeries wrote:
| Nathaniel Porter wrote:
| I find it worrying that the article suggests segregation is the
| solution. Dedicated cycleways have their place, but we must never
| lose sight of the fact that all vehicles (regardless of their means
| of propultion) have equal rights to use the road.
|
| Thing is in Denmark when a cycle lane is provided, they MUST be used
| and you don't have the right to ride on the road.

Also in Holland IIRC.

| This has always been my greatest fear. That one day the buggers will
| realise that they only need to spend a bit more money on cycle farcilities
| and then vote us off the road altogether.

But why - if the road has no attached cycle way you could go on the
road, if it does it'll be better than the road (for security anyway).
I suppose you might say that drivers will get used to not having to
think about cyclists so will be worse when they have to share, but
separate lanes will get many more cycling and we just might end up
like Holland and Denmark.


Because if the drivers know there's a cycle lane and you're on the road,
they'll hurl abuse at you (get on the cycle path you ****ing ****er etc)
and occasionally one'll run you off the road just for good measure...

And most off-road cycle ways are bumpier, ruttier, full of
glass/thorns/other muck, badly maintained, and force you to cycle very
slowly for fear of a reversing out the drive accident, and to stop every
time you get to a side road.

The condition of the cycle path might be of no consequence to those with
suspension or mtb's, but on a tourer they're a bloody pain in the neck
to ride any distance at all on.

--


Velvet
  #13  
Old May 24th 04, 09:24 AM
Richard
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default The _Observer_ on "deadly" bike lanes

Patrick Herring wrote:

"John Mallard" not_me@all wrote:

| MSeries wrote:
| Nathaniel Porter wrote:
| I find it worrying that the article suggests segregation is the
| solution. Dedicated cycleways have their place, but we must never
| lose sight of the fact that all vehicles (regardless of their means
| of propultion) have equal rights to use the road.
|
| Thing is in Denmark when a cycle lane is provided, they MUST be used
| and you don't have the right to ride on the road.

Also in Holland IIRC.

| This has always been my greatest fear. That one day the buggers will
| realise that they only need to spend a bit more money on cycle farcilities
| and then vote us off the road altogether.

But why - if the road has no attached cycle way you could go on the
road, if it does it'll be better than the road (for security anyway).


Not at all - see the report into, eg, the Milton Keynes off-road bike
paths. Crime is higher. Accidents are higher at junctions.
  #14  
Old May 24th 04, 09:44 AM
Peter Clinch
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default The _Observer_ on "deadly" bike lanes

Velvet wrote:

The condition of the cycle path might be of no consequence to those with
suspension or mtb's, but on a tourer they're a bloody pain in the neck
to ride any distance at all on.


While not in any way disagreeing with your point, it should be pointed
out that "tourer" and "suspension" need not be mutually exclusive terms,
and you don't even need to get a recumbent. Moulton T21 and R&M Delite
Black (or Grey) are both full-sus dedicated touring uprights, for example.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch University of Dundee
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Medical Physics, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

  #16  
Old May 24th 04, 10:04 AM
David Hansen
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default The _Observer_ on "deadly" bike lanes

On Sun, 23 May 2004 23:07:10 +0100 someone who may be "Tumbleweed"
wrote this:-

One must also take responsibility for ones own safety. If there was a
section of road that you believe was dangerous,


All sections of road are dangerous, not in themselves but because of
the people using them. The question is relative danger.

why not get off before it and walk past that bit?


I'm sure the road builders would love that. Another way to get these
dammed cyclists off the road.


--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
prevents me using the RIP Act 2000.
  #17  
Old May 24th 04, 10:05 AM
David Hansen
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default The _Observer_ on "deadly" bike lanes

On Sun, 23 May 2004 21:43:19 +0100 someone who may be "MSeries"
wrote this:-

Thing is in Denmark when a cycle lane is provided, they MUST be used and you
don't have the right to ride on the road.


Germany changed that rule. I thought similar consideration was being
given in Denmark and the Netherlands.


--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
prevents me using the RIP Act 2000.
  #18  
Old May 24th 04, 11:35 AM
Simon Brooke
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default The _Observer_ on "deadly" bike lanes

in message , Patrick Herring
') wrote:

But why - if the road has no attached cycle way you could go on the
road, if it does it'll be better than the road (for security anyway).


No, it won't. On average, cycle ways are very much _less_ safe for
cyclists than normal roads. Read the research. Of course there may be
some cycle ways which are safer, but at present they;re the exception
not the rule and I think that's true for every country in which the
issue has been studied.

--
(Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
;; Skill without imagination is craftsmanship and gives us
;; many useful objects such as wickerwork picnic baskets.
;; Imagination without skill gives us modern art.
;; Tom Stoppard, Artist Descending A Staircase
  #19  
Old May 24th 04, 11:35 AM
Dave Kahn
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default The _Observer_ on "deadly" bike lanes

"Tumbleweed" wrote in message ...

One must also take responsibility for ones own safety. If there was a
section of road that you believe was dangerous, why not get off before it
and walk past that bit? Surely its madness to cycle on a bit of road you
believe to be dangerous, just because someone painted the words 'cycle lane'
on it?


If I walked every stretch of unsuitable cycle lane it would convert
about 6 miles of my daily total from cycling to walking. I'm sure one
of the reasons we see so many pavement cyclists these days is that
that is the solution they have adopted to these dangerous cycle lanes.

--
Dave...
  #20  
Old May 24th 04, 12:19 PM
Velvet
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default The _Observer_ on "deadly" bike lanes

Peter Clinch wrote:

Velvet wrote:

The condition of the cycle path might be of no consequence to those
with suspension or mtb's, but on a tourer they're a bloody pain in the
neck to ride any distance at all on.



While not in any way disagreeing with your point, it should be pointed
out that "tourer" and "suspension" need not be mutually exclusive terms,
and you don't even need to get a recumbent. Moulton T21 and R&M Delite
Black (or Grey) are both full-sus dedicated touring uprights, for example.

Pete.


True, but even so, I'm not sure the majority of tourers that are about
on the roads actually have full-sus.. and I fail to see why I should
have to buy a bike with suspension just to be able to ride on shoddy tarmac.

If they're going to put in cycle facilities then at the very least the
surface should mean all bikes should be able to use them, not just a
sub-set of bikes.

IMNSHO :-)

--


Velvet
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
if you wanted maximum braking, where would you sit? wle Techniques 133 November 18th 15 03:10 AM
buying my first road bike Tanya Quinn General 28 June 17th 10 10:42 AM
Trips for Kids 13th Annual Bike Swap & Sale Marilyn Price Marketplace 0 June 1st 04 04:52 AM
Convert Hybrid to Touring bike Willy Smallboy Techniques 23 March 26th 04 02:03 PM
FAQ Just zis Guy, you know? UK 27 September 5th 03 10:58 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:27 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.