A Sustrans dilemma

It's no wonder the paths are so poorly designed when the self-professed
cyclist officers clearly are not cyclists.

Whoever designed the routes in Speyside was no cyclist!

In some places the road is fairly level buy the cycle path goes up and
down by as much as 20 feet.

In several places routes stop as busy main road junctions despite there
being plenty land to continue the path.

In one area the route goes across little bridges with VERY tight 90
degree corners. It then emerges onto a main road up a very steep path
with another tight 90 degree corner. The majority of cyclists would get
off and push on this section. Irony is the road it's next to isn't that
busy and it's a 30 zone.

One path starts off as a good road. By the time you're half way to the
next village it turns into a gravel track (large loose lumps of the
stuff) suitable only for mountain bikes. There's no indication of this
at the start.

Generally the paths have enough little obstacles and problems to make
fast cycling quite a mentally demanding process!

With the exception of one path which is a very laudable safe route to a
school a mile from the village it serves, I think the money would have
been better spent putting cycle lane markings two feet from the kerb to
give cyclists a bit more room.

--
Who needs a life when you've got Unix? :-)
Email: , John G.Burns B.Eng, Bonny Scotland
Web : http://www.unixnerd.demon.co.uk - The Ultimate BMW Homepage!
Need Sun or HP Unix kit? http://www.unixnerd.demon.co.uk/unix.html

"iakobski" writes:

So he claims to be a cyclist. He also thinks 12 mph is fast.
[...]

It's no wonder the paths are so poorly designed when the self-professed
cyclist officers clearly are not cyclists.

I've never averaged as much as 12 MPH on any journey of over a mile. I'd
like to think I'm a cyclist; at least, I wasn't aware of any physical
tests I had to pass before I was allowed to cycle.

--
Keith Willoughby http://flat222.org/keith/
Generalísimo Francisco Franco is still dead

Yes, but I'm not talking about the average. I'm talking about a speed
the officer considers too fast for a straight clear tarmac path on flat
land.

Do you consider 12mph to be cycling fast?

If you're averaging 10mph or even 8mph on a journey, you're surely
exceeding 12mph on the straight, flat sections?

Anthony Campbell wrote:

I agree that 11-12 mph is ridiculously slow. I *average* 16.5 over 31
miles and, as I'm 72, I don't think that this can regarded as
exceptional.

I'm exactly half your age and I'd chew my own arm off to be able to
average 16.5 over 31 miles. :-)

R.

in message , tom
') wrote:


Well it's great to see such massive support for a primarily cycling
oriented sustainable transport charity.

Sustrans has very little to do with transport and as such, its title
is a misnomer.

It's a bit like argueing that the BBC isn't an organisation involved in
broadcasting because you don't like their output. I quote "Sustrans is
a charity that works on practical projects to encourage people to walk,
cycle and use public transport".

That's what they /say/. As the guid buik has it: 'by their fruits shall
ye know them'.

The extent to which they are effective or interested in your views on
what it is you think they do is another matter.

It's very clear that they aren't the least interested in cyclists' views.

--
(Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

[ This .sig subject to change without notice ]

in message , tom
') wrote:


Well it's great to see such massive support for a primarily cycling
oriented sustainable transport charity.

They aren't a cycling oriented sustainable transport charity. They may
have been that twenty years ago, but they aren't now.

We can either make jokes, or state facts. Mine is a fact. I think 20
years ago, Sustrans were more of a pressure group, which is what you
might be confused about.

I was not joking, merely stating the facts as I see them.

I hold up as a
special example of this the hill just west of Creetown, where the (two
way) cycle path is precipitous, very twisty through a wood with poor
sight-lines, and the tarmac is covered with moss, mud and slime.
Someone is going to get killed on there.

Perhaps you should take the responsibility to determine who the land
owner and manager of the specific path is and take the issue up with
them.

I've already raised it both with Sustrans and with the council. Nothing's
been /done/, of course, because the problem is in the design of the
route.

--
(Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/


... a mild, inoffensive sadist...

in message , tom
') wrote:

And beyond my personal feelings you have the fact that it closes off
access to the very groups who will most benefit. How is a tricycle
handcyclist meant to get their mount through these things?

Agreed, this is the only argument against barriers which actually holds
any weight.

Oh, for heaven's sake! Do we have barriers across the motorway every two
miles with signs telling truck drivers to 'dismount' and lift their
trucks over? No, of course we don't. Why not? Because it's a f*cking
transport route. That's 'transport' as in 'sustrans'. Barriers and
transport aren't even remotely compatible.

As to this viaduct he
URL:http://www.jasmine.org.uk:80/dogfood/story/article_8.html
which has locked eightfoot high barriers at each end erected by Sustrans,
I really have no words to express my opinion. The viaduct (which is
structurally sound) was /given/ to them as a transport route, and
they /chose/ to block it off.

--
(Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

my other car is #Subr-Car: #5d480
;; This joke is not funny in emacs.

"iakobski" writes:

Yes, but I'm not talking about the average. I'm talking about a speed
the officer considers too fast for a straight clear tarmac path on flat
land.

Do you consider 12mph to be cycling fast?

I consider it normal, for me.

If you're averaging 10mph or even 8mph on a journey, you're surely
exceeding 12mph on the straight, flat sections?

Not especially, no. 12 mph is right on my cruising speed on flat
Sustrans paths.

I agree that Sus"Trans" is a misnomer in many respects. Their paths (as
opposed to their signed road routes) probably aren't suitable if you
want to cycle fast. But then, if you want to cycle fast, we already have
hundreds of thousands of miles of cycle route - it's the road
system. If, like me, you enjoy trundling along at 12mph away from
traffic, fumes, roundabouts, traffic lights, and homicidal drivers,
they're ideal. And, heck, the surface along much of the Taff Trail from
Nantgarw to Cardiff is considerable better than the surface of the
roads, and it goes right to the centre of Cardiff, Pontypridd, and
Merthyr, so is eminently practical - as long as you don't expect to do
20 mph.

It's horses for courses. If you want to cycle as fast as you can, get on
the road, where it's far more suitable to do so. I'm just grateful that
a once derelict, overgrown railway now provides me with a pleasant,
stress free environment in which to enjoy myself on my bike. I'm
convinced that if it didn't exist, I wouldn't be a cyclist. Even though
I now do a fair bit of on-road cycling, I don't think I'd have gotten
that far without SusTrans.

--
Keith Willoughby http://flat222.org/keith/
I hate you, Butler

Anthony Campbell wrote:

Interesting discussion. I've never been on a Sustrans route (don't
think there are any round here) but I don't feel much encouraged to look
for any now.

Well, there's Sustrans routes and there's Sustrans routes. Some involve
very slow progress through contrived routes and poor surfaces, and some
are gobsmackingly wonderful. For example, from Tain to Tongue on NCN1
takes you across the sort of stuff you see he
http://www.personal.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/tdn5.htm Of course, this is
the A836, but it is nevertheless part of NCN1 and thus a Sustrans route.

Most of the flack you see here is directed at the off-road tracks.

I agree that 11-12 mph is ridiculously slow. I *average* 16.5 over 31
miles and, as I'm 72, I don't think that this can regarded as
exceptional.

That you are willing to cycle 30 miles at all in the UK is exceptional,
so don't do yourself down!

However, when you look at Sustrans' literature it appears to me to be
targeted primarily at getting "non-cyclists" on their bikes for leisure
use, and since such people have a perception of utility cycling as
dangerous I think that is why the off-road tracks are being made nice
and cuddly and in safety terms relatively foolproof. Problem with
foolproof systems, of course, is only fools want to use them.

Near to me I have an option of the stretch of NCN1 running along the
river to Broughty Ferry. I often take it because it's a very amiable
seaside trundle, but it's just not on the radar if I have deadlines to
meet. Takes about half as long again as taking the main road.

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

"iakobski" wrote in message
ups.com...
I frequently cycle up to Fakenham & my son does it foru times a
week during term time. We simply would not use the Sustrans route - it
goes
all over the place. Fine for a convoluted pootle on a Sunday afternoon,
but
as a transport network to get from A to B.

Your points are valid, but there are many balances to be struck. Of
course your son's not going to be happy on any route where he can't
maintain 35-40 km/h, and on a long regular journey like that it makes
sense to take a shorter route. He's also a competent and experienced
cyclist.


Interesting you know my son's mph/kph on his ride to school. When did you
ask him about it? ;-)
He rides to school at a completely different speed to racing.


There are still compromises that we all make, and we choose routes
suitable for ourselves individually. Sustrans allows people with no
experience of choosing routes to start out, maybe some of them will
choose different roads later.



Let me put it this way - the Sustrans route to Fakenham would have put me
off cycling as a means of getting there.

Cheers, helen s




For example, I came to work on the main road this morning and it took
me 23 minutes, but it wasn't pleasant. Normally I use the back roads,
at the cost of an extra two miles and more hills, it takes me 32
minutes but I far prefer it. There's still a couple of major hazards
(blind summit, narrow bridges) but I have the confidence and experience
to deal with these properly. A less experienced cyclist would be
happier on a longer route with less traffic.

I disagree with the implementation of much of Sustrans, but they are
helping in some ways. A city route I used to use regularly has just had
lighting installed (shock horror, all the roads for cars have
lighting). After many emails one section has been resurfaced (I had a
long argument with the NCN officer, who seemed to think I was
unreasonable expecting to cycle at aver 12 mph. Lots of people use the
routes at the weekends. Some of them might progress to cycling for
transport too.