East London Thames River Crossings

Tony Dragon wrote:
Tom Crispin wrote:
On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 13:16:08 +0100, "Mrcheerful"
wrote:

what about a sedan chair to take you from your front gate to the
other side of the river?

Funny you should say that!
http://www.britishschoolofcycling.co...l/cablecar.pdf

And you would not be allowed to cycle on that, except perhaps on the
suspension wire.

outrage mode on so cyclists would have to dismount to use the cable car?
off. . I shall note that in my strongly worded objection to the plan.

On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 17:55:56 +0100, JNugent
wrote:

Tom Crispin wrote:
On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 10:16:57 +0100, JNugent
wrote:

Tom Crispin wrote:
On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 01:20:30 +0100, JNugent
wrote:

Tom Crispin wrote:

Today the lifts to the Greenwich Foot Tunnel were closed. The nearest
toll-free alternative for cyclists is the Rotherhithe Tunnel. However,
that too was closed for northbound traffic. I think that at times like
this, Transport for London really should consider allowing northbound
cycle traffic to use the 20mph restricted Blackwall Tunnel, after all,
the Blackwall Tunnel was specifically built for pedestrian, cyclists
and horse use.
Cycling isn't allowed in the Greenwich *Foot* Tunnel anyway.
I am not convinced you are entirely correct.

Cycling in the Foot Tunnel is certainly selfish when there are lots of
pedestrians around, and there are plenty of signs saying 'No cycling'.
However, it takes a by-law to make the riding of bicycles on a footway
that is not by the side of the road a criminal matter, and I have not
seen any evidence that such a by-law for the Greenwich or Woolwich
Foot Tunnels exist.

That is no way proves that cycling is permitted, only that I am not
*convinced* that cycling in the foot tunnel is illegal.

So how does the closure cause any disadvantage to cyclists (other than
meaning they have to carry their bikes up and down the staircases as well as
push them through the tunnel)?
I think that you have answered your own question. Cyclists unable to
carry their bikes up and down the shafts were not able to divert
northbound to the Rotherhithe Tunnel.
It does seem odd that you "wonder" that the Blackwall Tunnel is not opened to
cyclists whilst the Greenwich *FOOT* Tunnel lifts are out of action, because
it isn't long ago that you were insisting that due to some alleged lack of
regulation and/or signage, the Blackwall Tunnel (northbound) is not closed to
sycling in any case.

If you can be wrong on that, you can be wrong on the question of whether
cycling is permitted in the Greenwich *FOOT* Tunnel.

The northbound Blackwall Tunnel opened to horse, pedestrian, cycle and
motor traffic in May 1897. There is a sign at the south end of the
northbound tunnel, no cycling except mopeds.
http://www.britishschoolofcycling.co...blackwall8.jpg

However, on the main approach to the Blackwall Tunnel, once clear of
the section which used to be motorway, there is no indication of a
bicycle ban:

That doesn't matter. If cycling is prohibited on the part that used to have
motorway status, then since that is the only approach you are describing, the
tunnel cannot be reached without passing a sign that prohibits cycling.

There are at least two distinct ways to appoach the northbound
Blackwall Tunnel without passing a cycling prohibition sign.

Start of A102 - used to be A102(M)
http://www.britishschoolofcycling.co...blackwall0.jpg

And there's a sign right there, prohibiting pedestrians and cyclists from
proceeding onto the A102 from the A2. They must use the A2 sliproad.

Indeed.

End of what used to be the A102(M)
http://www.britishschoolofcycling.co...blackwall1.jpg

That doesn't matter. You can't get to there without failing to comply with
the prohibition of cycling on the former A102(M).

Yes you can. The road on the left is called Tunnel Avenue, and from
Morden Wharf Road is closed to all motor traffic except the 108 bus.
It forms part of Link 65 of the London Cycle Network, and Sustrans
National Cycle Route 1, Dover to Shetland.

http://www.britishschoolofcycling.co...blackwall2.jpg
http://www.britishschoolofcycling.co...blackwall3.jpg
http://www.britishschoolofcycling.co...blackwall4.jpg

Plenty of prohibition notices, but no cyclist prohibition notices.

So why do you take issue with cycling prohibition in the northbound tunnel if
(as you claim), cycling isn't prohibited in that tunnel, and is only
prohibited on the approach road, A102?

Why don't you just use that tunnel?

Do try to keep up. The northbound tunnel is currently closed for
refurbishment.

However, the southbound tunnel has plenty of cyclist prohibition
notices:
http://www.britishschoolofcycling.co...blackwall5.jpg
http://www.britishschoolofcycling.co...blackwall6.jpg
http://www.britishschoolofcycling.co...blackwall7.jpg

During the Blackwall Tunnel refurbishment works northbound traffic is
being diverted via the southbound tunnel which clearly does have a
cyclist prohibition.

So which is it?

Is cycling prohibited or not? If it isn't, your complaint about the lack of
the Rotherhithe Tunnel for cyclists is looking less solid.

Right, I will try to explain again...

1. The Rotherhithe Tunnel currently carries traffic southbound only.
2. The lifts in the Greenwich Foot Tunnel are out of use while the
lift mechanism is being replaced.
3. The northbound Blackwall Tunnel is closed; northbound motor traffic
is diverted via the southbound tunnel, from which cyclists are
prohibitied.

On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 17:57:09 +0100, JNugent
wrote:

Tom Crispin wrote:
On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 10:38:15 +0100, Tony Dragon
wrote:

Tom Crispin wrote:
On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 08:05:23 +0100, "Bill" wrote:

"Tom Crispin" wrote in message
...
Today the lifts to the Greenwich Foot Tunnel were closed. The nearest
toll-free alternative for cyclists is the Rotherhithe Tunnel. However,
that too was closed for northbound traffic. I think that at times like
this, Transport for London really should consider allowing northbound
cycle traffic to use the 20mph restricted Blackwall Tunnel, after all,
the Blackwall Tunnel was specifically built for pedestrian, cyclists
and horse use.
Can cyclists not use the Woolwich Ferry. I haven't been down that way for
30 years so things may have changed!!
Yes, cyclists can use the Woolwich Ferry - but only when the Thames is
fog free, the crew aren't on strike, the ferrys' aren't broke and it
is inside the ferrys' limited hours of operation. Even then there are
often lengthy delays.

Nevertheless, if you ignorethe above and the surly attitude of the
crew, the Woolwich Ferry is a delight for cyclists to use.
So the same restrictions as for cars then.

Car drivers have the alternative of the Blackwall Tunnel to travel
southbound, and the Dartford River Crossing is just half a gallon of
fuel diversion.

That's £3 + £1.50 unless the journey is done late at night.

If they charged you £4.50 to cross the Thames one way, would you consider
that fair?

If I was in a car, yes, very reasonable.

On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 18:20:11 +0100, Tony Dragon
wrote:

Tom Crispin wrote:
On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 13:16:08 +0100, "Mrcheerful"
wrote:

what about a sedan chair to take you from your front gate to the other side
of the river?

Funny you should say that!
http://www.britishschoolofcycling.co...l/cablecar.pdf

And you would not be allowed to cycle on that, except perhaps on the
suspension wire.

http://cdni.wired.co.uk/674x281/a_c/cycle-track.jpg

Tom Crispin wrote:

JNugent wrote:
Tom Crispin wrote:
JNugent wrote:
Tom Crispin wrote:
JNugent wrote:
Tom Crispin wrote:

Today the lifts to the Greenwich Foot Tunnel were closed. The nearest
toll-free alternative for cyclists is the Rotherhithe Tunnel. However,
that too was closed for northbound traffic. I think that at times like
this, Transport for London really should consider allowing northbound
cycle traffic to use the 20mph restricted Blackwall Tunnel, after all,
the Blackwall Tunnel was specifically built for pedestrian, cyclists
and horse use.

Cycling isn't allowed in the Greenwich *Foot* Tunnel anyway.

I am not convinced you are entirely correct.
Cycling in the Foot Tunnel is certainly selfish when there are lots of
pedestrians around, and there are plenty of signs saying 'No cycling'.
However, it takes a by-law to make the riding of bicycles on a footway
that is not by the side of the road a criminal matter, and I have not
seen any evidence that such a by-law for the Greenwich or Woolwich
Foot Tunnels exist.
That is no way proves that cycling is permitted, only that I am not
*convinced* that cycling in the foot tunnel is illegal.

So how does the closure cause any disadvantage to cyclists (other than
meaning they have to carry their bikes up and down the staircases as well as
push them through the tunnel)?

I think that you have answered your own question. Cyclists unable to
carry their bikes up and down the shafts were not able to divert
northbound to the Rotherhithe Tunnel.

It does seem odd that you "wonder" that the Blackwall Tunnel is not opened to
cyclists whilst the Greenwich *FOOT* Tunnel lifts are out of action, because
it isn't long ago that you were insisting that due to some alleged lack of
regulation and/or signage, the Blackwall Tunnel (northbound) is not closed to
sycling in any case.
If you can be wrong on that, you can be wrong on the question of whether
cycling is permitted in the Greenwich *FOOT* Tunnel.

The northbound Blackwall Tunnel opened to horse, pedestrian, cycle and
motor traffic in May 1897. There is a sign at the south end of the
northbound tunnel, no cycling except mopeds.
http://www.britishschoolofcycling.co...blackwall8.jpg
However, on the main approach to the Blackwall Tunnel, once clear of
the section which used to be motorway, there is no indication of a
bicycle ban:

That doesn't matter. If cycling is prohibited on the part that used to have
motorway status, then since that is the only approach you are describing, the
tunnel cannot be reached without passing a sign that prohibits cycling.

There are at least two distinct ways to appoach the northbound
Blackwall Tunnel without passing a cycling prohibition sign.

Start of A102 - used to be A102(M)
http://www.britishschoolofcycling.co...blackwall0.jpg

And there's a sign right there, prohibiting pedestrians and cyclists from
proceeding onto the A102 from the A2. They must use the A2 sliproad.

Indeed.

End of what used to be the A102(M)
http://www.britishschoolofcycling.co...blackwall1.jpg

That doesn't matter. You can't get to there without failing to comply with
the prohibition of cycling on the former A102(M).

Yes you can. The road on the left is called Tunnel Avenue, and from
Morden Wharf Road is closed to all motor traffic except the 108 bus.
It forms part of Link 65 of the London Cycle Network, and Sustrans
National Cycle Route 1, Dover to Shetland.

http://www.britishschoolofcycling.co...blackwall2.jpg
http://www.britishschoolofcycling.co...blackwall3.jpg
http://www.britishschoolofcycling.co...blackwall4.jpg
Plenty of prohibition notices, but no cyclist prohibition notices.

So why do you take issue with cycling prohibition in the northbound tunnel if
(as you claim), cycling isn't prohibited in that tunnel, and is only
prohibited on the approach road, A102?
Why don't you just use that tunnel?

Do try to keep up. The northbound tunnel is currently closed for
refurbishment.

I meant (and it was fairly clear from the context, which mow stretches back
farther than the current works in the tunnels) why don't you use the
northbound tunnel when it is open to (effectively motor) traffic?

However, the southbound tunnel has plenty of cyclist prohibition
notices:
http://www.britishschoolofcycling.co...blackwall5.jpg
http://www.britishschoolofcycling.co...blackwall6.jpg
http://www.britishschoolofcycling.co...blackwall7.jpg
During the Blackwall Tunnel refurbishment works northbound traffic is
being diverted via the southbound tunnel which clearly does have a
cyclist prohibition.

So which is it?
Is cycling prohibited or not? If it isn't, your complaint about the lack of
the Rotherhithe Tunnel for cyclists is looking less solid.

Right, I will try to explain again...

[snip]

There's no need to. It's all clear enough. Either the northbound tunnel is
available for cycling or it isn't. One of those propositions will be true,
and the other will not be.

If it is available as far as you are concerned, why don't you use it with
your bike (when it is open)?

Tom Crispin wrote:
On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 17:57:09 +0100, JNugent
wrote:

Tom Crispin wrote:
On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 10:38:15 +0100, Tony Dragon
wrote:

Tom Crispin wrote:
On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 08:05:23 +0100, "Bill" wrote:

"Tom Crispin" wrote in message
...
Today the lifts to the Greenwich Foot Tunnel were closed. The nearest
toll-free alternative for cyclists is the Rotherhithe Tunnel. However,
that too was closed for northbound traffic. I think that at times like
this, Transport for London really should consider allowing northbound
cycle traffic to use the 20mph restricted Blackwall Tunnel, after all,
the Blackwall Tunnel was specifically built for pedestrian, cyclists
and horse use.
Can cyclists not use the Woolwich Ferry. I haven't been down that way for
30 years so things may have changed!!
Yes, cyclists can use the Woolwich Ferry - but only when the Thames is
fog free, the crew aren't on strike, the ferrys' aren't broke and it
is inside the ferrys' limited hours of operation. Even then there are
often lengthy delays.

Nevertheless, if you ignorethe above and the surly attitude of the
crew, the Woolwich Ferry is a delight for cyclists to use.
So the same restrictions as for cars then.
Car drivers have the alternative of the Blackwall Tunnel to travel
southbound, and the Dartford River Crossing is just half a gallon of
fuel diversion.
That's £3 + £1.50 unless the journey is done late at night.

If they charged you £4.50 to cross the Thames one way, would you consider
that fair?

If I was in a car, yes, very reasonable.

£9 for a return journey. You must be very rich to think that "very reasonable".

But I was actually asking you whether you would think a one-way charge of
£4.50 was reasonable for a bike and rider (eg, over the Dartford Crossing).

A taxi would cost a lot more, of course.

On 18 July, 09:24, Tom Crispin
wrote:
On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 08:05:23 +0100, "Bill" wrote:

"Tom Crispin" wrote in message
.. .
Today the lifts to the Greenwich Foot Tunnel were closed. The nearest
toll-free alternative for cyclists is the Rotherhithe Tunnel. However,
that too was closed for northbound traffic. I think that at times like
this, Transport for London really should consider allowing northbound
cycle traffic to use the 20mph restricted Blackwall Tunnel, after all,
the Blackwall Tunnel was specifically built for pedestrian, cyclists
and horse use.

Can cyclists not use the Woolwich Ferry. *I haven't been down that way for
30 years so things may have changed!!

Yes, cyclists can use the Woolwich Ferry - but only when the Thames is
fog free, the crew aren't on strike, the ferrys' aren't broke and it
is inside the ferrys' limited hours of operation. Even then there are
often lengthy delays.

Nevertheless, if you ignorethe above and the surly attitude of the
crew, the Woolwich Ferry is a delight for cyclists to use.

Not my experience but I am speaking motorcycle, head of the queue
every time, no need to dismount if you don't choose and first off on
docking, restrictions mentioned covering operating issues apply to
all, so cyclists have no discrimination issues there. In fact they
don't even have to dismount either should they choose not to, many
times, and this used to be part of my regular commute, I was chewing
the fat with a cyclist stopped beside me, him still on his bike
maintaing equlibrium by holding on to the handrail. I preferred to set
the centre stand of the BMW rather than balancing it all the way
acroos but I was free to balance should I have chosen, Seem you
cyclists are moaning for the sake of it.

On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 19:43:04 +0100, JNugent
wrote:

Do try to keep up. The northbound tunnel is currently closed for
refurbishment.

I meant (and it was fairly clear from the context, which mow stretches back
farther than the current works in the tunnels) why don't you use the
northbound tunnel when it is open to (effectively motor) traffic?

1. Because I expect it would be highly unpleasant for cycling due to
the high speeds of motor traffic, especially on the haul up from the
low point of the tunnel.
2. The Greenwich Foot Tunnel is closer and goes to the places I want
to visit.
3. The Woolwich Ferry and the Woolwich Foot Tunnel go to the places I
want to visit.
4. It is not part of any defined cycle route I know about and the
north side is not well connected to the London Cycle Network.

The Rotherhithe Tunnel, with its speed limit of 20mph is bad enough
for cyclists; the northbound Blackwall Tunnel has a speed limit of
30mph (however, with Northbound traffic now flowing through the
southbound tunnel, which usually has a speed limit of 40mph, the limit
is temporarily restricted to 20mph making it more suitable for
cycling).

On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 19:44:56 +0100, JNugent
wrote:

Tom Crispin wrote:
On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 17:57:09 +0100, JNugent
wrote:

Tom Crispin wrote:
On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 10:38:15 +0100, Tony Dragon
wrote:

Tom Crispin wrote:
On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 08:05:23 +0100, "Bill" wrote:

"Tom Crispin" wrote in message
...
Today the lifts to the Greenwich Foot Tunnel were closed. The nearest
toll-free alternative for cyclists is the Rotherhithe Tunnel. However,
that too was closed for northbound traffic. I think that at times like
this, Transport for London really should consider allowing northbound
cycle traffic to use the 20mph restricted Blackwall Tunnel, after all,
the Blackwall Tunnel was specifically built for pedestrian, cyclists
and horse use.
Can cyclists not use the Woolwich Ferry. I haven't been down that way for
30 years so things may have changed!!
Yes, cyclists can use the Woolwich Ferry - but only when the Thames is
fog free, the crew aren't on strike, the ferrys' aren't broke and it
is inside the ferrys' limited hours of operation. Even then there are
often lengthy delays.

Nevertheless, if you ignorethe above and the surly attitude of the
crew, the Woolwich Ferry is a delight for cyclists to use.
So the same restrictions as for cars then.
Car drivers have the alternative of the Blackwall Tunnel to travel
southbound, and the Dartford River Crossing is just half a gallon of
fuel diversion.
That's £3 + £1.50 unless the journey is done late at night.

If they charged you £4.50 to cross the Thames one way, would you consider
that fair?

If I was in a car, yes, very reasonable.

£9 for a return journey. You must be very rich to think that "very reasonable".

£4.50 one way does not imply £9 return.

But I was actually asking you whether you would think a one-way charge of
£4.50 was reasonable for a bike and rider (eg, over the Dartford Crossing).

I grudgingly pay £4 one way to cross the river from Tilbury to
Gravesend, so no. I would not consider such a charge for bicycle and
rider reasonable to cross the Thames e.g., over or under at the
Dartford Crossing.

A taxi would cost a lot more, of course.

On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 12:50:54 -0700 (PDT), NM
wrote:

the Woolwich Ferry is a delight for cyclists to use.

Not my experience but I am speaking motorcycle, head of the queue
every time, no need to dismount if you don't choose and first off on
docking, restrictions mentioned covering operating issues apply to
all, so cyclists have no discrimination issues there. In fact they
don't even have to dismount either should they choose not to, many
times, and this used to be part of my regular commute, I was chewing
the fat with a cyclist stopped beside me, him still on his bike
maintaing equlibrium by holding on to the handrail. I preferred to set
the centre stand of the BMW rather than balancing it all the way
acroos but I was free to balance should I have chosen, Seem you
cyclists are moaning for the sake of it.

What part of "the Woolwich Ferry is a delight for cyclists to use" is
not in your experience?

Everything you say we are in full agreement about. With the tunnel
chaos between East and Southeast London yesterday I crossed the Thames
at the Woolwich Ferry. I was last onto the boat, it departed
immediately, and I was first off. Motor vehicle drivers faced a
two-hour wait for the ferry.